Is Obama the Anti-Christ?

There is a video making the rounds on Youtube that claims to present biblical evidence that Barack Obama was declared the anti-Christ by none other than Jesus himself. Dan Wallace in a blog post at Reclaiming the Mind Ministries reports that the video is wildly popular and that many Christians find its arguments compelling. (I should mention that Dan thinks it's completely ridiculous, and that I really like Reclaiming the Mind Ministries which has no affiliation with the loony in the Youtube video).

The basic argument in the video goes like this :


Jesus says in Luke 10:18 "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven". The New Testament written in Greek, but many scholars believe that Jesus likely spoke Aramaic. The word for "lightning" in Hebrew is בָּרָקwhich is pronounced "bā∙rāk" (the Q at the end is pronounced like a K). Sounds like Barack right? (Hebrew and Aramaic are pretty close, so we'll just pretend they are identical here). Now as Aramaic scholar Steve Caruso points out, the Swahili word "Barack" does have a Hebrew etymology, but comes from the word בָּרַךְ or barak meaning "blessed", not בָּרָק or baraq meaning "lightning". The two words barak and baraq are pronounced similarly, but have no etymological connection. Just as the English words "write" and "right" sound the same but are unrelated.




Next the narrator decides that instead of looking at the word in Hebrew for "heaven" which is שָׁמַיִם pronounced sha∙may∙im, he would rather translate the word for "heights". Now the two most common words for "heights" in Hebrew are מָרֹום pronounced mar∙um and קֹומָה pronounced qu∙mah. That won't do of course so he takes the word בָּמָה which really means something more like an elevated hill, often referring to an alter or place of worship. Why does he pick this word? I bet you can guess what's coming can't you? Because it is pronounced ba∙mah. Now nevermind that this translation would mean that Jesus said "I saw Satan fall off a hill like lighting" which would be a really weird thing to say, and instead imagine him saying

"I saw Satan fall like Barack from Bama"

So we're almost there, now all we need to do is stick an "O" in front of "bamah". The Hebrew for "from" here would be מִן but that would give us Barack Min-bama, so he makes it an "O" instead which would mean "and". Giving us

"I saw Satan fall like Barack Obama"

Or as his disciples would have understood him

"I saw Satan fall like lighting and a hill" (huh?)

Or the equally strange

"I saw Satan fall like lighting and a height" (again, huh?)

Of course since Jesus said "heavens" and not "height" it would have sounded like

"I saw Satan fall like Barack Min Shamayim" or if we go with "heights" it would be
"I saw Satan fall like Barack Min Bamate" since "heights" is plural.

Unfortunately, I don't know anyone with either of those names...

So, now that you have suffered through all of that, let me present you with my own theory based on the same type of argument.

Jesus says in Jn 14:6 "I am the way and the truth and the life." The Hebrew word for "the way" is דֶּרֶךְ which is pronounced "Derek". My name is Derek. Therefore Jesus said

"I am Derek, the truth and the life. "

So there you have it. If Barack Obama is the anti-Christ, then by that same logic I am the second coming of Jesus (hint: I'm not). The real exegetical problem here is that just because a word in one language sounds like another word in a different language does not mean there is any relation to them. The word for "drive" is German is fahrt which sounds like "fart" in English. The above exegesis is like that. It sounds like fart, so it must be a secret message about farts.

If we want to just take the word "lightning" in the NT and switch it out with the Hebrew for lightning pronounced "Barack" I could also then cite the passage in Mt 28:2-3 which describes the angel at the tomb , was that angel really our President?

"An angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like Barack, and his clothes were white as snow."

And while I'm at it, the word in Hebrew for "shame" בֹּושׁ is pronounced "Bush" and the שׁ looks like a W. So "Bush" according to my Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains means:

"To have a painful feeling and emotional distress (sometimes to the point of despair), by having done something wrong, with an associative meaning of having the disapproval of those around them (Jdg 3:25; Jer 14:4), note: this wrong can refer to a social mistake, or a serious sin. Bring shame, cause disgrace, with an associative meaning of causing frustration, and loss of hope to the object one is shaming (2Sa 19:6)"

I report. You decide.

