Balaam’s Donkey

You’ve got to admire a farm animal that stands up for itself. After all the years of being told to do this and do that, and being expected to follow obediently, it is something of a welcome relief to say “No More. This really is one step too far and I am not going to do this.”

It would need something pretty drastic to make a farm animal take this step. It’s not going to be just any old act of rebellion. “Let’s go to the shops today to get the milk” is not a suitable cause of rebellion. The consequences will be drastic, so it had better be worth it.

We need to specific now. I am talking about a donkey, not just any old farm animal. Not a cow (and I like cows) and certainly not a chicken. I am not sure about a pig. Pigs get a bad press, which is unfair, because they are kind of cuddly, really, in a piggy sort of way. But let’s stick to the donkey.

I was trying to think about whether an act of rebellion would be pre-meditated. “Today, I am going to rebel” or whether it would be just be the spontaneous accumulation of the petty and daily accumulation of injustice and nonsense, which, given the right occasion, flares up into the unexpected and unpredictable.

At this point, you need to get out your bible, and look up Numbers 22. (For those of you unfamiliar with the geography of the Bible, it is the fourth book in the Old Testament i.e. pretty early on. To make it easy for you, I have supplied you with an internet link. You need to read verses 21 to 35, although you can read the whole chapter if you want to.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=numbers%2022&version=NIV

The donkey is on her way with the master, going to a meeting. The master’s name is Balaam. All is fine, until the donkey lies down in the road and refuses to move. Balaam is naturally furious at this. The meeting is important, and there is no reason for the delay.

He beats the donkey, as that’s what we do to donkeys when they don’t move and we are having a bit of a temper. (It’s what I do to IKEA furniture when it won’t assemble properly.) There is not much thinking going on here in Balaam’s mind, such as, “I wonder what the problem is. Perhaps she is not well. What can she see what I can’t?” (which would have been an intelligent question in the circumstances). No – he just carries on beating her.

The whole story, of which verses 21 – 35 is just one part, spans three Chapters in total, and has a number of points, which I do not intend to go into. In this part, the familiar servant, the donkey, fails to perform as normal.

A simple reading of this section shows that God was bringing Balaam to a stop, in order to speak to him. Balaam was not paying attention, but his donkey was. He had decided that he would go to this meeting, come what may; that was where he was going and nothing was going to stop him. A great deal depended on that meeting. Do you know the feeling?

But God had other intentions.

A reading between the lines of the previous section shows that Balaam knew that he should not be on that road. If he did not know, then he should have known. His donkey lying down annoyed him even more, but he knew in his heart that he was going in the wrong direction, and it took the donkey to lie down and speak for the message to get through.

The common place world, in which we live, provides God with plenty of opportunities to speak to us, of things that we know and of things that we should think about. God made the world like that. Mostly we like to think that God gives us positive experiences, of things that go well. But if we are not listening, then, as with Balaam and his donkey, many times these are negative, of things that go badly. These are not punishment from an angry and revengeful God, but as reminders and instructions / guidance from a loving, if uncompromising, Father.

Keep listening.

He is a Creating and Sharing God

After a brief detour around the Book of Nahum, it is back to my “Eight Things that I Believe”. Remember – You are only allowed a maximum of twelve beliefs.

We are on to my Number Three. In number two, my “Belief” was that God made Man for his pleasure and purposes. I successfully evaded the question of what that purpose might be. Evasion is one of my core competencies. (“I’ll deal with that question at the end, if I may.”)

I am starting to have something of a problem. As I work through this list of eight items, or think ahead, I come across other important beliefs that warrant a place in the list. I am alright so far, as I am only up to ten (only you don’t know what they are yet).

“Belief Number Three” was originally to have been God’s purpose in making man. This is a pretty crucial subject, but I tripped myself on the question of why God embarked on this journey at all. Therefore, I am just going to have to add this to my list and see if I can deal with this now.

God’s overall purpose in starting the whole story (as per Genesis 1, for example) is not, as far as I can tell, set out anywhere. I am very happy to be contradicted on this point, and feel that I must be wrong and have missed something. (Who am I kidding? I will probably be very miffed when someone shows me the errors of my ways.)

I don’t know what theories people have and this is unusual for me. I normally undertake an informal survey, but not on this occasion. People must get fed up with me asking intrusive questions about religion and God. Even my second source, the 39 articles, has nothing to say on this subject. As a result, I will list some of the sillier ideas that have been put forward, without making any comment.

