mnphysicists theological blog

A recurrent theme by some Christians, is that the church can take care of the poor, and that it would be more compassionate and efficiency if they did rather than the govt. Certain Matthew 25 is pretty hard core that Christians should be doing so. Likewise, the cities in Ezekiel that chose not to do so did not end well. Even more so, in this Sunday’s lectionary reading, we have the parable of the 5000… just a few fish and some bread starting with the apostles multiplied to feed the entire group, and there were 12 baskets left over! Whats perhaps most interesting, is the words of Jesus. “They do not need to go away; you give them something to eat!”

As such, it is certainly a reasonable stance that the church should take care of the poor…

If one were to go back to the Old Testament rules on tithing, ie not 10%, but 23-1/3%, the church could do so somewhat. On the other hand, most Christians believe that the old testament laws no longer apply, but more so that we should give from the heart. In theory, this sounds like a much better solution. There will be some who give little to nothing, and others who give 90%+, and it would seem that giving would be even greater than the OT’s 23-1/3& figure.

Realistically, the US average church tithe ends up being only 2.43% or about $40 billion. Of that $40 billion, nearly 3/4 goes to salaries, buildings, and program expenses… thus, there is about $10 billion left for missions. If one splits the missions costs in half, ie 50% for evangelism, materials, missionaries, overhead, we end up with $5 billion/year to take care of the world’s poor by providing food, clothing, & shelter. I’m leaving off medical care, as there are differences in opinion as to the parable of the good samaritan and todays medical practices.

The US Govt spends $9.1 billion on food, nutrition, and temporary assistance for needy families each month (page 16 of the above report). So… if the church were to take care of the poor in the US, they could do so for ~2 weeks, before running out of money. In fairness though, lets assume there is a loss of efficieny, fraud, waste, etc in govt programs where in the church could do quite a bit better. For the sake of argument, lets say the church could out perform government on a 10:1 basis... fewer regs, fewer middlemen, ie farm direct to the poor with volunteer transport, better negotiations, more donations than direct purchases, more volunteer positions than paid ones, greater oversight, less fraud, better full time employment placements etc. (Ok, so I’ve way overly optimistic on this)

The church at its current budget levels, and priorities could thus provide for food, nutrition and temporary assistance for the poor in the US for 6 months out of the year…

Some have suggested, if the govt were to step away, that church folks would then donate more… some have even researched this (its behind paywall) and suggest that church giving declined as the new deal programs came into being. Then again, causation and correlation are not the same. It is how ever interesting to note the following data:

1933 Church giving 3.2%

1955 Church tithing 3.2%

2002 Church tithing 2.6%

2008 Church tithing 2.4%

If one then adds in the fact that taxes as a percentage of GDP are lower than they have been for decades… its easy to go???? Again, correlation and causation are often at odds.

Another aspect to consider, is how much the poor should be helped. Ie, govts idea of what is reasonable support. may be at odds with the values of some Christians. A Bishop of the Catholic church says one thing, those in the pew another and priests another. Likewise, Hugh, a Mennonite minister, overhears some Bible study commentary and….

“The passage was the story of the rich young ruler, who comes to Jesus for advice, and then Jesus tells him to sell everything he has and to give it to the poor. The people in the small group were having a tough time with this.

After hearing that story read, a young guy in the room – richer than 80% of the planet, born the predominant race and the most privileged gender in the wealthiest country in the world – the very epitome of a rich young ruler to the majority of our planet – it was then that this kid said,”I think the important thing to keep in mind is to have a balanced view. After all, God gives us our possessions for a reason, and—”

It was then that I lost it….”

Read the entire article at Who Sinned that these people are poor

What about Barbados, Calcutta, Guyana? If churches only help those lacking food in the US for 6 months, what about the rest of the world? What about the rest of the year?

There is corruption in government, even the most optimistic pro-government person there is can see problems with favoritism, single bid contracts, political contributions etc… but alas, the church is not immune. A fellow was kicked out of his church, as he didnt attend often enough. Imagine in todays economic climate, how many can’t attend “often enough”…now imagine said folks not only being thrown out of church, but also economically tossed out on the street. A very sad example of this is what happens far too often when folks get divorced. Imagine what would happen to the poor person who the church was helping.

