JACK'S BLOG
|
|
TelevisionMark Burnett's presentation of The Bible on the History Channel has drawn epic audiences as well as some interesting criticism. Ninja angels. A devil that eerily resembles President Obama. Indeed, a non-black actor in black-face portraying Satan has left some uncomfortable. However, these have been minor annoyances for me. What interests me is the interpretation of the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees. Did you catch it? The narrator tells us that the Pharisees taught that the path to redemption lay in living according to Mosaic Law and Jesus taught a new path. Now, for the uninitiated, Mosaic Law is the Ten Commandments. Jewish sages hashed these into 613 Commandments over a couple thousand years, by applying the original ten to specific circumstances and how they might be applied in daily life. By comparison to the U.S. Congress, these sages were amateurs. Our legislators began with ten amendments in the Bill of Rights, and created libraries of laws, rules, and regulations to dilute them in just two hundred years.
Of course, disagreements arose over the exact order and wording of God's Commandments. Thus, it was easy for Jesus to offend someone. He seemed to offend just about everyone by dismissing them all with his new message. Well, he upset the nobles and the priestly class. The masses adored him (at least, that's the way the story goes). All major religions (most minor ones, too), have adherents who disagree over everything. Doctrine. Dogma. Ritual. You name it, they'll argue about it. Many go so far as to persecute those who differ with them. Judaism is no exception. In the time of Jesus, Judaism was divided among the Pharisees (no relation to Pharaoh) and the Sadducees as well as a few minor sects. The Sadducees were primarily composed of the noble and priestly classes, hardly the kith and kin of a common carpenter from Nazareth. The Pharisees were composed more of the common classes, the people who Burnett cast following Jesus on his travels. However, in Burnett's interpretation of Biblical history, the Pharisees were at the center of the conspiracy to have Jesus crucified. Perplexing, isn't it? It's easy to envision Burnett's version of Jesus as a progressive of his time. As Burnett presents the story, we are told that Jesus believed that Mosaic Law could be reinterpreted, even dismissed, if it conflicted with his vision of the path to redemption, much like modern American progressives feel that the Constitution can be reinterpreted or dismissed if it interferes with their vision of fairness. I don't know about you, but I was taught differently. The Constitution is the fundamental law of the land. All laws, rules, and regulations must conform to the standards set by the Constitution. The Ten Commandments are the laws of ethical living that should guide all our lives and ultimately by which our lives are judged. I'm not a Biblical scholar. I have to depend upon the lessons taught to me by real Biblical scholars. They taught me that the temple priests were unhappy with Jesus' popularity because it threatened their tenuous relationship with the Romans. These priests weren't Pharisees. Like Herod, they were barely Jews. They were Edomites and Nabateans who practiced Judaism. Inasmuch as most Jews didn't accept them as real Jews, the Romans felt comfortable elevating Herod to King and his cohorts to priests of the Temple, so that they could administer Judea as a client state. Herod and the Temple priests remained in the good favor of the Romans so long as they kept the kingdom pacified and kept the taxes flowing into Roman coffers. Jesus threatened that peace by providing the people with a popular focal point to disregard attempts by Herod and the priests to make over their nation and their religion in the image of Rome. You should be able to see where this is going. The Blood Liable that Jews crucified Jesus, the one used to justify the persecution of Jews throughout the ages, was misguided. Yet, Burnett and his experts chose to repeat it in their production. There is little difference between their version of the Bible story and the Passion Plays used in Medieval Europe to inspire the Crusades and the murder of Jews. Granted, all tellings of biblical stories are interpretations. Opinions will differ, and there are many who believe that theirs is the one true interpretation and all others are merely misguided opinions. Thus, this posting is just another opinion, mine.
5 Comments
Army LifeIn this third posting about the plight of Army Lieutenant Michael Behenna, convicted of murder and serving a twenty-five year sentence in a federal penitentiary, we learn that the government is dragging its feet in filing an answer to an appeal now pending before the Supreme Court. The following is the content of an email received from Lieutenant Behenna's family. It includes a link to a amicus brief filed on behalf of several high ranking officers who contend that the decision in Lieutenant Behenna's case sets a dangerous precedent for all armed forces personnel serving in combat. THE GOVERNMENT HAS received another extension of time to answer Michael’s Supreme Court petition and now their response is not due until the end of April. We have seen glimmers of hope in our most recent efforts… such as the Supreme Court requesting the Government to answer Michael’s petition, a rare occasion with a military case; or the 37 Generals and Flag Officers signing an Amicus Brief which lent a great deal of credibility to Michael’s argument that a Soldier should not lose his right to defend himself in a war zone.
