Posts

Posted on

Why Church? To Care for the World

Jeff Garrison 
Bluemont and Mayberry Presbyterian Churches
March 20, 2022
Luke 10:25-37

Sermon recorded on Friday, March 18 at Mayberry Church

Thoughts at the beginning of worship:

We’re continuing with our Lenten theme, “Why Church?” Our world can be cruel. But that shouldn’t be the church. We’re to show an alternative to the world.[1] We’re to be a place and a people who care for others. And because we know the church is far more than just what goes on inside these walls an hour on Sunday morning, we are reminded to care not just here, but wherever we find ourselves. How can we care for one another, for our neighbors, and for the world?   

Before reading the Scriptures:

The Good Samaritan is one of the best known and most loved parts of scripture. We have Jesus answering the questions of a lawyer. This isn’t a lawyer like we think, but one who studies God’s law. In other words, he’s a theologian. That should let the lawyers off the hook a bit; after all, they find themselves at the blunt of enough jokes. This lawyer/theologian begins by asking Jesus a question about eternal life. Jesus asks him what the law says, and he answers with the great commandment. Love God and neighbor. 

Jesus agrees. But the lawyer continues, asking for clarification. This provides an opportunity for Jesus to tell a story. As Luke recalls Jesus’ teachings in this section, he points out that our relationships to neighbors, to Jesus, and to God are all important.[2]

Read Luke 10:25-37

After the reading of Scripture:

Come on Jesus! You were asked a direct question. “Who is my neighbor?” There can’t be a better way to muddy the waters about neighbors than to tell a story about a journey. It’s hard enough to know our neighbor when we deal with those living close by. But when we travel? 

Traveling

When we travel, we often don’t want to be bothered? Think of how things are designed to insure our comfort and privacy? We drive in enclosed cars on freeways that keep us from facing other vehicles, with easy access ramps to and from the highways which helps us avoid hassles. At the exits we find drive-through restaurants where we talk to a machine along with gas pumps where we swipe a card and never talk to an attendant. Our whole system of highway transportation has evolved to isolate us from one another. 

So, who is our neighbor? How do we know a neighbor when traveling? How about closer to home. Are those in the next hollow our neighbor? Who are our neighbors in the United States? In the world? What about Russia or North Korea or Cuba? This question is problematic. How many billion people are they in the world? They can’t all be my neighbor, can they? We must admit that Jesus’ answer to the lawyer’s question doesn’t make our quest for eternal life any easier.  

Putting it into context: The Good Samaritan doesn’t stand alone

To understand this passage, realize that the parable of the Good Samaritan, like much of scripture, doesn’t stand alone! It’s a part of a longer conversation between Jesus and a lawyer. Like lawyers of our day, this dude tries to trap Jesus. He asks: “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” In a way, the question is flawed. How can we do anything to inherit. Inheritance is a gift; we don’t work for it.[3] Eternal life comes through grace, but back to the dialogue… 

Jesus responds with a question of his own. “What do the scriptures say?” The man answers, quotes from the Torah, the books of Deuteronomy and Leviticus, telling Jesus that one must “love God with all your heart, soul, strength and mind,” and one must love your neighbor as yourself.[4]

Who is our neighbor?

“You got it,” Jesus responds. Do this and live.” Perhaps the lawyer hopes to trap Jesus as he asks a follow-up question. “Who is my neighbor?” However, the question naturally arises from such a command. The Jewish rabbis of the day had generally interpreted one’s neighbor in restricted ways. They did not have the benefit of Mr. Rogers encouraging us all to be good neighbors. Instead, “neighbors” were generally understood to be pure blooded Jews.[5] Others, like the half-bred Samaritans, could be ignored.  

The lawyer’s probably thinking, “If I only have to love those like myself, I’ve got it made! The boarding pass for the heaven express is in the mail.” And then Jesus tricks him into realizing those low-down dirty Samaritans who live across the tracks are neighbors. Our passage starts with the lawyer trying to trap Jesus, now we see that Jesus laid a trap for him. Upon hearing the story, the lawyer is forced to admit that the Samaritan is the good guy. 

Nouns and verbs

Interestingly, the man’s question speaks about a neighbor as a noun (a person, place of thing). Jesus responds, not with a noun, but with the verb form of a neighbor. A neighbor becomes an action, one who shows mercy. Being neighborly isn’t because of location; it’s something we do.[6]

Story told with contemporary enemies:

Jesus ends the conversation with the command to go and do likewise. Pretty tough words! “Go and do.” Over the centuries this story has become one of the most loved and best-known passages in scripture. But do we realize the force of this command? This is a scandal! If we were to tell this story today, with the force that Jesus told it, the Samaritan would be someone we despised—maybe a Russian soldier or an illegal alien.  

Encountering Jesus

In A Generous Orthodoxy, Brian McLaren describes a series of encounters with Jesus that “ruined his life, ruined it for good, in a good kind of way.”[7] In some ways, this is what happens. If the lawyer listens, this encounter will change his life radically. I don’t think he’s that interested in being changed, but it happens.

I vividly remember back when I was in seminary in Pittsburgh. I’d been hired, sight unseen, to assist at a church in Butler, a town to the north. In the phone interview, they sold me on Butler as a quaint little town that’s a pleasant drive through the countryside, just 30 miles up Route 8.” Little did I know that in the 30 miles from the seminary to the church were 48 stop lights! I counted them on my second trip. 

I was always in a rush on Sunday mornings as I had to be there early to teach Youth Sunday School. One Sunday I was running a little later than usual, and I passed a family whose car was broken down on the highway. Do you think I stopped? No, I would have been late and who knows what those kids I taught would have gotten into. But I felt guilty afterwards—especially as I pondered this passage. I played the role of the priest rushing to Jerusalem to lead a service in the temple, except that in the story, the priest is heading away from Jerusalem. He can’t use his work as an excuse.[8]

An impossible commandment?

This story stands as an impossible commandment. Yet, at the same time, it’s an imperative we follow it. You might say in taking this story seriously, we’re placed between a rock and a hard place! We cannot be neighbors to everyone; we cannot always act like the Samaritan to all the people we come contact with in this world. Only God can do that, right? Thankfully, there is forgiveness and grace.

An allegory 

Let me suggest another way to draw ourselves into this story. Instead of trying to see ourselves as the Samaritan (or even the priest or Levite), let’s place ourselves in the ditch beside the road. We’ve been robbed and beaten. We lie helpless. The Samaritan who stops is Jesus. In some ways Jesus was a like the Samaritans. Persecuted, the “religious Jews” looked down on him. And Jesus paid out more than required for our wounds—giving his life for our sins. 

So, Jesus picks us up out of the ditch, bandages our wounds, restores our soul, makes sure we are on the way to recovery, and arranges to continue care for us. By the way, the church now plays the role of the innkeeper. Once we have been nursed back to health, Jesus pats us on the back and tells us, “Go and do the same.”      

Understanding this passage this way, as an allegory, summarizes the gospel. Jesus shows great mercy to us and expects us to do the same to our sisters and brothers in this world. Such interpretation of the passage is ancient, as early as the second century.[9] But even as an allegory, it comes back to what we do.

The desire for eternal life

It’s interesting that this story is a part of the extended answer to the question, “what must I do to receive eternal life.” In answering this question, Jesus quickly moves pass the commandments, the theological dogma, and instead Jesus tells a story about our relationship to our neighbors. For Jesus, these relationships are not isolated incidents or theological concepts, but actual encounters with real people who have needs. 

If we have been lifted out of the ditch by Jesus, if we have experienced salvation, if we are assured of eternal life, we must go and do likewise, to all our neighbors.  

Emphasis on “Go and do”

While I accept the allegory interpretation of this passage as one way to understand it, I also see the danger in such an interpretation. John Calvin, one of the founders of our theological tradition, questioned the allegory interpretation because he felt it diminished our Lord’s command to “Go and do likewise.[10]

Let me interpret this parable in this manner. We must first accept and believe in Jesus Christ and the gift he offers to us (that’s Jesus pulling us out of the ditch). Following our acceptance of salvation, we must then live as the Samaritan, helping others, regardless of how we feel about them.

Conclusion

Like all the folks in the story, we’re all on a journey through life. The question we’re left with is how we go about making this journey. Do we continue to travel down the road with our windows closed and our eyes straight head, the radio up so loud that we can’t hear anyone calling out for help? Or do we slow down and look for opportunities to make a difference in the lives of others? The lawyer asks the question for us, “who is my neighbor?” Jesus turns that question around and asks us, “To whom have you been a neighbor?” How do we answer? Amen.

[1] The Great Ends of the Presbyterian Church USA include the command to “exhibit the kingdom of heaven to the world.” Book of Order, F-1.0304

[2] Following the Good Samaritan in Luke’s Gospel is the story of Mary and Martha (relating to him, then gives the example of the Lord’s Prayer (our relationship to God the Father). 

[3] Kenneth E. Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Press, 2008), 286.

[4] Deuteronomy 6:4-5, Leviticus 19:18

[5] Norval Geldenhuys, The Gospel of Luke: he New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 311, 313 n5.

P[6] James R. Edwards, The Gospel According to Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015), 323.. 

[7] Brian D. McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004 ), 20.

[8] We’re told the priest and Levite were going “down that road.” Jerusalem sat on a hill at 2600 feet. Jericho was below sea level. So going down meant they were leaving their work behind and possibility heading home or to visit realities. See Edwards, 320.

[9] Edwards, 324.

[10] Edwards, 324, John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.5.19. 

“A man was going down… (Luke 10:30). A foggy morn on Laurel Fork Road.

Posted on

Red Famine (some background on the conflict between Ukraine and Russia)

Anne Applebaum, Red Famine: Stalin’s War on Ukraine (2017), 17 hours and 46 minutes

I read reviews of this book when it first came out. It looked intriguing, but I never got around to read it. When Russia invaded Ukraine, I decided I needed to read something to get myself up to speed on what is happening in the world. I have often appreciated Applebaum’s insights on talk shows, so I tried to find this book. Guess what, there were no hard copies immediately available, so I got an audible copy and listened to the book. I am glad that I did and recommend this book as a helpful way to understand more of what’s going on in Ukraine. If you only read the introduction and epilogue, you’ll have a much better understanding of what’s happening. 

