Easter Body

It's a couple days after Easter. I didn't write anything about Easter, except some thoughts on Jesus death.

What was Jesus' body like after Easter? after he had risen from death? (I don't think that it's helpful to distinguish it from of the other 'raised from the dead' stories just here, but maybe another time.) The one thing thing that I've heard that really distinguishes it (besides immortality) is the walking through walls. The Easter body is able to walk through walls. Don't anticipate much privacy in heaven.

I'm not sure, however, that such abilities would be normal for the most Resurrected bodies. Jesus was able to walk on water while have the same kind of body that we all have now - and that isn't normal human behavior. He cast out demons, healed the sick, multiplied tasty treats, but this is outside the bounds of everyday expectation. If Jesus demonstrated these rare abilities before his death, why wouldn't it be fair to assume that the abilities He had after His death were also fairly unique to Him?

Another thought: I woke up Easter morning wanting to hear a Sandi Patti song. I looked through my whole Sandi Patti CD collection (2) and couldn't find what I was looking for. So I found it on Youtube here. I suspect I shall not have another Sandi Patti 'yearning' for quite some time. But the song is an interesting one - pretty much all questions (like my favorite from M. Card) "Did the grass sing? Did the earth rejoice to feel you again?" I haven't heard the grass sing, but if it sang then, I hope the grass remembers how.

Emergent Questions - Is God Violent?

Brian McLaren has written a new book, A New Kind of Christianity. I ran across a link from my brother Dan's Blog, and followed link after link until I found a video of Brian McLaren discussing a part of his book. It addresses the question, "Is God Violent?". To which I immediately replied to myself, "Yes". But McLaren doesn't like that answer. Although in the video, he discusses how many people are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with God-caused harm. There's the story of the Flood or the slaughter of the Caananites in the OT to put this into focus.

Although he pats himself on the back for raising this question, he doesn't want to directly answer it. Instead, casts doubt on whether its a good idea to have God as the source of this violence. I think a great follow-up question to McLaren's question, "Is God violent?" might be, "What do the Scriptures say? How do you read them?" (hat tip to Jesus).

If we are uncomfortable with the God that the Bible talks about, then who do we turn to? Shall we make up our own God or try to twist the Bible to say what it never intended?

The Bible clearly implicates God in Ananias' and Sephira's death in the Book of Acts. That was violent? Does it matter the numbers after that? 5? 50? 1000? a city? the world? This was seen by the Church as a good and right thing. And, in contrast to McLaren's view, the Fear of the Lord that came was a good thing.

I have not read McLaren's book. I'm simply responding to his video. Frankly, if his book and video are similar, I'm not interested in reading his book.

(image from Amazon.com)

Book of Mormon and Map Traps

I am not a Latter-Day Saint. I don't believe that the Book of Mormon is authentic in the way that the LDS Church believes it to be. I believe that there are many flaws, but there is a tiny detail in the 'original' Book of Mormon that clinches the deal for me. To describe this, I will first need to explain about Map Traps.

What if you were a maker of maps? And what if you made your living by making maps? What would you do if another map-maker came along, copied your maps, then sold their maps for less than you? Could you prove that they copied your maps? Map-makers (cartographers) have purposefully inserted into their maps mistakes - errors that would not be duplicated by someone looking at the actual source. It might be a street on the map where there is, in reality, a dead end. It might be a made-up lake in the middle of a field. But the duplication of the error would indicate copying because a mistake like that made twice is simply too remote a possibility. Thus, the wronged cartographer would have the proof, or at least very strong evidence, that the second is not original work.

Some quick background about the origins of the Book of Mormon. It was first published in English in 1830. As the story goes, Joseph Smith Jr. translated the story from golden plates that he had received earlier from an angel. Since then, the book has had updates that changed some parts - mostly grammatical errors.

OK, now we come to the rub. Here's the original. King James Version, Isaiah 6:2a says, "Above it stood the seraphims...." The error here is grammatical. "Seraphim" is the plural of "seraph". It was a mistake in the King James - the Bible that Joseph Smith Jr. had available to him. It was his map trap to show that he copied the Bible rather than translated the plates. For in the original Book of Mormon, published in 1830, in 2Nephi 9, it reads, "Above it stood the seraphims...." (see picture on top)

I used to get a chance to talk the the LDS missionaries often when they would come knocking on my door. They haven't come by my house in many moons. They are genuinely kind people, and I miss them. We would give them food - even invite them to sit-down meals. But alas, they don't come around anymore.

(image from iNephi.com)