Zigga-what? Tower of Babel and Jacob's Ladder

I've always envisioned the Tower of Babel to be shaped like a cylinder with little windows here and there...like some kind of medieval tower. I've also considered Jacob's ladder to be just that...a ladder. But they may not have been.

Instead, both of them may have been ziggurats, like the one below.

It's a little blurry, but you get the idea. I'm not very sure where this ziggurat was from but this is more like what the Tower of Babel and Jacob's Ladder looked like. Growing up, I would hear about the story of Jacob's Ladder and picture angels sliding up and down a ladder Batman and Robin style, kind of like the one below:

I never understood how multiple angels could go up and go down the ladder simultaneously. It didn't seem like they would have much elbow room. Jacob's vision makes a bit more sense when we think of angels climbing and descending the steps of a ziggurat instead of the rungs of a ladder.

At any rate, ziggurats were quite popular in the late 3rd millennium B.C. If we place Jacob historically in the 1900-1600 B.C. area, this would make him contemporary with the Mesopotamian usage of ziggurats.

She & Him + Sloss Furnace = Awesome

Jessica, the Cortezes, and I had a blast at the She & Him concert last night at Sloss Furnace. Great friends, great conversations, great music, and a great venue (very hot, though). Here's an old picture I found of the factory where the concert was held.

It doesn't look like much but...well, it ain't. It has changed a little from the time this picture was taken (at least the grounds around the barn-looking-thing have changed). We had no idea what it would be like but it was very fun. We'll know to get there early next time for the coveted spots above the railing. Otherwise it's just standing.

The opening act was the Chapin Sisters. We missed the first song or so but were impressed. Zooey came out to sing harmony with the sisters (she's quite the talented lass--vocals, keyboard, and ukulele) and then left, returning later with M. Ward and the backup band for an awesome show. My favorite song may have been their cover of The Beach Boys, "Wouldn't It Be Nice." For a much better review, check out this blog.

Photography was difficult with the guards doing body searches for digital cameras but my handy iPhone managed to get one photo that is semi-discernable.

The little blur in the front is Zooey:)

Afterward, it was to Yogurt Mountain! Always a great way to end an evening.

Tattoo Thoughts

I think some tattoos are weird, gross, odd, and disturbing. Others are redneck, hillbilly, and plain dumb (like the scorpion tattoo I recently saw on the top of a bald guy's head). However, some tattoos are incredibly cool.

That being said, I've considered getting a tattoo for quite some time but since I was not (and am not) completely sure I haven't done it (they cost quite a bit of jack, from what I've heard).

Any tattoo on my body must meet two criteria:

1. Aesthetics: it must look wickedly awesome.
2. Significance: it must mean something (to me, at least)

So I've thought about it for a while and have made a breakthrough. I won't say I'm completely sold on the idea, but this is the best thing I've found so far: 

 evkei/non dei/ auvxa,nein, evme. de. evlattou/sqai

"He must increase but I must decrease" (John 3:30)

Let me tell you a few reasons I like this:

1. John 3:30 is just an awesome verse and makes a great motto. Besides the fact that it looks really cool, this verse reminds me that my life is not my own and pride (one of my biggest faults) should have no place in my heart.
2. It is a Greek uncial (manuscript with capital letters) which looks cooler than the miniscule (the lower case letters just below the image).
3. AND this is an image from Codex Sinaiticus, one of the world's oldest Bibles (the oldest significant book to survive antiquity, in fact). In the 4th century, Eusebius, the "father of church history" made about 50 "luxury edition" Bibles and this codex (book) seems to be one of them. It was found in the middle of the 19th century in the Monastery of St. Catherine, Mount Sinai.

For an idea of what this may look like, check out this guy's tattoo.

I have a few reservations that keep nagging at me about this:

1. I'm not sure if I like how the verse is formed into two and a half lines. I wish it were even and symmetrical, perhaps just in two lines. However, the more I look at it the less this bothers me.
2. Where would I put this? I don't think I like it high on my side (like the guy in the above link), so I think about the side of my shoulder or on the inside of my forearm. However, would it fit well on my shoulder, and would I be able to read it easily (without breaking my neck)? Also, if I put it on my forearm, do I want it visible for anyone to see?

I'm not sure. I really like the idea but I have to put a lot more thought into this before I go through with it.

The Purpose of Prayer

HT: Sacred Sandwich

John's Identity Crisis

Jesus said that John the Baptist was the "Elijah" that should come and restore all things (Mark 9:11-13). However, when the Jewish delegation was sent from Jerusalem to investigate John and question if he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the Prophet, John denied that he was Elijah (John 1:21). What gives? Did John not understand his role? Did he not realize the prophecies concerning himself (Mal. 4:5-6)?

