Just a place for an amateur internet archeologist, part-time mad scientist, full-time father and husband, pathfinder and theologian by trade (and insanity) to speak his mind in the struggle to be more outgoing.
Adam Baumann Concordia Theological Seminary Fort Wayne, Indiana
It has been quite a while since you last heard from me. At lot has happened in the time since mail service was restored. I'll send a nice long update soon, but I just wanted everyone to know things are fine.
We're moving to Iowa. I've been assigned as vicar at Trinity Lutheran Church in Hampton. My start date is August 18, so we're packing the truck on the 6th and heading out on the 7th.
The next year will be very busy. I'll preach at least 25 sermons, teach Bible studies and catechism class, and plenty more. My intention is to regularly update everyone as the year progresses.
When we think about the crown of thorns, we imagine a full circle atop Christ's head. But the sort of crowns the Romans would have been familiar with are the horseshoe shaped laurel wreaths worn by generals on triumph or athletes after competing in the games. The soldiers fashioned for Christ a victory crown made of the very item God cursed the garden with due to Adam's sin.
Been a long time since anything's happened on this blog. Mostly because I've been too busy doing more immediately necessary things. And doing enough writing that I haven't wanted to do much recreational wordsmithing.
But then the teaser trailer for Star Wars Episode IX dropped.
(Don't mind me. I'm okay.)
If you haven't watched it yet, what is wrong with you?!?!
I mean... if you haven't watched it yet, you can watch it here.
Or here:
Hoo, boy! There's almost nothing in this video. Seriously. Other than seeing a new iteration of the TIE Interceptor, and a fun little pip-squeak droid, nothing overly fascinating.
Except for Rey wandering in some desert (Jakku? Tatooine's Jutland Wastes?).
And the Skywalker lightsaber has been repaired.
And an A-Wing (?) approaching a city/starport/base on a somewhat snowy and mountainous looking world.
Lando piloting the Falcon, again.
A Star Destroyer of some class in a battle. Not sure if it is an Imperial-class or the newer Resurgence-class.
Remnants of a Death Star.
And good old Palpatine himself cackling in the background.
Yeah, forget all that for a moment. Because I think I might have figured it out. I have a sneaking suspicion that I know exactly what the tagline and the title mean.
"The saga comes to an end."
Well, everyone in an official position has been stating that this is the end of the "Skywalker arc." And that kind of makes sense, overall. The Legends universe was able to open up the galaxy with many, many, new characters to follow. With the old EU being closed, Disney and Lucasfilm started back at square one. So, no major grievances here from me. (Other than those grievances I've already aired; see previous posts.)
But couple the tagline with the title.
Now, in my opinion, there are a few options that sort of overlap. Let me explain.
1) Rey is a Skywalker.
2) Ben gets redeemed.
3) "Left field."
And following the lead of my idol, Eric Idle, I'll start with the second one.
Will Ben Solo be redeemed? To be honest, I think it may be irrelevant. I know everyone likes a classic "good guys win" story, especially when it includes getting family to stop being jerks. But I don't think it is needed.
Why do I think that? Balance. One "Light Side," one "Dark Side." Or, jumping on the older theory bandwagon: Ben was a double agent the whole time.
Think about it. Has he been good at being a bad guy? Not really. He's been flighty, impulsive, reckless, and at times even stupid. Maybe he turned to the dark side out of fear of Luke, but then realized he was in over his head and started trying to sabotage it all, except it is getting difficult to figure out there one lie beings and the other ends.
As for Rey being a Skywalker, I stand by there being only one way for that to work: Mara. Don't get me wrong, I think she is (likely) deceased as of TFA. I'll even go so far as to say she died before Ben and Luke had their "falling out." However, the origin of Mara would be in play. And then some. Buckle up for this one, we're going to brush left field.
(the following is the theory, ignore similarities)
Mara Jade was not only one of the Emperor's favorite assassins, but she was his illegitimate granddaughter. At the Emperor's death, she was assigned to kill Skywalker. Instead, though, she was redeemed, going on to aid the New Republic both in the reestablishing of the Jedi and in the intelligence departments efforts to weed out Imperials. Around the time Luke's nephew began attending the Academy, Mara disappeared. She had been assisting Sen. Organa-Solo's efforts to combat the rising First Order. Luke never found out what happened to her, and the agitation he felt from her disappearance contributed to his actions toward Ben. What happened to Mara was she went into hiding briefly when her daughter was born. To protect her Mara took her to Jakku, hiding her with an associate, who would end up falling on hard times and "sell" her to Unkar Plutt. Mara would go back into the field, disappearing for the final time in the first attempt to located Luke. No one knows what happened to her. However, there was a ship spotted that appears to be the same type as the one in Rey's memory.