The thing is, it wasnt always this way, and likewise not all churches are like the above. Back when, churches were behind the building of hospitals, the building and planning of schools. Public schools, a hundred plus years ago were rallied for, and even funded by the ELCA’s predecessor bodies. Today, churches have sold their hospitals, sold their schools, and many have become exceedingly dependent upon government to function. Ie, Lutheran social services and Catholic charities here in MN receive so much money from the state, that had the MN budget shutdown continued, they were looking to have to cancel any number of services. Likewise, when government funds church charities, hospitals etc, strings are included, and rightly so… but alas, such is often in conflict with the mission and/or values of the church.

Bottom line, its not just a math thing, a history thing, a definition thing, or even an abuse thing. Recent history is pretty clear, the church cant do it all, or even a major portion, irrespective of Matthew 25. Likewise, the government cant do it all either, as evidenced by greater and greater budget cuts, almost always impacting the least of these more so than anyone else.

This is where churches can and often do step up to the plate… and yet so many still fall through the cracks. To think that the govt should step back, and shift greater burden for poverty onto the church is beyond unrealistic….

“No real Christian would do that” seems to be a common Christian apologetic to what Breivik did. Most assuredly his actions were exceedingly evil… but whether he is a Christian or not is another story.

If we believe the words of Christ as concerns the parable of the wheat and the tares, the no real Christian phrase falls apart.

If we take the doctrinal position that all sins are equal, short of the unforgivable sin, the no real Christian argument crashes and burns. Yes, it is a hard thing to consider the lusting of the eyes of a 17 yr old with the murder of 90+ people, but either we believe what scriptures say about sin equivalence or we dont.

If all scripture is inspired and beneficial, the killing actions of Saul and David, namely the deaths of 10′s of thousands in 1 Samuel 18 and the acts of genocide commanded to Saul in 1 Samuel 15, must not be ignored.

If we look at contemporary culture, we have Francis Schaeffer, one of the founders of today’s Christian Right in the US, book “A Christian Manifesto” who states:

“There does come a time when force, even physical force, is appropriate. . . . A true Christian in Hitler’s Germany and in the occupied countries should have defied the false and counterfeit state. This brings us to a current issue that is crucial for the future of the church in the United States, the issue of abortion. . . . It is time we consciously realize that when any office commands what is contrary to God’s law it abrogates its authority. And our loyalty to the God who gave this law then requires that we make the appropriate response in that situation.”

Francis son, Frank, presents a really scathing analysis, which I think goes much too far, and likewise far too politicalized, but beneath it all there appears an element of truth. .

A scary deal is the following from Breivik’s 2083 Manifesto, much of which I’ve heard espoused by any number of folks who would be considered “real Christians”. Bear in mind, Breivik attributed this to another author, but must have agreed with it enough to include it in his book.

As Christianity is a way of life, and life involves power relationships, Christianity is at once a political way of life. One can not separat eout ones politics from ones faith and beliefs, they are intertwined as ones beliefs effects ones politics. Thus, within the Christian worldview, there is no separation of ‘Christianity’ and ‘politics’, as distinct spheres, ‘politics’ is but another sphere of the way of life that is Christianity. Politics is subsumed within Christianity.

Persecution of Christians and oppression of Christianity is contrary to the will of God. Thus, ‘the universal and global church on earth’ should enter into solidarity with persecuted Christians wherever they are found. The church should centre its life, not around sacraments, or dogmas, (though these should never be done away with), but on the experiences and the cause of the martyred, and the oppressed, and suffering Christian. Christians should come together and study and support one another in tackling persecution and oppression of Christians. Theology should be rooted in the experiences of the persecuted.

Perhaps whats even scarier, is its not just Breivik, case in point the following extended forum discussion from 2007 which references parts of the same document that Brevik quoted above. Its far too lengthy to cut and paste.

