Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Week 6

Remember this from two weeks ago?

We all wrote this sentence in our non-dominant hand. This was explained in the "Drops Like Stars" film


  1. The Art of Disruption
  2. The Art of Honesty
  3. The Art of Elimination,
  4. Solidarity
  5. The Art of Possession, which is not the same thing as ownership.
  6. The Art of "Failure" 
Look also for these class themes:
-a Prodigal Son  paradoxical hemistiche
-the liminality  (see "Radical Loving Care," pp, 82ff) of the hospital hallway
-removal of "insulators"
-listen for the word "lament"
-removing the boundary (or "box") of a bounded set.
-how "texting" can literally save lives 
-the power of unplanned and unscripted interruptions
-help for Philemon.  Listen for a Paul text: 2 Corinthians 6

see complete album of sketchnotes here

There is a difference between ownership and possession. I own the guitar, but Joey possesses it in ways I can’t. We own the Jeff Condon painting, but our friend possessed it in ways we don’t.
You can own something and not possess it.
 You can possess something and not own it.

 One of the first Christians, a man named Paul, wrote about his “troubles, hardships, distresses, beatings, imprisonments, riots, hard work, sleepless nights, and hunger.” This is a man who suffered, yet he doesn’t end his list with despair.
-Bell, Rob (2012-07-24). Drops Like Stars: A Few Thoughts on Creativity and Suffering

Chiasm from the film:

--When Jesus died, he:


N.T. Wright video: Why begin with Philemon? It's "pressing your nose against the window to see the landscape"

We read Philemon in 3 translations

. common problems:

-make thesis clear and obvious.
-evidence from the text for any assumption/conclusion
-practical app
-DO of letter
use class translation
-2 rules/mechanical
Click here for a complete signature paper, which would flunk due to mechanical errors alone.  They are all noted in red and corrected.

Here are the "13 Commandments"--that is the most common mechanical errors in signature papers over the years


2)clauses and fragments that are not full sentences
3)commas where they don't belong (or no commas where they do)
4) CAPS: a)words like king, president, pastor, apostle are NOT capitalized unless used as a title.  "Barrack Obama is the President" is  not correct.   "President Obama says.." is.
b)often students capitalize words because they are important: faith, prayer,altar.. Incorrect
c)"Bible" is capitalized; "biblical" is not  Some formats allow Bible to not be capitalized; if you choose that, be consistent throughout paper
5)Careful with plurals, possessives, apostrophes etc.  Google if you need help.
This sign is all over the country, but dead wrong!
6)For historical figures whose name ends in 's, you write  "Jesus' disciples," not "Jesus's."  Note you have a lot of these who may appear in your paper: Onesimus, Moses, et al
7)Traditions and translations vary as to whether or not "He" "Him" "His" are capitalized when referring to God or Jesus.  Either way you choose, be consistent thought the paper.
8)"Their"  vs "they're" type errors
9)It's vs its.  Read this for help.  Think in your mind about our textbook title:
 "How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth"

or is it

"How to Read the Bible For All It's Worth"
Answer and the look.  Most students guess incorrectly, This is even explained in the preface.

10)singular and plural disagreement across sentences  Google for help
11)Departments vary in this. For biblical studies, spell out numbers under 100.
12)HUGE: "who" for people; "that" for things.  "A person that likes cookies" is wrong
13)miselanyaous speling errrors

This sign in a church is incorrect:


Philemon help --------------------------------------------

--When Jesus died, he:


 died naked (but not in Christian art and movies) to subvert shame

I am not here to offend anyone unnecessarily.
But I believe Corrie Ten Boom was right and right on:

Jesus died naked.

Even the (very conservative) Dallas Theological commentaries assume this, so this is not just some "liberal" agenda:

"That Jesus died naked was part of the shame which He bore for our sins. " -link

Which means this picture
(found on a blog with no credit)
is likely wrong(Jesus looks too white).

...and largely right (What Jesus is wearing).

I answered a question about this a few years ago, I would write it a bit differently know, but here it is:

First of all, it is probable that (again, contrary to nearly all artwork and movies), Jesus hung on the cross absolutely naked. This was a typical way of crucifixion, to increase the shame factor. Romans might occasionally add a loincloth type of garment as a token concession and nod to Jewish sensitivity; but not very often, it would seem. Of course, once we get past the emotive and cultural shock of imagining Jesus naked, we realize that if He indeed die naked, the symbolism is profound and prophetic: In Scripture, Jesus is called the "Second Adam". As such, it would make sense that He died "naked and unashamed." We are also told that "cursed is he who dies on a tree." The nakedness was a sign and enfolding of shame and token of curse. And the wonderful story of Corrie ten Boom and family, told in the book and movie "The Hiding Place," relates. One of the turning points of her ability to endure the Ravensbruck concentration camp, particularly the shame of walking naked past the male guards, was her conviction that Jesus too was shamed and stripped naked before guards. "Finally, it dawned on me," she preached once," that this (shaming through nakedness) happened to Jesus too..., and Jesus is my example, and now it is happening to me, then I am simply doing what Jesus did." She concluded, "I know that Jesus gave me that thought and it gave me peace. It gave me comfort and I could bear the shame and cruel treatment." 

