Attachment 943181 Details for Bug 1148570 – Tracker log

Tracker log

TRACKER2 (text/plain), 1.91 MB, created by Lubomir Rintel on 2014-10-01 18:29:15 UTC

(hide)

Description:

Filename:

MIME Type:

Creator: Lubomir Rintel

Created: 2014-10-01 18:29:15 UTC

Size: 1.91 MB

patch

obsolete

>Sep 28 18:37:19 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): GLib-CRITICAL **: g_hash_table_insert_internal: assertion 'hash_table != NULL' failed
>Sep 28 18:37:19 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-CRITICAL **: tracker_sparql_connection_query: assertion 'self != NULL' failed
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 32, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:96753885-c1dd-f2f1-a46b-62d3fbda42ed' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '101100', new value: 'urn:uuid:f63415df-ff52-10f2-a4c2-9332531c03cc')
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:96753885-c1dd-f2f1-a46b-62d3fbda42ed> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:96753885-c1dd-f2f1-a46b-62d3fbda42ed> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "nsa-tao-ant.PDF" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "J"] ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 3 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "Der Spiegel, 29 December 2013 (images from purchased German edition:\nhttp://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-tao-ant-pdf.pdf )\nEnglish version (without following images):\nhttp://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-nsa-uses-powerful-toolbox-in-effort-to-spy-\non-global-networks-a-940969.html Der Spiegel, 29 December 2013 (images from purchased German edition:\nhttp://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-tao-ant-pdf.pdf )\nEnglish version (without following images):\nhttp://www.spiegel.de/international/world/catalog-reveals-nsa-has-back-doors-for-\nnumerous-devices-a-940994.html " .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 40, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:1a665dd0-4884-48ee-10b2-535e807e1faa' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '101142', new value: 'urn:uuid:de316fc8-e44f-17f3-9f93-94e1f947a477')
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "NKC001867619" }  }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "NKC001867619" }) }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "OCR (30708)" }  }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "OCR (30708)" }) }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:1a665dd0-4884-48ee-10b2-535e807e1faa> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:1a665dd0-4884-48ee-10b2-535e807e1faa> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "Vypraveni o zazracich : stredoveky zivot v zrcadle exempel / Caesarius z Heisterbachu ; [z latinskeho originalu vybrala, prelozila, uvodem a poznamkami opatrila Jana Nechutova]" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:subject "TOC.nkp.cz" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Comdat s.r.o."] ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag1 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag2 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 10 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "I. R O Z H O D N U T Ã P R O Å E H O L N Ã Å½ I V O T\n1. ZaloÅ¾enÃ cisterciÃ¡ckÃ©ho ÅÃ¡du\n2. C o j e to konverze, p r o Ä se tak j m e n u j e , jejÃ druhy\n3. PÅevor klÃ¡Å¡tera v Clairvaux, kterÃ½ vstoupil do klÃ¡Å¡tera s Ãºmyslem krÃ¡st\na zÃ¡zraÄnÄ se polepÅ¡il\n15. H r o z n Ã¡ smrt novice B e n e k a\n16. J a k vstoupil do ÅÃ¡du c h r o m Ã½ J i n d Å i c h z Clairvaux\n17. J a k se stal ÅeholnÃkem autor t o h o t o spisku\n19. J a k vstoupil do ÅÃ¡du J i n d Å i c h , bratr francouzskÃ©ho krÃ¡le\n2 0 . J a k se dostal do ÅÃ¡du ÄlovÄk, kterÃ½ se v n o c i zjevil j i n Ã© m u pÅed branou\nv podobÄ malÃ©ho dÃtÄte\n2 5 . O rytÃÅi LudvÃkovi, kterÃ½ byl uzdraven pro svÅ¯j slib, Å¾e vstoupÃ do ÅÃ¡du.\n2 7 . O bludu lantkrabÄte LudvÃka a o predestinaci\n3 2 . J a k se stal ÅeholnÃkem opat z M o r i m o n d u , kterÃ½ zemÅel a vrÃ¡til se k Å¾ivotu.\n3 3 . O klerikovi, oddÃ¡vajÃcÃm se ÄernÃ© magii, kterÃ½ se zjevil Å¾ivÃ©mu kamarÃ¡dovi\na poradil m u , aby vstoupil do ÅÃ¡du\n4 0 . J a k podivuhodnÄ vstoupila do ÅÃ¡du svatÃ¡ panna Hildegunda,\nkterÃ¡ se vydÃ¡vala za muÅ¾e\n4 3 . J a k vstoupila do ÅÃ¡du Helswinda, abatyÅ¡e klÃ¡Å¡tera v Burtscheidu\nII. P O K Ã N Ã , N I T E R N Ã L Ã T O S T\n1. V n i t Å n Ã lÃtost. C o to j e , proÄ se tak j m e n u j e , kolik m Ã¡ druhÅ¯, j a k Ã½ j e jejÃ plod.\n. . .\n3. O odpadlÃ©m mnichovi, kterÃ½ se kÃ¡l na zÃ¡kladÄ zÃ¡zraku svatÃ©ho Bernarda.\nZ e m Å e l m i m o ÅÃ¡d, byl pohÅben v knÄÅ¾skÃ©m odÄvu, ale pÅi exhumaci byl nalezen\nv mniÅ¡skÃ©m hÃ¡bitu a s tonsurou\n4 . O knÄzi, kterÃ½ Åekl âJsou-li hÅÃchy opravdu hÅÃchy,\nm Ã¡ duÅ¡e nebude nikdy spasena\"\n5. O zhÃ½ralÃ©m knÄzi, kterÃ©mu v den NarozenÃ PÃ¡nÄ holubice\ntÅikrÃ¡t vzala svÃ¡tost oltÃ¡ÅnÃ a vrÃ¡tila m u j i , j a k m i l e projevil lÃtost\n7. O lichvÃ¡Åi GotÅ¡alkovi, kterÃ©ho v pekle Äekalo ohnivÃ© sedadlo 1 0 . O paÅÃÅ¾skÃ©m studentovi, kterÃ½ byl sklÃÄen natolik, Å¾e nebyl s to se vyzpovÃdat,\na j e h o Å¾ hÅ
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Ãchy, sepsanÃ© na lÃstku, byly vymazÃ¡ny B o Å¾ Ã m zÃ¡sahem\n1 1 . O Å¾enÄ, kterÃ¡ poÄala s vlastnÃm synem, a jiÅ¾ papeÅ¾ I n n o c e n c\npro jejÃ dokonalou lÃtost prohlÃ¡sil za zproÅ¡tÄnu trestu za hÅÃch\n1 8 . J a k lÃtostivÃ¡ modlitba m n i c h Å¯ z H i m m e r o d u promÄnila\nv dobÄ schismatu srdce cÃsaÅe Fridricha\n2 3 . O klerikovi, kterÃ½ zneuctil Å¾idovskou dÃvku;\nkdyÅ¾ jej Å½ i d Ã© chtÄli v kostele obÅ¾alovat a on se kÃ¡l, onÄmÄli\n3 0 . V i d Ä n Ã o schismatu v ÅÃmskÃ© ÅÃÅ¡i, o p o h r o m Ä kolÃnskÃ© diecÃ©ze, o SvatÃ© zemi\na o pÅÃchodu Antikrista\nIII. Z P O V Ä Ä , V Y Z N Ã N Ã VIN\n1. C o j e to vyznÃ¡nÃ vin, jakÃ© m Ã¡ bÃ½t, jakÃ¡ j e j e h o m o c a j a k Ã½ pÅinÃ¡Å¡Ã uÅ¾itek\n2. O knÄzi, kterÃ½ zneuctil manÅ¾elku j e d n o h o