Okay, tin foil hats off now. Outlandish and unlikely? Yep. Buckle up, though, because you ain't seen nothing yet.
What is outlandish is the title: "The Rise Of Skywalker." How so?
Skywalker is not a name, but a title.
Ladies and gentlemen, may I please direct your attention to a document known as "AlienExodus," the outline of which is here and the first two chapters are here. I'll wait while you read it.
Oh, yeah. You sort of see where I'm going with this now, huh? Well, hold on to your hat. Because here's the theory.
The title of "the Sky Walker" is much like that of "the Chosen One." And Palpatine knew this. He also knew that he hadn't, actually, killed his master, who was playing with trying to create life. So Palpatine did what had to be done to keep the galaxy, as well as the universe and the Force, from being destroyed by his master: fulfill the prophecy of the Chosen One.
That meant finding the right candidate. The difficulty with that was in the wording of the prophecy, wording that the Jedi did not know. But he did. The Chosen One was to be a Sky Walker. The title became a renown Jedi family name long before Ruusan, but they nearly died out in the battle. But Palpatine found one: Shmi. The son would have fulfilled the prophecy, if not for Snoke appearing in the Unknown Regions after the rise of the Empire. How did the Emperor learn of this? A young Chiss commander, who had information regarding Snoke's activities.
You see, Palpatine had been working on essence transfer as his master perfected parthenogenesis. But his master had stolen his work just as Palpatine stole his. That threatened Palpatine's plans enough to make it worth while to abandon or postpone his efforts. Or at the very least make a contingency plan. As Vader did what had to be done, namely, kill his master, the Emperor ordered his granddaughter to kill Skywalker, knowing that he would partner with her to provide the means to defeat Snoke. But, thank the Force, Anakin had not one but two children, and Leia's son was equally powerful in the Force.
An so, from beyond the grave, Palpatine, through the memory and myth of his former servant Vader, influenced Ben Solo to be not only the intended Dark Side user, but the perfect inside man within Snoke's efforts. And with the death of Snoke, it seemed things were set right.
Only now there are only two Force users, and there is no balance, so perhaps Palpatine's plan can work out. If not for those who believe in the Legend of Skywalker, striving against the Dark Side.
Bazinga, nerf herders! How's that for "left field?"
Yeah, that's okay.
At this point I'm just playing around with whatever scraps I'm finding, hoping to pick up grenades along the way. Nothing here is a serious "I'm pretty sure I've got it all figured out." Especially since Ian McDiarmid said he's not in the movie. Oh, well. Being wrong won't bother me. It hasn't yet regarding any predictions I attempted. But it would be hilarious if any of this is right. If I'd bank on any of it, it's my prediction regarding the title.
But, until December, or the full length trailer drops more land mines on everyone's head canon, all we've got is spitballs and hypotheticals.
On March 11, 2019, Fox News posted an opinion article titled "Church as we know it is over. Here's what's next." (If you are curious what was in the article, you can read it here.)
(pardon me while I beat my head against the desk for a moment, until I forget about the dumb for a while)
Now, at the top, he does rightly call out churches that focus on attempting to increase attendance numbers, as if that is the goal of the Church. But he then claims that this also means that the "traditional" church model, namely that there is a physical building where worship takes place is like the dinosaurs: dead.
No, Dave. The Church does not die. She thrives. But, then again, you wouldn't know. You're not a pastor.
What you are is a has-been sports announcer who now works for a Bible-denying heretic at a place of business that looks more like Facebook and Instagram than the countryside of Galilee, or Rome, or Wittenburg. It doesn't even look like what Billy Graham was doing.
Some churches and "churches" will try to implement the sort of stupidity. Now, I'm not saying it is bad to have the ability to navigate modern social media and use it as the tool which it can become. No. I'm saying that thinking foolishly that you can replace church with a Facebook chat session.
Yes. That is what he suggested. He just probably has no idea that's what he suggested. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that.
Why do I say that? Because if he knew what "church" was he wouldn't have made such a suggestion.
The word we now know as Church comes from the Greek word ἐκκλησία. Quite literally meaning "assembly" or "communion," though whenever it is used in the New Testament it does clearly mean the Church. And the Church only exists as a group. As Jesus says in Matthew 18:20 "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”
That is one of the primary marks of the Church: fellowship. And not just being "together" in some vague way, but legitimately being in the same space worshiping together, reading the words of Scripture, partaking in the Sacraments, and praying. If you are not together, physically, you are not the Church. You cannot have baptism and communion without being physically together.