The word Ukraine means borderland. While much of its history is that of a colony (of Poland, Imperial Russia, the Austrian/Hungarian Empire, and the Soviet Union), it has a distinct language and culture separate from each of these. Applebaum provides a brief history of the region prior to the Bolshevik revolution in 1917, but her story really begins with the defeat of the Czar and the rise of the Bolsheviks. The defeat of the Czar and the rise of the Soviet state might best be understood through a line from the song “Won’t Get Fooled Again,” by “The Who.” “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” 

When Russia fell to the Bolsheviks and pulled out of the Great War, Ukraine was able to press its own identity and for a few short periods, became independent. However, independence was short-lived as the country constantly being overrun. Twice by the Bolsheviks conquered Kiev, along with the German/Austrian/Hungarian army and both the White and Black armies who fought the Bolshevik. The region value came from the grain produced in its fertile ground.  After it finally arrived within the Soviet sphere (Ukraine had its own communist leaders, who didn’t always go along with Moscow), the country primarily became as a place for grain to feed the Soviet rising industry. 

The first demands and confiscation of grain occurred during this time as Lenin saw Ukraine as a source for feeding the masses in the more industrial regions of Russia. Following the Revolution and the fights against White Russians, along with a drought in 1921, the young Soviet Union needed grain. They demanded it from Ukraine, even though she had suffered under the same circumstances. Interestingly, when the America Relief Association under the work of Herbert Hoover brought food to Russia, the were discouraged from working in the Ukraine. 

Like Czarist Russia before them, the Bolsheviks were troubled by any nationalist ideology in Ukraine and continued the policies of insisting on the use of Russia while they stamped out Ukrainian identity. At times, they would give nod to the Ukrainian unique situation and loosen up a bit, but they made it clear that Moscow was in control. Compounding the problem with the Soviets in the Ukraine was how to deal with the peasants, as Marxist ideology had no real understanding of such a class of people.

At first, the Soviets sought to voluntarily collectivize the farms, but with few wanting to join such farms, the Soviets put more and more pressure on peasants to collectivize. The nation’s “five-year plans” required the region provide and outrageous amount of grain. With the resentments toward collectivization and no incentive to work harder, these “goals” became unrealistic. The central state began to demand the region turn over more and more grain (even seed grain), which led to the terrible famine (known as the Holodomor, which combines the words for hunger and extermination) that occurred in 1932-33. Other policies such as blacklisting some villages and collective farms, exasperated the situation. The situation became dire as starving people were unable even to work the fields. As Applebaum describes the growing famine, she also provides detail on how starvation effects the body. Such details are horrific. As the famine grew more severe, people even began to eat the dead.  Sadly, there were no American Relief committees in the 1930s and an estimated 3.9 million people in the Ukraine died. While there was starvation in other parts of the Soviet Union during this time, no area suffered as much as Ukraine.

To collect more grain for the Soviet Union, they forced everyone onto collective farms and began to use propaganda. The Soviets created tension and hatred between groups. They even created a special class of peasants, the Kulacks. At first, Kulacks were large landowners, but later included anyone against the collectivization efforts or those seen as enemies of the state. 

After the famine, with not nearly enough workers to harvest the grain, the Soviets began to move even more Russian speaking people into the Ukraine. Among these included a young Nikta Khrushchev, who first worked in the Donbas region of Ukraine. In the purges of the late 1930s, they eliminated almost all the Ukrainian communists and replaced them with “Russians.” The famine, as terrible as it was, helped the Soviets control the Ukraine. This helps explain why many in the Ukraine were willing to, at first, go along with the Nazi invasion in 1941. This legacy is seen today with Russia (or Putin) referring to Ukraine as “Nazis.” Applebaum wrote between the Crimean War and this latest conflict. Applebaum is almost prophetic as Putin has declares his invasion to be an anti-Nazi campaign). Despite such terms, Applebaum points out how all sides (Czar, Soviets, and Ukrainians) had antisemitic tendencies. 

This book has several takeaways. First, in relation to current world politics, it is easy to see Putin as a continuation of Russian views of the Ukraine (which started with the Czars and continued through the Soviets). Russia viewed Ukraine as its bread basket. Beyond that, the Russians looked down on Ukraine as second class. The reader also comes to understand the tension between Russia and Ukraine because of different languages. Ukraine’s cultural leaders (writers and such) has sought to bring the country more aligned with the West, while Russia wants them to be aligned with the East. However, after the terrible things done to the Ukrainians in the 1930s, it is no wonder the people of the country are willing to fight to the death to avoid returning to their previous subjugation. Furthermore, during the Soviet era, information about the famine was constantly covered up and denied (just as it’s against the law now in Russia to speak of the invasion of and war in Ukraine as anything other than a special military action).

In addition to understanding the regional conflict (which could become a worldwide conflict), we should also take seriously Applebaum’s insights into the Russian propaganda campaigns of the 30s. In these campaigns, groups of people were seen as undesirable and as unimportant. Essentially robbed of their humanity, everyone lost their moral compass and allowed the needless deaths of millions. The warning: we must be careful of how we refer to those seen as “the other.” 

While she doesn’t see the famine as genocide only because the tight legal definition of the word is due to the Soviet’s influence at the United Nation. Soviet policies caused the famine and while they did not try to kill all Ukrainians, they did want to destroy such identity for the people there. Moscow used the famine to dominate Ukraine and continued to discourage Ukrainian identity until after the end of the Soviet Union. In the epilogue, Applebaum credits Ukraine (and Chernobyl) as the catalysis leading up to the end of the Soviet state. When the truth about Chernobyl began to be known, it opened a pandora’s box that the Soviets could not close. Perhaps this is another reason why Putin is so out to get Ukraine, as its people helped bring about the demise of the Soviet Union, which he’d like to reestablish. 

Posted on

Why Church? A Place for Questions

Jeff Garrison
Bluemont and Mayberry Churches
March 13, 2022
Acts 8:26-39

Sermon recorded at Bluemont Church on Friday, March 11, 2022

At the Beginning of Worship: 

Last Sunday, I kicked off my Lenten sermon series on “Why Church?” with a discussion on why Jesus established the church. In the sermon I pointed out that the word used in the Greek New Testament for church is the same word used in the Greek Old Testament for the people or the community of God. The church is the people of God. 

Perhaps I should have gone a little deeper and emphasized that Bluemont and Mayberry Presbyterian Churches is not “the Church.” Yes, we’re churches, but we ‘re only a drop in the bucket of the church on the earth, which include people of all races and ethnic groups and languages. While we like to think that we’re important, we’re should always remind ourselves that God’s work in the world is much larger than those of us who gather in each of these rock buildings along the Blue Ridge Parkway. Nonetheless, we’re still a part of that movement of God, that began with Jesus and continues through the Apostles’ and down to us.  

Today, our theme will be the church as a safe place for people to ask questions and to explore their own relationship to God. We should all be asking questions and encouraging others to ask questions. We may not have all the answers, but we have faith in the one who does. 

Before the Reading of Scripture: Conversion in Acts

Before I read the Scripture for today, I would like to discuss the idea of conversion to the faith as it occurs in the book of Acts. Interestingly, there are no patterns that becomes a standard for all conversion in Acts.[1]  Conversions involved large numbers of people, as it did on Pentecost.[2] It involved family groups as it did with the jailer in Philippi.[3] And at times it involved a single individual, as with Paul[4] and with the Ethiopian eunuch, which we’ll look at today.  

The catalyst behind each set of conversions is different. The Pentecost crowd heard the call to repentance. The Philippian jailer and his family witnessed the faithfulness of Paul and Silas. Paul’s conversion came with a command, for the Lord had something for him to do. And in our story, the conversion comes from Philip leading the Ethiopian through the scriptures. 

God Must Act for a Conversion to Happen.

Ultimately, these conversions came through an act of God, whose Spirit worked within the lives of those converted to bring about a change in their lives. In a way, conversion was never the end, but the beginning of a new life following Jesus. Conversion is not our destination, but a start of a journey that won’t end until we’ve gone home to be with the Lord.[5]

Let’s now listen to the story of Philip and the Ethiopian. I was shocked to see that I had preached on this text early in my time here on the Blue Ridge. But today, I’m approaching the text from a different angle than I used back in late 2020.[6]

Read Acts 8:26-39.

After the Reading of Scripture: 

I mentioned how there is no universal model for conversion in Acts, but there appear to be two necessary things that need to happen for a conversion to occur. First, God’s Spirit must act in the life of one being drawn into the faith. Second, there must be someone to help interpret what it means to be a follower of Jesus. Even with the dramatic conversion of Paul on the Damascus Road, he was sent while still blinded by the light, to believers who helped him understand Jesus.[7]

In our text today, we see the Ethiopian is intrigued with what he is reading from Isaiah, but he has no context. Had he continued along the road back to Africa by himself, he would have just remained confused. But God works by whisking Philip out onto the Wilderness Road, where he’s able to help the Ethiopian understand. 

Notice what happens. Philip and the Ethiopian converse about what he’s reading. Philip doesn’t just jump up on the carriage and say, “You must be saved.” Instead, he asks if he understands what he’s reading. And then he allows the Ethiopian to ask questions. And, once his questions have been answers, the Ethiopian is at the point that he wants to take the next step and asks to be baptized. 

The Need for Questions.

One of the things we can learn from this text is that we need to be open and willing to answer questions. The idea Christian community isn’t one that has all the answers. If we believe we have all the answers, we are mistaken. We think too much of ourselves if that’s the case. We don’t have all the answers, but we believe in a God who does have the answers. And we are to help direct or point others toward God’s Son, Jesus Christ, who can lead them back to God the Father. That’s what is happening here with Philip and the Ethiopian. 

Of course, you may be wondering what this has to do with church? Too many people think we must draw more people into the church building. And while it’s a noble goal, it’s the wrong way to look at church. The church, as I’ve already noted, is the community of God. And that community exists beyond the walls of buildings. What Philip was doing was to go to where there was a need.

We’re to do the same. Instead of trying to drag “the heathen” into a church building so they might we saved, we need to go to where they are at. And we need to seriously listen to their questions about our faith. We must befriend them and love them for who they are, as does God. And we need to be honest when we don’t have an answer. Humbly, we need to let others know that we live faithfully as a follower of Jesus and while we don’t have every answer, we trust him.

