Flag it!

I'm a Kiwi. New Zealanders differ from their American cousins in a number of ways, not the least in how we regard our flag.

From a Kiwi perspective, Americans are weird about their flag. Hands on hearts, kids reciting pledges, salutes, displayed in all kinds of unlikely places - sometimes including churches; completely "out there".

Not so in Godzone. Patriotism is an understated thing in Aotearoa. I was in high school before I consciously noticed the difference between our flag and the Aussie knock-off (yep, those Ockers rarely have an original idea). My parent's generation still regarded "God Save the Queen" as the national anthem and referred to the rain-sodden fields of Old Blighty as "the old country", despite both being born half a world away.

For people of my generation the nuclear-free legislation was a first taste of national self-assertion, beginning years earlier with opposition to nuclear testing. New Zealand sent a frigate to monitor French nuclear tests in the Pacific, bringing down the ire of France. Later France, in an illegal act of state-sponsored terrorism, sank the Greenpeace vessel Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour. How soon we forget.

The tea towel

Then there was the decision to bar nuclear armed ships from our harbours. Margaret Thatcher sent a high ranking women apparatchik, a toffee-nosed baroness, to tear strips off our then Prime Minister, David Lange, apparently under the illusion that the colonies must still conform to Downing Street. In a press conference following the meeting, fronted by the PM with the lady diplomat nowhere in evidence, Lange remarked that the British rep had probably left by broomstick.

Ah, the good old days.

Then, while our best buds, the craven Canberra crowd, huffed and puffed about our responsibility to do as we were told by the US, we were kicked out of the ANZUS defense pact. The result? Never had Kiwi patriotism been as prominent in peace time. Even today the conservative National coalition government cannot bring itself to repeal that legislation.

The bombed out hull of the Rainbow Warrior

But flag waving was never part of that. That was something other people did.

On the weekend, driving around the local area with some old friends, we saw flags flying in what, by Kiwi standards, can only be described as profusion. Today I counted three flags flying within a just block of home.

The reason? We're gearing up for a flag referendum. The choice is between the current flag and a tea-towel design.

What fascinates me is that every flag I've seen flying in recent days is the one we have now.

I don't know what this augurs for the final referendum. Public opinion is always a fickle thing, and I fear time will favour the tea towel (and in the upper-income LOMBARD* suburbs of Remuera and the North Shore I suspect the tea towel is indeed in evidence). But, as I pondered those flags proudly fluttering from nearby houses, I had to wonder whether the combination of Southern Cross and Union Jack meant something more than a backwards nod to our colonial heritage. Perhaps it's also the flag we associate with the progressive policies that have set us apart as New Zealanders over many years.

I don't have a flagpole. But if I did, I know which one I'd be flying.


(* LOMBARD: alternative to Yuppie; "Lots Of Money But A Real Dick".)

Are You an Evangelical?

'Evangelical' means many things, and in the best of worlds it would reflect the Reformation definition which basically means, to quote the words Bob Brinsmead used to devastating effect in his critique of Seventh-day Adventism, "judged by the Gospel".

But the buffoons at America's National Association of Evangelicals couldn't have that. In partnership with something called LifeWay Research they've cooked up their very own four-point formula.

1. The Bible is the highest authority for what I believe. 

2. It is very important for me personally to encourage non-Christians to trust Jesus Christ as their Savior.

3. Jesus Christ’s death on the cross is the only sacrifice that could remove the penalty of my sin. 

4. Only those who trust in Jesus Christ alone as their Savior receive God’s free gift of eternal salvation.

All of these statements are problematic. Worse, they run contrary to anything that might be described as genuine Christian theology; Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox. For these folk the Bible is their "paper pope", hallelujah, and their lives are circumscribed by sin and guilt passed down from imaginary forebears in a mythical garden. Worse, they turn faith into an act of assent that merits "eternal life"... like a bad TV offer, "free", but subject to conditions.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that this perversion of Christian faith is as big a "heresy" as any of the usual suspects. Indeed, maybe more-so.

It's not so much who's included in this definition, but who's excluded. But then 'evangelicals' have always been keen to reassure themselves that they're in the community of the saved by building walls to keep the riff-raff out; especially those who ask irritating questions.

More than a century ago a group of goofballs got together to publish "The Fundamentals", a series of papers published in twelve volumes and funded by a couple of oil company executives, thereby giving us the term fundamentalism. A hundred years later it seems nothing much has been learned by their spiritual descendants.

ISSUU: Lapland, Europa's Oceans, the Celts

For anyone who hasn't yet been seduced by its allure, issuu is a fantastic way to enjoy publications, mainly magazines but also a range of books (some full, others samplers), both well known and obscure. This week, in the first of what might become a semi-regular series, here are a few of my recent discoveries.

