Words that echo, words that get stuck in your ear

During the Zoom men's Bible study in Ecclesiastes 3:13-14 and thereabouts there were a number of words that seems to stand out and reverberate with special emphasis in this framework of "wisdom books" and doom and gloom (on the face of the word-pictures on those pages). The idea of TIME comes up again and again. The Greeks of that period, presumably likewise to some extent in 2024, distinguished time is two senses: chronos (seconds, minutes, hours) and kairos (akin to English 'timing' or the proper moment for action or for inaction: release the arrow, shoot the shuttle across and through the loom). On a tangent of conversation the idea of 'right time' came up. That triggered thoughts of 'Righteousness' and 'in right relationship with God'. As a result of this emphasis on time and timing (timeliness, in sync, human time versus 'God's own time'), the notion of getting right with God and God's creatures suddenly took on the additional light of right TIME to engage with others and with other creatures, too. In other words, it is not enough to pray as a way to align with God's will and efforts to make things "on Earth as in heaven," but also the praying should include the desire to be on time, in time, timely, starting or stopping at the right time.

A recurring grapple with the two senses of KNOWing (e.g. Spanish distinction: saber =know facts, conocer =know places, people, things) also cropped up this morning. Knowing WHAT is much less important than knowing WHY. Or put another way, WHOM you know (relationship) is more significant than what you know. And when Ecclesiastes talks about "everything is meaningless." it is about the Chronos (time sweeps away castles and other proud projects), since "meaning" has the sense of "intention" or striving or purpose. To the extent that non-striving (echoes of Buddhism) and just being and being in relationship with God is the goal, then it is as Ecclesiastes puts it: there is no meaning, effort, future-oriented achievement. All that really matters is here and now; not living in the past, nor dreaming of futures. Fully occupying the present is the place to be (in living relationship with God and the many parts of God's world).

The catchphrase, wisdom of comedians and humorists also popped up in the morning conversation, "timing is everything." The same punch line can fall flat or can thrill audiences, depending on the timing when tension is broken or cognitive dissonance is resolved. Perhaps the five arenas located at advance language mastery can be understood not just as parallel tracks, but also as cross-connecting so that an insight of one arena can suggest something similar in the other. Religion, language arts (poetry, song, drama), emotion, persuasion (politics), and humor require great language fluency to express and to understand the reverberations and connotations. So when Ecclesiastes says that timing (kairos) is part of righteousness, there seems to be something similar to "timing is everything," as comedians say. Knowing when, how, and with whom to engage with also pertains to matters of great emotion, powerful persuasion, and soaring language art.

CURIOSITY: X P (Greek letters 'chi' and 'ro') abbreviate Chi Ristos (Christ); but this also seems rooted is 'Kairos' [chi + ro]. If this is not coincidence, then Christ is timely savior; present at right place and right time.

When life's routines are shaken up

Today's Tuesday Men's Bible Study ranged far and wide from the passage from Romans, chapter 10.

A friend taught me a useful way to respond to upsets, irritations and frustrations, and all manner of surprise that causes a negative feeling. Rather than a knee-jerk reaction, far better to say, "thank you, Lord," as a way to acknowledge that good things may come after the bad ones. What at first seems to be an unwanted change in plans intended or expectations dashed sometimes turns out for the best in hindsight or even right at the time that reactions take place. By braking one's speedy life and frictionless pursuit of happiness, there comes a break in the routine, normal, taken-for-granted picture of the world. Outside forces may have caused your predicament and the "thank you, Lord" response, but it is possible to do something similar by deliberately shaking up your accustomed routines. For example, digital fasting is a way to stop spending time scrolling the Internet and endless headline news. Fasting from making complaints, from snacking after 7 p.m., from caffeine, from meat, and so on: all of these examples alter the accustomed habits of doing, being, seeing, and thinking.

