| Christian Bloggers
Aggregator Join | Blogroll | Official Webring | Bloglines | Blogdigger | Netvibes | Contact |
A digression from the usual spiritual fare to report on my recent Sunday morning experience.
I. The highest values in the Kingdom start with every believer being equipped to have a life of Passionate Participation in God. To live in a passionate pursuit of knowing, experiencing and enjoying God and in bringing others along on the adventure.For we don t live for ourselves or die for ourselves. If we live, it s to honor the Lord. And if we die, it s to honor the Lord. So whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. Christ died and rose again for this very purpose to be Lord both of the living and of the dead. (Romans 14:7-9; NLT)
Two concepts of Judaic theology emerge from the story of the aqedah: vicarious atonement and the suffering of the righteous. Both are impenetrable mysteries, and both are illustrated by the prophetic portion of the Bible that speaks of a suffering servant of Yhwh (Isa. 53). [1]
What is meant by Moriah? R. Simeon ben Yohai said: It is the Land which, if it were an arrow, would shoot up through the heavens directly to the heavenly altar. Here the world is derived from the stem shot through (yrh) (Exod. 19:13).
AND ABRAHAM TOOK THE WOOD OF THE BURNT-OFFERING (XXII, 6) like one who carries his stake on his shoulder.
The Aggada, the Talmudic legend, unhesitatingly identifies him with the Messiah, and understands especially the descriptions of his sufferings as referring to Messiah ben Joseph. [2]
There was a remarkable tradition that insisted that Abraham completed the sacrifice and that afterward Isaac was miraculously revived According to this haggadah, Abraham slew his son, burnt his victim, and the ashes remain as a stored-up merit and atonement for Israel in all generations. [3]
Ibn Ezra (commentary on Gen. 22:19) also quotes an opinion that Abraham actually did kill Isaac and he was later resurrected from the dead. Ibn Ezra rejects this as completely contrary to the biblical text. Shalom Spiegel has demonstrated, however, that such views enjoyed a wide circulation and occasionally found expression in medieval writings.
A Father Offering His Son: the Son, for Three Days, in the Father s Mind, as good as Dead (22:4): a Substituary Sacrifice (22:13): and it was on Mount Moriah (22:2), same mount on which Jesus was Crucified, same place where Abraham had paid tithes to Melchizedek (14:18), Salem being on Mount Moriah. As Melchizedek seems to have been a primeval Shadow, in Abraham s Life, of the PERSON Abraham s Nation would bring into the world, so here seems to be a Shadow of the EVENT in the Coming Person s Life by which He would do His work. What an apt Picture of the Death and Resurrection of Christ! [4]
And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him may have eternal life (John 3:14).
Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her how often I ve wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing (Matthew 23:37).
Could the image of the serpent kill or save life? But the Israelites kept looking at it and believing in Him Who commanded Moses to act thus, and the Holy One, blessed be He, performed a cure for them. [5]

[As a disclaimer, I (as the parent of a 17 year old girl) believe that there is no reason why my daughter should be able to get surgery without adult supervision (her parents or a judge) just because it happens to be an abortion rather than having a mole removed. Indeed, as someone who believes that an unborn child is the type of being whose life it is seriously wrong to end, I am much more comfortable with her getting the mole cells killed without my permission than I am with having an unborn child killed.]What I am interested in is the concepts of moral agency and moral reasoning - not only as regards parental notification in specific but also more generally about human moral decisions in general. This post is triggered by this comment in the linked post above:
Don't you think that if your child isn't coming to you, you've already failed and lost the "rights" to make their decisions?While the "poster children" examples on both sides are indeed rare exceptions designed to evoke an emotional response, the questions in this comment - despite their inherant hostility and condescenion - are more fundamental to the real questions:
And the expression rational "moral" agent; what does that mean? It sounds like a nebulous expression for "I'll decide when you're ready to start agreeing with me on all topics"!
Is disagreeing with your personal, religious and political ideas the type of thing that makes someone incapable of their own "moral" agency?
Not trying to be a pain, just throwing it out there. I'm not sure how we can legislate that every parent gets exactly the type of relationship with their child that they desire.
This is a very unforgiving perspective, not to mention a punitive one. As Digby has said over and over again, the laws intended to strike down Roe aren't about ending abortion. They're about regulating women's sexuality, so that Papa always guides the family. After all, he's the only one who can think clearly enough to lay down the law.I think all humans are impaired moral agents - again, all humans are impaired moral agents [different link]. I believe we are moral agents - I think the hyper-determinists on both ends of the spectrum are wrong: we do have real moral choices that we can make that are neither determined by our "synapses firing just so" (the brain vs mind discussion), our culture, and/or our experiences; or by an omnipotent God. We are not robots programmed by nature/nurture or God.
"What is Enlightenment?" asked Immanuel Kant. It is the capacity "to use one's intelligence without being guided by another." "Have courage to use your own intelligence! is therefore the motto of the enlightenment". Thus stand side by side, in unmistakable opposition, two ideas of the way one lives in the world. One is that of attentive listening to the guidance of another, whether of a wise guide, or tradition, or of God. The other is the notion of the self-determined "free" man, who without listening to another, becomes the master of his own soul.However you feel about how that quote applies to mature moral agents, I do not "get" how a 16 year old girl is the "master of [her] own soul" or body.
February 3, 2010