Yes, having the ability to watch a service, or listen to the audio, when it is physically impossible to physically attend service, can be beneficial, especially for some members, such as the elderly. But this cannot replace worship. And to claim that, not only will it, but it is beneficial for the church in such an age of post-modernistic fluff, is foolish. I'd even go so far as to say treasonous. To not only think this might happen, but to wish for it, to look forward to it, to think it will be the next step in the progressing of the Church from archaic to modern is disgusting.
According to Dave "If the Church is going to make an impact in the modern world, we need to take the swim lanes out and let people explore our church and our content in their own time and in their own way. We need to understand that digital channels do not compete with physical attendance, they partner with it. And if the marketplace is an indicator, doing digital engagement well will lead to increased physical attendance."
What it should say is "If the Church is going to make an impact in the modern world, we need to quit trying to be what the world wants and be the Church. We need to understand that digital channels do not replace with physical attendance, but they can support it. And if the marketplace is an indicator, living in such a disconnected and digital engagement means we need to be promoting the value of physical and routinely attending a confessional and Scriptural community."
Yeah, I know that isn't what he said. But it is what he should have said. Not "oh, look, let's abandon our heritage and identity as the Church as we try to emotionally manipulate people into attending through callous and secular methods based on psychology and advertising."
If he was really a pastor, he would call out his boss Andy Stanley, the leader of North Point Ministries in Atlanta. Stanley is a known and intentional heretic who has gone on record stating that the Old Testament is of no use to Christians. This would make Stanley a Marcionite.
Marcion and his followers rejected the "Hebrew Bible" (which we call the Old Testament), since they saw the Hebrew God was vengeful. According to them the one true God sent Jesus to be the savior, and Paul was the chief apostle. If that sounds familiar to another religious mantra... I'll let you figure that out yourself. Because gnosticism never goes out of style, unfortunately.
So, Dave, like I said. Dead wrong.
The church is not about being "popular" and neglecting to mention Christ in nearly everything we say and do. The Church has always been about preaching Christ crucified and risen for sinners, which includes me and you. Everything a pastor says should be about or connect back to that central most fact of Christianity.
Maybe you should go back to talking about sports. At least there if you are wrong it is only your opinion, and not heresy.
Adam Baumann
Concordia Theological Seminary
Fort Wayne, Indiana
Winter Quarter, 2018-2019
29 Sept. 2018 - 1 Feb. 2019
Apparently mail service to and from northeast Indian are really slow.
Actually, that is true. It seems that the USPS isn't very efficient this side of the Mississippi. Then again, nothing is.
So it has been too long since I have written anything here. And I'm not ashamed to admit I realized that because of a message in email that a comment noted that some images are not working. I fix them when I find them, when I can. But the pictures are just extra, the real meat of this blog is the stuff I write.
Which I haven't done a lot of in the last four months. But, in my defense, this has been a busy four months. And I realize that a weekly or biweekly posting is untenable at this juncture. Maybe once a month. Or if my posts are much shorter, which is doable too. The reason is pretty simple: one quarter ended and my family journeyed back home for the Thanksgiving holiday, then back to the Seminary where both Homiletics and Hebrew dominated my time. Among other classes, like some very challenging Gospels exegetical papers. And not because the text was difficult, but the professor is a stickler for quality and a self-described tough grader.
The "big deal" this quarter is Homiletics, which includes writing three sermons. One was video recorded, one will be just a manuscript, and one will be delivered in class. That one is also the first sermon I will give in church, on 17 March at my field work church. Which, honestly, will be less nerve-wracking than speaking it in class. Yeah, I'm weird like that.
On top of all that the first years were assigned to lead chapel services. I was assigned 15 January, a simple service of Prayer and Preaching, which meant I didn't have to worry about chanting. But it was during Symposia week, so the chapel was packed. If you want, you can watch it here. You'll have to search a little bit to find the right day. Maybe you'll even see me look up from where I'm sitting, hoping to see my family, only to see President Matthew Harrison.
Yep. Not nervous at all. No idea what you're talking about. (Afterward I did get to speak with Harrison, and he said I did a good job.)
Otherwise, things keep plugging away. I'll try to not disappear for so long again.
And the disciples of John told him all these things, and John summoned to himself two of his disciples he sent them to the Lord saying “Are you the one who is coming or are we to look for a different one?” When the men had come to Him they said “John the Baptist sent us to you saying ‘Are you the one who is coming or are we to look for a different one?’” In that hour He had healed many with diseases and torments and evil spirits, and many blind He granted the ability to see. And He answered them saying “Go yourselves, tell John the things you saw and heard, the blind regain sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead roused, the poor have the good news preached for them, and blessed is the one who shall not offended by me.” When the messengers of John had gone He began to speak to the crowds concerning John “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? What, then, did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft robes? Behold, the ones in fine clothing and exist in luxury in the palaces. What, then, did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, indeed, I say to you, and greater than a prophet. This is the one about whom it has been written 'Behold I send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.' I say to you, no one born of women is greater than John. But the least in the kingdom of God is greater than he."Luke 7:18-28
The third week of Advent is traditionally focused on joy. Hence the rosy colored vestments. But John really isn't the typical "rainbows and sunshine" preacher. Especially right now.