A couple of reflections on pausing from ordinary routines come to mind. One is the determination and focus that sometimes comes from the fresh perspective glimpsed during the break from normal patterns. W.A. Mozart is credited with saying something like, "music is in the silences between the notes," which is to say both the sound and its absence work together; one without the other does not produce the experience of music. A parallel might be for Bible scripture: the translated ink on the pages alone is not where the full meaning is. The white space and the reverberations to read between the lines; the non-verbal surroundings for the text also is important to pay attention to.

Continuing on the theme of putting the brakes on ordinary doing and thinking in order to break the routinization of daily experience, several ideas come from stopping to scrutinize how much of God's creation is not about language and logical arguments. One is the statement that scripture is the breath of God: in Genesis God spoke, "let there be light." And Jesus as the flesh and blood form of God on planet Earth is called "the word made flesh," or "the Word of God." The making of Adam comes from breathing spirit into his mortal body. So this breath of God does double duty: breath for respiration and life, but also breath to form syllables and words (and worlds). Again, like the earlier paragraph, though, verbal things are only a small part of the larger creation. The scripture is one thing, but what is unspoken and can be felt between the lines is also important to see and hear. A curious property of words - ordinary conversation or scriptural passages - is that you can be the listener or the speaker: when you understand and agree with a statement you can "own it" (take responsibility or ownership for caring for it) but you are not the owner/author/Creator. So it is possible to embrace God's word (text of the Bible, but also Jesus, the Word of God) and to "own it" even though it does not fully belong to you.

Going further with this idea about holding onto a teaching (owning it) but not grabbing it in a vise-like death grip, that technique of "holding lightly" seems to work well for the scriptures and by extension for all the relationships to fellow believers, too. In other words, rather than to memorize the Bible or to cling to a set of rules or Biblical Laws, it is far healthier to hold lightly your Bible knowledge and your Life knowledge, too: be confident but at the same time be open to doubt and wider meaning (that one cannot know all). In terms of words and logic it sure does look like a contradiction, but "knowing" God's word really can be certain (one's unbroken relationship to the scriptures) AND uncertain at the same time (leaving open the possibility that there is more to it than first understood). You may feel you've arrived but somehow you're not there yet. This seeming paradox between owning and not being the owner; between being confident and also allowing doubt and vigilance does produce some cognitive tension. The saying from President Ronald Reagon springs to mind when he spoke of USSR agreements to reduce the nuclear warheads for both sides. He said, "trust but verify." In Christianity that might be "have faith but be always vigilant for false prophets.

Tension allows "productive discomfort" -- that is, things like irritation, hurtful words, careless actions (or neglected actions) may increase the tension in one's life, but having "thank you, Lord" moments may stir reflection and deliberation so that the ordinary way of seeing things can be viewed in a new light. With one's mind open to seeing things a new way a sequence of meanings can follow: to put on the brakes and pause your routine is to be present with the people and other living things around you. To be present is to pay better attention and to respect (literally re+spectate; to take a 2nd look) the people and other living things that you may have overlooked or somehow taken for granted. Pausing from one's busy routines allows you to be humble (less of Ego and more of everything around you) and from there to feel grateful for your connection to everything around you. In other words, fasting or another "thank you, Lord" pause from routines produces respect, humility, and gratitude for a change; less self-absorption and more other-attention. And by getting into the habit of encountering the people and places of one's days from this position of respect - humility - gratitude then the habit of "holding lightly" one's own place in the scheme of things comes to feel natural and desirable, too. There is no need to "let God take care of everything" or the opposite extreme, to "leave God to the Sabbath and oneself being in charge of everything." In-between these extremes of "God's in charge" and "I'm in charge" is this middle way of holding lightly: being in the driver's seat of one's life, but always listening for direction coming from God's Will to be done, too. 

All in all, the six men on Zoom this morning covered a lot of ground. These reflections are just a fraction of the meanings woven together during the discussion.