Lastly, in Breivik’s own words

Christian, Protestant but I support a reformation of Protestantism leading to it being absorbed by Catholisism. The typical “Protestant Labour Church” has to be deconstructed as its creation was an attempt to abolish the Church. Religious: I went from moderately to agnostic to moderately religious

My parents, being rather secular wanted to give me the choice in regards to religion.
At the age of 15 I chose to be baptised and confirmed in the Norwegian State Church. I
consider myself to be 100% Christian.

Regarding my personal relationship with God, I guess I’m not an excessively religious
man. I am first and foremost a man of logic. However, I am a supporter of a
monocultural Christian Europe.

We’d like to think no real Christian would do such, but alas with scripture, church history, contemporary writings, and others actually advocating violence… it appears that some would do such. Even sadder, I’m not convinced the perpetrators are always deluded nutjobs, no matter how convenient such a label would be.

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever getteth his Christology right enough shall not perish, but have everlasting life.” is what a friend said the other day when we were having a rather indepth discussion on the trinity.

In isolation, such a comment seems pretty insane to the 21st century Christian. On the other hand, it doesnt seem too out of line when it comes to some of the writings of the early ecumenical councils. Even today, with a little bit of poking around, such a belief is a lot more common than one might think.

Where it gets really interesting, is when the above statement is a belief held by *Nestorians in regards to the other Abrahamic faiths or non-trinitarians. In a nutshell, “right enough” starts getting really crazy fast, so much so, that its pretty much impossible to resolve.

Last Sunday’s Gospel reading on the wheat and the tares seems quite applicable. Ie, as any gardener knows, when desirable plants and weeds are intermixed and young, its near impossible to tell them apart. In the case of Gospel readings, its even more difficult and dangerous, in that the weed in reference was darnal, where in its impossible to tell which is wheat, and which is a poisonous weed, until the time of harvest.

The part where Jesus goes on to explain the parable really hits home on this. The weeds and the wheat are people… the harvestors are the angels at the end of the age. Namely, the wheats role is not to pull up the weeds and cast them into the fire. Likewise, its not the wheats role to pound the suspected weed into the ground… but such is what happens far too often. My friend John in his sermon last sunday stated.

We are, in effect – no, that’s not right, it isn’t “in effect,” it’s exactly that we are ripping out the wheat along with the weeds, and doing it with wild and joyful abandon! In our passion to construct the perfect vehicle with which to express our freedom in Christ, we’ve fenced ourselves in – thirty-five thousand separate plots of theological ground. In our dedication to perfecting our walk, purifying our prayer, sanctifying our thought, we have shut out anything and everyone who does not conform to our precise expectations.

So what about the Nestorians, non-Trinitarians, and others with widely differing beliefs which we believe to be in error? Plant seeds, Love them, pray for them, and let God take care of the rest. Do bear in mind that abuse, spiritual or otherwise is a different matter… Unlike weeds and wheat that are hard to distinguish, a roaring fire in the field needs to be extinguished before it destroys everything.

*Nestorianism basically splits Christ in half, and in todays world, Nestoriansim by label primarily exists in Iran, albeit it is a very small group. By theological definition, Nestorianism is pretty rampant in US protestant circles, an informal survey some years back put the number upwards of 40%!

On the spreading of God’s word and the parable of the sower. Some bits from some sermons.

If the Sower is walking the hard packed road, is not the fertile soil farthest away, farthest away from the Sower and most reliant on the wind of God’s Spirit to carry it aloft and home to the good ground? Rev Gene

Seed eating birds are not the end state, they drop seeds all over, often on better soil, bird seeded mulberry bushes show up everywhere. Pastor Steve

It is as if the sower got on his John Deere, hooked up the Model SS10B Broadcast Spreader, and before he even drove out of the barn, pushed the PTO button that started the hopper spinning. As he drives to the field, seed is slinging everywhere! On the driveway, in the grass, bouncing off of passing cars, whizzing into the weeds on the side of the road, and finally – finally – as he drives into the field, the seed flies where it’s actually supposed to go! Tragic_Pizza

Some obervations from my garden:

Soil turns into a hard pack where nothing will grow if you follow the same exact samepath all the time. Such is advantageous for weed control. It is probably less so a good idea when it comes to spreading the Gospel.