Questions and the Sermon

By the way, this idea of the church as a place for communication has implications that I don’t like for the sermon. Sadly, often the sermon is one direction, with me giving you my ideas about the Scriptures. Ideally there should be a way for this to become a two-way conversation. But that’s hard to do in an hour, so I encourage you to discuss the sermon with each other afterwards.  

Reaching out to different people

Another thing we learn from this text is that the people God sends us to interact with may not look anything like us. This Ethiopian didn’t look like a Hebrew. He probably had very dark skin. He stood out in the crowds around the temple. Too often the church has focused only on reaching people who are, in many ways, like us. 

As the book of Acts shows, the church is to be constantly expanding its boundaries as it reaches people for Jesus Christ. But that’s not just the work of missionaries, for there may be people in our community that don’t fit into the stereotype of what we think a Christian should look like. Sadly, few churches do this very well. In the 1960s, Martin Luther King, Jr pointed out that Sunday morning was the most segregated time in America. And the segregation extends beyond racial divisions. We feel comfortable with those most like us, but the church throughout Acts is always being called to step out in faith and to reach others. 

Example of a church reaching out

In the late 1990s, I spent parts of several summers in San Francisco as I was doing course work for my doctorate. Each Sunday, I sought out different types of worship experiences. One of the most engaging churches was on the edge of the Mission District of the city.[8] It was an old church with thick brick walls, and it was packed. Not only were all the pews filled, but there were also people sitting in every windowsill around the church. This congregation had three services each Sunday, and there was a line for each service waiting to get in. It was an amazing experience. 

But what impressed me most wasn’t the numbers, but the make-up of the congregation. There were blacks and whites, Hispanic and Asians. There were rich people, who allowed the church’s valet attendants to park their brand-new Mercedes. And then there were homeless people who staggered in. There were those who walked the streets at night as prostitutes and drug dealers as well as those who had offices in the nicer buildings of the city. This was before COVID, so we all packed in together.

Why church? Because every one of those people who gathered at that church, whether young or old, rich or poor, had a need to hear the message of Jesus Christ. We all have that need, and we all should have the willingness to help others meet this need. 

Conclusion.

An ideal congregation, in my opinion, is a place where we can have a friendly dialogue about what’s important in life. And as these conversations occur, as with Philip and the Ethiopian, we can help one another foster a better relationship with our Savior. And for us to create such a conversation, we need to be open to people’s questions. Are we? Amen. 

[1] For an in depth discussion on conversion in Acts, see: William H. Willimon,, Acts: Interpretation, A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, (1988, Louisville: John Knox Press, 2010), 100-105.

[2] Acts 2:37-42.

[3] Acts 16:25-34.

[4] Acts 9:1-9

[5] For a discussion on conversion in Acts, from which I draw upon in these paragraphs, see William H. Willimon, Acts: Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (1988, Louisville: John Knox Press, 2011), 101-104.

[6] To see my sermon from December 2020, click here:  https://fromarockyhillside.com/2020/12/advent-2-joy/

[7] Acts 9:10-19.

[8] Glide Memorial Church. 

Sun sinking over Laurel Fork (February 13, 2022)

Posted on

Two Books about Mark Twain

I recently read Heretical Fictions, which I am reviewing here. I am also reposting another review that I wrote seven years ago on Mark Twain and Orion Clemens, which looked at the relationship between Twain and his older brother. That review will enlighten us on the first review. I hope to soon find a way to post an article I wrote for the Nevada Historical Society Quarterly in the 1990s. “Of Humor, Deaths, and Ministers: The Comstock of Mark Twain” is about Twain’s relationship to clergy when he lived in Nevada in the early 1860s. While I could post it through individual images (PDFs), I would like to find my original copy so that the document could be searchable. Now, for my two reviews:  

Lawrence I. Berkove and Joseph Csicsila, Heretical Fictions: Religion in the Literature of Mark Twain (Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press, 2010), 271 pages including index, bibliography, and endnotes. No photos.

Edgar Lee Masters once said, “Twain threw out the Bible, but it seemed to be attached with a rubber band and was likely to bounce back in his lap at any time.” One finds constant allusions to Biblical stories in Twain’s writings. Perhaps, instead of trying to free himself from the Bible, Twain really wanted to free himself from the harsh Calvinism of his youth. But, as with the Bible, his faith kept bouncing back into his lap. 

Berkove and Csicsila challenges an older understanding of Twain. Many still see him as a humorist who became a bitter agnostic in his later years. Instead, these scholars explore a thread running through Twains work which displays his constant battle with the Calvinism of his youth. From his childhood faith, Twain continued to believe in God, and accepted two of the three major Calvinist views of God. Twain understood God to be omnipotent and omniscient. Where he departs from the Calvinism of his youth is that he didn’t accept the idea of a benevolent God. 

Twain develops a “counter theology” which the authors highlight in nine points: 

  1. God is omnipotent, omniscient, and malevolent. 
  2. Existence is a fleeting and transient, a dream within the mind of God making the world unreal and an illusion (this comes out especially in No. 44: The Mysterious Stranger and influenced by the writings of William James). 
  3. The consequence of original sin is God’s “Primal Curse.” Humans are enabled to do wrong.
  4. Humanity is not just flawed by original sin. We are corrupted by it.
  5. Virtuous deeds cannot save us for the balance sheet between our good and bad deeds are always going to be stacked against us.
  6. Everything is predestined.
  7. Most of humanity are reprobates, predestined for eternal punishment.
  8. Because God is perfect, there is no possibility God will change his mind.
  9. Conscience is from God, but affected by religious instruction and warns us when going astray. 

While Twain accepts these principles, he views them as “arbitrary, unfair, deceptive, and cruel.”  (see pages 15-17)

To make their case, the authors examine five of Twain’s novels (Roughing It, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, and No. 44, The Mysterious Stranger) along with several of Twain’s shorter writings in his last decade. 

I have read all the novels but one (most of these novels I’ve read several times). I’ve also read many of the reviewed short stories. I confess that the chapter on No. 44: The Mysterious Stanger, was the most difficult for me which had to do with having not read that book and not having a frame of reference.  

In Roughing It, the book of which I probably know best of Twain’s writings because of my own work on the role of the church in Nevada during the 19th Century, Twain explores the concept of getting rich without working hard (a desire that he humorously relates to in his own life). We’ve been cursed since the garden to toil for our bread, but we don’t like it! Although Twain wants his readers to laugh and enjoy the book, he layers them such that they each explore a different theme. Tom Sawyer attempts to find freedom before deciding to become a respectable part of society, but is that society respectable and pure?  Huckleberry Finn and Jim, long for freedom, only to learn it’s not obtainable.  Hank Monk in A Connecticut Yankee, explores things such as get rich schemes within the stock market (something Twain had seen in Nevada). Other themes include pride (Monk’s knowledge of the future allows him to become God-like in the ancient world), and human damnation (people act the same back then as in the 19th Century, look out for themselves). Twain cleverly uses an allusion to a card game throughout the story, but in the end the reader learns it’s all a dream. This dream motif occurs in many of Twain’s later stories which the authors link to Twain’s study of the writings of William James.  


While Berkove and Csicsila stick to Twain’s work and his theology to make their points, I found myself often wondering about events in Twain’s own life. The tragedies he experienced from the death of his younger brother Henry on a steamboat that blew up on the Mississippi (an event Twain felt somewhat responsible for), the death of his niece in Nevada from Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, and the deaths of some of his own children and his wife, all haunted the author. I wondered if some of Twain’s more cynical writings about God might be his attempt at a lament as seen in the Psalms. In such writings, the author of the Psalms becomes angry with God, but never abandons God.  Another life event would be Twain’s relationship to his brother. Early on, Orion was far more religious than Twain, even serving as an Elder for the Presbyterian Church in Carson City and helping organize a church in the mining camp of Meadows Lake, California. However, after his daughter’s death and other hardships, he gave up religion and became an atheist. 

I appreciate how Berkove and Csicsila have highlighted Twain’s lifelong interest in God and theology. While I enjoyed this book, I would only recommend it to those familiar with a large body of Twain’s writings. 

###

Philip Ashley Fanning, Mark Twain and Orion Clemens: Brothers, Partners, Strangers (Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama, 2003), 268 pages, no photos or maps

In much of Mark Twain’s writings, his older brother Orion comes across as a bumbling idiot. Was he?  Orion led and supported the Clemens family from an early age when their father died.  He also held a responsible position in the Nevada Territory, the territorial secretary, a political appointment he earned for his support of the Republican Party in the 1860 election.  Like his younger brother, who became Mark Twain, Orion desired wealth, but he was known to be a man of principle and stuck to his principles even when they led to financial shortcomings and failures.   Philip Ashely Fanning examines the relationship between these two brothers, who were similar in some ways, yet very different.

Orion was ten years older than Samuel Clemens, so when their father died, he became the patriarch of the family.  He worked in various positions along the towns of the Mississippi, as a newspaper man, a printer and occasionally as an attorney.  At a young age when Sam quit school, he went to work for his brother.  This arrangement didn’t work well.  One of the stories told is that Orion decided there were too many stray cats hanging around the print shop and had Sam collect them in a sack and drown them, something that bothered the younger brother who always had a soft spot for cats.  In 1852, Sam quits and heads out on a trip though New York, Philadelphia and Washington DC, funded by working in various print shops and newspapers along the way.  He occasionally wrote articles that appeared in his brother’s newspaper. During this time, Orion broke with the family and became convinced that slavery was evil.  This led to him becoming a Republican and working for the party in the 1860 election of Abraham Lincoln.

 Coming back from his trip east, Samuel Clemens continues to work in print shops and for newspapers, until he concocts a plan to go to South America.  On his way down the Mississippi, to New Orleans, he changes direction and accepts an offer to “learn the river.”  In 1858, Sam became a riverboat pilot, an occupation that paid more than the Vice President of the United States.  At this stage, the younger Clemens usurps his other brother’s position as the family patriarch.  After the Republican victory in 1860 and the beginning of the Civil War, their role reverses with Orion being offered a political position in Nevada as Sam finds him out of work.  The two of them head west, with Sam bankrolling the trip from his savings.  Later, when Sam (now known as Mark Twain) begins to write an account of his western adventures, he depends heavily on his brother’s journals to reconstruct (in a humorous manner) the stage trip across the country.  This account was published in his second book, Roughing It.  In Nevada, the brothers parted ways for a period.  Twain’s practical jokes and attempts at humor created problems for his brother and sister-in-law.  Sam headed to California and then to the Sandwich Islands (Hawaii) while Orion headed back to the Midwest.  