God's Will Be Done Forevermore

 

Bible verse comparison: New International Version (left) and The Message (right), emphasis added

Over and over the people in the Bible are perplexed. Sometimes "the greatest among Gods" seems paradoxical and topsy-turvy (crucifixion for eternal life). Other times the Creator's actions seem to come as commandment or dictator's omnipotence and omniscience. Still other times the lessons seem unfair (grape harvesters hired at different times but paid the same, regardless of hours labored). No matter how logical and penetrating the human mind, the wrestling never seems to accommodate God's ways and will. As soon as the person "makes sense" of God's wishes, then the faith is dead or at least loses vitality and liveliness.

An advocate for the devil could point out that God is always right(eous). Disaster, blessing, incompetence, abuse can all lead to different outcomes, but despite the inconsistency that people see and experience, God is always right. God's position cannot be wrong, no matter the suffering or distress that people find themselves in. And while that perception and experience may be painful, it does not deny that God is present in good times and in bad. The ups and downs do not exclude God from being present; indeed, at extremes of joy or sorrow God's abiding presence is especially valuable.

Another implication of this idea that "God always is right" is that there is no escape; no place to be outside of God's circle of care and presence. You could be in air, on land, or at (or under) sea and God will be present; and God's will reigns. So the devil's advocate may be right about God can't lose; in good times or in bad, God wins. But that does not mean that human life is a rigged game of chance. Rather, it means that God is inescapably present in all that one sees and does, and present for all time; from first breath to last. A person cannot escape God's world or otherwise not show up; "not playing, just watching."

Echoing the all-encompassing blanket of God's presence and love for what the Creator has made, there is the imagery of "knowing all the hairs of your head" and "knowing you before you were born." This sense of knowing a person, or personalizing a relationship (not knowing facts and other fragments of information pulled from its context). God's timeless presence is in tune with the idea of knowing everything, omniscience: not a trivia master but a personal relationship with every large or small sentient being, whether animal or vegetable. Inescapable and never letting go. By accepting this bond between Creator and one's own self, it is easy to feel one's exterior (physicality) and one's interior (intangibles) linked to the surrounding creatures in this moment and for all the passing milliseconds one strides the planet. Perceiving self as being isolated from the surroundings is a perspective that is impoverished and short-sighted. Instead, all this creation is co-present with one's own time and space; all of this is joined together in a massive convoy traveling down the road together.

Between the LETTER of the Law and the SPIRIT of the Law

In Romans 7, Paul puts his Jewish foundations into terms that the city dwellers surrounded by street shrines and altars for the named Roman gods. He describes The Law of the Hebrew Bible as an important reference point to know the times one is off track from God's Ways; sinning, in other words. But being mortal creatures, people are bound to fail to follow the intent and the letter of The Law. He goes on to say that grace and mercy (by way of Jesus redeeming everyone else's sins) close the gap between God's Will and the ideas carried in The Law, on the one hand, and human weakness. Only Jesus paying the price can pay for everyone's sins. No amount of good deeds and so on will allow a person to develop a full relationship with God unless Jesus' redeeming grace is taken into account first.

The screenshot from Wikipedia article for 'weighing scales' illustrates the way that the two sides even out to create a horizontal line when the beam is balanced. In Paul's letter to the Romans he warns them about taking The Law too literally. It is not a magic idol to worship, Something similar could be said about taking the scriptures too literally, as if one needs only to cherrypick phrases or passages, disregarding the surrounding circumstances, in order to "prove" one's point of view. Perhaps the opposite extreme of "taking too literally" the teachings and parables is "taking too figuratively" (regarding phrases and passages more like poetry or indirect pointers in the direction of meaning; nothing legalistic, contractual, or detailed and subdivided). Seekers after God's presence and Way such as Mystics might be grouped into the people NOT dwelling on the commas, synonyms, and other verbal details but instead focusing on the general picture being presented. After all the spirit of the Law could have a double meaning of (a) intentionality that is present, regardless of the interpretations and emphasis heard by one generation of scholars or practitioners versus people of another time or place; and (b) the Biblical meaning of intelligent agency or force alive in the world that is invisible to human eyes - a living spirit which inhabits the bloodless text. When speaking in a court of law, for example, there is a clear distinction between what is "on the books" or "by the book" and the discretion in the sentencing judge's hands to consider the purpose and intent of the law that is recorded in order to give that day's view of the relevant statutes and come up with a declaration that is consonant with the Spirit of the Law.