Areas of minimal soil are not forever, quick shoots die off, and eventually turn into compost, which is uber fertile, but the wind blows it everywhere.

Thorns and vines are fleeting deals… they are there for a seasons, and they die, and new ones often return to take thier place. Gaps between growths do exist for a time. I’ve used this for automatic weed control, by planting corn, beans, and squash together. Likewise, I now have some volunteer tomatoes and a raspberry vine in my strawberry patch.

The parable brings home the radical idea to plant seeds everywhere, let no spot be left unseeded… even the spots off the beaten path.

Kenda Dean presents 10 characteristics of a healthy youth ministry, and the tenth one was called safe space… Its fascinating in that Jesus pretty much ripped safety out of the practices of 2000 years ago by upending tribal ingroup/loyalty, authority/hierarchy, and religious based purity. Its disturbing that as youth ministry evolved over the years, it seemingly embraced much of what Jesus put aside in the interest of safety.

Tribalism and Fear

Youth groups tend to be very tribal focused, ie safety in numbers, and fear of other groups. Some go so far as to embrace isolationism and fear of others.

Authority / Hierarchy

Often times youth ministry revolves around its leaders. Youth often look to the leader as the center, case in point when a leader moves on, youth group fall apart time and time again. Parents look to the leader to outsource their baptismal promise. The leader looks to the executive pastor.

Religious Purity

Often times moral issues and purity seem to occupy a greater priority of youth ministry than does Jesus. Its no wonder moral therapeutic theism is so predominant amongst the young adult crowd.

All of the above are focused on safety, and while at odds with Jesus message, are likewise at odds with the “safe space” which Kendra Dean presents.

Young people need safe spaces in their lives where they can “be” themselves instead of trying to “prove” themselves. Safe space can means time, relationships, or physical space where young people have the emotional, relational, physical, and spiritual freedom to explore, to risk, and to fail in a safety net of love–real love, not the Hallmark stuff. Safe spaces give youth the experience of being really “seen” and known as God sees and knows them, as beloved brothers and sisters of Christ.

If i think back to my years in camping ministry, and the resulting arguments I had back then.. the over-scheduling and activities to keep kids busy and out of trouble, rather than prayer and available percolation time, safety really was the bottom line, rather than safe space.

The thing is, safe space is anathema to many… exploration and risk are scary deals, likewise is failure, and the need to establish REAL safety nets. This is further complicated, as such goes far beyond the realm of just the youth leader, it really requires buy-in and participation of the entire faith community.

Yes, if you ask church councils what is important, children, youth, and families come up again and again…. but implementation is where the rubber meats the road. Matt Cleaver has some good points on what youth ministry needs more of, and what youth ministry needs less of which present some great ideas for change. The question is, will folks go beyond the words of church councils and take to heart what change/work might really need to happen?

In todays world, Acts 2:36-40 would pose a serious organizing and logistics problem… back then, it would be even more of a challenge. Lets roll on the text.

36 “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.”

37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”

38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.
Peter gave the message, and folks responded… Lets think about the logistics problems.

First… the probability of every person responding and getting Baptised is about nil. More realistically only a percentage of folks got Baptised, which means a whole lot more folks than 3000 had to hear the message. If we look at the following graph of yearly adult baptisms vs weekly attendance based upon a limited sampling of the St Paul area synod…

…it would seem that well over 200,000 folks would need to hear the message in the best case!

Then again, lets assume Peter had 20X greater success than the best we are doing today, thus 10,000 folks would need to show up. (This is even more impressive in that the above chart is based upon baptisms/year… not baptisms/day!)

Second… How do you gather 10,000 folks together to hear the message, there were no flash mobs, no TV, no radio spots, only word of mouth.

Third… Peter didn’t have an arena with 20,000 watts of audio power, he didn’t even have a PA system, more so, he was more than likely open air preaching… with that many people, Peters message was likely to only reach a few hundred folks if that, due to the ambient noise levels.