He was lonely and wanted some company
He likes to show off
He wants to be loved (a bit like the first one really)
He was bored

There is always the possibility that He didn’t have a purpose. He did it one moment, just to see what would happen. However, if that were the case, this blog would be totally undermined, and that is not fair.

It is time for me to get off the fence, and state my views on why God created the Universe and Man.

He likes to creates things
He wants to share himself

I carried out a Google Search on “Why did God create the Universe?” Nine of the first ten hits answered the question “Did God create the Universe?” and other one “Why did God NOT create the universe?” I am not sure what conclusions I should draw about Google from this. Perhaps the question “Why” is too difficult or just not asked very often.

The first serious hit on the Google search was about number 55, by Stafford Betty, a professor of religious studies. Stafford Betty puts forward the idea that God created the universe because he that is what he does. He is a creating God. (In my first blog in this series, I omitted this as a characteristic of God). He gives the analogy that a great composer, who composes music because it is something that flows from him. I’ll go for this reason. He created the Universe because he is a creating God. It is in his nature.

It is also possible that he created the Universe just as context for his creation of Man. The thought here is that the whole universe has only one purpose for God, which is to provide a backdrop for Man to live his life and for Man to appreciate the power of God. This alternative is an entirely credible conclusion from what I can see. The creation story in Genesis 1 could be interpreted in either way. However, if I have to decide for myself, one way or another, I will settle for the thought that God enjoys his creation for its own sake.

This still leaves us with the question why God made Man. Again, the Bible gives few clear answers, but perhaps a number of clues. The nearest that I can get to this, is that he wants to share himself and Man is the target of that sharing. Why God should want to do this is another question? (Questions within questions – will they never stop?). I can get no further than it is in His nature. For the same reason that He creates, He wants to share himself. It is in the nature of God himself to do these things.

There was still Time to Change

I have decided to take a short break from “The Eight Things that I Believe” (or was it nine?).

A few weeks ago, I made an excursion through the Minor Prophets. These make up the last 12 books of the Old Testament, and have a motley collection of themes. Most people ignore them, because they are at the back of the Old Testament, and don’t seem so important.

(They are “Minor”, because they are shorter than the “Majors”. There is no musical differentiation on major and minor keys, intended here.)

Individually they have some good stories and interesting lessons. The most famous one is probably the Book of Jonah, who was “swallowed by a whale”. Actually it wasn’t a whale, but a large fish, but who cares.

I would have liked to say that, in reading the Minor Prophets, I was particularly struck by some or other point. However, on this occasion, this would not be true. It was only some days after I had completed my meanderings through these twelve books that it occurred to me that the prophecy of Nahum (7th of the 12) was unusually uncompromising in its telling, even by the bloodthirsty standards of the Old Testament.

Like the story of Jonah (the 5th minor prophet), it is about the forthcoming destruction of the city of Nineveh (in what is now Northern Iraq). In the book of Jonah, however, the forthcoming destruction did not happen. The Book of Jonah was set some time earlier than the Book of Nahum and the two books are completely contrasting.

The Book of Jonah has a number of themes. One of them concerns Jonah’s announcement to the people of Nineveh of their impending destruction because of their evil. The city’s response is immediate. The inhabitants are appalled by their own acts, and go out of their way to demonstrate this before God. Those of you who have read the Book will know that God himself changes his intentions and spares them (classically called “A Happy Ending”).

But my original purpose in starting this blog was not so much to talk about the book of Jonah (book 5), but to contrast this to the Book of Nahum (book 7).

The Book of Nahum, set some time later, prophecies the complete destruction of Nineveh, (which took place in 612 BC). The prophet recounts the evil carried out by this city during the course of its brief reign as the leading city of the region (which I do not intend to go into here) and announces its imminent destruction.

This prophecy was not a warning. It was a statement of God’s intent, of (future) fact. There was no opportunity now for the City to change its way and to turn to God. It was too late for that. The decision was made.

Embedded in the storyline of Nahum are words of comfort to the people of Israel. Israel had suffered at the hands of this empire, and now this was going to be over. God reminded Israel of his love for them, while at the same time, reminding them of their obligations to serve Him. (This also could the subject of another blog, but not this time, folks).

The message of Nahum was clearly not for the people of Nineveh. They were not listening. They had had their moment and now it was over. The message was for God’s people (as a sign of his love) and for those for whom there was (or is) still an opportunity to change.