Somewhere between the surface-level and word-centric, tightly literal interpretation and an imaginative image-centric loose interpretation of the law (and in Paul's description of The Law) there is a middle ground where some kind of balance exists: enough detail to make the words useful and coherent, but enough latitude for applying those terms in real life to make the worlds flexible instead of fuzzy and blurred. At one extreme or the other is very little value or worth. So worshipers must continuously check to make sure they do not stray so far into one extreme or the other. Besides this idea of balance between the extremes, there could be other dimensions to discover the middle point.  

Literal implicates literacy and literature. So for oral traditions (no writing system; if at least nobody who can read or write it), maybe there are extremes for interpreting a surface and verbal-privileging interpretation AND for interpreting things more loosely in a visual or holistic interpretation. But to name the tight and the loose 'literal' and its opposite does not seem to fit: without a writing system to put sounds into letters, maybe such tight interpretations are less likely, too. [literal meaning deriving partly from the writing system, authors who are authorized to be authoritative authorities, and record-keep accountability]

Developmentally, too, added life experience, education and responsibility can lead a person to more liberal interpretations of others' lives and the confines that define one's own life. So "the letter of the law" seems to fit with more rigid thinking and narrow views while "the spirit of the law" seems to fit with more flexible or fluid thinking. The arrow of aging and evolving viewpoints seems to trend toward looser and looser interpretations. On the other hand, with age frequently comes orneriness and striving to resist changes to the accustomed ways of doing things. Overall, then, it is hard to say if maturation (not that everybody matures as the days go on) corelates with ever more "spirit of the law" or the reverse, ever narrower frame of mind.  

Altogether different is the layers of problems going into the making of the "letter of the law" since the teachings of the Hebrew Bible that Paul shares with the Romans and other congregations he visited and wrote to. There was a time before the Torah was written down; it was maintained by oral tradition. Even after written words were committed to visual records, errors in copying, the passage of time to change nuance or major meanings of keywords, then the many centuries of translations into dozens of languages all have left marks on the "letter" of the Law. In other words, clinging too tightly to English of the 1980s and later makes the sentences palatable and the meanings clearly focused, but that is not always identical to the meaning at the time it was written in Hebrew of long ago. By claiming moral superiority on the basis of a string of modern English words that smuggle in modern overtones and images is problematic at best. At worst, to claim that a narrow view of a passage "must be right because it says so in black and white today" is just deluded and self-righteous, built upon nothing but hubris or rising seas of self-certainty.

In summary, in our time some people are well aware of the dangers of literalism for reading scripture, for seeking answers, and for drawing implications from "The Law." Seldom do that same people discuss the opposite extreme --figurativismfor reading scripture, seeking answers, and spelling out the meanings that follow from such a loose interpretation. Although Paul does not spend time in search for a balance between interpretations that are too tight or too loose, he does discuss the importance and the limitations of The Law when it comes to living God's Way in God's World. This seems consonant with Jesus' own assertion that he "comes not to abolish The Law, but to fulfill The Law" (Matthew 5). In other words, there is something more important that comes out of the Law; something beyond merely endorsing or enforcing those dictates.  For people living in 2024, then, the task is to keep The Law in sight but to live filled with God's Love and guided by insight: the Spirit of the Law. 