Fourth… Assuming each Baptism took at maximum one minute, at least 50 hours would be needed…

Bottom line… Peter had to have a ton of help, he’d need PR type folks to get people out there, he’d need folks to orally repeat his message in near real time, he’d need folks to jump in doing Baptisms etc. No way could one guy, or even one guy with a few  fellow apostles pull this off in the alotted time frame.

As a result, one would like to think that the larger the church is, the greater the potential for scalability of effort, but such doesn’t seem to be the case today as evidenced in the above chart. If anything the reverse appears true, and the larger the church, the greater the dilution of effort… hmmm

*The chart is courtesy of Tim Thompson @feralpastor as part of his learning to evangelize resolution for the St Paul Area synod assembly.

I’ve been following the twitter stream on and off tonight, and responses of Christians are all over the place. So much so, an outsider could well think that Christians have widely differing scriptures, rather than the same Bible. Big picture wise, I think much of it rolls down to how individual Christians view justice, mercy, and the balance between the two, or perhaps if there should even be a balance.

Granted, for those who suffered the loss of friends and/or family members during 911, a focus on justice just due to basic human nature is likely to predominate. Likewise, for those who are very much pro-life, mercy is likely to predominate. One also has to consider that some will tie nationalism into this, which seemingly is possible after a careful study of Augustine’s Just War Theory.

In light of this happening on Divine Mercy Sunday, as well as John Paul II’s Beatification, I thought it would be useful to reread his encyclical entitled Rich in Mercy.

…mercy is in a certain sense contrasted with God’s justice, and in many cases is shown to be not only more powerful than that of justice but also more profound. Already the Old Testament teaches that, although justice is an authentic virtue in man, and in God signifies transcendent perfection, nevertheless love is “greater” than justice: greater in the sense that it is primary and fundamental. Love, so to speak, conditions justice and, in the final analysis, justice serves love. The primacy and superiority of love in the face of justice – and this is a mark of the whole of revelation – are revealed precisely through mercy. This seemed so obvious to the psalmists and prophets that the very term justice ended up meaning the salvation accomplished by the Lord and His Mercy (Ps 4011; 98:2f; Is 45:21; 51:5; 56:1). Mercy differs from justice, but it is not in opposition to it, if we admit in the history of man, as the Old Testament precisely does, the presence of God, who as Creator has already linked Himself to His creature with a particular love. Love, by its very nature, excludes hatred and ill will toward the one to whom He once gave the gift of Himself: Nihil odisti eorum quae fecisti “you hold nothing of what you have made in abhorrence” (Wis 11:24). These words indicate the profound basis of the relationship between justice and mercy in God, in His relations with man and the world. They tell us that we must seek the life-giving roots and intimate reasons for this relationship by going back to “the beginning,” in the very mystery of creation. They foreshadow in the context of the Old Covenant the full revelation of God, who is “love” (1 Jn 14:16).

Yet, going back to those who lost loved ones and friends, the divine love John Paul II speaks of is very very hard. A fellow who struggles with this presents the following:

Can we forgive Bin Laden? Can we pray for God to have mercy on his soul? Can we weep for the senseless death we find in any war? Include his name in the prayer of the faithful?

Answering no, only means that the enemy continues to win–even when it feels right to celebrate.

Perhaps God can forgive Bin Laden and in God’s perfect reconciliation we find our human imperfection reaching its limits? After all, we are not Jesus, who called from his cross for mercy, not for himself, but for those who nailed him to the wood.

But that merciful call goes out to us as well. It haunts us to pray for peace and not pain, reconciliation, but not revenge.

Can we forgive Osama Bin Laden?

I hope one day I can. And because I believe that Debbie, Tom and Jeannine are firmly united with God in eternal salvation, it helps me to also believe that their sainthood already gives them the perfection to do what I and probably many others find so difficult, nay, even repulsive or impossible.

The entire entry is a must read, it pretty much ties justice, mercy, nationalism, and human struggle together in such a way as to be all encopassing.

Lyman Beecher was a Presbyterian pastor, and is known for his leadership in the 2nd great awakening. Much of what he said concerning the church and state going way back to the late 1800′s has many parallels today, especially so when it comes to unity.