Problems with the Penal System

I'm becoming increasingly aware of how ill equipped our criminal justice system is to deal with many of the problems in our world. One poignant example is the mentally ill. In the 1980's the mental health institutions that had housed people with severe mental illnesses like schizophrenia were shut down, and these people were left to fend for themselves. Large numbers of them now make up the homeless. Because prison is the "institution that can't say no" many of these people end up in jail. Not for commiting crimes, but for basically acting crazy. If you have not seen it yet, there is an excellent Frontline documentary detailing this that you can watch online. They tell the story for example of a man with paranoid schizophrenia who goes into a 7/11 and is arrested for "disturbing the peace", being paranoid he freaks out when the police come and resists arrest. In jail he is uncooperative and "acts up" so in the jail system he is punished by being put in solitary confinement. This of course makes his condition worsen. This escalates until eventually he is is transfered into a maximum security prison all for an original petty crime. Not only is the prison system that is focused on punishing people the wrong place for someone with a mental illness, it is also completely unfair to the people who work there who are not trained to deal with such cases. Imagine how you would feel if someone hurled their own feces at you in a psychotic fit.

I've been reading about other examples of the inadequacy of our penal system as well in "Not for Sale". For example, girls who are kidnapped and forced into sexual slavery are often arrested for solicitation instead of being treated as victims of abuse and rape. Likewise, runaways are commonly put into juvenile detention. Because of this setup when a child sexual slavery ring was discovered, the abused and abducted girls were going to be put into detention cells. Luckily several members of a local church volunteered their homes for the girls to stay in. With this same kind of thinking, people who were trafficked as slaves into the USA are deported, often right back into the hands of those who sold them. The problem is not with the individual people in the criminal justice system. The problem is systemic: the way the institution is set up, it treats these victims as if they were criminals, and does not look for the signs of human trafficking.

The good news is that many people are working to change the system, to offer shelter, mental health services, safe houses, re-integration, rehabilitation programs, vocational training, restorative justice, drug rehab... as well as working for reform in our legal system, training of police to notice signs of modern slavery, and so on. In short, our penal system focused on punishment is slowly moving towards real justice that makes things right.

Part of that does need to involve laws and penalties that will protect children from these predators. Once you start opening your eyes to the hurt in our world, you also find that we humans are capable of profound evil. I don't want to minimize that. But Jesus died for sinners like that, and prayed for those who had just whipped and beaten him bloody and nailed him to a cross "forgive them Father, they know not what they do". Those words become all the more shocking when we really confront the profound evil in our world. We want to hurt back those who hurt others. As a father, I know I do. A parental rage boils within me when I hear such horrific stories of what people do to children. Jesus seems to have had similar feelings. Yet as Paul says in Romans, that part of us the seeks to accuse the evil in others comes back to accuse us as well. We have all been hurt, and we all have hurt others, sometimes profoundly. We need a way to deal with the brokenness and evil in our world and in ourselves that works towards restoration of the broken, including protecting the vulnerable.

Blogging thru Wikiklesia

The Wikiklesia book seems to be off to a good start. It's gotten some rave reviews like this one from Kevin Kelly, the co-founder of Wired Magazine,

"The hive-mind of Christianity speaks! It brings news of the future. Uttered like a prayer retrieved from the year 2030, spoken in a new tongue, a new form. Listen!"

For those of you who would like to get a sample taste of the stuff in the book to whet your appetite, Paul Walker at Out of the Cocoon is blogging through every chapter of the book, including the one by yours truly on Theology As Art. So go check it out, and then buy the book. It's for a great cause since all the proceeds go to supporting the Not for Sale campaign to end modern slavery in our world. It's available now as a download (PDF) and as audio from Lulu, and within the next few weeks will also be available there in paperback. Here's a list of all the books author's with links to their sites:

Andrew Jones
Andrew Perriman
Bill Kinnon
Bob Hyatt
Brad Sargent
Brother Maynard
Calvin Park
Cynthia La Grou
Cynthia Ware
David Hayward
Derek Flood
Drew Goodmanson
Ed Brenegar
Heidi Campbell
Jo Guldi
Joe Suh
John La Grou
John Sexton
Br. Karekin Yarian, BSG
Katharine Moody
Kester Brewin
Len Hjalmarson
Matt Reece
Michael Lissack
Mike Morrell
Mike Riddell
Peggy Brown
Rex Miller
Rick Meigs
Scot McKnight
Scott Andreas
Scott McClellan
Scott Ragan
Stephen Garner
Stephen Shields
Steve Scott
Steve Knight
Stuart Murray Williams
Thomas Hohstadt
Wild Grace

Calling

In studying the Atonement I've had to dig down deep into our own human brokenness, why we are hurt and hurt each other so much, what separates of from God and life. As I have done this I have encountered story after story like the one of Kelsey in my last blog entry, and I have found myself drawn towards the huge problem of evil and suffering in our world.