Not exactly - 2nd Commandment, "Love They Neighbor"

These days most people understand the commandment to "love your neighbor" as both 'paying back' and 'paying forward'; in other words, everyone owes a debt of gratitude to one another. The illustration here puts Mark 12:30-31 in three versions of the commandment, New International Version, The Message (contemporary, conversational style), and set to Hawai'ian Pidgin English. Whether you rationalize the effort to offer help to others as "owed" or "freely given and unconditional," or simply a Biblical injunction, the idea is to hold the heart of a servant who puts the other person (the master or a fellow servant, or a stranger) ahead of oneself; or rather, equal to oneself - loving the neighbor AS LOVING ONESELF, neither self nor other on a pedestal.

But in practice, day to day, most people will assume this means to think about others AND THEN to do something that directly or indirectly benefits the person. In other words, fulfilling the commandment is about oneself making a gift of time, caring, money, or some other form of value to the other person; a sort of one-directional movement in one's own power to initiate and define the terms. There is an echo in this commandment acted out that way in the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as you would also have done unto yourself." And yet, perhaps that is not exactly the full meaning of relating to others since a one-way action is only part of the relationship.

In present-day USA society there is a premium put upon attaining independence; not being a burden on others, never being in a position of having to ask for help. So it makes sense that the commandment would be seen as wholly in control of the donor; the person committing to action on his or her own terms. Perhaps a complete, fulfilled meaning of the commandment leaves room for the recipient of the gift to initiate the process, set the pace, and react to the terms of the interaction, too. For example, a donor who is in ill health, disabled, or otherwise ill equipped for something may receive others' help and both parties can be viewed as donors because the helper is giving something, but the receiver is allowing themselves to be helped, by choice or maybe in having no choice. In other words, the definition of "giving" need not be limited to something of value transferring from donor to receiver. Rather, there is a valuable gift in the situation of the person needing help, verbalized or silently expressing a need (and willingness) to be helped. Dignity can inhere in both sides of the relationship. "Loving" one's neighbor can thus take the form of gracefully and gratefully accepting the donor's gift.

Besides the word 'love', the other word to scrutinize in "Love they neighbor as thyself" is SELF. In present-day US society there is great emphasis on isolated agency at liberty to act in a least restrictive environment, unfettered by government, ordinances, customs, or superstitions. Each person is an island on which she or he is ruler (and subject). But despite this imagery of separateness, most people in 2024 are not alone. They are related to kith and kin in some ways in private life or in public occupation and transaction. Therefore, a truer interpretation of SELF is a relationship image to see when looking in the mirror. Who you are is the sum total of all those past, present, and (presumptive) future relationships, too. If you were to suddenly leave the country or the mortal world, the gap left behind is maybe the most complete picture of your SELF in (social) totality. Thus, "love thy neighbor as thyself" in its more complete sense means to care for others and equally to care for oneself not as isolated data points, but as whole beings in webs of connection to many others at the same time. By touching the heart of the visible person, ripples extend to many others whom you cannot see at the moment. So the second commandment is not exactly limited to unilateral acts of donor to recipient. It is a 2-way experience: both parties presenting something of worth to the other. And it is not exactly limited to the flesh and bones of SELF since the totality of a self cannot truly be excised from the surrounding relationships that person is part of.

By extension, the Golden Rule can usefully be upgraded to the Platinum Rule that international exchange programs teach their incoming and outgoing travelers: "Do unto others AS THEY WOULD LIKE to be done unto (not as YOU would like done unto you)."

Not exactly created "in the image" of God

Little by little discovering by reading, conversations, and questions that familiar Bible phrases and references sounded out in modern English can fail to communicate some important texture, echoes, resonance or other attached meaning to a Biblical word or idea, today it occurred to me that maybe something similar is going on in the cherished idea that humans are "created in the image of God." Related: that a person can see Jesus in the face (voice, actions, examples) of others. And: that "we are the hands and feet of God" here on Earth.