rytÃÅe, a potÃ©, co se vyzpovÃdal ve stÃ¡ji,\no n Ä m ÄÃ¡bel musel ÅÃci, Å¾e j e prost hÅÃchu\n6. O pannÄ, o kterou se uchÃ¡zel dÃ¡bel v p o d o b Ä muÅ¾e. Pak o muÅ¾i,\nj e m u Å¾ tÃ½Å¾ ÄÃ¡bel vytkl hÅÃchy, z nichÅ¾ se vyzpovÃdal lÅ¾ivÄ. A o dÃvce,\no nÃÅ¾ prozradil, Å¾e pÅiÅ¡la o panenstvÃ\n1 1 . O J i n d Å i c h o v i , mÄÅ¡tanovi ze Soestu, kterÃ©ho unesl dÃ¡bel v p o d o b Ä Å¾eny,\na kterÃ½ se n a k o n e c zblÃ¡znil\n1 2 . PÅÃbÄh o H u n e c h a o Merlinovi; o t o m , Å¾e v dÄtech i n k u b Å¯\nje skuteÄnÃ¡ lidskÃ¡ pÅirozenost\n1 3 . J a k zpovÄÄ osvobodila o d ÄÃ¡belskÃ½ch zjevenÃ Aleidu, jeptiÅ¡ku v Langwadenu.\n. .\n1 4 . J a k vysvobodila zpovÄÄ knÄze, kterÃ©ho ÄÃ¡bel oklamal pÅedpovÄdÃ j e h o smrti. . . .\n1 5 . O klerikovi z Arrasu a o j e h o sestÅe, kterou zpovÄÄ zachrÃ¡nila\nod smrti na hranici za vraÅ¾du klenotnÃka\n1 6 . KacÃÅi, kteÅÃ byli v C a m b r a i s vyÅ¡etÅovÃ¡ni zkouÅ¡kou Å¾havÃ©ho Å¾eleza a upÃ¡leni;\nj a k j e d n o h o z nich zachrÃ¡nilo dobrodinÃ zpovÄdi\n1 7 . O deseti kacÃÅÃch vyÅ¡etÅovanÃ½ch a upÃ¡lenÃ½ch ve Å trasburku,\nz nichÅ¾ jeden byl zpovÄdÃ uzdraven a zachrÃ¡nÄn, oklamala jej vÅ¡ak Å¾ena\na byl tedy k o h n i odsouzen znovu\n1 8
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: . RytÃÅ, kterÃ½ zÃ¡sluhou zpovÄdi dobyl v souboji pÅed cÃsaÅem J i n d Å i c h e m vÃtÄzstvÃ.\n2 1 . J a k byli poutnÃci, kteÅÃ se kvÅ¯li h Å Ã c h Å¯ m j e d n o h o ÄlovÄka\ndostali na moÅi do nebezpeÄÃ, j e h o zpovÄdÃ zase vysvobozeni\n2 4 . J a k zhÅeÅ¡il zpovÄdnÃk s j i n o c h e m , a kdyÅ¾ pak zemÅel,\nnabÃ¡dal j e j , aby se z t o h o vyzpovÃdal\n2 6 . J a k se zpovÃdal Äert\n3 7 . J a k dva kupci z K o l Ã n a dostali pÅi zpovÄdi radu, aby kÅivÄ nepÅÃsahali\na aby nelhali, a j a k p o t o m zbohatli\n4 6 . J a k se j e d n a Å¾ena povaÅ¾ovala pÅi zpovÄdi za spravedlivou,\na j a k j Ã m o u d r Ã½ zpovÄdnÃk ukÃ¡zal, Å¾e se dopustila m n o h a smrtelnÃ½ch hÅÃchÅ¯.\n4 9 . O p a t , kterÃ½ ze sluÅ¾ebnÃ horlivosti jedl se svÃ½mi m n i c h y v o b Å Ã m sudu maso\na m n i c h y pak svÃ½m pÅÃkladem pÅimÄl, Å¾e se z t o h o vyzpovÃdali\n. . . IV. P O K U Å  E N Ã\n1. Å½ivot ÅeholnÃka j e stÃ¡lÃ½m pokuÅ¡enÃm; e x e m p l u m o krÃ¡li K a r l o m a n o v i ,\na dalÅ¡Ã o zlodÄji, kterÃ©ho vysvobodil svatÃ½ Bernard od Å¡ibenice\n2 . S e d m hlavnÃch neÅestÃ\n3 . PÃ½cha a jejÃ dcery.\n4 : KonvrÅ¡, kterÃ©ho pokouÅ¡el duch pÃ½chy a jejÅ¾ vysvobodil andÄl tak,\nÅ¾e m u ukÃ¡zal mrtvoly.\n6. J a k novic T h e o b a l d potlaÄil pÃ½chu pitÃm Å¡pÃny.\n7. J a k si svatÃ½ opat Bernard mazal boty a j a k se m u pÅitom vysmÃval duch pÃ½chy. . .\n8. J a k se m n i c h z klÃ¡Å¡tera M o n t e Cassino v pÅedveÄer V e l i k o n o c\npo obÅadu svÄcenÃ svÃcÃ ztratil\n9. O klericÃch, kteÅÃ zpÃvali pyÅ¡nÄ a Äert sebral jejich hlasy do pytle\n1 2 . J a k francouzskÃ½ krÃ¡l Filip pokÃ¡ral benediktinskÃ©ho m n i c h a za ÃºzkÃ© stÅevÃce.\n15. Kterak jeden pohan v A k k o n u ÅÃkal, Å¾e kÅesÅ¥anÃ© byli ze SvatÃ© zemÄ vypuzeni\npro svou pÃ½chu a obÅ¾ernost\n2 2 . O zlostnÃ© dÃvce, kterou v h r o b Ä seÅ¾ral od p u p k u nahoru o h e Å\n2 5 . DÃvka, kterÃ¡ svÃ© sestÅe zÃ¡vidÄla studijnÃ ÃºspÄchy.\n2 8 . M n i c h , kterÃ½ byl tak apatickÃ½, Å¾e ned