I don't know about you, but a real roadblock I encounter in trying to address these problems of abuse, starvation, modern slavery, abortion, AIDS, genocide, and homelessness is that it all seems to overwhelming. What can I as one person do, especially if we are to understand these problems as not only individual but structural and work towards change on both a personal and institutional level? So I've been reading stories of what individuals are doing to try and get my head out of the rut of helplessness and to open my imagination. Right now I reading stories of modern day abolitionists in the book "Not For Sale" who are working to free people from the Hell of human traffickings. Each person found a way in their own circumstances and their own ability to make a radical difference. But it also involved real risk and sacrifice and courage to respond to the call of justice i their lives. So I'm asking myself, "what is God calling me to do? How can I find my place to invest my life and fight for love and justice with the gifts I have?".

Here I am Lord. Send me.

54% Say Impeach Cheney

Recently Bill Moyers interviewed conservative constitutional scholar Bruce Fein who wrote the 1st article of impeachment against president Clinton "because he was setting a precedent which placed himself above the law." But Fein, who served under Regan and has been part of conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation says he thinks Bush's crimes are far more severe,

"Bush's crimes are more worrisome than Clinton's because he is seeking more institutionally to cripple checks and balances and the authority of congress and the judiciary to superintend his assertions of power, his claim to tell the Congress they don't have any right to know what he's doing with relation to spying on American citizens, using that information any way that he wants in contradiction to a federal statute called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He's claimed authority to say he can kidnap people, throw them into dungeons abroad... without any political or legal accountability. These are standards that are totally anathema to a democratic society devoted to the rule of law".

You can see a video clip of that interview here. According to a recent poll, a majority of American's agree that Cheney should be impeached (54%), and just under half (45%) favor impeaching Bush. The focus on Cheney is significant because he is seen as being in the driver's seat on international policy. There has been a long list of abuses of power and lawlessness one can point to: policies of illegal torture, holding people imprisoned indefinitely with no legal representation (many of which have turned out to be innocent), illegal wiretaps, defying Congressional subpoenas with "executive privilege". The list goes on and on, but it seems what has broken the camel's back in the minds of many American's is the President's commuting the jail sentence of Scooter Libby for his involvement in the Valerie Plame affair.

What is particularly striking is that the public reaction and call for impeachment appears to be going beyond party lines. It is not a red/blue thing, it is simply a moral thing, and American's are alarmed at how this administration consistently places themselves above checks and balances in every other branch of government and the Constitution. The issue is not about punishing a President for his misdeeds, it is about setting a shocking precedent of abuse of power and lawlessness. John Nichols, chief Washington correspondent for The Nation writes,

"The stakes are enormous: If Bush and Cheney are not held accountable, this administration will hand off to its successors a toolbox of powers greater than any executive has ever held... The Founders intended impeachment less as a punishment for officeholders than as a protection against the dangerous expansion of executive authority. If abuse of the system of checks and balances, lies about war, approval of illegal spying and torture, signing statements that improperly arrogate legislative powers to the executive branch, schemes to punish political foes and refusals to cooperate with congressional inquiries are not judged as high crimes, the next president, no matter from which party, will assume the authority to exercise some or all of these illegitimate powers".

I find the fact that the American people are saying no to abuse of power and lawlessness encouraging. What I am less hopeful about is whether the Democratic majority in Congress will have the backbone and moral courage to actually do something about it.

update: Dennis Kucinich has introduced a bill into the House to impeach Dick Cheney for high crimes and misdemeanors. House Resolution 333 currently has 16 co-sponsors:
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA), Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), and Rep. Al Wynn (D-MD).

Seminary

So it's official, I've been accepted to Asbury Theological Seminary!

I'll be doing graduate studies there in systematic theology. My plan is to eventually work my way towards a PhD and eventual professorship. It is another part of my journey to become more engaged both with my art and theology which has been a theme of my life for the past few years, and to deeply pursue both. I'm really looking forward to learning and participating in the whole seminary conversation. Classes start this Monday.