In particular "in the image of" possibly has other facets or nuances that get overshadowed by the typical, casual meaning - as if a mirror image or photographic image. Note that the speculations that follow are purely conjecture and don't derive from excavating the original ancient Greek or ancient Hebrew source words and surrounding lines of text, either. Trying on some synonyms for "image of God" there are several that put the overall meaning in a slightly different light. (1) With the likeness of God, (2) in a manner similar to God, (3) with the essential orientation and purposes [character] of God, (4) an identity or resemblance that is true to God's Way.

Examine closely the usual "in the image of God," [Genesis 1:27, New International Version]

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

Now substitute one of the earlier synonyms to see the result. In place of pepple as God's carbon-copy that we tend to imagine in the age of photocopiers and social media photo sharing, the meaning shifts to talk about the interior instead of the looks and likeness on the outside. Without analyzing the source languages used at the time of Genesis going from oral tradition to written inscription, it is impossible to know if "image of God" does differ to modern understanding. But certainly it is in the realm of possibility that "the image of God" more accurately is about some essential interior capacity and instinct; something that is in the human identity that comes from God, something that resonates with and longs for God. To have a core, essential, heart-felt, identical identifying identity to the Great I Am surely rings with truth, righteousness, and beauty.

Judgement Day is not what you think

Popular imagination for judgement that is balanced and weighed.

The weekly Bible Study is incrementally making its way through Romans; this time the tail of chapter 3 and first lines of chapter 4. The idea of JUDGEMENT comes up and for some reason when hearing it read on this occasion that word stuck out in my mind. Like so many words, with modern ears a particular image comes to mind that could miss the meaning of the original word long, long ago. Besides the historical drift in meanings - what it refers to AND the connotations that echo from it, there is also the potential misalignment of (modern) English and the earlier translation(s) relied upon to arrive at the words printed today. Setting aside both concerns (historical and translational), though, consider the roots and several senses contained in 'judgement'.

The idea of "You will be judged" in a courtroom situation has the idea of punishment and maybe reformation or realignment: too lenient is considered unjust, but too harsh is also considered unjust. However, the folk image of "knocking on heaven's door" and being judged as to being admitted or else being denied admission is slightly different to the courtroom example. It is more of a pass/fail gatekeeper image. What the passage in Romans 3 and 4 means, though, could be something neither of the Pearly Gates or the courtroom bench. Clues to the full and true, intended sense of Justice that Paul describes can be found in the family of related words: Justice, Justify, Judgement, Judicial, Adjudicate, and so on. Assuming that God's nature is Love for all creatures, animal and vegetable (micro-organism, too?), and that his faith is abiding --no matter what is in a person's own mind or heart, then JUDGING is about realigning the out-of-tune soul, restoring neglected relationships between Creator and Creature. Therefore, when coming before God to be judged and/or for the Final Judgement Day the purpose is to put things in order, completion, Shalom, in-tune. It is not retribution, revenge, tit for tat, or punitive damages coming due in some kind of cosmic accounting. This sort of judging is more closely related to justifying something, in the sense of typewriters that arrange the lines of text along the left margin, or the right margin, or center-justified along the axis of the page.

See Romans 3:28 (NIV translation, emphasis added)

...we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.

Or the same verse from The Message translation: Our lives get in step with God and all others by letting him set the pace, not by proudly or anxiously trying to run the parade.

Or from Hawai'ian Pidgin English translation: So dis wat we figga: Anybody can get um right wit God wen dey trus him, not wen dey ony do da stuff Godʼs Rules say. 

  Justified in this passage may sound to modern ears as a synonym for 'authorized' and 'by reason of' (in the sense of rationalizing or entitlement for something). But consider the earlier discussion where justified has the meaning of realigning and putting into order. With that emphasis, then the assertion that "a person is JUSTIFIED BY faith" gives a new picture: faith does not authorize or give excuses for a person's way of walking through the world, but instead faith is the mechanism by which a person's drifting off the path can thereby be put back into the proper standing again. Likewise of JUDGEMENT DAY: this is not a frightening threat of ultimate accountability. Instead it is a repair of misaligned and mistaken being for the purpose of putting things right all over again.