Literally thousands of you have stood by Michael and our family these past four years as we fought our way through the military justice system. It has been a slow, painful, and frustrating process, but you have continued to provide us with strength and hope through your prayers, letters and emails. As we near the point where the Supreme Court will make their epic decision as to whether they will hear Michael’s case, your prayers and encouragement for Michael are needed more than ever!!! The legal battle has been costly in lost time, treasure, and disappointment, but your support has been endless. Thank you so much for continuing to help fund Michael’s legal battle. The lawyers have done an excellent job in making their argument to the Supreme Court about why Michael’s case is so meaningful, but there are still other potential briefs to be written before the Supreme Court could find the necessity to overturn Michael’s conviction. To read the incredible Amicus Brief signed by those 37 Generals and Flag Officers, including a former chief of Naval Operations, a recent commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, a former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, and five retired four-star generals, click on the following link: www.caaflog.com/wp-content/uploads/Behenna-Brief-of-Retired-Flag-and-General-Officers-et-al-2.pdf In the coming days and weeks we will keep you informed about the movement of the Supreme Court case and any new developments. In the meantime please continue to support Michael’s cause, sign his petition, and push your friends to Michael’s web site at www.defendmichael.com. To close I wanted to share the last lines from one of Michael’s favorite poems - Tennyson’s Ulysses. Tho' much is taken, much abides; and though we are not now that strength which in old days moved heaven and earth; that which we are, we are; one equal temper of heroic hearts, made weak by time and fate; but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find, and never to surrender. With your help we will continue to strive, to seek, to find….and with absolute determination, to never surrender in our quest to gain Michael’s freedom. Sincerely, Scott and Vicki Behenna www.defendmichael.com ----------------------------- Links to: Original posting : Justice Denied First Update : Request for Parole Second Update : Parole Denied Good ReadHERE I GO AGAIN. Another interview, this time with David Welch, author of Stop The Insanity, on Blog Radio this Monday, March 25, 2013. Looking at America's propensity for reelecting incumbents, David is obviously a fan of Albert Einstein who famously quipped that “Insanity is repeating the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results”. Thus, it is no surprise that David wants to interview me on the subject is books and politics. Books are safe. Politics? Not so much. I feel that I am standing on the edge of the Serbonian Bog. What's that (I hear you cry)? It was a favorite reference of my professor of contracts in law school. According to Wikipedia: “Serbonian Bog Arabic:مستنقع سربون) relates to the lake of Serbonis(Sirbonis or Serbon) in Egypt. Because sand blew onto it, the Serbonian Bog had a deceptive appearance of being solid land, but was a bog. The term is metaphorically applied to any situation in which one is entangled from which extrication is difficult. The Serbonian Bog is identified as Sabkhat al Bardawil, one of the string of "Bitter Lakes" to the east of the Nile's right branch. It was described in ancient times as a quagmire in which armies were fabled to be swallowed up and lost.”