Over the next couple of decades, Orion found himself having to depend on his younger brother’s generosity both for money and positions.  Orion, who was always honest, finds himself excommunicated from his church after having expressed his beliefs.  At Sam’s encouragement, he beings to write an autobiography.  Sam begins to insist on rewrites as a way to protect his own self-constructed myth.  Orion seems to have compiled, even though much of the autobiography has been lost (and may have been burned by Twain or lost by his biographer).

Fanning presents some interesting ideas concerning how Twain related to his older brother.  He offers some interesting possibilities concerning the brothers’ father’s death, suggests that after Twain had thoughts about killing his brother, and that Orion’s time in Nevada was much more successful than Twain would later acknowledge (he was often the acting governor and as such helped settle a border dispute with California).  He also demonstrates how the younger brother encouraged his older brother to go into the ministry, even though later in life Orion would find himself excommunicated because of his unorthodox beliefs 

Although Fanning’s book raises a lot of questions concerning the two brother’s relationship, he also helps redeem Orion for the “bumbling idiot” characterization in which he’s often been portrayed.  Unfortunately, due to loss of material (especially that which was written by Orion) and the inability to know what’s happening inside the mind of another, we will never be able to really know for sure if some of Fanning’s ideas are correct, but it is safe to assume that Orion needs to be assessed in a different light.  This, Fanning does, while also showing how Twain, a wonderful author, had a mean streak and was not above throwing his brother under the bus in order to make himself look better.

Posted on

Why Church?

Jeff Garrison
Bluemont and Mayberry Churches
March 6, 2022
Matthew 16:13-20 

This sermon was recorded at Mayberry Church on Friday, March 4, 2022. It does not include the opening comments and the prayer I used at the beginning of the service to address the troubles we’re facing in today’s world. This can be found at the beginning of the text below.

At the Beginning of Worship:

News wise, it’s been another difficult week. We’ve watched the horrors of war in Ukraine. The sabre rattling is frightening as the Russian dictator threatens nuclear war and others warn of a possible World War III. And there is little we can do, as individuals, to control events, except perhaps pay more for gas. We’re even more helpless than we are with COVID, for there at least there were things we could do to protect ourselves and others. Perhaps this challenge is forcing us to learn to lean on God, so again this morning, before we get into worship, let’s clear our hearts with prayer: 

Holy God, you have shown repeatedly how much you love the world. We know your heart must be breaking as you watch the horrors we inflect on other people, as if they are not also created in your image. We, too, are horrified as we see schools and hospitals and apartment buildings shelled and bombed. Our hearts grieve as old Ukrainian women watch in sadness as invaders burn their homes to the ground. And when we hear the talk of the war expanding, knowing the weapons available to those making war, we are frightened. We can’t image the horrors of such a scene. 

Gracious God, we pray for the people of Ukraine, and for the Russians who are prosecuting this war. We pray for the safety of civilians, especially the children. We pray that leaders of nations might act rationally, honor the territorial boundaries of others, and work to reduce tensions and to bring about peace. We pray for the crowds around the world, even inside Russia, who have risen in protest. May we all seek peace. Yet, we know we are in a world filled with sin, a world in which the evil one is in a desperate battle of destruction. Give us confidence in your love and the courage to do what we must to further your kingdom. This we pray in the name of the prince of peace, Jesus Christ. Amen.  

A New Sermon Series:

During the season of Lent, I plan to preach a series of sermons around the question, “Why church?” Why do we worship weekly? Why do we gather in this building? What is our purpose? 

Let me suggest at the beginning that church is not home. Nor is the earth our home. Our home is with God and in that final vision we have in Scripture, we learn that heaven itself is void of a church building (or at least the temple which symbolized the church in the Old Testament).[1]

Again, our home is to be with God. To quote Craig Barnes, a Presbyterian minister and theologian, “If the church is the home we’re looking for, we’re in bigger trouble than we thought.” Barnes suggests that instead of greeting people with “Welcome Home,” when returning to church, we should acknowledge that it is a place where we find “long-lost brothers and sisters who are as confused about home as [we] are.” Instead of this place being our home, we come to worship to “renew our longing for the true home.”[2]

In other words, the purpose of preaching shouldn’t be to make us comfortable as if we’re in a den by a fire enjoying a good drink. Instead, preaching’s main goal is to be like John the Baptist (although I hate locust), pointing to Jesus.[3] For Jesus is our way to the Father, Jesus is our way home.[4]

Before the Reading of Scripture:

Today we’re going to look at Peter’s Confession as described in the Gospel of Matthew. This event is a key event in Matthew’s gospel, for from this point Jesus turns toward Jerusalem. And we know what happens there. This passage is one of the most discussed and debated passages in Matthew’s gospel, as we’ll see as we get into it. 

Read Matthew 16:13-20

After the Reading of Scripture

Why Church?

Why church? My first stab at an answer to this question begins with Jesus Christ, who is the head of the church. Before we can ask ourselves why we are a part of the church, we should know why Jesus established it. And, while we’re pondering that, we should go back to the beginning. Why did Jesus pick such a motley group of men to serve as Apostles and to help establish his church? 

And, while we’re asking questions, why did this unlikely organization, fraught with weakness from the very beginning, survive over 2,000 years? After all, hosts of better-established organizations have come and gone. But the church continues. We may be beaten and bruised, or as the hymn, “The Church’s One Foundation” claims, “by schisms rent asunder, by heresies distressed,” yet we continue despite our troubles. While church membership in North America and Europe is in decline, we’re still here. We’re not going anywhere. And besides, the church is growing rapidly in places like Africa and Asia. 

Why church? Because Jesus wants it that way. Let’s explore our text for the morning.

Exploring the Text: A disciple retreat

Jesus and the disciples have left Galilee, which has been their primary area of mission following Jesus’ baptism. They are now north of Galilee, in a community that is between Israel and the rest of the world, a border town.[5] We can only guess why Jesus has led the disciples here. First, outside of his normal area, Jesus won’t be troubled with the interruption of crowds. Second, Jesus can spend some quality time with his core team. And third, he needs them to jell into a focused unit. This retreat with the disciples prepares them for the task ahead. At the end of Matthew, after the resurrection, Jesus sends them out into the world to do his mission. 

Exploring the Text: Jesus’ identity

While they’re all together, Jesus asks first who people say that he is. He receives several interesting responses: John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, one of the prophets. While people don’t really understand the nature of Jesus’ ministry, by equating him with one of these, they are thinking Jesus must be someone important. 

Jesus displays an important insight with his questions. He doesn’t come right out and ask the disciples to make a profession of faith. His teaching is more inductive. Think about this, these 12 men have had more exposure to Jesus than to anyone else. So, when we are talking to someone who isn’t a believer, we shouldn’t expect them to make a profession of faith right away. Jesus didn’t expect the disciples to get it immediately. Instead, we should provide space for nonbelievers to ponder and for God’s Spirit to work a miracle.[6]

Yet, the question really isn’t who people say Jesus is, but who the disciples (and us) say that Jesus is. When Jesus asks, “who do you say that I am,” Simon Peter shouts out, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 

Exploring the Text: Peter’s confession

Peter gets it. Peter understands. Notice his language. He doesn’t say, “I think you are the Christ.” He doesn’t just believe Jesus is his personal Messiah, nor the Christ of just the disciples. Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, the Chosen One who bridges the gap between earth and heaven.[7]  There is no other.

Next, think of how Jesus responds. He doesn’t say, “Way to go, Peter. You got a good head on your shoulders.” However, Jesus does call Peter “blessed,” but instead of congratulating him for receiving an A+ on the only exam that matters for eternity, Jesus informs Peter that he has had some help. Peter’s proclamation didn’t come from his brain, it came from God. God always acts first. Through the work of the Holy Spirit, God gives Peter this answer, just as God works on our salvation even before we knew we were lost. 

Grace means that our relationship with Jesus isn’t something we’ve done, but that which God has done for us which allows us to experience the benefits of such a relationship. 

Exploring the Text: Jesus builds his Church

Next, Jesus plays with Peter, essentially using a pun based on his name. Verse 18 can also be translated like this: “Rocky, on this very rock I’m going to build my church…”[8] Of course, Peter will later show that rock might also refer to his head, for he had a hard head and wanted things his way.[9]

Jesus continues talking about his church, how the gates of Hades will never prevail against it and how the church will be given the keys to heaven with the power to loosen and bind, with its authority extending even to heaven. What does all this mean?

There’s been lots of debate over this. The Roman Catholic Church uses these verses to proclaim Peter as the first pope and his successors all coming from him. But Protestant and even Orthodox Churches speaks of the church being built upon the Apostles, not solely on Peter’s shoulders. Even some notable Catholics of old, such as Bebe, an English Doctor of the church in the 7th Century, insisted that Christ is the Rock, not Peter.[10]Regardless of which way you take this verse, the emphasis is that Jesus is building his church. The church belongs to Jesus. As Paul writes, as is found in many of our hymns, Jesus is the cornerstone.[11]

As far as the “gates of Hades,” this was an ancient way of saying that the powers of death won’t destroy the church. You know, in my ministry, I have seen the death of many whom I’d call saints, pillars of the church. But the church’s foundation isn’t upon us. Jesus Christ, the eternal one, is the foundation. We are to just do our part as long as we’re able. But we have an important part to play for we’ve been given the “keys to the kingdom.” In other words, we are the organization that God uses to help further his kingdom. 

Exploring the Text: The Church as the People of God

The Greek word used for church by Jesus here is Ekklesia. While we think of the church as a New Testament concept, when the Hebrew Bible was translated into the Greek around 200 years before Jesus, the same word, Ekklesia, that Jesus used for the church was used for the “people of” or the “community of God.”[12] To answer my earlier question, that’s what Jesus expects the church to be, the community of God. And God’s community may look surprisingly weak to the larger world, but when it’s us and God, we’re strong.