Similarly for the words, 'true' (and truths), 'righteous' (and self-righteous), and 'holy' (perfected, Shalom, full circle of completion). Taking the technical meaning in carpenter language, a cut line or a plank is 'true' when the line is straight, correct, right, aligned. Thus when something is seen to be true, this means it is right, and by extension that it is righteous. When things are indeed all in order (not chaos or in entropy) then there is a sense of completion and rest; thus everything is whole, holy, hale, healed, healthy, and complete. Shalom.

Not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it - music metaphor

Bible Study on Tuesday morning brought us back for the 4^th or 5^th time in the past many years to Paul's letter to the Rabbi Christ followers in Rome. The NIV (new international version) and maybe all Bibles, no matter the branch of Christianity or language of publication, arranges his many letters by order of length rather than chronologically or geographically, for example. This is the longest of the 13 attributed to him.

 

[Wikipedia in English for 'Epistle to the Romans']

In Romans 2:1–4 Paul warns hypocrites of condemning others for failing to follow Jewish Law while themselves also fail to fulfill its ultimate spirit, sticking to the letter of the law but missing the meaning of it. The men in the weekly Zoom get-together chewed on this timeless tension in general, but then also looked for examples in our own time and the people and places we know today, too.

Music is a precious metaphor or analogy so often. Here, too, it provided a way to think about Paul's warning about the connection of form and content, law and spirit. Consider the way a band, a soloist, or a choir learns a piece of music. The printed sheet of music is something like a law - a declared way things should be. However, blankly (lacking in spirit or verve) reproducing the pitches and rhythms in synch with the others does not express the full meaning and beauty (and truth) of the song. Only by practicing over and  over can the performer's mind let go of the technical details of the printed 'law' and begin to hear one's fellow players. Perhaps at an even higher level the entire ensemble of performers begins to feel the swell and dip of the whole piece of music, not just thinking about one measure at a time or just one musical phrase, but also the much larger musical art all together. In other words, the music is only alive after the printed notes on the page of musical notations no longer confine the spirit of the players. Likewise in Paul's letter: it is not the legalisms, the details and preoccupation with small things that is the beginning and end of worship. Those elements of Law do exist and occupy a place of significance. But such things should not be confused with the larger spirit of the Law. In modern terms, it is the difference between Christianity and Churchianity; worshiping the Lord and Master versus the building and by-laws. 

Taking the musical metaphor a little further, consider the creative power of (jazz) improvisation. There are rules and boundaries, but those do not define the art. Rather it is the free-flow and back and forth of one performer in relationship to the others that makes the whole thing pulse with life. Listeners can recognize phrases of well-known melodies woven into much larger unscripted meanings. In order to satisfy players and listeners alike there must be a constant tension between the 'Law' (tempo, whole group sync to each other, taking turns with each other) and the 'Spirit' (embellishment, variations, returns to the central pattern of melody). Too much 'flow' or too much 'control' will not allow the life of the event to rise up.

Leaving the land of music in order to venture into the arena of foreign language learning, there is another useful metaphor between 'law' and 'spirit' that Paul has put into his letter in the 2^nd chapter of Romans. Newcomers to a language need to practice basic syllables, accent, and core vocabulary again and again; they have to 'walk' before they can 'run' or fly. Such things as word order, social status (addressing the right person in the right way) are a kind of linguistic and social grammar. Only by gaining a kind of 'muscle memory' can the student of foreign language go deeper and farther to express their own meanings. Intermediate-level students have the task of balancing "fluency" and "accuracy." Being overly concerned about making mistakes (accuracy focus) can inhibit the person from putting their skills into play. Being overly concerned with speed and repartee with native speakers (fluency focus) can mislead the person into believing they have no corrections to pay attention to – with the result that native speakers may struggle to catch the intended meaning, or may be caused embarrassment from errors in word choice, for example. Something similar may be true in the grammar of Christianity that Paul writes about: too much concern with ritual rightness could distract the faithful from the larger prize and main point - to love God and also one's neighbor as oneself. But too much concern with the Greatest Commandment (to love God and also one's neighbor as oneself) while disregarding the Law and process means that congregational efforts may fail through lack of common structure and ways.

