You Can’t Fight Evil from the Belly of the Beast

Eventually I will go through Revelation verse by verse in audio form with a podcast, but I thought I would mention chapter 12 and relate it to our modern situation. Revelation 12-13, if I am correct regarding the structure of the book, is the climax of the book. Here is where “the dragon” is described:

12:9  The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

Chapter 13:1-4 then tells us what the dragon did:

The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast. People worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, “Who is like the beast? Who can wage war against it?”

This is John’s reusing of the various beasts in Daniel. This beast is drawn from the sea, and the sea in prophecy represents the Gentiles. So Satan is drawing out his servant, human government, to oppress the people. At the time Revelation was written this was Rome. Today it is a different government; it is the same oppression with a different face. 

As Paul tells us in Romans 8, Christians who are martyred do not struggle against human governments alone, but against the secret demons that influence them. He clarifies this in Ephesians 6.

 ¹² For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

So how does this relate to Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party?  

It seems to me that both are making the same mistake. They think they can fight the beast from the inside. They will be co-opted. While Jesus expected us to be in the world, he did not expect us to be of the world. He expects us to be as self-reliant as we can. 

Jesus wants us to do something.  Revelation 18 tells us what He wants:

   Come out of her, my people,
   so that you will not share in her sins, 
   so that you will not receive any of her plagues; 
⁵ for her sins are piled up to heaven, 
   and God has remembered her crimes. 
⁶ Give back to her as she has given; 
   pay her back double for what she has done. 
   Pour her a double portion from her own cup. 
⁷ Give her as much torment and grief 
   as the glory and luxury she gave herself. 
In her heart she boasts, 
   ‘I sit enthroned as queen. 
I am not a widow;
   I will never mourn.’ 
⁸ Therefore in one day her plagues will overtake her: 
   death, mourning and famine. 
She will be consumed by fire, 
   for mighty is the Lord God who judges her.

I am not advocating that we need to "go" someplace-there is really no place to go. Instead I am proposing that each of us individually leave the system as best we can. We need to be more self reliant to prepare for the troubling times ahead. Are you ready? 

Calling Evil Good

Coach Paterno "retired" at Penn State due to a serial child molester being a coach at the University's football program. The problem was that Paterno did not follow up to see that the man was arrested, even when he was caught in the act in the school shower with a ten year old. (To be fair to Paterno, he could not have had the man arrested, but he could have shown his concern to the police more agressively.) 

Paterno said this, "with the benefit of hind site, I wish I had done more." What? A man is caught in the shower sodomizing a 10 year old and this is the best he can do? It looks like he is only sorry he got caught. Again to be fair to Paterno he also said this: "This is a tragedy. It is one of the great sorrows of my life." Yet at the same time he seemed surprized that he was forced to "retire." 

One of my favorite passages in the Bible is the Song of the Vineyard in Isaiah 5. Here is the relevent section:

²⁰ Woe to those who call evil good 
   and good evil, 
who put darkness for light 
   and light for darkness, 
who put bitter for sweet 
   and sweet for bitter.

Naturally the students were upset with the coverup  er, well no, they did riot–in support of Coach Paterno. 

How is it that we who believe in the Bible can look at the punishments given to anceint Israel and Judah, but yet think we can do the same things without any consequences? 

Principle of the Second Tithe

As we saw in the last installment of this series, the second tithe, the tithe associated with festival observance, is fined tuned to provide enough food to celebrate the festivals of Leviticus 23. There would be a little extra for most people living in ancient Israel, which would make the festival celebratory, which is another principle we will talk about before this series ends. 

We cannot really directly port over the second tithe to our modern situation. There have been attempts to do this but they fail. The main reason these attempts fail is that the tithe in Ancient Israel was only agricultural. There was no tithe on pottery making for example. So if one wishes to adjust the tithe to our modern situation, I have no objection, but making the tithe apply to income is already an adjustment, so why not make other adjustments to make it fit our situation better?