Stephen Seamands, in "Wounds That Heal," (much of it a free read here) stirs me to wonder if shaming is always perpetrated in two stages:

1)forced/involuntary/public nakedness (literal or emotional) nakedness of soul may be even worse)
2)the promise of continued shaming beyond death (by dishonoring our name after we are gone, or sending us to hell in the afterlife ).

Seamands quotes the most important theologian you have never heard of, Frank Lake, and that section reminds how vital it might be to doggedly defend the doctrine (that most evangelicals seem to think is unspeakable.... even though as we mentionedh very conservative Dallas Seminary professors claim it is necessary, let alone Martin Hengel in his classic book "Crucifixion)"that Jesus died completely naked...especially that he might completely identify with, incarnate; convert and subvert our shame, particularly of sexual abuse or memories:
Crucifixions were purposely carried out in public..Executioners heightened the shame by turning the gruesome personal ordeal into grisly public entertainment.. In most paintings, films and artistic depictions, the crucified figure of Jesus is partially covered with a loincloth. But in the ancient world, the victim was always crucified naked. The shameful exposure often continued after death since it was common for the victim to be denied burial.. Hengel explains, ...'What it meant for man in antiquity to be refused burial, and the dishonor that went with it, can hardly be appreciated by modern man.' ...Frank Lake expresses the truth powerfully in describing Christ's experience of shame in nakedness: 'He hangs on the Cross naked. Both the innocent who were not loved and the guilty who have spurned love are ashamed. Both have something to hide. Clothing is the symbol of hiding what we are ashamed to reveal. In His own innocence He is identified with the innocent in nakedness...He was so deprived of His natural clothing of transfigured beauty and glory that men, seeing Him thus, shrank away from Him. The whole world will see this King appearing in all beauty and glory, because He allowed be utterly taken away.' -Seamands, pp 49-50
More posts on Jesus dying naked?  See:.
 "The Last Temptation of Movie Boycotters,"

That some well-meaning folks suggest we should never mention his nakedness,
 that doing so is so wrong as to be satanic...
 that we should fear thinking about genitalia,
 is represented here:

That he may have been naked is as about as important as what kind of nails were used to nail him there. Copper? Bronze? Iron? Who cares?! Was the crown of thorns made of Briar thorns or Thistle? Who cares?

Did Jesus die? Who cares? (Bear with me).

Did Jesus lay down his life willingly and by his own power, and then take it back up again just as willingly and just as powerfully? THAT is the point.

Don't get distracted by images of genetalia! [sic] And let's face it; as soon as you hear someone say "Jesus died naked on a cross", that's the first thing that pops into your carnal, fleshly, sinful mind. As soon as you hear it, you are IMMEDIATELY distracted.
That man who is telling you that may not know that he's being used as a servant of Satan; but he is.
Of course, I feel for this position, and am aware that the naked Jesus doctrine could be terribly abused...But I fear that ironically, it may be crucial to recover/uncover.
It may not be a "required doctrine,"....but..


Several pages later, Seamands, in a discussion on the practical relevance of the Trinity (Note:see his entire wonderful book on this important topic):

'My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?' On the cross, Christ gave expression not only to his own sorrow and disappointment, and ours, but also to God's...At the foot of the cross, our mournful cries of lament are always welcome...

...This cry is the only place in the gospels where Jesus didn't address God with the personal, intimate, 'My Father,'...

..On the cross, the bonds of trust between the Father and the Son seem to disintegrate. As theologian Jurgen Moltmann says, 'The love that binds the one to the other is transformed into a dividing curse.'....Yet at the cross, the Father and the Son are never more united, never more bound together. They are one in their surrender, one in their self-giving. The Father surrenders the Son...The Son, in turn, surrenders himself...So {they} are united even in their separation, held together by their oneness of will and purpose
-Seamands, 67-68
More on the dynamics of God forsaking God here, and more on the trinitarian centrality of all this by clicking the "trinity" label below this post.

Finally, Seamands helps me grasp that Jesus died not only for our shame, but our rage
(rage, of course, is often enacted as a reaction to shame). Rage, ironically, is what literally killed Jesus (and shamed him into nakedness):

Christ became the innocent, willing victim of their rage. But not only their [those at the cross] rage -ours too. Frank Lake is right: 'We attended the Crucifixion in our crowds, turned on our Healer..' -Seamands, 69
Which of course, leads to Jesus healing us precisely when we deserve it least and need it most.
Naked and (un)ashamed.



Erie Chapman, author of one of your textbooks  ("Radical Loving Care") was interviewed here below about the book, and his Baptist Healing Trust foundation:

No comments:

Post a Comment