The Sugarlump Theology Salon

I'm a big believer that since theology is primarily about relationship that the act theology should also be something that is done in community. So I've been making an effort over the last few months to find ways to get more connected both locally and globally to the theological world. I've been talking with all sorts of cool people and have made lots of connections. Its been a great experience so far. One of those connections was to try to get involved with a local theological peer group. I figured that theologians must get together in the same way as writers or scientists do and share their work with their peers for enrichment and feedback. To make a long story short: since I didn't find a group like that, I decided to get together with a couple church builder types and make one. In addition to yours truly, our founders are Linda Bergquist, adjunct professor at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary and church planter extraordinaire, and Mark Scandrette, head of Re-Imagine and groovy Emergent bohemian dude. We're calling it the Sugarlump Theological Salon, and you're invited.

Wikipedia defines salon as

“a gathering of stimulating people of quality under the roof of an inspiring hostess or host, partly to amuse one another and partly to refine their taste and increase their knowledge through conversation and readings”.

The Sugarlump Theological Salon is a gathering of Christian theologians and thinkers in the San Francisco Bay Area who meet in order to share and discuss their ideas and get peer feedback from one another. In the tradition of "The Inkling" (the literary group of C.S. Lewis's and J.R.R. Tolkien that met in a pub for readings and criticism of their own work) we meet in a coffee house (the San Francisco equivalent of a pub) called the “Sugarlump Coffee Lounge”.

I've made a webpage where you can find out more about upcoming Sugarlump talks and even share your own theological work with us. Just click over to the salon page

Stem Cell Ethics Breakthrough

A study published in the Jan. 7 online edition on the journal Nature Biotechnology says that stem cells derived from human amniotic fluid (the fluid that surrounds the developing fetus) appear to offer many of the benefits of embryonic stem cells -- including the ability to grow into brain, muscle, bone and other tissues. The difference is that these stem cells are derived from the amniotic fluid in the womb, and unlike with embryonic stem cells, the embryo is unharmed. This means that we can potentially have the full benefits of stem cells without the ethical problem of taking a potential life to potentially save a life. Amniotic stem cells can be easily obtained though amniocentesis which is a safe procedure regularly done in older pregnant women to screen for birth defects by inserting a needle into the womb and drawing out the fluid.

Researchers from the Institute for Regenerative Medicine and Children's Hospital Boston found that amniotic cells in the laboratory can grow into all of the major types of cells, dividing at the rate of once every 36 hours. Researchers coaxed amniotic fluid stem cells to develop into brain cells and injected them into the skulls of mice with diseased brains. The stem cells replaced the diseased areas and appeared to create new connections with surrounding healthy neurons. Researchers also coaxed amniotic fluid stem cells to become bone cells and implanted them in a mouse. The study found the stem cells calcified and turned into dense, healthy bone. The researchers also coaxed amniotic fluid stem cells to develop into muscle, fat, blood vessel and liver cells. (source: Kaiser Network Daily Reports Jan 7)

In the past, adult stems cells, were put forward as a way to generate stem cells without harming life, but they had limitations: adult stem cells can only grow into the part that they were derived from while embryonic stem cells can grow into any part. Because amniotic stems cells are "somewhere between" embryonic stems cells and adult stem cells, it appears they have the advantages of both: Like embryonic stem cells they are versatile and can grow into all major groups, and like adult stem cells they are stable and easier to maintain in laboratory dishes and can be kept for years without developing tumors. (source: Newsweek)

Because the cells are a genetic match to the developing fetus, tissues grown from them in the laboratory will not be rejected if they are used to treat birth defects in that newborn, which is of course not possible with embryonic stem cells which would mean the destruction of that embryo. Dario Fauza, a pediatric surgeon at Children's Hospital in Boston is seeking permission from the FDA to try the method in children diagnosed with birth defects while in the womb. He hopes to grow replacement tissues from their own amniotic cells and use those tissues to repair their defects after birth. Additionally, because amniotic stem cells remain stable for years, the cells could be frozen, providing a personalized tissue bank for use later in life. (source: The Washington Post)

Love of Enemies v2

I have done a major rewrite of the chapter "Love of Enemies: The Way of the Cross". I think it is a big improvement and reads a lot better. let me know what you think.

read chapter "Love of Enemies: The Way of the Cross"

Amish Forgiveness

The cross is about how God forgave His enemies, and a big reason that it is so hard to understand is not that we are not smart enough, but simply that we are not good enough. We have not plunged the depths of what love can endure by loving in the face of evil; we have not experienced what it means to forgive a terrible wrong done to one who is our "beloved" as God the Father did on the cross when he lost his Son. Jesus once said of a prostitute "she loved much because she was forgiven much". The inverse is also true: to understand the forgiveness of the cross we need to learn to forgive. Until we can begin to do this in our own lives, we will have no idea what God has done for us, and what the cross cost God. The person who has forgiven a grievous wrong done to them understands what the cross means better than a thousand theologians.