Much of God’s work is done by people like you and me who, not on our own ability, but on God’s power, commit ourselves to do God’s work in the world. 

Conclusion 

So, “why church?” Because it’s the way Jesus Christ has set things up. We don’t come here because we think we’re special or superior. We come here because we know Jesus is the Lord, the Messiah, the Christ, the one who bridges the gap between earth and heaven. We come here to worship, and then to be sent back into the world, to do his work. Amen. 

[1] Revelation 21:22.

[2] M. Craig Barnes, Searching for Home: Spirituality for Restless Souls (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2003), 26. 

[3] Matthew 3:11-12, Mark 1:7-8, Luke 3:16-17, John 1:23-28

[4] John 14:6.

[5] Frederick Dale Bruner, The Churchbook: Matthew 13-28 (1990, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 119. 

[6] Bruner, 120. 

[7] Bruner, 121.

[8] Bruner, 119, 127. 

[9] Immediately following this encounter in Matthew, Jesus chastises Peter, calling him “Satan” for not accepting Jesus’ teachings. See Matthew 16:21-23.  And Peter will also be quick to deny Jesus three times after Jesus’ arrest. See Matthew 26:69-75 and companion stories in Mark 14:66-72, Luke 22:54-62, and John 18:15-18, 25-27. 

[10] Bruner, 129. 

[11] Ephesians 2:20

[12] Douglas R. A. Hare, Matthew: Interpretation, a Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville; John Knox Press, 1993), 191. 

Iona, Scotland
Posted on

Joe’s Fork

Joe’s Fork, about a mile upstream from the old mill

“Were you able to dig us some worms?” Granddaddy asked as he got out of his truck. 

“Yes sir,” I said, “some nice ones.” 

He smiled.  We head into the house.  Dinner is ready.  He stops in the bathroom to wash his hands and removes his cap as he sits at the table.  Grandma is across from him, and I sit between them.  We bow our heads. Granddaddy prays:

“We thank thee for the food we’re about to receive. Bless it to the nourishment of our bodies and us to thy service.  Amen.  

Grandma passes around the food. Fried chicken, field peas, corn on the cob, squash, and biscuits. The vegetables all come from her garden. We eat in a hurry. When finished, I run back into my room and change into long pants. I strap my knife to the belt. Granddaddy collects the rods and placed them in the back of the truck along with tackle boxes and the can of my recently dug worms. As we climb into the cab, Grandma berates us to use plenty of bug spray. Granddaddy turns the ignition, then pops the clutch. The truck springs forward. He pulls out onto the highway, heading east. About a mile later, the road snakes down into a hardwood swamp. We cross Joe’s Fork on a small bridge. Looking down, I realize we could wade across without getting our knees wet. As we begin the climb on the other side of the bridge, granddaddy turns right, onto a two-track dirt road that leads back into the woods.

“Where are we going?” I ask as we bounced in the truck and bushes swished along the sides of the truck. 

“To McKenzie Mill Pond.”

“What kind of fish will we catch?”

“There should be some nice bream, maybe a jack or a bass.”

“Is the mill still there?”

“No, it burned.” 

“How? When was that?” I ask.

“I’m not sure.” 

“But the pond is still there?”

“Yeah, the beavers damned the stream back up.”

“When you were a boy, did you ever go to the mill? 

“No, it was before my time.” 

Realizing I not going to learn anything about the mill, I think I’ll see if there was anything to know about the current residents. “When did the beavers dam the stream up?”

“In the late forties, I think. Your dad was a boy when they reintroduced beavers to this area.” He slows down, then turns hard, pushing the pickup into brush by the side of the two-track road. I realize he didn’t want to block the road, but it didn’t seem to matter. The road with this much overgrowth didn’t appear to be well traveled. 

“You sure ask a lot of questions,” my granddad says as he turned the engine off. Getting out, we spray ourselves with bug juice. Granddad puts a wad of Beechnut chewing tobacco in his mouth, then we grab our rods and stuff and walk toward the dam which the beavers had restored.  

On the edge of the dam, we drop our gear. The vegetation is thick around the pond. Granddaddy wouldn’t be using his Browning fly rod here, I realize. We’ll both be fishing with worms. I tie a hook to the line on my rod, placed a small weight just above the hook, and attached a bobber about 2 feet up the line. The pond is shallow. Once my rod is rigged and baited, I step out on the edge of the dam and cast into the middle of the pond, just shy of a water moccasin bathing on a log in the waning sun. Granddaddy heads around the pond and finds a place where he could cast his line out and be freed of more questions. 

My bobber floats undisturbed, as I swatted mosquitoes and deer flies which swarmed around my head, pausing occasionally to wipe the sweat from my brow. It’s a hot and steaming. No air moves along the creek bottom.  After a few minutes with no action, boredom sets in. I slowly reel in the line, and cast it again, right beside that big snake. My cork doesn’t faze it, but neither did anything nibble on my worm. I pull my line in again. 

“If you don’t leave your hook in water, you won’t catch any fish.” Granddaddy yells over at me. He normally didn’t say much when fishing. He doesn’t want the fish to be spooked with our talk.  

A jitterbug lure

I cast again, this time dropping the hook just inches in front of that big old moccasin’s head. I wait: ten seconds, twenty seconds, thirty seconds, a minute. Nothing bites. I didn’t come out here to wait. I reel my line in again and made another cast and then another. The whole time that water moccasin sits on his log position. I wonder if it is dead, but I know better. Is it mocking me? The snake just lies on the log. It is getting on my nerves. I retrieve my line again. Looking in my tackle box, I pull out a large jitterbug, a top floating lure that works wonders on the bass right around dark. Taking off the hook and bobber, I tie the jitterbug on my line, and cast it toward the snake. It fell just short of the moccasin. I reel it in, the lure jittering back and forth across the water.  

“What are you doing fishing with that?” my granddad ask.

 “Nothing’s taking the worms,” I answer as I make another cast. This one sails across the moccasin and lands in the water, a few feet beyond the snake. It doesn’t move, even with the line lying across its back. I slowly reel, bringing the lure up beside the log upon which the snake has perched itself. I pause. Then I jerk the rod back hard and snag the snake in the back with the lure’s treble hook. The snake snaps around at its unseen assailant, its cottonmouth angrily exposed. It slides off the log with and starts swimming away with my lure, its head high above the water. I let it have some line while tightening the drag. 

“What did you do that for?” My grandfather yell, as he beats a path over to me. “That snake wasn’t bothering you.” 

The snake turned. Instead of fighting the line, it started swimming toward us, its head propped up like the Loch Ness monster. I stopped reeling as I could see no reason to hasten the encounter.

“What are you going to do now?” Granddaddy asked.

I pulled out my knife and hold it in the same hand as my rod.

“What are you going to do with that?” 

“I’ll stick him,” 

“Put that knife away,” he yells as he picked up a stick that was maybe five feet long. “Use this.” He hands the stick to me. “You hooked him, take care of him.”  

It seemed like a good idea, but now I’m not so sure as this is one large angry and deadly poisonous snake. But then, thankfully, when about twenty feet away, the snake shakes free of the lure. It then turns, and swims in another direction, disappearing in the brush. I reel my lure in. I’d been saved from an angry snake, but now had to contend with an angry grandfather.

“We’re done fishing,” he says, packing up his gear.

As we walk back to the truck on the trail that was near the brush where I last saw the snake, I keep my eyes peeled for a moccasin out for revenge. It was not to be seen. I hear distant thunder. A cloud is building that might bring relief to this hot day. I step into the passenger side of granddaddy’s truck. I know better than to ask any more questions. We drive in silence.   

There are no ice cream and Pepsi floats before bed this night. It takes me a while to fall asleep as I worry if hell ever take me fishing again. Grandma has turned off the air conditioning and opened the windows. The curtains fly like ghosts in the cooling wind of the approaching storm. Lightning bolts quickly followed by thunder and each strike fill the room with light. Then the rain comes. Finally, the rain stops, and the lightning and thunder became further apart as the storm moves east. I fall asleep to the drip of water off the roof. 

The air smells fresh the next morning. As I come out for breakfast, Granddaddy looks up from the News and Observer he’d been reading and asks if I want to go fishing again.  

A copy of a photo of my grandfather’s company. He is second to the right. This photo was taken sometime in the early 70s. He died in January 1977.

###

Posted on

The Conclusion of Daniel: Promised Rest

Jeff Garrison
Bluemont and Mayberry Churches
February 27, 2021
Daniel 12:5-12

At the beginning of worship

This week, we have watched in horror what’s happening in the Ukraine. We need to trust that God is in control in the chaos. That’s the message of Daniel. But we also need to strive to do what is right to help those who cannot help themselves. That’s a message found throughout scripture. Let’s open with a prayer for peace: 

Lord Jesus, we long for your kingdom. Isaiah promises it’ll be a place of peace, where the wolf shall live with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down with the kid, the calf and the lion and the fatling together.”[1]

But Jesus, our world is filled with bullies and dictators, those who do what they want and ignore the rights and the needs of others. It’s a world where families hide in subways hoping to avoid the explosion of artillery shells. It’s a world where people flee for their lives and where the weak are eaten up by those who are strong. It’s a world where people are used and abused. We know this is not the good world you intended at Creation. We have messed things up.

We long for peace, for the end of this world of violence and the fulfillment of your kingdom. But until then, give us strength to endure. Help us to know right from wrong, good from evil. Help us stand fast with those who suffer in the Ukraine. This we pray in your name, recalling your wiliness to die that we might life, and who lives and promises such to those who believe in you and who follow in your footsteps. Amen. 

Before the reading of Scripture

I was thinking after last week’s text and sermon how the evil one depicted in Daniel’s vision dies alone at the end. It seems to me that when we burn all our bridges and abuse all our friends, loneliness becomes our destiny. It’s a dangerous place. And we don’t have to be as evil as the evil one depicted in Daniel to experience this. 

Relationships are important. There are two dimensions to our faith, just as there are two dimensions to the cross. One is vertical, the other horizonal. One reaches up toward God, the other reaches out toward others. Both are necessary if we’re to have a balanced life as God intends. However, if we behave as the one cited in Daniel 11, our actions will lead to judgment.  