There comes a moment for individuals, for organisations, countries, when the clock has stopped and judgement (in whatever form) comes. But until that moment comes, there is still time to change.

If we are asking the question “Is this God’s judgement on us?”, then the book of Nahum shows us that the answer is probably no. If God’s judgement had come, we would have known about it. It would all be over. If God is calling people to return to Him, then there is still time, but that period will, at some point, come to an end.

His Own Pleasure and Purpose

When I did my original “List of Nine Items” for Ian Chambers, this was the first item on the list. I don’t know why I placed it first. It was not necessarily because I thought that it was the most important. It was just the first one that came into my head.

One could argue for ever about whether one belief is more important than another. However, as they are all part of the “Nine Items”, they are equally important. As “The Existence and Nature of God” came first, this one is second, merely as an arithmetical necessity.

Before we go on, I should mention that to get this far, you should have read Part 1 (link).
http://colinhawkersother.blogspot.com/2011/09/existence-and-nature-of-god.html
If you find that blog offensive and disagree with it violently, then you will enjoy this even less, and you should probably do something else.

Prayers are often phrased in the following way. They are requests to God to do something for us, our friends, our country perhaps, or the world as a whole. I do not make this statement to criticise it. My view at this point is largely neutral. However, it is my starting point that we are concerned largely with ourselves, even in our Religion.

All this is very natural. It is often good and right as well.

How does this sit with the fact that it was God who made man (and time, the earth and the Universe etc) and not the other way around (despite what some may say*)?

I could pose the question in a different way: “Did God create me for my benefit?” or “Did God create me for His benefit?" My original hypothesis is that we start by believing the former, i.e. that our creation was for our benefit. This universe is about me.

The theme in the Bible of God’s chosen people (whether the people of Israel in the Old Testament or the Church of the New Testament) places great emphasis on the importance of “us”. It also places even greater emphasis on God’s dealings with us, of what he requires from us.

God’s dealings with us also point us in the same direction. Life is not a trouble free existence and God is not a Father Christmas, bringing us endless presents. But I am only telling you this stuff now that you already know.

Why God should go to what seems to have been a great deal of trouble is not clear. The Westminster Shorter Catechism has a stab at this and says: “Man’s chief end is to know him and glorify him forever”. This is quite a leap.

So what is that purpose? This is a sensible question. The central point is that God made all this, everything that we see, touch, hear, think etc. for his pleasure and purpose. What my thoughts, ideas and speculation on what this purpose might be, will have to be saved for another day.


* For a heavyweight rebuttal of some of the arguments that God does not exist, you could worse than read: http://www.brainwaves.org.uk/reports/lion_bw_report_018.shtml

Existence and Nature of God

It was Ian Chambers to whom I first sent my “List of Nine Things in which I Believe”. He was suitably encouraging, but observed amongst other things, that (i) there were actually only eight items on the list and (ii) there was nothing on the nature or existence of God. He assumed that this was because I took the statement for granted.

He was correct, but I also agreed that it needed to be on the list, as it was “kind of important”. (This in itself is a “kind of “English understatement.)

I am told that the statement “I believe that God exists”, requires me to say what I mean by God. I am not very good at this intellectual or philosophical stuff. As a result, there will be a huge amount of plagiarism in this and a large number of statements which will be challengeable by people more articulate than me and accusations of “Shout loudly; Argument weak”, all of which, most likely, will be correct.

But this is my blog, so who cares. Grumpy and his brother have never been famous for rigour, just uninformed prejudice, together with 98% of the rest of the population.

So I will start with a quote from Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion”, where God is said to be ‘a superhuman intelligence, who deliberately designed and created the universe and everything in it, including us”. Actually I must confess I have not read the book. Furthermore I have lifted it from a quote from someone else’s article. However, the point is that this starting point does OK for me, as I am a man of very little intellectual rigour.

Next step is to expand on this, and to give God (and I will refer to him as “him”, in the masculine, out of intellectual laziness) a number of characteristics. I cannot prove any of them, but I am sure that they cannot be disproved either by endless arguments in smoke-filled college rooms.

He is the only God. There are no others. To put it another way, there is only one of him.

He is eternal and outside space and time. He has always existed and always will.

He created time, the universe and all that is in it. He sustains, guides and controls it. He created the Universe out of nothing. He creates order out of chaos.