Politics, a quagmire? Yes, that about sums it up. I used to enjoy discussing politics. I grew up near Washington, D.C., where every child was weaned on the subject. I learned how to read between the lines of editorials almost before I could interpret Dr. Seuss. Now? Not so much. Few people tolerate opposing views as they once did. Political foes are tantamount to archenemies. Why would I subject myself to this? Simple. I'm a masochist. I have never shied away from any political discussion. That's why I have so many “friends” (he said with a smirk). Which book will we be discussing? Actually, all of mine touch on politics. (Like I said, a masochist.) During this interview, we'll be discussing Rebels on the Mountain, my tale romance and action/adventure during the time of Castro's Cuban revolution. Inasmuch as revolution, indeed all acts of war, are full contact politics, this interview should be interesting. Please join us at Blog Talk Radio at 7:00 pm PDT on Monday, March 25, 2013. Look for the Books and Politics show. A recording of the live broadcast will be available at the same website. 3/19/2013 2 Comments Rebels on the Mountain re-released with new cover and promo as well as corrected listing on AmazonGood ReadAMAZON INCORRECTLY LISTED Rebels on the Mountain as non-fiction when it was first released at the beginning of 2012. Granted, it's based on historical events and possibly presents them more accurately than self-serving histories of Castro's revolution written by propagandists. It also deals honestly with racial bigotry in America that greatly influenced U.S. Foreign policy towards the island nation. Famous personalities such as Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Ernest Hemingway, and Fulgencio Batista appear in it, and much of the dialog attributed to them is taken from their own writings. But still it is a work of fiction. Rebels on the Mountain is an epic tale of a forbidden romance set in the time of Fidel Castro's insurrection to depose the U.S.-backed dictator, Fulgencio Batista. An interracial couple, a Cuban mulata with African roots and an American soldier/spy, seek a safe haven in a world in which their love is not welcome in either of their native lands. Based on historical events, it reveals men and women fighting and loving amid the chaos and uncertainty of revolutionary Cuba. The action and adventure flows from the mountain camp of the Fidelistas at the eastern end of the island to the halls of wealth and power in Havana at the western end. Familiar personalities play their roles in Rebels on the Mountain, including Ernesto Che Guevara and Ernest Hemingway. Lesser known though equally important characters such as Camilo Cienfuegos, arguably Fidel's most important lieutenant, and Herbert Matthews, the reporter from the New York Times who introduced America to the Cuban insurrection, influence the revolution as well as the underlying love story in Rebels on the Mountain.
Most know how the revolution ended, but few understand how a band of three hundred outcasts and outlaws defeated a modern, well-equipped and well-trained army of forty thousand, and elevated Fidel Castro to the heights of power in the Caribbean or how the United States lost control of the island nation. That is the surprise that Rebels on the Mountain delivers. OpinionAn open letter to the senior United States Senator from California regarding the exchange between her and the junior Senator from Texas. Senator Diane Feinstein:
Your exchange with Senator Cruz of Texas over the Constitutionality of proposed gun legislation has forced me to reassess a long held opinion that there are far too many lawyers in Congress. Although voters seem to intuit that lawyers are best equipped to craft legislation, their record in Congress belies that assumption. Now, as we wrestle with issues of public safety and turn our attention on the weapons that criminals employ, we seem thwarted by the Second Amendment. Understandably, you respond with passion whenever your opponents throw it in your face. However, there it is and you may have to consider more strenuous methods of taking the guns out of the hands of everyone, possibly even revoking the Second Amendment. After all, if it blocks your path, why not cut it down? Do you have the support to repeal the Second Amendment? I suspect that is the course you must follow because a lawyer served a useful purpose. He showed us that your proposed legislation is unconstitutional. His reasoning rang true, and no amount of bluster and righteous indignation can overcome it. Congress cannot selectively infringe on natural rights, not as regarding speech or the right of self-defense. Respectfully, Jack Durish Rancho Santa Margarita, California 3/12/2013 5 Comments Are you feeling vulnerable?OpinionI'LL ADMIT IT. I'm feeling vulnerable. A man came pounding on my front door the other night. It was about 7 pm. As I approached the door, I could hear him shouting at the next door neighbor who was shouting back. Now, my neighbor is given to speaking in a loud voice. It seems natural to him. Maybe he's hard of hearing. I don't know. But, these two were shouting when I looked out the peep hole to see who it was. I didn't recognize him. Obviously, I'm not the only one feeling vulnerable I asked who was there and he replied that he was a new neighbor. Okay, what did he want. Before he could respond, he had another shouting exchange with my neighbor. Apparently there was some unfinished business between them. I couldn't immediately discern what they were saying. My hearing in one ear is impaired and my neighbor's accent (African I believe) wasn't helping. That brings me to my sense of vulnerability. I have impaired hearing. Its not much of a disability, but I seem to have accumulated a few with age. Age is another source of my sense of vulnerability. I'm not the man at seventy that I was even just a decade ago. Then there's sciatica. That really left me debilitated for several weeks. I'm still getting over it. I'm still carrying a cane, fearful that my left knee will fold with any step, especially if I attempt to change direction without lifting the foot. So, yes, I'm feeling vulnerable. I admit it. Meanwhile, the stranger at the door finished his shouting match with the neighbor and pounded on my door again. Again I asked what he wanted. He mumbled something. It sounded like mumbling to me. Remember, the hearing loss? I told him it was late. He objected that it was only 7 pm. It was. Even so I refused to open the door for him and he went away, obviously perturbed with me. I haven't seen this “neighbor” since. I don't like feeling vulnerable. I was a rough and tumble sort of a kid, trained as an infantry officer. I've studied martial arts. I am expert with every sort of weapon placed in my hands: bows and arrows, guns of all types and calibers, I even used a sling effectively to throw snowballs as a kid. I'm not used to feeling vulnerable. Maybe that's why I'm reacting passionately to the current assault on our Second Amendment rights. Why are they doing this? What is their goal? Make our world safer? Of course not! As any fool can see if they look at the statistics, guns used in crime are down to historically low levels and still dropping. Indeed, those jurisdictions that have the most restrictive laws on gun ownership are suffering the greatest incidence of gun-related crimes. There is no rational excuse for disarming law-abiding citizens. So, we can only assume that the proponents of infringing on our Second Amendment rights have some unnamed, ulterior motive, and it's making me feel even more vulnerable. I'm not the only one. Women are feeling more vulnerable. So are minorities. Anyone traditionally victimized by bullies, bigots, and criminals is feeling vulnerable and they will be vulnerable if denied their right to defend themselves. Still, the anti-gun proponents wage their unrelenting war on us, the vulnerable ones.
