<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Peterwchin's Weblog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>An Almost Daily Christian Devotional</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:14:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on 10.12.09, Isaiah 29:14-24 by peterwchin</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/10-12-09-isaiah-2914-24/#comment-1785</link>
		<dc:creator>peterwchin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:14:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=713#comment-1785</guid>
		<description>yeah, i&#039;ve been pretty busy - i was out of town this week and totally forgot to post for wed and fri - apologies!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yeah, i&#8217;ve been pretty busy &#8211; i was out of town this week and totally forgot to post for wed and fri &#8211; apologies!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 10.12.09, Isaiah 29:14-24 by Joo Oh</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/10-12-09-isaiah-2914-24/#comment-1784</link>
		<dc:creator>Joo Oh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 20:53:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=713#comment-1784</guid>
		<description>Pastor Peter!!
I feel like you&#039;re doing so much these days.. biking, building...
WOAH. 
Hang in there!!!! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pastor Peter!!<br />
I feel like you&#8217;re doing so much these days.. biking, building&#8230;<br />
WOAH.<br />
Hang in there!!!! <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 10.2.09, Isaiah 25:1-12 by BenK</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/10-2-09-isaiah-25/#comment-1778</link>
		<dc:creator>BenK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 01:28:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=704#comment-1778</guid>
		<description>Oh, also, this not to say that the point you were making isn&#039;t made in all sorts of passages about horses and chariots and false hope.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, also, this not to say that the point you were making isn&#8217;t made in all sorts of passages about horses and chariots and false hope.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 10.2.09, Isaiah 25:1-12 by BenK</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/10-2-09-isaiah-25/#comment-1777</link>
		<dc:creator>BenK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 00:21:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=704#comment-1777</guid>
		<description>Oh, no need for an apology; I think you are right that Israel and Moab had ties - and our interpretation of them rely on our sense of biblical archaeology - there were many events of apostasy that were related to intermarriage and close ties (so, is Deuteronomy post-exilic or not, for instance).  Using the &#039;canonical&#039; interpretation, Ruth is an example that does bring Moab into the bloodline of David.   However, this is centuries before the time of Isaiah, and not necessarily relevant to the reading of the long term animosity between them.  As such, I find it impossible to read in this passage a warning against being overly secure or anything like that.  

What does then appear in the passage?  Well, there _is_ the sense that any victories have been long planned and long promised.  They are not inherently dependent on obedience or fervent prayer or abundant sacrifices or anything like that.  That would make a great sermon application, but tends to create some issues with other texts.  Further, in performing this reading, is this logical, rational reading a faithful method of exegesis?  Well, that&#039;s a bigger question that might go beyond the scope of a post... then you bring up the rational demands of the idea that all the people will be at a banquet, though some are being vanquished and killed.  The question of how to incorporate all people being blessed in a passage about their destruction - they seem to be blessed through the triumph of Israel and subjugation to Israel... that is, they fit into God&#039;s plan finally.  Well, that should remind us how modernist philosophy and post modern ethics do not provide a framework in which the scriptures can be interpreted as they would have been at the time of their writing, or their interpretation by Christ, or in fact, their interpretations over the millennia intervening.  

