Not that I am eager for a chance to quote Rush Limbaugh, but he made a comment a few days ago on his radio broadcast that forced me to think more broadly, especially in terms of what we in the US know to be “poverty”. The US government has waged war against poverty for years and while it can be said that there are some stories of success, it seems more often than not that we might only be holding steady if not actually losing ground in some respects.
Mr. Limbaugh was talking along these lines when he stated that we in the US are severely lacking when it comes to poverty perspective. Even those who consider themselves poverty-stricken here and meet government poverty criteria in America cannot actually know what it means to be in severe poverty. When it comes to those who live in such areas where they either do not have access to or cannot afford utility services, for instance, I’m not so sure we could convince them that they are actually pretty well off compared to those who live as refugees in the far reaches of Sudan in a region called Darfur. There are other places around the world such as in Nigeria where it can be virtually impossible just to get a drink of clean water, something we Americans just cannot comprehend.
I suppose that when we consider our own level of misery, there has to be some perspective because we can believe that things are pretty bad for us but we cannot fully appreciate how things are for others. Those in the US who are poor (and we will only be kidding ourselves if we suggest they do not exist) are poor according to American standards they can readily see, but these same poor cannot see what is happening in other parts of the world where the level of misery is unimaginable to us. Of course I am also of the opinion that, in a nation where a farmer can actually go broke while people are going without food through no fault of their own, something is badly out of balance.
Conversely but with the same perspective, it is equally difficult to see blessings staring us in the face because often these blessings do not come to us in a form we can or will imagine. For instance, if we can imagine a blessing we’ve prayed for, it may come to us in a way not easily recognizable because it doesn’t look like what we had in mind.
Consider the “new thing” recorded in Isaiah that the Lord will be doing. This is a promise from the Lord so we can be confident that it is a done deal. The problem for Israel, however, is that this “new thing” will be exactly what they NEED but not necessarily what they desire. Could this “new thing” be the Christ who would come not as a desired warrior king but as a much needed prince of peace?
It is argumentative that this “new thing” is a direct reference to Jesus the Christ. To say such a thing might not be entirely incorrect, but that level of certainty may have come from a New Testament perspective and not necessarily a historical one. The Lord is talking to a nation in exile, and this exile has been self-imposed because of their lack of faith and their failure to keep themselves pure and segregated from the other nations. It is not an intermingling of the races but an intermingling of faith; the Jews had the one True God, the rest had multiple, lifeless, and yet demanding gods that required much; Jews lost sight of YHWH. The poisoning of Israel from such contamination may have as much to do with the conflict between desire and need as it does for us today.
Whether Isaiah’s prophecy is a direct reference to Jesus Himself is not nearly as important as understanding our Lenten time line and what is upon us. It is not long until Jesus will enter into Jerusalem and will be hailed as a conquering hero. Soon enough, however, those who blessed Him as He came into the city’s gate will be among the same ones who will curse Him and spit on Him and call for His murder. The blessing was before them, right under their noses, and they were blinded by their own selfish desires. They had no idea what their true need was, and I’m not sure we’re fully aware now.
No comments:
Post a Comment