BBC History: Vikings vs Anglo Saxons, Who were the Celts?, The Royal Navy's American Disaster. What's not to like in the full 100 page November issue? There might even be a few BI devotees who could profit from that Celts article.

Australian Geographic: Now that Rupert Murdoch has set about gutting National Geographic, it might be time to explore alternatives. The November-December issue of Australian Geographic has a distinct Aussie focus, but also some intriguing features for those beyond the Lucky Country, including Alien Oceans - love the artwork!

Blue Wings: The magazine of Finnair, helpfully published in English. The complete September issue has been uploaded featuring the violin makers of Cremona; the beaches of Brittany; Hoi An in Vietnam and the joys of pedaling through 21st century London. On a more Finnish note, trekking tours through Lapland. Airline magazines aren't to everyone's taste, but hey, how many people do you know who've thumbed through a copy of this one?

issuu takes a bit of getting used to, the search function is - shall we say - idiosyncratic, and the "suggestions based on everything you read" can often be eye-brow lifting, but it's nonetheless a great way to stay up to date with more magazines than you'll find in all the dentist's waiting rooms within a 100k radius. The iPad app is just brilliant.

Mythmaker: Of the Tribe of Benjamin

Chapter 9 begins the second section of Mythmaker, now focusing on Paul beyond the Damascus horizon. The story is familiar. En route to Damascus Paul (Saul) is struck down, blinded and converted to the faith he has heretofore persecuted.

"It was through this event that Jesus' movement changed from being a variety of Judaism into a new religion with a theology and myth distinct from those of Judaism."

But there are problems with the story. Unlike Judea, Damascus was not under Roman occupation or rule at the time, having been ceded by Caligula in CE 37. So what kind of mission could he have been on?

Here is where Maccoby gets, in my view, either overly creative or overly literal, depending on your point of view. He suggests that Paul did indeed strike out for Damascus, but his mission was not legal or officially sanctioned.

"Saul must have been on a clandestine mission to kidnap certain leading Nazarenes and bring them back to Judaea for imprisonment or for handing over to the Roman authorities."

The words "must have been" are injudicious. Such things indeed happen even today where client states turn a blind eye to the activities of foreign powers wishing to apprehend persons of interest on their territory. But is this what Paul was on about? This assumes a historicity that may not be much more than an ancient 007 tale.

Maccoby isn't finished. He turns to a fascinating verse in Galatians (3:14) which reads "in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." Creative commentators have wondered at Paul's identification here with Gentiles, almost as if he considered himself one. Maybe he's just one big cuddly ball of empathy? Not likely given his frequent rants.

"A better explanation... is that Paul here, in the heat of his emotion, has forgotten his persona as Pharisee, and has lapsed into his real identity and motivation."

That statement requires some backing up, but Maccoby has some further strings to this bow. One is the problem with Paul's claim to be a Benjaminite.

"As it happens, it was impossible for any Jew at this time to describe himself truthfully as of the tribe of Benjamin."

The reference here is to Romans 11:1 and Philippians 3:5.

"While it is true that part of the tribe of Benjamin survived in Palestine after the deportation of the Ten Tribes by Shalmaneser of Assyria, the Benjaminites later intermarried with the tribe of Judah to such an extent that they lost their separate identity and all became Judahites or Jews. Only the Levites, the priestly tribe, and that section of the Levites called the kohanim or priests (the descendants of Aaron) retained their identity because they needed to do so for cultic reasons."

So, what do we make of the claim? Sheer bluff.

"... when Paul described himself as 'of the tribe of Benjamin', this was sheer bluff, although the recipients of his letters, being Gentile converts to Christianity, were in no position to know this."

Again, Maccoby cites the Ebionites.

"According to the Ebionites, Saul's parents were Gentiles who had not been converted to Judaism [although he concedes they may have been 'God-fearers']; Saul himself, then, was the first of his family to be converted."

Again, perhaps Maccoby is stretching the evidence a little too far, but if he hasn't offended his Christian readers to the point of red-eared rejection, he certainly will have caught many off balance.


(This is the tenth part of a review of Hyam Maccoby's 1986 book Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity.)

From Radio Dunedin to Radio Gaga

It seems hard to credit, given the current situation with radio in New Zealand, but once this country led the world in broadcasting innovation. In 1922 4XD (albeit under an earlier call sign) became our first radio station, the oldest in what was then called the British Commonwealth and the fifth oldest in the world (beating out the BBC by more than a month). In later years it was to become the sole privately owned station in the country, maintaining its independence through the tumultuous years of pirate station Radio Hauraki.

Some time ago the station, now an impressive 93 years old, was effectively hobbled by the US vulture fund-owned MediaWorks conglomerate, losing its main frequency to another MediaWorks franchise. More recently it seems to have regained some mojo, continuing to broadcast in Dunedin on AM and a low power FM frequency and enjoying a lot of home town support.