The end of the book of Daniel

Now, we’ve come to the end of Daniel… As I pointed out two Sunday’s ago, the last three chapters of Daniel consist of a single unit with one long vision. Daniel’s vision is now over. He finds himself back on the banks of the river. But there appear to be some heavenly beings still floating around after the vision. Although we are not sure, they could be angels, maybe even Michael and Gabriel,[2] who have been mentioned earlier. Their purpose appears to have a conversation of which Daniel overhears but does not understand. This sets up a nice epilogue for this vision and the entire book of Daniel. 


Remember, as I have often said in these sermons on Daniel, the overall message of this book is that despite the present circumstances (which are quite trying in Daniel’s day as in ours), “God is in charge and will win the day.”[3] Once again, we’re reminded that things will work out and that Daniel needs not to worry.

Read Daniel 12:5-12

After the reading of Scripture

In his novel The Whisper of the River, Ferroll Sam’s protagonist, a college student, has a delightful conversation with a professor about Christian progress. The question is asked by the professor, “How long does it take a man to grow from the whining question of ‘Why me, Lord?’ to the mature dedication of ‘Why not me, Lord?’” The professor went on to explain how each has an accent on “me,” but throw in that “one-syllable negative” and you have “two entirely different philosophies.” One is shallow, the other has spiritual depth.[4]

Daniel, it seems, accepts the second question from the beginning. Spiritually mature, he maintains his relationship with God in a troubling time. He does so even when God appears distant. It would also have been a lot easier to accept the ways of the Babylonians or the Persians. But Daniel stands fast. As believers, we don’t take the easy way out.

The final scene in Daniel

We’ve come to the end of this book. In this final scene, Daniel is back by a stream. We can assume this is the river where the vision began. Daniel sees two beings standing opposite banks of the Tigris River, having a conversation. One asks how long before everything happens. The other provides an enigmatic answer: “A time, two times, and a half a time.” Just what does that mean? 

So, Daniel speaks up and acknowledges he doesn’t understand. “What shall be the outcome of these things?” Daniel asks. Daniel is like us; he wants to know.[5]

The response Daniel receives is rather curt. “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are to remain a secret until the time of the end.” 

Daniel is not about predicting the future

There you have it. If you think you can use Daniel to predict the end of time or the events leading up to it, this epilogue rains on your parade. There are things we are not to know. Nonetheless, there are things we do know. By telling Daniel to “go on your way,” I think he’s being told to not worry about the future and to continue to do what he knows is right. That’s also good advice for us. How we live our lives in the face of evil is the purpose of Daniel, not predicting the future.

We’ll continue to have good and evil people 

The next verse reminds us of the way of things. There are people like Daniel, who strive to live godly lives even within an evil, pagan, or corrupt society. Just because someone else acts bad is no excuse for us to do likewise. Just because we live in an evil world, we’re not to resort to evil. We always take the high ground. To the best of our abilities and, depending on God’s help, we should act nobly. 

And while there will be those who strive to do what is right, the book of Daniel is realistic. There are those continue to act wickedly. Again, throughout Daniel we have seen examples of wicked behavior. The silly laws of kings fly in the face of the Almighty and force believers into disobedience to God if they obey the king.[6] Or other kings who do as they please, as if they’re accountable to no one,[7] and who bring great evil upon the world.[8] Such leaders will be judged. They will be held in eternal contempt.[9]  

Of course, the wicked don’t understanding what’s happening or what’s in store for them, because they have no regard for others, including God.[10] They think they are exempt, or their theology is so bad, that they think they’re a god on earth. Those who are wise understand this differently. 

How long will the abomination last?

Our passage then returns to the abomination in the temple, which occurred under the reign of Antiochus IV, whom we met last week.[11] There are questions here about how the long the sacrifices will be missing from the temple. Is it 1290 days or 1325 days, as listed here? Or as we heard in chapter eight, 2300 evenings and mornings which could be interpreted as 1150 days.[12] And what kind of relationship exist between these days and the time, times, and a half time. By the way, it’s not the first time we’ve seen that formula, either. It appeared in chapter 7?[13]

If this sounds confusing to you, you’re not alone. Even Daniel is confused. Some think the days and the times go together. Time, times and a half time could be 3 and a half years, roughly the same number as the days. But since there are several different sets of “days,” what can we make of this?[14]

We don’t know. Some things are purposely vague.

I think the message at the end of Daniel is this.  When it comes to the future, we don’t know. Only God knows. This is the same thing that Jesus teaches in Mark 13, only the Father in heaven knows when such things happen.[15]

Our text says that those who persevere this period of great evil will be happy or blessed. Then Daniel is sent on his way. He’s told to rest. There’s nothing he can do about the future, and it’s going to happen long after he’s gone. So, Daniel, who is now an old man, having been in exile for nearly 70 years, can rest assured that when the resurrection happens, he’ll rise for his reward. 

Conclusion: promised rest

After a long life of faithfulness, Daniel can rest. That’s good news. For those of us on this side of the resurrection, we have Jesus’ words: “Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Daniel reminds us that things won’t always be easy, and Jesus follows up his comment about promised rest with talk about taking up his yoke. A yoke is a tool for work. The rest Jesus provides, at least in the short term, is for our soul.[16] There’s always work to do. 

As verse 10 reminds us, there is purification, cleansing and refining to be done. So, we roll up our sleeves and trudge on, but our souls do not need to be troubled. We can take solace that God controls the world, that they’ll be times rest, and when it’s over, the faithful will be rewarded. 

While life at times can be overwhelming, we place our hope in the goodness of God, whose love is from everlasting to everlasting.[17] Amen. 

[1] Isaiah 11:6.

[2] Daniel 9:21 and 10:13.

[3] Tremper Longman III, Daniel: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999), 288. 

[4] Ferrol Sams, The Whisper of the River (1984, New York: Penguin Books, 1986), 498-499. 

[5] W. Sibley Towner, Daniel: Interpretation, a Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1984), 169.

[6] An example would be Daniel 6, where the king decrees no one can pray to anything but himself for 30 days. See https://fromarockyhillside.com/2021/09/daniel-in-the-lions-den/

[7] An example: Belshazzar defaming the holy items from the temple. See https://fromarockyhillside.com/2021/09/the-writing-on-the-wall/

[8] The horrific king in Chapter 11 is an example. See https://fromarockyhillside.com/2022/02/5529/

[9] Daniel 12:2

[10] Proverbs 14:16, Psalm 14:4. 

[11] Daniel 11:31.

[12] Daniel 8:14.

[13] Daniel 7:25, 12:7.

[14] Longman !!!, 287, and Robert A. Anderson, Daniel: Signs and Wonders (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 152-153 provide details on these dates and the issues they raise. 

[15] Mark 13:32.  From my sermon on this passage just before we started exploring the second half of Daniel, see https://fromarockyhillside.com/2022/01/remain-at-your-post-stay-awake/

[16] Matthew 11:28-30.  See also Dane Ortlund, Gentle and Lowly: The Heart of Christ for Sinners and Suffers (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020), 21-23.  

[17] Psalm 103:17.

Sunset over Lake Baikal (Siberia, taken 2011)

Posted on

Learning more about Russia

Our Frightening World

Dining on the train

We’re living in a scary time with what is going on in Ukraine and Putin’s disregard for the rule of law as he orders Russia to invade a sovereign nation. In 2011, I took the Trans-Mongolian railroad from Beijing to Moscow and then an elegant overnight train on to St. Petersburg. It was a wonderful trip and a few years later I read Colin Turbon’s book (which I’m reviewing below). The photos in his post came from that trip. I found the Russian people to be warm and welcoming. But sadly, the country has a long history of corrupt leadership (from the Czars to the Soviets, and now with Putin). While it would be wonderful for Putin’s army to be humiliated in his Ukrainian operation and order restored, we must remember that those who will suffer are the Ukrainian people and the Russian soldiers, many who are conscripted into the military. 

Notice the km marker indicating the distance A Rfrom Moscow

When I was in college, I took a class focusing on Russian history. Sadly, most of those books I read focused on the attempts to modernize (or westernize) the country by Peter the Great, the 1917 Revolution, and Stalin. I should attempt to update my knowledge. I found a wonderful Twitter trend by an London bookseller (who is from Eastern Europe) on books to learn more about both Ukraine and Russia. Click here to read through the thread. Who would like to join me in learning more? 

A Russian rail yard

Colin Thuborn, In Siberia

 (1999, HarperCollins ebook, 2009), 270 pages

During the Soviet era, much of Siberia was closed off from the West. The Soviets utilized this vast area (which contains nearly a fifth of the world’s landmass) as the Czars had earlier. Siberia existed as place of exile of criminals and political prisoners. During the Second World War, industry began to develop in Siberia. The remote lands were far from the reach of Hitler’s tanks. The land is blessed with resources including minerals, oil, timber, wheat and cursed with hardship. The coldest temperatures ever recorded in inhabited place was in Siberia. After the breakup of the Soviet Union and two years after the end of collective farming, Colin Thubron set out to explore this region. Thubron, an Englishman, was familiar with Russia, having spent time there during the Cold War and having written on the nation. In his travels, he takes the Trans-Siberian Railroad as well as the BAM (Baikal-Amur Railroad), a line that runs north of Lake Baikal, and a steamer up the Yenisei River to the arctic. In the East, he flies to remote locations. In all, he covers the region from the Urals to the Pacific, from the “Altai Republic” along the Mongolian border to Dudinka, beside the frozen waters of the Arctic.  

Sunset over Lake Baikal

Siberia, Thubron writes was “born out of optimism and dissent.” (22)  Starting in the 1750s, Siberia became a place to exile criminals (just as Britain exiled its criminals to Australia) and although the number of criminals outnumbered the political prisoners, the later served as a “leavening intelligentsia” for the region. (162) Ironically, Siberia with its vastness became a place of freedom. In the 18th Century, those who moved there had a saying, “God is high, and the czar is far off.” (22)  In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution, Siberia was a stronghold out for the White Russians who fought against the Bolsheviks. Thubron tells of a discussion in Irkutsk to build a statue to honor Admiral Kolchak, a leader of the White Russians who was shot by the Bolsheviks at Irkutsk and his body pushed below the ice. He doubts the monument will be built. However, in 2011, when I travelled across Siberia, I enjoyed a a beer brewed in Irkutsk named for the Admiral. If you can a statue, a beer seems like a fitting tribute. 