Come to think of it, the anti-gun proponents are clearly demonstrating all the characteristics of bullies and bigots. Furthermore, attempting to infringe on our natural right to defend ourselves, they are making themselves enemies of the Constitution, which should be regarded as criminal activity. Obviously, the anti-gun proponents are attracting the support of people of good will and good intentions. Just remember, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. They perceive guns as the “devil” and feel justified in cutting down any laws that stand in their way. However, as the character of Sir Thomas Moore proclaims in the play, A Man For All Seasons, “...what is to protect them when the devil turns round about?” Regardless of what laws they may pass, I shall regard them as unconstitutional and hang onto my guns. Then I won't feel so vulnerable in the presence of tyrants. OpinionI'm not feeling well. I'm still recovering from sciatica and another ailment has struck. I don't fear death. I simply fear that I won't have a complete set of functioning parts when I reach the grave. They'll just toss what's left into a compost bin and I'll return as a stalk of celery. I suppose that's why I'm feeling less hopeful today. Solve society's problems? I doubt it. First, the issues are complex, very complex. I suspect all simplistic responses. Proposals such as ban guns and bring back school prayer are emotionally driven in response to horrific acts of violence. Unfortunately, although each proposal may have some validity, none receive rational discussion. People generally divide into two camps, pro and con, and shout at each other until they've vented their spleen. They then retire to neutral territory, grumbling about each other, until the next act occurs.
We need to sit down and apply our energy better instead of wasting it on such feuds. Secondly, we have greatly diminished our resources to respond. Whatever solution we agree upon will probably languish unfunded because our government has been spending our treasury on useless programs whose only outcome is to insure the continued reelection of incumbents. Indeed, things are going to get worse as cities and counties go bankrupt and can no longer provide police and other emergency services to the same degree with enjoy them today. You can bet that acts of violence will proliferate in such conditions. Ideology has gotten in the way of education. Even if we are motivated to sit down and discuss these issues rationally, and we have the resources to effect the solutions that we craft, we are quickly losing the ability to think and solve problems effectively because educators are more concerned with indoctrinating our children with their brand of ideology rather than teaching them critical thinking skills. Indeed, critical thinking is the enemy of their indoctrination efforts. Go ahead and argue with me on this one. There is plenty of extant research to support my claim. I could go on, but suspect that I have already upset or lost most readers by this point. That is why I choose to prepare to defend myself and my family, much like the wild west. I fear that we are descending into lawlessness. Just look at the proof of history. Every nation that has followed the course we have now adopted, has entered periods of economic strife. Scapegoats were identified and persecuted. Guns were seized so that minorities couldn't defend themselves and holocausts ensued. That, I fear, is where we are headed. Then again, maybe I'll feel better next week, but we still won't be any closer to learning how to think critically, will we? |
More than 500 postings have accumulated since 2011. Some categories (listed below) are self explanatory, others require some explanation (see below):
CategoriesAll America Army Life Blogging Cuba Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 2016 Entrepreneurs Food Good Reads History Humor Infantry School In The News Korea Middle East Oh Dark Thirty Opinion Sea Scouts Short Story Sponsored Survey Technology Television Terrorism Today's Chuckle Veterans Vietnam Writing Explanations |
Copyright © 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 Jack Durish All rights reserved
|
Web Hosting by iPage
|