Spending 10% of one’s budget on festival observance sounds about right when one is attending three pilgrimage festivals. They are expensive.  It should also be considered that many of those celebrating these festivals do not observe Christmas. I do not. The average Christmas spending in America is $500 per person. The average spending for a family vacation is $1,600.  (These figures were from a quick google search.) Combining these two items into festival observance certainly means less of a burden than one would think when looking at festival observance for the first time. 

(Note that the most logical date for the birth of Jesus is the Feast of Tabernacles. Many take note of his birth during that festival. The festival site I attended sang some “Christmas songs” during services.) 

Those that do observe the festivals of pilgrimage usually limit their pilgrimage to one time a year—at the Feast of Tabernacles. So in that situation saving a full 10% of one’s budget seems excessive. I had one person admit to me years ago that they wasted money in their festival observance because they had extra, since they saved a full 10% of their income for the fall festival. I did not say anything as I was young and new to festival observance, but it did not seem right to me then, nor does it now. 

What I am advocating is that one set one’s feast expenditures based on a combination of income and the number of pilgrimage feasts one attends. For some this might mean saving 10%, for others a lesser amount. But the point of the tithe is not so much an exact percentage, but that one should plan to make sure that one can attend the festivals. Do the Best You Can. 

If you wish to follow the biblical pattern of 10% rigorously I have no objection. But if you do, the question may come up of what to do with the excess money. Rather than spend the money frivolously, I suggest a different approach and one that I will be talking about in my next installment on the festivals next week—The Principle of Community. 

Principle of Tithing

For Some Reason Tithing Is A Old Testament Law Pastors Like! While I do not intend to get too deep on the issue of the festivals and tithing, it is necessary to understand how the festival system worked in ancient Israel as a first step to understand the financial aspects of festival observance. 

The first problem is that no one really knows how the tithing system worked. (I have found it humorous to hear people speak on tithing who do not understand this fact.) It is not certain if there were one, two, or three tithes. The common view is that there was one tithe with three functions. The Talmudic view is that there were three tithes. The "correct" view, going back at least to Maimonides in the 12th century, is that there were two tithes, one with two functions.  

The reason for the confusion is that the tithe is described in somewhat contradictory ways.  It is said to belong to the Levites because they had no land to pay them for the work they did.  

Numbers 18:21 “I give to the Levites all the tithes in Israel as their inheritance in return for the work they do while serving at the tent of meeting. 

(Another interesting fact is that we do not know exactly what that work was. It was not the sacrificial system, as a tithe of the tithe was allocated to the priests for that purpose. It must have included more than singing at the tabernacle.) 

Another section tells us that about the tithe being given every three years to help the poor—and no doubt troubling to us Tea Party types that included illegal aliens! (Of course there was no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants at that time.) 

Deuteronomy 14:28-29 At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year’s produce and store it in your towns, so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the foreigners, the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied, and so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.

Yet another section tells us that the tithe is to be used for festival celebration. 

Deuteronomy 14:22-23 Be sure to set aside a tenth of all that your fields produce each year. Eat the tithe of your grain, new wine and olive oil, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks in the presence of the LORD your God at the place he will choose as a dwelling for his Name, so that you may learn to revere the LORD your God always.

The common explanation is that there was one tithe with three functions. Anyone who has actually observed these festivals would immediately realize that this was wrong. Pilgrimage festival observance is expensive—for  the ancient Israelite, it was also time consuming. Remember that there were three festival observances and most people walked. 

2 days travel

8 days for Passover

2 days travel

2 days travel

2 days Pentecost and the Sabbath before it.

2 days travel 

2 days travel

8 days of Tabernacles

2 days travel

This is about 30 days of food consumption for these days. Since most people were subsistence farmers who only grew enough food for themselves, there was very little surplus. So there was 36 days of food for 30 days. The tithe was pretty fine-tuned for this exact purpose. Thus the amount left over for any other purpose was small to nonexistent. In fact the Principle of Celebration would lead to the whole 10% spent on those days. There must have been more than one tithe.