Traveling in the years after the breakup of the Soviet system and the end of state-sponsored atheism, Thubron was surprised to find religion so alive. “Russia’s atheist past seemed no more than an overcast day in the long Orthodox summer,” he noted. (56)  As he traveled, he witnessed new and renovated churches opening. At the dedication of a monastery outside of Omsk, he asked himself, “Why had this faith resurrected out of nothing, as if a guillotined head had been struck back on its body? Some vital artery had preserved it.” (59) Not only does he explore the resurgence in the Orthodox faith, (who seemed to be profiting from the ability to import and sell alcohol and cigarettes tax free (56), but also Buddhism among the Buryat (165ff), a dying Jewish settlement in Eastern Siberia (208ff), Russian Baptist (220f), Old Believers with their insistence of the correct way to cross themselves in prayers (175f), and even a few who were trying to revive traditional shamanistic practices (98ff). In each situation, he meets with religious leaders. One of the more interesting interviews was with an Orthodox priest in Irkutsk, whose father had been a communist and whose mother was a Christian. He told about how in the Army, he began to be convicted of his sin and came to God through his guilt. This priest feared a war between China and Russia and felt that America was a godless land (156-7).

But not all of Siberia is teaming with religious revival. Many of the people Thuborn spoke with felt their world collapse along with communism. One woman, sent to Siberia by Stalin,still refused to criticize the Communist Party. Toward the end of his journey, in northeastern Siberia, he visits Kolyma, the location of some of the deadliest camps. Being sent here was a death sentence. In the winter of 1932, whole camps (prisoners, dogs, and guards) froze to death. It is here that the coldest inhabit place on earth is at, where the temperature has dropped to -97.8 F, where one’s breath will free into crystals and twinkle onto the ground, a phenomenon known as the “whispering of the stars.” (254)  Yet, despite such harsh conditions, they produced nearly a third of the world’s gold in the 1930s. It is estimated that one life was lost for every kilogram of gold produced.  Over 2 million people died here. (251f) The condition of the camps horrified Thubron, who seems concern that the residents of Siberia accept the camps of the past without much thought.

Water tower from the days of steam engines

In his last collection of Stalin horror stories, Thuborn tells of the prison ship, the SS Dzhurma. This ship, according to Thubron, became lodged in ice in 1933 with 12000 prisoners on board. All the prisoners froze to death and half the guards went crazy, according to Thubron. This would also be the deadliest maritime disaster ever, in terms of life lost. When I read this, I thought it sounded like fodder for a horror story and I did some checking. From a couple sources on the internet, found that there are some questions of the validity of this tragedy. Two things don’t fit according to these sources. First, the Soviets purchased the Dzhurma two years later, in 1935. Second, it was only a little over 400 feet long, making it nearly impossible to have had 12,000 prisoners onboard. However, in 1939, another “death-ship,” the SS Indigirka sank with its human cargo trapped below deck. (256) 

I really enjoyed this book and wish I would have read it before traveling through Siberia. At that time, I read Ian Frazier’s excellent travelogue, Travels in Siberia. Thubron’s book is a little out of date, but it is also excellent. His writing is engaging and never boring as he weaves together a story about this vast and unknown landmass. I found reading this book on a e-reader both pleasant (it’s nice and light) and a little troublesome as I couldn’t easily flip back to the map at the beginning. Furthermore, the map didn’t show up well and found myself dragging out an atlas to locate places Thubron traveled. I recommend this book.  

Small village along the railroad tracks
Posted on

Daniel foresees the future

Jeff Garrison
Bluemont and Mayberry Churches
February 20, 2022
Daniel 11-12:4

At the beginning of worship:

I’ve been reading a modern translation of the Norse poems, myths, and legends. It’s a weird world which probably comes from huddling around the fire on those long winter nights in Scandinavia.[1] These stories are often violent and set in a tough world. They could be seen as depressing for everyone and everything dies on their fated day. Neither gods, giants, nor humans are spared. Yet, the stories encourage the reader to be to be brave even if it’s their fated day. Those who are honored have done their duty. 

Now, our faith doesn’t condone such violence as in these stories and shuns vengeance. In our tradition, vengeance is saved for God.[2] As we’ve seen in Daniel, (and will see again today), we too live in a world that is often against us. Yet, we are called to do be faithful, to our duty, and to be brave even when things don’t look up. We can do so for we know that God is in control. 

Before the Reading of Scripture:

The bulk of the vision Daniel receives by the Tigris River is found between the beginning of Chapter 11 through the fourth verse of chapter 12. I’m not going to read this entire piece, but I encourage you to go home and read it on your own. However, let me say a bit about what’s in it. Daniel, as we’ve seen already in chapter 7[3] and chapter 8,[4] has had multiple visions that cover what happens in the world between the end of Babylonian dominance and the rise of Rome. This is repeated in chapter 11; however, more details are provided. Daniel speaks of all these kings rising from the various points of the compass, but especially to the north and south. 

Ancient Israel is a little like Ukraine. If you look at a map of Europe, you’ll see Ukraine pinched between Russia and its allies to the west, north and south. To the east is Europe. Sadly, the people there have seen horrors from each side—the Soviets who starved four million of them in the 1930s. That caused many of them to welcome Germany when it invaded in World War II. However, the Germans were no better. When you find yourself in a position recalled in the old proverbial saying, “between a rock and hard place,” you become a pawn. 

Ancient Israel was also in such a place. Geographically, the country sits between the powers of Egypt and those in the fertile crescent. By the 2nd Century, BC, Israel is pinched between Egypt and Syria. 

Daniel doesn’t use names in Chapter 11. However, if you read this entire chapter and have a historical timeline from the 5th to the 2nd century BC, it’s easy to plug in to whom Daniel refers.[5]Daniel’s vision continues to Antiochus Epiphanes IV. He’s not just a bad guy, he’s a really bad guy. He’s evil. He did the unspeakable inside the Jewish temple in Jerusalem.  


Read Daniel 11:36-12:4

After reading the scripture:

Tonight, if we have clear skies, Orion the Hunter will be visible high in the eastern sky as the light fades. It’s a brilliant constellation and I’m sure most of you can point out the three stars of Orion’s belt. They form a distinct line in the sky. From our perspective here on earth, the stars appear side by side. But they’re not. 

Let me tell you a bit about these three stars. I’m probably going to butcher the pronunciation, something I often do with English so you can imagine what I’ll do with the Arabic names of these stars. 

The star to the west is Mintalca, which in Arabic means “the belt.” It’s 916 light years away and slightly fainter than the other two stars. 

The middle star, Alnilam, means “string of pearls” in Arabic. It’s by far the furthest of these stars from earth, at 1342 light years away. Tonight, you’ll be seeing the star tonight as it was during the Dark Ages of Europe. The star is huge. It’s also the only solo star in the belt, with the one to its west made up of many stars and the one to the east a binary star. But it’s so big, which is why to our eyes it appears as the brightest. 

And then the eastern-most star is Alnitalz, which means the girdle. Don’t ask me how it got its name. This is the closest star, only 800 lights years away, which means that tonight we’d be seeing what happened on the star about the time of the crusades.   

Now, you might be wondering what this has to do with the price of tea in China, or at least what it has to do with Daniel. Let me continue. 

This part of Daniel is set after Babylon’s fall from world power, at a time when Persia ascends in power. Now, there is a disagreement about when it was written, whether in the 5thCentury or 2nd Century, BC, but for understanding the meaning, it doesn’t matter.[6] Daniel wants us to understand the book as being from the 5th Century, and the prophet’s vision looks forward. 

It’s as if Daniel has a telescope. From his point of view, Daniel has a good understanding of what happens in the world over the next three centuries. But his view continues afterwards to the final judgment. He doesn’t have as clear of an understanding except to know that in the end, righteousness will be reward and evil punished. And as he looks forward, it all appears closer together, as do the stars in Orion’s belt.

In this manner, Daniel’s vision of the future is a little like us looking at Orion in the sky this evening. The stars all appear to be equal distance from us, but we know that some are closer, and others are further away. Likewise, much of the events Daniel writes about was fulfilled in the centuries between Babylon and Rome, but then there’s the resurrection at the end of time, which hasn’t yet happened.

Antiochus IV

Daniel vision reaches a pinnacle with a king who becomes an abomination, one who is well known in Jewish history. Antiochus IV, or Antiochus Epiphanes, was a Syrian king who attempted to take over Egypt and parts of Greece. The Romans helped push him back which brought them into this part of the world. But the king is infamous for his disregard of the Jewish temple, as he co-opted it for pagan gods. 

While there is no clear transition, it appears that Daniel doesn’t just speak of Antiochus, but at some point, he sees an even larger, more horrific individual, whose evil surpasses Antiochus.[7] The person in Daniel’s vision goes beyond the terror and evil of the Syrian king. Christians have often seen this people as the Antichrist, but as Christ has not yet come, Daniel has no frame of reference for such a being. 

Daniel and evil tendencies

What Daniel sees in this vision is a tendency for evil to grow. This happens when we are left on our own and follow only our own desires. You see it in Genesis. Adam and Eve sin, their son Cain kills his brother Abel, and soon there are wars and God decides to do a reset with the flood. Governments and collective groups of people can raise the level of evil to greater heights. Daniel understands this.

Editorial by David Brooks 

David Brooks, in a New York Times editorial this week, writes of the change in the world since the 1990s. He suggests that what we’re seeing around the world, with autocratic strong leaders, is business as usual.[8] I think Daniel would agree. The natural way of the world is for the strong to become stronger, evil to become eviler.  This doesn’t mean we should give up. Again, the book of Daniel shows us how to remain faithful to our beliefs while living under tyranny. 

Hopefully we won’t end up like Daniel. However, for us to avoid such tyranny, according to Brooks, will require hard work as society pulls together for the good of all. It’s a nearly impossible task that the founders of our nation got, at least partly, right. 

Daniel’s hope

But as Daniel looks off to the future, he sees hope. The one who amasses so much territory and becomes so powerful is also alone and friendless. He’s defeated. Evil brings death. Those in the orbit of the evil one dies. With no one left to help him, eventually even the evil one dies. 