So many worried over how the Amish, without our modern grief counselors or emergency services would survive when the ugliness of the modern world invaded their little parish. But it turns out that those "backwards" Amish have something that we in our post 9/11 post columbine world desperately need. The following story is from PBS's "Newshour with Jim Lehrer" by Anne Taylor Fleming

"The modern media world descended en masse into this rural enclave, as if dropped back through time, poking and prodding the grief of the families and the community as a whole. And what they found and what we heard from that community was not revenge or anger, but a gentle, heart-stricken insistence on forgiveness; forgiveness, that is, of the shooter himself. The widow of the shooter was actually invited to one of the funerals, and it was said she would be welcome to stay in the community.

In a world gone mad with revenge killings and sectarian violence, chunks of the globe, self-immolating with hatred, this was something to behold, this insistence on forgiveness. It was so strange, so elemental, so otherworldly.

This, the Amish said, showing us the tender face of religion at a time and in a world where we are so often seeing the rageful face. This was Jesus' way, and they had Jesus in them, not for a day, an hour, not just in good times, but even in the very worst.

The freedom contained in Jesus' teaching of forgiveness, wrote the German philosopher Hannah Arendt, is the freedom from vengeance, which includes both doer and sufferer in the relentless automatism of the action process, which by itself need never come to an end.

We have seldom seen this in action. So many tribes and sects in a froth of revenge, from Darfur to Baghdad. And, here in this country, so many victims and victims' families crying out in our courthouses for revenge.

To this, the Amish have offered a stunning example of the freedom that comes with forgiveness, a reminder that religion need not turn lethal or combative. I, for one, as this week ends, stand in awe of their almost unfathomable grace in grief".

Rethinking Religion and Politics - Sam Harris on NPR

NPR's Talk of the Nation aired a program called Rethinking Religion and Politics a couple days ago (October 3, 2006) with two pastors, one liberal and the other conservative, both responding to Sam Harris' new book "Letter to a Christian Nation". You can hear the program by clicking on the link above. From there you can also surf your way to interviews with Harris and other info.

Overall I found Harris' arguments to be strawmen which in their inflammatory nature distracted from the few good points he was making. But rather than concentrate on that and get sidetracked into a "my belief is better than yours" debate, I thought I would address the one good point that Sam Harris was (rather badly) making: Since religion is in world and national politics so corrosive, we should keep it out of public discourse altogether.

The program on NPR ended up focusing on whether this means that people should leave their values and morals out of public life, which is of course absurd as the two pastors argued. I would like to raise a more subtle proposition: In a public discourse where there is diversity and disagreement an argument cannot be based on unquestioned authority (like "the Bible says so") because we do not all agree on those authority sources. Instead each proposition needs to be argued on its own merit in a public setting. This would mean not that religion does not play a role in public life, but that it is communicated in a way that is accessible to all people.

What I think Harris does not comprehend is that even Atheists have a set of values and assumptions of what is valued that they bring with them. For instance they may value human rights, or value human freedom. These are core values that they share with most of the Western world. Even if we would strip away the religious garb of all faiths and simply converse in the universal language of these values, we would still find that there are fundamental disagreements about these core values. For example the West would focus on human rights and freedom, while a fundamentalist Moslem may argue that the core value is neither of these but instead purity which is why women should be covered and thieves' hands chopped off. On a core level what we think is "self evident" about what is most important in life is in fundamental disagreement.

Removing the religious garb from this and presenting it in a "secularized" language may enable a more transparent discussion, but it will not remove the fundamental and profound disagreement that leads to wars and violence. So while I agree that it is valuable to learn to "translate" our values and beliefs into a language that is accessible to people who come from a different background, I think the "imagine there's no Heaven" approach to solving the world's problems is terribly naive because it fails to see the values of who we are and what life is about that lie at the heart of faith and instead focuses only on the superficial trappings. Abolishing religion would not solve anything because we would still have differing core beliefs and values about who we are, and about what matters in life that are at the root of all faiths (including Atheism and Secular beliefs systems). A world where no one has any values at all, would be peaceful, but it would also mean that everyone was lobotomized.