The ultimate question of our hermeneutic actually has a very substantial impact on our daily lives, as a Christian.  That should make us very nervous when we face the text with something at stake.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, no need for an apology; I think you are right that Israel and Moab had ties &#8211; and our interpretation of them rely on our sense of biblical archaeology &#8211; there were many events of apostasy that were related to intermarriage and close ties (so, is Deuteronomy post-exilic or not, for instance).  Using the &#8216;canonical&#8217; interpretation, Ruth is an example that does bring Moab into the bloodline of David.   However, this is centuries before the time of Isaiah, and not necessarily relevant to the reading of the long term animosity between them.  As such, I find it impossible to read in this passage a warning against being overly secure or anything like that.  </p>
<p>What does then appear in the passage?  Well, there _is_ the sense that any victories have been long planned and long promised.  They are not inherently dependent on obedience or fervent prayer or abundant sacrifices or anything like that.  That would make a great sermon application, but tends to create some issues with other texts.  Further, in performing this reading, is this logical, rational reading a faithful method of exegesis?  Well, that&#8217;s a bigger question that might go beyond the scope of a post&#8230; then you bring up the rational demands of the idea that all the people will be at a banquet, though some are being vanquished and killed.  The question of how to incorporate all people being blessed in a passage about their destruction &#8211; they seem to be blessed through the triumph of Israel and subjugation to Israel&#8230; that is, they fit into God&#8217;s plan finally.  Well, that should remind us how modernist philosophy and post modern ethics do not provide a framework in which the scriptures can be interpreted as they would have been at the time of their writing, or their interpretation by Christ, or in fact, their interpretations over the millennia intervening.  </p>
<p>The ultimate question of our hermeneutic actually has a very substantial impact on our daily lives, as a Christian.  That should make us very nervous when we face the text with something at stake.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 10.2.09, Isaiah 25:1-12 by peterwchin</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/10-2-09-isaiah-25/#comment-1776</link>
		<dc:creator>peterwchin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 21:57:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=704#comment-1776</guid>
		<description>i think it&#039;s definitely a good point, that moab had a contentious relationship with israel.  and there is a clear sense in which this is a victory psalm over moab.

but the situation is more complex than this, since the book of ruth indicates a surprisingly close relationship between israel and moab - some think that even king david was partially moabite!  even in this psalm, although it seems to exult in the destruction of foreigners, it says in verse 6 that God prepares a banquet for all people - so it shouldn&#039;t be read simply as a victory song over moab because there is more to it than that.

in the end, this psalm follows a very similar idea as isaiah 22, that when God destroys something (whether it is jerusalem or moab), it is a work of God, planned far in advance, for the good of both Israel and foreign nations.  and that is the point i was trying to make, to see God&#039;s destructive actions as ultimately being constructive ones - i apologize if i wandered too far from the context in making that point!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i think it&#8217;s definitely a good point, that moab had a contentious relationship with israel.  and there is a clear sense in which this is a victory psalm over moab.</p>
<p>but the situation is more complex than this, since the book of ruth indicates a surprisingly close relationship between israel and moab &#8211; some think that even king david was partially moabite!  even in this psalm, although it seems to exult in the destruction of foreigners, it says in verse 6 that God prepares a banquet for all people &#8211; so it shouldn&#8217;t be read simply as a victory song over moab because there is more to it than that.</p>
<p>in the end, this psalm follows a very similar idea as isaiah 22, that when God destroys something (whether it is jerusalem or moab), it is a work of God, planned far in advance, for the good of both Israel and foreign nations.  and that is the point i was trying to make, to see God&#8217;s destructive actions as ultimately being constructive ones &#8211; i apologize if i wandered too far from the context in making that point!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 10.2.09, Isaiah 25:1-12 by BenK</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/10-2-09-isaiah-25/#comment-1774</link>
		<dc:creator>BenK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:16:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=704#comment-1774</guid>
		<description>Is that really what this passage is saying?  When it says that he destroyed the fortified town of the foreigners, is it saying that he destroyed something that Israel was depending upon for security?  When it says that he crushed Moab, is this something that Israel was upset about?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is that really what this passage is saying?  When it says that he destroyed the fortified town of the foreigners, is it saying that he destroyed something that Israel was depending upon for security?  When it says that he crushed Moab, is this something that Israel was upset about?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Non-Devotional: A Truly Prophetic Role by BenK</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/09/26/non-devotional-a-truly-prophetic-role/#comment-1769</link>
		<dc:creator>BenK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:38:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=692#comment-1769</guid>
		<description>Quite.  We could also add that the prophet wasn&#039;t actually &#039;counter cultural&#039; all the time or even most of the time, but in their times of greatest prominence, the prophets were running visibly across the path of the priests, kings, and people.  If the prophet was speaking doom to people who already believed doom, it wasn&#039;t such a big deal.  If he was speaking blessing to people who believed doom (and this can be seen in the prophets who are discussing God&#039;s continuing faithfulness to the exiles) that was a big deal.  &#039;Prophets&#039; can be just curmudgeons - or even false prophets - depending on what they cry out and when.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quite.  We could also add that the prophet wasn&#8217;t actually &#8216;counter cultural&#8217; all the time or even most of the time, but in their times of greatest prominence, the prophets were running visibly across the path of the priests, kings, and people.  If the prophet was speaking doom to people who already believed doom, it wasn&#8217;t such a big deal.  If he was speaking blessing to people who believed doom (and this can be seen in the prophets who are discussing God&#8217;s continuing faithfulness to the exiles) that was a big deal.  &#8216;Prophets&#8217; can be just curmudgeons &#8211; or even false prophets &#8211; depending on what they cry out and when.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 9.4.09, Isaiah 13:1-22 by peterwchin</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/9-4-09-isaiah-131-22/#comment-1762</link>
		<dc:creator>peterwchin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 20:48:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=669#comment-1762</guid>
		<description>i remember a calvin and hobbes cartoon, where calvin is reading a magazine and exclaims, &quot;i absolutely must have this thing that i didn&#039;t know existed until a moment ago!!&quot; or something to that effect.  makes you wonder how he survived before he read the magazine...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i remember a calvin and hobbes cartoon, where calvin is reading a magazine and exclaims, &#8220;i absolutely must have this thing that i didn&#8217;t know existed until a moment ago!!&#8221; or something to that effect.  makes you wonder how he survived before he read the magazine&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 9.4.09, Isaiah 13:1-22 by BenK</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/9-4-09-isaiah-131-22/#comment-1761</link>
		<dc:creator>BenK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Sep 2009 23:25:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=669#comment-1761</guid>
		<description>Great topic,useful questions.  Some reflections:    