Perhaps there are two ways we can explain this conundrum:

1. Literal Elijah. How did Elijah's life on earth end? "He didn't die...he went to heaven in a chariot of fire!" That's partially correct: he did not experience physical death but the Bible actually says that a chariot of fire separated Elijah and Elisha and that a whirlwind carried Elijah to heaven (2 Kings 2:11). Thus, if Elijah did not die but ascended to heaven, the Jews in the first century may have interpreted the prophecies to mean that Elijah would literally come back, descending from heaven physically just like he ascended! If so, John's statement could have been a denial that he was not the literal Elijah come back from heaven (though he dressed and acted remarkably like Elijah).

2. Humble Forerunner. John the Baptist never identified himself as Elijah. This does not require us to think he was unaware of his prophetic office. Another explanation that fits John's personality better is that John simply did not think as much of his ministry as Jesus did. He called himself "the voice" of Isaiah 40:3 that prepares the way of the Lord, but he was always pointing to Jesus as his superior (Matt. 3:14; John 1:19-34).

Neither option completely solves the problem but they both show that there are more possibilities than "John didn't know his office" or "John contradicted Jesus."

Grace Upon Grace

And from his fulness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given by Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known (John 1:16-18, ESV).  

So what exactly does "grace upon grace" mean in John 1:16? (rhyme unintentional). Does it mean upon or instead of?

Argument for upon: Some take it to mean "upon," as in "God piled grace on top of grace with the coming of Jesus." Because John 1:14-18 has many parallels with Exodus 32-34, some see "grace upon grace" as a parallel to Moses asking for grace even though he had already "found grace" in God's sight (Ex. 33:13). This is viewed along with the fact that God had given Moses the Law (a "grace" in its own right) but when the people sinned Moses broke the tablets, having to make two new tablets and scale Sinai once again, this time for a supernatural display of God's glory (Ex. 34:1-20; also, verse 20 connects with "no one has seen God" of John 1:18). In other words, Moses received a grace, then a greater display of God's grace because the first "grace" was not enough. The Law, then, came by grace but Christ came in an even greater display of grace.

However, this argument is undercut by two facts: 1) "grace upon grace" is typically constructed with epi, and not anti,, (cf. Sirach 26:15), the latter of which is found in John's prologue; and 2) there is no precedent in Greek literature for this usage (Blomberg, Historical Reliability of John's Gospel, 75; Kostenberger, John, 47).

Argument for instead of: The contrast of verse 17 ("for the law came by Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ"), which follows immediately after the "grace upon grace" clause could be the commentary that explains it (Carson, The Gospel According to John, 132). Yes, Matthew 5:17-18 seems to indicate some lingering effect or force of the Law, but the remainder of John contains a constant antithesis between the Law and Jesus. He replaces the Temple (ch. 2), is the "bread of life" in contrast to the manna in the wilderness (which came from God, though the people attributed it to Moses, ch. 6), and replaced the water in the Feast of Tabernacles (ch. 7). Further, He is the "true vine" (15:1) as opposed to Israel in the Old Testament, for Jesus is forming His own Messianic community after not being received of "his own" (1:11).

Conclusion: As cool as the first argument sounds, I suppose I will side with the second argument in favor of "instead of." Because John embedded so many themes in the Prologue that he would later develop in the life of Jesus, perhaps the "grace upon grace" means that Jesus is the greater grace that replaces the Law of Moses.

Open the Door

Electronic signals are swarming around my head. Radio signals are flowing through your living room. All sorts of "stuff" is around us. But do we have the ability to receive it?

The apostle Paul says, "he who sows to his flesh will from the flesh reap corruption; but he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life" (Gal. 6:8). Paul's analogy is instructive. A farmer is helpless to grow grain; all he can do is provide the right conditions for the growing of grain. He cultivates the ground, he plants the seed, he waters the plants, and then the natural forces of the earth take over and up comes the grain. This is the way it is with the Spiritual Disciplines [meditation, prayer, fasting, study, worship, solitude, service, etc.]--they are a way of sowing to the Spirit. The Disciplines are God's way of getting us into the ground; they put us where he can work within us and transform us. By themselves the Spiritual Disciplines can do nothing; they can only get us to the place where something can be done. They are God's means of grace. The inner righteousness we seek is not something that is poured on our heads. God has ordained the Disciplines of the spiritual life as the means by which we place ourselves where he can bless us. (Richard J. Foster, Celebration of Discipline, 7; emp. mine)