The last prophet, sent to prepare the hearts that had strayed from God, was in prison. And not like prisons today, or even prisons back in the 1800s. Like, a prison that makes the Bastille look like a Sandals resort.
So is it understandable that John asks is Jesus is really the Messiah? This is the guy who, while still in the womb, was jumping in excitement knowing that he was in the same room as the Savior. And he had no fear speaking truth to power. So why ask this now? Why not when Christ was at the river, being baptized?
But John's question is understandable. He knows that the end, for him, is soon, and he wants to know that he hasn't been wrong.
Paul had somewhat similar circumstances. He was in prison, multiple times. Yet, as he wrote to the church in Philippi, he expressed that, no matter what, he was content. This is because of his assurance and hope in Christ. Not that John did not have hope, but it wasn't as clear before Christ's death and resurrection. That and Paul wasn't quite under the same threat of death (at that time).
Which, in many ways, is for our benefit and joy. We can look back and be certain that Christ has died for us. And for that, we celebrate and wait for His return.
In the fifteenth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius, while Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of Ituraea and the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, at the time of the high priest Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came upon John son of Zachariah in the wilderness. And he went into the whole surrounding region of the Jordan announcing a baptism of repentance for the purpose of the forgiveness of sins. Just as it is written in the book of The Words of Isaiah the Prophet "A voice crying in the wilderness 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.' Every valley will be filled and every mountain and hill made low, and the crooked will become straight and the rough roads be smooth and all flesh will see the salvation of God." He began saying to the crowds that were coming out to be baptized by him “You brood of vipers who warned you all to flee from the future wrath? Therefore produce fruit worthy of repentance. And do not begin to say to yourselves: we have Abraham for a father. For I tell you that God is able from these stones to raise children of Abraham. And even now the axe is already laid at the root of the tree thus every tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.” And asking him the crowds said: “What shall we do?” And he answered them saying “The one who has two tunics shall share he who has not, and the one who has shall do likewise.” And tax collectors came to him as well to be baptized and said to him “Teacher, what must we do?” And he said to them “Collect no more than you are ordered to.” And some soldiers were questioning him saying “What shall we do?” and he said to them “Do not take money by force or by false charges but be satisfied with your salary.” [As the people were in expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Christ, John answered them all, saying, “I baptize you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.” So with many other exhortations he preached good news to the people. But Herod the tetrarch, who had been reproved by him for Herodias, his brother's wife, and for all the evil things that Herod had done, added this to them all, that he locked up John in prison.] Luke 3:1-14 (15-20, ESV)
It is always interesting having a Gospel text that isn't about Christ. Except, that, it is.
The last and greatest prophet, John, had a mission from God: prepare the way of the Lord. The Jews probably thought that the phraseology literally meant that a road had to be made ready for the messiah to arrive and reclaim the throne of David.
But that was not the duty of the prophet. The prophet's job had always been to call the people back to God, and His statutes. And so John prepared. He taught the people that they needed to be contrite. Which is true, but not because it would bring about the Messiah. The Messiah was coming regardless.
That does not mean John rightly teaching the Law was wrong. The Law is to be taught to sinners who are secure in their sin. That's why he calls them "kids of snakes" and says that Abraham isn't their father. He doesn't mean anything genealogical. Because being children of Abraham has nothing to do with genetics, bloodline, familiar relations, or ethnicity. A child of Abraham is a believer in the promise. Even the stones, the "dumb rock" Gentiles, could (and would) be raised up by God to be the true Israel.
When those who had been shown their sin by the Law asked John what they must do, we best not that they do not ask "what must we do to earn salvation." No, they want to know what they should do to stop breaking God's law. "Be generous. Don't steal. Don't resort to violence to get what you want."
With all of this fire and feistiness, John was not the expected messiah, by a long shot. And he said so. He knew the Messiah, having met Him while still in the womb. John was merely teaching the Law and doing simple washings, much as the priests had done stop-gap sacrifices. But the Christ, He baptizes through water and His Word, by which we receive the Holy Spirit that is the Fire of God.
And so John stands there on the banks of the Jordan river, the last great herald of the King before His return. John represents the true exodus from slavery and wilderness, pointing to the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world by His death and resurrection.
(Since my Greek Readings class only translated the 1-14, I elected to use the ESV for the remainder.)