As we move into the 12th Chapter, we see the appearance of Michael, the archangel. Michael, labelled a prince and the protector of Israel, comes on the scene in this final battle. Then there is deliverance. But this true deliverance is not for this life, but for the world to come. 

Verse two is the only clear understanding of a double resurrection in the Old Testament.[9] Those who have been wise, but wronged in this life, rise from their graves. The same is true for those who have been abusers and evil in this life. Those shamed in this life find glory in the life to come, while those who found glory at the expense of others in this life rises to eternal contempt. 

Conclusion 

Daniel vision is for the Jewish people who live in that period between the end of the exile and the coming of the Messiah. Many may have left Babylon for Jerusalem with the hope that Israel’s former glory will return. Daniel dashes such hope. Israel at the end of the exile were hopefully just as we, as David Brooks pointed out, were hopeful in the 1990s at the end of the Cold War. But things change.

We live in a world in which despots use people for their own benefit. We must make the best of the situation, while remaining faithful to God. However, there is always good news, it’s just off in the distance. In the end, goodness prevails. God looks out for his people. 

David, in the Psalms, gets it right. “Our help is in the name of the Lord, who made heaven and earth.”[10] Amen.

[1] The Poetic Edda: Stories of the Norse Gods and Heroes, Jackson Crawford, translator (Hackett Publishing, 2015). 

[2] Deuteronomy 32:35, Romans 12:19.

[3] https://fromarockyhillside.com/2022/01/daniel-dreams-of-the-future/

[4] https://fromarockyhillside.com/2022/01/butting-heads-and-history/

[5] For modern commentaries following Daniel with those who rose to power after Babylon, See W. Sibley Towner, Daniel: Interpretation, A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1984), 154-157; Robert A. Anderson, Daniel: Signs and Wonders (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 129-142; and Temper Longman III, Daniel: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999), 271-283.  Ancient scholars also understood to whom Daniel speaks. See Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel. 

[6] Longman III, 282.

[7] Longman III, 280-281; Towner, 164-165.

[8] David Brooks, “The Dark Century,” New York Times, February 17, 2022. 

[9] See Towner, 166; and Longman III, 284. Longman III suggests they may be other references to the “double resurrection” in the Old Testament, but this is the clearest. An example of another possible reference is Isaiah 26:18

[10] Psalm 124:8. 

Daniel takes a long look into the future

Posted on

Two stories of mine and two related book reviews

Story 1:

Like a lot of kids, I don’t look back fondly on my Junior High. But the one exciting thing about those years occurred shortly after sundown, especially in the winter. I would wait with excitement as the sky darkened, turning on my receiver and listening as I prepared my transmitter which was tied into a long-wire diapole antenna. Soon, the 80-meter amateur radio band came to life. My headphones became clogged with the sound of morse code. Sometimes I would respond to a CQ (an invitation to chat by morse code) and make a new friend. Other times I would send my own CQ or join a network that was busy handing “traffic.” This was an exciting hour for a fourteen-year-old. Early in the evening, one might connect with someone in Europe or up and down the east coast. As the darkness moved further west, connections were more easily made to operators in the Midwest and, even later, on the West Coast. In high school, I lost the wonder of amateur radio and at some point, my license expired. Occasionally, I think back on those days and wonder if I should study up and renew my license. These two books that I review below helped rekindle such interest.

Story 2:

The first story I remember from a sermon came from Rev. Jessie Parks. He was the pastor of my home church from the time we moved to the Wilmington NC area until shortly after I turned 11. I remember the timing of his move as he had a son a few months older than me. For short time, we were in Boy Scouts together. I was probably ten when he gave this sermon. The story was about the radio operators on the high seas on that fateful night of April 14-15, 1912. I would later learn that Mr. Parks was also an amateur radio operator. I’m sure most ham operators know well the story of what happened that night when the Titanic sank. 

On my recent trip to Savannah and back, one of the books I listened was about the sinking of the Titanic from the perspective of two ships, the Carpathia and the Californian. Then, I listened to an Erik Larson story that wove together the early years of radio and that of a murder in London. Here are my reviews:  

Daniel Allen Butler, The Other Side of the Night: The Carpathia, the Californian and the Night the Titanic was Lost 

(2009, Audible, 2013), 9 hours and 29 minutes.  

Butler suggests the purpose of his book is to focus, not on the sinking of the Titanic, but on the other ships that were in the vicinity on the night of April 14-15, 1912. However, this isn’t new information as many of the details I had already known. After the sinking of the Titanic, there were major investigations, one in the United States and the other in Great Britain. All officers of the two nearby ships along with those officers and crew who survived the sinking were interviewed by these two investigations. What Butler does is to provide more insight into the lives of the development of the transatlantic shipping in the early years of the century, the captains of the two ships, the details of what happened that night from the perspective of the two ships, and report on the inquiries in the aftermath of the accident. Furthermore, he provides an interesting overview of how radio operated in the early days of wireless, which I found most interesting.

Wireless radio in 1912 was under the control of the Marconi company. The operators on the ships didn’t work for the shipping company, but for Marconi. He trained the operators, assigned them to the ships, and paid them. While onboard, the captain of the ship had authority over the operators, but he didn’t control them as he did rest of the crew onboard ship. Most ships had only one operator, although the larger liners like the Titanic had two. Part of the reason for the additional operator was that by 1912, Marconi’s company had found a profitable niche in sending telegraphs from the passengers of ships in the mid-Atlantic. As evening settled in on April 14th, the Titanic’s operators were busy sending such messages. Therefore, when the Californian operator contacted nearby ships to warn of ice, the Titanic’s operators were busy sending messages of good will from their passengers. His response was rather curt as he told the Californian not to interrupt their traffic. The Californian’s captain, Stanley Lord, decided it was unsafe to continue moving through the ice field in the dark. He had his ship stopped for the night and the radio operator, as there was only one onboard, went to bed. The captain also went to bed. A few minutes later, the Titanic struck the fatal iceberg. 

Knowing his ship was in danger, Captain Smith of the Titanic soon had his operators sending out a distress single. The Carpathia, which was fifty-eight miles away, responded and quickly changed course. Arthur Rostron, its captain, immediately began making plans as to how he might best respond. He had the confidence of his crew and pushed the ship to a speed beyond what was thought capable. While in transit, they readied lifeboats, prepared places inside the ship to receive passengers and to provide medical care, and prepared food. However, when he learned how fast the Titanic was sinking, he knew he could never reach the ship in time.

Throughout the night, until the lights went out, the Titanic’s operators stayed at their station hoping to awaken a closer ship who might be able to arrive in time to save the passengers and crew. The Titanic also shot up flares, some which were seen by the Californian, which was probably around 5 nautical miles from the disaster. The officers on the Californian reported such sights to their sleeping captain. The Californian tried to respond to the Titanic by morse code using lights but was probably too far away and received no response. There was even discussion on the ship as to whether the flairs were “company signals” or “distress signals.” Captain Lord never left his bunk to examine the situation. Nor did he wake the radio operator so that he might learn what was happening. 

Early the next morning, around two hours after the Titanic disappeared (those on the Californian through the ship had sailed off and didn’t even realize it was the Titanic), the Carpathia arrived and began to collect those in life rafts. 

Butler tells this story in an engaging manner. He rightly praises the work of Rostron and the Carpathia. And, as has many before him, he condemned the actions of Captain Lord. However, he goes beyond condemning the inaction of Lord, by psychologically diagnosing him. He also condemned the supporters of Mr. Lord. This, I thought, went to far. A historian is in no position to psychologically evaluate someone long dead and I’m not sure who, today, are Mr. Lord’s supporters. To me, attacking Lord’s supporters was to create a straw man to beat up. Nonetheless, I enjoyed his telling of the story of the Titanic from the perspectives of those on the seas that evening. 

Erik Larson, Thunderstruck

 (2006, Audible 2006), 11 hours and 56 minutes.

Like many readers, my first exposure to the writings of Erik Larson was through The Devil in the White City. In that book, Larson tells the story of one of nation’s first serial murderers and the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair. In Thunderstruck, Larson weaves together the story of a murder that occurred in London in early in the 20th Century with the story of Marconi’s development of the wireless radio. 

Hawley Crippen was a homeopathic physician from Michigan who worked in the patent medicine business. He spent much of his life in London. He married a woman who saw herself as an opera star. After failing to break into such trade in the United States, she tried and failed to make a name for herself in the London.  The portrait Larson creates of Crippen’s wife, Cora, who went by her stage name, Belle,” is less than flattering. She was never satisfied. She nearly bankrupted her husband with her shopping sprees. She had several affairs. To most people, Crippen doted on her and did what he could to make her happy. Then, he hired a new typist, Ethel, whom he fell for and with whom he had an affair.

In early 1910, Cora went missing. Crippen said she’d gone to the United States and later said she’d died in California. But some friends of Cora questioned this and brought her disappearance to the attention of Scotland Yard. Knowing he was under investigation, Crippen and Ethel fled to Europe and then to Quebec. Ethel was disguised as a young boy. But the officers of the ship were on the lookout and the captain became suspicious. Using the radio, he contacted authorities. Scotland Yard sent an investigator to Canada on a faster ship, which beat Crippen’s ship and allowed him to make an arrest with the help of Quebec authorities. This high seas chase became the headline in newspapers. Everyone except those on Crippen’s ship, knew what was happening because of radio. Crippen, who was always known as a gentleman, was hanged for this crime. Ethel was tried as an accessory but was found not guilty. 

The Crippen story is broken up by the story of Marconi and the development of wireless radio. In the 1890s, there were great interest in an ability to send messages through the “ether.” While some of this was through scientific means, others sought to do such through magic or the occult. Marconi was the one who figured out how to send wireless over a long distance. But his is not the rags to riches story. His father was a wealthy businessman in Italy and his mother was from the Jameson distilling family of Ireland. It was the Jameson family who helped pull together backers to support Marconi as he began wireless operations that eventually crossed the Atlantic. But there were lots of issues to overcome. Even once it was shown as possible, there were legal challenges from cable companies who saw wireless as an unfair competitor. There were issues of isolating the signal to a particular frequency.  For some reason that was only later understood, wireless worked best at night (as I experienced as a 14-year-old kid in the longer frequency bands). Larson weaves all this together into a compelling story. I thoroughly enjoyed this book.