Jesus states that he has come not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it, not its letter but its spirit.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." [Matthew 5:17 NIV]

In conclusion, after reading and reflecting on Romans 2 the other day, the illustrations from making music & from speaking in a new language seem to line up with this essential tension Paul describes between leaning too much on the letter of the law (or the opposite, paying little attention to its particulars). So the next time something you hear or see gives you feelings of hypocrisy, think of the Jazz Masters jamming: holding on to the law, but just barely, in order to soar all together - not a lone voice but an ensemble raising their song.

Suppose 10 years from now - AI conversation partner

During the weekly Bible Study via video meeting the idea of interacting with each other but interacting with one or more AI services came to mind: wandering and wondering about meanings, comparisons, seeming paradoxes, word roots and so forth. Human participants have a reserve of personal experiences, a learning curve of meanings early and now and ones to aspire to in the future. On the other hand, having a facsimile "conversation" with the vast reserves of an AI database of other people's words and findings has some merits, too; maybe not lived experience, but filtered pieces of others' lives, for example. Seeing others demonstrate fruitful ways to build productive phrases and question syntax when engaging with an AI could soon lead to more and individuals and groups interacting with the giant but also imperfect services/agents of Artificial Intelligence, of which there were about 800 AI projects in late 2023 for various purposes and scale around the planet, at least 800 that are known of.

Looking at the Word Cloud illustration here, it comes from pasting the 'Bible' section of the Wikipedia article on Hermeneutics. It puts some of the words into visual form: bigger or more centrally placed is for pieces of the text most numerous (not necessarily the most significant; quantity over quality). By presenting something in a new medium or arrangement, sometimes new responses come to mind. Similarly, when working with an AI there is a chance of hearing a familiar reply but in a slightly different frame of reference or accenting different parts of the solution than is usual. As a result, a person posing questions or asking for responses from the AI to one's own assertions and summaries can turn up new perspectives in a rapid and wide-ranging way.

Supposing that the video meeting of the weekly Men's Bible Study could jump ahead 10 years. Maybe interacting with an AI would be completely normalized and the interchange between mortal creatures would thereby gain wider scale and more detailed cross-linkages than they draw in 2024 without the benefit of an A.I. to comb the digital cosmos. In the end would this augmented way of seeing, imagining, and knowing God lead to a more durable, stronger, and many-sided relationship witih God; or, indeed would it lead to the reverse – weaker and more easily broken linkage to knowing God and facilitating his will to be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven.

God is Love but also Love is God?

God in fleshly form made it possible to see what it means to be righteous (not like Pharisees or Sadducees) among one's fellow residents, kindred or stranger. And since "God is Love" is the starting point or center of everything else, including the Greatest Commandment (to Love God; and to Love your neighbor as yourself), it stands to reason that the nearest that any one person can get to knowing God's nature and self ---since a mountain-top experience with a Burning Bush is most rare, indeed– will be to dive deeply into loving one's fellow child of God. In other words, if God is Love and also the reverse is true; that Love is God's innermost foundation, then devoting oneself to the care and commitment to others (both stranger and friend, and even one's enemy) is the most direct, substantive, and flesh-and-blood encounter with God.

However, all this conjecture is based on logic (logos), something that is useful to human interactions, but something which cannot encompass God's infinity. So much of who God is fills the space between words, in places no known language has touched. God's omniscience and omnipresence and eternity is much bigger than all the logic and syllables in the world. Therefore, equating God is Love to the equation stated the other way around, that Love is God, may well tangle itself in circle of logic and miss God altogether.