He is a hidden God, who reveals himself as he chooses.

He is good. He is a moral God (included in the first of the Church of England’s “39 Articles”, which come highly recommended).

He cares and loves those who turn to Him and trust in Him.

There are many other characteristics that are ascribed to Him. Please do not be annoyed or angry with me, but I am not always sure that I can remember them or know what these all mean. I leave it to you to add to this list, and improve on this.

I want to be a Screwdriver

Do you ever have one of those random conversations, where you end up on a topic, with no particular recollection of how you got there? This occurred to me over Christmas, when talking to Louise. As in the film “Inception”, “In a dream, you never ask how you got to this point.” Perhaps most of my conversations are like this.

Anyway, this particular conversation alighted on the point of why God ever bothered to create this world and in particular, us. In the usual man-centred view, we think about “us” or “me”. We think in terms of what God does for us or should do for us, and ask why things happen to us. The thought of what God gets from this, leaves us scratching our heads, either at the question itself (“What sort of question is that?”) or leaving us perplexed as to a plausible answer. (An acceptable and realistic response is certainly “I don’t know”.)

Nevertheless, you may have your own answer. The nearest that I could come up with was a mixture of Old Testament, when, for example, God talks about “Making a Nation for my own Name” and the “New Testament”, as it describes the (spiritual) Church (being the totality of all those who trust God, and not to be confused with the organisations that go by the same name).

The theory that we talked about was that God has a role for us in this “Building” and that this role is pre-defined. In the initial drawings and specifications for God’s “Spiritual Building”, there are hundreds and thousands of different parts, all important, but not all visible. The parts that visible are the most noteworthy. “Perhaps I can apply for the post of a Prophet; a minor one would be alright”.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that. God writes the specifications and the parts, and allots us roles within this. We cannot all be Great Doors, or Magnificent Windows. We do not get a vote. Of course, we can choose not to follow the route, to object to it, to be puzzled by it, to doubt it.

But if I could apply for a role, I would be a screwdriver. Pretty small and insignificant in the overall scheme of things, but occasionally very useful in some specialised way. It spends most of its time doing nothing, just being a screwdriver, waiting to be used to do what it does best; screwing in screws.

Writing a Novel and the Shepherds

November has been and gone and with it, the deadline for the “Write a Novel in November”.

I thought (correctly) that writing a novel without a couple of intermediate steps was a seriously bad idea. As a first step, a short story seemed to be the logical step, and I had my first crack at this. Being a modest person, some critical feedback was sought and received. The best that could be said was that it scored well “For Effort.” Don’t give up the day job. One member of my family said that the short story was good (with a face that looked as if she was chewing a lemon), but that my Blogs were really good (said with the enthusiasm of a diner at a gourmet meal). Point taken.

I was trying to bring the story of the birth of Jesus, the shepherds and the wise men into the 21st century. By this I mean, if Jesus were to be born today, to whom would the angels appear and who would be the wise men?

The other question that had strolled through my mind was why were these events recorded in the bible? They certainly make for some great nativity plays, and where would School Christmas Plays be without these celebrated characters? (Kevin asks where the essential donkey came from in the original).

Leaving such theological niceties aside, I thought that some teenage boys, finishing their shifts at McDonalds, would meet an angel, in the form of a glowing business man, on their way home. The three wise men would clearly have money to give away, so in this day and age, they must be bankers (I have thought about extending the story to cover how they came to look for the star in the first place, but that would be even more speculative and take too long).

As to the point of the story, I imagined that Mary, having travelled so far in the cold for a reunion of some kind, and ending up in a hospital without any staff or beds (nearer to real life in England than you might imagine), was feeling very cheesed off. What of all the promises that had been made months before about the baby. Joseph too might have been puzzled, not to say disbelieving. And into this come our Likely Lads, in the form of the shepherds or McDonalds staff, who had just been given the same message as she had received all that time ago.

Maybe (and only maybe, because I am really stretching a point here) Joseph was still not completely convinced by the whole affair, and worried about the money, when in walk three wise men / bankers bearing gifts to value of a decent win on the National Lottery.

Just because the Bible does not record these emotions does not mean that I am wrong. I might not be correct either, but the story is there for a reason and it makes you think, doesn’t it.

As to the second rate story of my lads from McDonalds, glowing businessmen, and three bankers, I may just put it on my Novel blog, and be done with it. Or I may not.