Psychologists have learned that we tend to overestimate the value of things we don&#039;t yet have and are devestated by the loss of things we possess even if we don&#039;t use/need them.  Powers use this against us.  

How can we get out of this fix?  Humility.  Having God&#039;s perspective on ourselves and the people around us, the things he has given us, and the situations we are in.  

Oh, and this holds for the church too.  People overestimate the value of established, accumulated &#039;stuff&#039; and also the benefits of the latest revolution they are championing.  We need to try for God&#039;s perspective.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great topic,useful questions.  Some reflections:    </p>
<p>Psychologists have learned that we tend to overestimate the value of things we don&#8217;t yet have and are devestated by the loss of things we possess even if we don&#8217;t use/need them.  Powers use this against us.  </p>
<p>How can we get out of this fix?  Humility.  Having God&#8217;s perspective on ourselves and the people around us, the things he has given us, and the situations we are in.  </p>
<p>Oh, and this holds for the church too.  People overestimate the value of established, accumulated &#8217;stuff&#8217; and also the benefits of the latest revolution they are championing.  We need to try for God&#8217;s perspective.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 8.28.09, Isaiah 11:1- by BenK</title>
		<link>http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/2009/08/27/8-28-09-isaiah-111/#comment-1760</link>
		<dc:creator>BenK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:28:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterwchin.wordpress.com/?p=661#comment-1760</guid>
		<description>That is an excellent point; compassion, and the passion of the Christ, is not about a sort of justice that settles debts in the typical way.  Similarly, our being Christ to people, our compassion and charity, is not about &#039;justice,&#039; but grace.  I like the way you made that leap seem inevitable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That is an excellent point; compassion, and the passion of the Christ, is not about a sort of justice that settles debts in the typical way.  Similarly, our being Christ to people, our compassion and charity, is not about &#8216;justice,&#8217; but grace.  I like the way you made that leap seem inevitable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