In his younger days, Lyman Beecher said the following:

In The Spirit of the Pilgrims 1831

The Government of God is the only government which will hold society against depravity within and temptation without.

In his Plea for the West, 1835,

If this nation is, in the providence of God, destined to lead the way in the moral and political emancipation of the world, it is time she understood her high calling, and were harnessed for the work. For mighty causes, like floods from distant mountains, are rushing with accumulating power to their consummation of good or evil, and soon our character and destiny will be stereotyped forever.

The context of Pastor Beechers comments was the push to decouple churches and the state. Views such as his as a younger man were commonly held viewpoints amongst many church folks. They were aghast at the push for separation of church and state years prior, and now that states were starting to likewise decouple the churches, they were exceedingly bent out of shape. They feared the downfall of the nation and society.

An interesting thing happened though… rather than the Gospel withering on the vine, the churches stepped up to the plate in a huge way. Many hold that such separation played a huge role in the second great awakening.

Lyman Beecher describes what happened near the end of his life in his autobiography (p344). He said the following with regards to the state of Conneticut severing its ties with the churches:

I suffered what no tongue can tell for the best thing that ever happened to the state of Conneticut It cut the Churches loose from dependence on State support. It threw them wholly on their own resource, and on God. They said ministers would loose their influence; the fact is they have gained. By volutary effoert, societies, missions, and revivals, they exert a deeper influence….

Not only did the event prove that religion was quickend,and enfused with a healthier life, when its unnatural connection with the State had ceased, and that more money was given freely to the support of the Gospel…

From the British Quarterly Review published in 1876!

The Churches of the pilgrim type which had been limping on the crutches of Caesar so long that their limbs were stiffening with inaction, have developed a vigour unknown before.

The inherent vital energy of the gospel has demonstrated that, with the ordinary blessing of Him of whom extraordinacy blessings may be confidently claimed by faith, it can be trsuted to take care of itself in the word.

Its interesting to see what happened when the state separated from the churches… continued from the British Quarterly review.

Disestablishment in New England has promoted a just catholicity between Christians of various shades of belief Standing alias one before the law all are thrown back upon the fundamental principles of their common Christianity and the teaching of that Word of God equally acknowledged by all and there being no element of felt injustice longer to force them apart they drift naturally toward that position indicated by the wise and catholic principle In essentials unity in non essentials diversity in all things charity The motto of William Penn was We must yield the liberty we demand Nowhere on the round earth we are persuaded has the practical union possible among Christians who differ as to minor principles been more beautifully or more beneficently exhibited than during the last generation in New England.

This above was written in 1876… so how come 135 years later, we have such problems? Christian polarization runs left and right, and arguments are everywhere. I’m jumping into the rally to restore unity… but I think once the week has passed, the diatribes will return in short order.

I think George Santayana with this quote written some hundred years ago provides an answer. “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

There is a problem with the parable of the mustard seed. Matthew 13:31-32

He told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. 32 Though it is the smallest of all seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds come and perch in its branches.”

The problem: The mustard seed is not the smallest of all seeds.

The issue at hand: The smallest of all seeds is the coral root orchid seed. It is so small, you could barely see it without significant visual aids, non of which existed at the time said scripture was written. The smallest visually observable seed one might come across is the Wolffia, just slightly smaller than a single grain of salt.

Secondary problems of the smaller seeds: Folks dont plant wolffia, being its fruit is hardly larger than the seed itself… Likewise, folks dont plant orchid seeds, and even if they did, they wouldnt grow without a symbiotic partner.

So whats the deal? Jesus couldn’t very well jump into a botanical discussion of plants which could not be seen, or talk about tropical rain forests, or talk of a foreign land called Australia. Rather, he spoke the language of the people, within the context of what they could understand.

The Bottom line: The wonders of scripture and the mysterys of such are huge… when we try to force scripture into a domain and or context for which it was never intended, we can end up running in circles… and totally miss the point.

Jesus answers the disciples questions as to why the parables in Matthew 13:11-15… its a similar deal here.

11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables:

“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

“‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15 For this people’s heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them