The reason it seems unlikely that there were three tithes is that the economic cost of three tithes was quite high. It is likely that a portion of the Levitical tithe ended up paying for what we would perceive as government. 

So I will proceed with the assumption that there were two tithes in ancient Israel with three functions. (I say assumption because there is really no clear consensus on this.) On Friday I will attempt to apply what we have learned to modern festival observance. 

Where Does God "Place His Name?"

The Principle of the Placement of God's Name is a difficult one—almost as difficult as remembering the difference between principle and principal. My beloved editor tells me that way you remember the difference is that the vice princiPAL is your pal. She never met the vice principal at my school.  

The phrase "the place where God has placed his name," in the old King James terminology, will be foreign to many of my readers. Here is the principle as outlined in Deuteronomy 12:

¹¹ Then to the place the LORD your God will choose as a dwelling for his Name—there you are to bring everything I command you: your burnt offerings and sacrifices, your tithes and special gifts, and all the choice possessions you have vowed to the LORD. ¹² And there rejoice before the LORD your God—you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, and the Levites from your towns who have no allotment or inheritance of their own. ¹³ Be careful not to sacrifice your burnt offerings anywhere you please. ¹⁴ Offer them only at the place the LORD will choose in one of your tribes, and there observe everything I command you.

So the passage is clear, no properly sanctioned sacrifice can be made anywhere except where God has placed his name. The assumption most people have is that this place is Jerusalem, and only Jerusalem. Therefore, they claim, no one can observe the feasts. The assumption that most commentators have is that this is only one place, and that place moved from time to time—ultimately from a place called Shiloh to Jerusalem. I think that both of these ideas are wrong. 

This is not an idiosyncratic idea of my own, it is in a few commentaries. They, like me, are forced to conclude it by the scriptures. Here is what the Jewish Encyclopedia says:

In the period covered by the books of Judges and Samuel sacrifice was offered in many places as in the book of Genesis; especially where a theophany occurred (Judges, vi. 11et seq., xiii. 3et seq.; II Sam. xxiv. 16et seq.).

The New World Encyclopedia says:

According to the Hebrew Bible, the ancient Israelite patriarchs and early prophets established altars and sacred pillars at high places, such as Bethel, Shechem, and Gilgal. Both prophets and Levite priests attended altars at these and other high places until at least the period of the ministry of the Elijah and Elisha. A movement against the use of high places developed as the Temple of Jerusalem emerged as a central sanctuary and the exclusive place of sacrifice to the Hebrew God.

This gives us several possibilities to the interpretation of Deuteronomy 12. One is that it was written after the establishment of the monarchy and reflects the custom of that later time; another is that everyone, including men like Samuel, knew it was forbidden and did it anyway; or the term where God has placed his name was not intended to imply only one location. I think this latter explanation is the most likely. This fits with one of the interpretive tools I use. If my interpretation of a section of the Bible contradicts the history we see in the Bible (and to a degree outside the Bible) then our interpretation is incorrect. I think that the examples of the Bible tell us that the place was wherever the representatives of God said it was. There are also examples of God setting a place, as he did with David in II Samuel 24:16. 

God's name was placed in many places. 

Why are these alternative sites (called high places) condemned by the prophets? The reason is that they tended to became centers of apostasy and false religious custom. So it was decided to concentrate all the sites into one site, which was Jerusalem. This failed of course, as Jerusalem became as corrupt as the "high places" it was to replace. The Temple was on occasion turned into a place of religious homosexual and heterosexual cultic religious prostitution. And before the Temple's destruction in 486 BC idols to Egyptian and Mesopotamian gods were placed there (see Ezekiel 8). 

What does this mean for us today? The principle is that the feasts were to be far enough away to require a pilgrimage of sorts. We are to take our family and go. Of course this must be tempered with another principle I have said before—DTBYC, Do The Best You Can. God does not expect anyone to do what is impossible for them. It honors God if you are unable to travel, and there are lots of valid reasons, if you celebrate the feasts the best you can, using the principles I have been writing about for this series and will write more about soon, after a little break—DTBTYC.