Arguably radio in New Zealand has been going downhill for the last several decades. Today local radio has been almost totally subsumed by demographically determined formulaic networks owned by MediaWorks and NZME. It gets worse: New Zealand was not only incredibly slow to introduce FM frequencies, years behind Australia, but digital radio of the calibre now available in Australia (DAB+) is still limited to what are euphemistically called "pilot transmissions" unavailable to most listeners. Moreover the current government continues to starve the public broadcaster, Radio New Zealand, of funding. That's without even mentioning the parlous state of television.

Of course, people with a bit of nous (and a reasonably healthy discretionary income definitely helps) can take advantage of new technologies to gain access to a broad range of quality broadcasters via the internet. But hearing Australian, British and Irish programming, for example, while refreshing, is hardly a substitute for quality local content. Australians justifiably complain about deep cuts to the ABC, but are still much better served than those of us on the other side of the ditch.

Meanwhile RNZ National struggles on doggedly, despite having its hands tied behind its back, while more and more Kiwis are driven to the advertising-soaked tosser network ghettos, "newstalk" formats with their gratuitously overpaid shock jocks and narcissistic harangues.

Yeah, I know, Grumpy Old Man stuff. But, alas, not far off the mark.

Meantime I'll be spending some time on Radio Dunedin's stream... while it's still there.

Luther 500 - Die Bibel and Ockers in Thuringia

The year of our lord 2017 is approaching, and the One True Protestant Communion - Lutheran obviously - is making preparations. It's almost 500 years since Brother Martin posted (in a pre-blogging sense) his 95 theses and thereby kick-started the Reformation on the last day of October 1517. Travel agents haven't been slow to cash in, intent on making a buck (or perhaps more to the point, a euro) out of visitors heading for the heritage sites in Germany. In my view a bunch of Australian Lutherans of Prussian descent in bush hats roaming free in Thuringia is a much scarier prospect than any Syrian refugees huddling on the border.

Anyway, as any good ex-Lutheran blogger would, even a ratbag like me, Otagosh will be providing an intermittent series on the events, starting with a link to this article on Luther's Bible. The impact of this translation is much under-appreciated in the English-speaking world, but arguably was (heck, there's no argument to it) a far greater accomplishment than the later King James Bible.

For the curious, you can find the Luther Bible online, in the original sacred German, complete from 1 Mose to Offenbarung.

But fear not, there'll be no hagiographies appearing here. Luther's lack of conventional saintliness is legendary. But he certainly was an interesting fellow (which isn't necessarily true of his imitators then or now).

The Journal - 178th issue

The November 30 issue of The Journal has been released, and can be downloaded in PDF form.

In this issue, news of an Ambassador College reunion scheduled for 2017 in Las Vegas. The organizer is Bob Gerringer (who in a past life was one of the founders of Ambassador Report. I guess advancing age really does ramp up the nostalgia). Alumni from Pasadena and Bricket Wood can visit a dedicated website for more information, while there's another with details for former Big Sandy students.

The first part of a personal account relating to his involvement in the church by the late David John Hill, a former WCG evangelist, gets a repeat outing in this issue.

Lest one gets the impression that this issue is the rose-colored spectacles edition, Brian Harris, an outspoken advocate of British Israel bullgeschichte, has contributed an article entitled "Why Did God Allow 9/11 and the Paris attack?" How myopically predictable is the content of that one! And yes, it completely lives up to the reputation for racist, jingoistic pabulum that characterizes BI.

Perhaps somebody should submit it to The Onion.

This issue runs to 16 pages, including the ad section, and includes a couple of reports from 2015 Feast sites including the Ian Boyne-led Jamaican CGI (not to be confused with GCI). Exactly what relationship the Boyne CGI has to the Texas mother church is unclear to me, but they certainly seem to operate out of their own rule book. Unusually for an Armstrong group, the Jamaican brethren were treated to a debate.

Our usual speaking competition had addressed the controversial matter of divorce and remarriage. This year was unusual as it became a real debate with one of the participants who disagrees with the church’s position given the opportunity to make a full presentation to show why the church is wrong. However, her arguments could not match those of Stephen Scale, the 2014 champion of the competition, who regained his title in a sensational presentation in which he debunked the view that there were no grounds for remarriage. Mr. Scale looked at the best arguments for the no-remarriage view, drawing on scholarly sources, and refuted all of them.

Well, let's give them credit. A "real debate". Can't see that being adopted by other splinter sects. Let's see, how about the CGI in Texas inviting Lonnie Hendrix to make a presentation at their feast site? Nope, can't imagine that. Mind you, lest we get carried away with just how enlightened this all is, Boyne's reporting seems just a tad gleeful don't you think? And did you notice that Scale gets acknowledged by name, but not his debate partner?

I wonder how long Ian spoke after Scale's rebuttal to ensure that everyone fully understood that the forces of righteousness had indeed triumphed?