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: okÃ¡zal vstÃ¡t a j Ã t na vigilie\n3 1 . J a k byl J i n d Å i c h , konvrÅ¡ ve Villers, vystaven tÄÅ¾kÃ©mu pokuÅ¡enÃ kvÅ¯li t o m u ,\nÅ¾e byl nemanÅ¾elskÃ½m dÃtÄtem\n3 6 . J a k pan opat Gevard probudil vyprÃ¡vÄnÃm o ArtuÅ¡ovi mnichy,\nkteÅÃ dÅÃmali v kostele\n4 0 . O jeptiÅ¡ce, kterÃ¡ si zoufala v pochybnostech a skoÄila proto do Moselly.\n4 8 . O rytÃÅi, kterÃ½ nechtÄl vstoupit do ÅÃ¡du, protoÅ¾e se bÃ¡l blech\n5 4 . J a k zbavil sen o zpÄvu Aleluja Gerharda, novice klÃ¡Å¡tera Alna, pokuÅ¡enÃ\n5 5 . O mnichovi z Otterbergu, kterÃ©ho zbavil pokuÅ¡enÃ opustit klÃ¡Å¡ter verÅ¡\nâPÅed n Ã m se bude ubÃrat ÄÃ¡bel\"\n5 6 . JeptiÅ¡ka chtÄla v noci opustit klÃ¡Å¡ter, vrazila vÅ¡ak hlavou do dveÅÃ,\na to j i pokuÅ¡enÃ zbavilo\n5 8 . J a k rytÃÅ Caesarius upÅel kanovnÃkÅ¯m v B o n n u dluÅ¾nÃ© penÃze\na pozbyl proto schopnost chÅ¯ze\n6 0 . Pohroma, kterÃ¡ stihla klÃ¡Å¡ter ve Villers\n6 8 . J a k klÃ¡Å¡ter zchudl kvÅ¯li lakomstvÃ svÃ©ho opata a j a k p o t o m zase zbohatl,\nprotoÅ¾e pÅijal dva bratry, kteÅÃ se jmenovali D e j t e a B u d e d Ã¡ n o\n7 6 . J a k manÅ¾elka j e d n o h o rytÃÅe vlezla pÅes j e h o zÃ¡kaz do Å¾umpy,\nprotoÅ¾e j i pÅemohlo pokuÅ¡enÃ\n8 4 . J a k Äert pÅinesl a nabÃdl husu pannÄ, kterÃ¡ drÅ¾ela pÅ¯st\n8 6 . J a k se slepiÄÃ vnitÅnosti promÄnily v ropuchu\n8 8 . J a k vzal zrÃ¡dce Steinhard za svÃ© kvÅ¯li Äesneku\n9 3 . J a k manÅ¾elka j e d n o h o rytÃÅe, kterÃ½ vstoupil do klÃ¡Å¡tera a byl v noviciÃ¡tu,\nÅ¾Ã¡dala, aby se k nÃ vrÃ¡til\n. . . 9 4 . J a k byl klÃ¡Å¡ternÃ hospodÃ¡Å R i c h w i n tÄÅ¾ce pokouÅ¡en\nmilostnÃ½mi listy j e d n Ã© jeptiÅ¡ky.\n9 6 . J a k si jeden m n i c h odporem proti pokuÅ¡enÃ zaslouÅ¾il cÃsaÅskou korunu\n9 9 . J a k byl v Soestu upÃ¡len klerik, obvinÄnÃ½ cizoloÅ¾nicÃ\n1 0 2 . J a k urozenÃ¡ hradnÃ panÃ potlaÄila tÄlesnÃ½ c h t Ã Ä ve vodÄ\nV. D Ã M O N I\n1. D Ã© m o n i existujÃ; j e j i c h m n o h o , j s o u zlÃ a lidem nepÅÃ¡telÅ¡tÃ\n2 . J a k rytÃÅ J i n d Å i c h nevÄÅil v exi
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: stenci d Ã© m o n Å¯\na spatÅil j e s p o m o c Ã ÄernoknÄÅ¾nÃka\n5. Kterak H e Å m a n , opat v Marienstattu, vÃdal d Ã© m o n y v rÅ¯znÃ½ch p o d o b Ã¡ c h\n8. J a k knÄz v D i e t k i r c h e n u vidÄl ve chvÃli smrti mnoÅ¾stvÃ ÄertÅ¯\n1 4 . J a k j e d n a posedlÃ¡ v klÃ¡Å¡teÅe O s t r o v svatÃ©ho MikulÃ¡Å¡e\novÄÅila pravost svatÃ½ch ostatkÅ¯\n1 6 . J a k se dal konvrÅ¡ z klÃ¡Å¡tera v A l t e n k a m p u oklamat slibem,\nÅ¾e se stane biskupem v Halberstadtu, a skonÄil na Å¡ibenici\n17. J a k se konvrÅ¡ dal oklamat hlasem kukaÄky, odpadl od ÅÃ¡dovÃ©ho Å¾ivota a zemÅel. . .\n1 8 . O dvou kacÃÅÃch, kteÅÃ v B e s a n c o n u m n o h o lidÃ oklamali ÄÃ¡belskÃ½mi zÃ¡zraky\na n a k o n e c tam byli upÃ¡leni\n1 9 . KacÃÅi, kteÅÃ byli upÃ¡leni v K o l Ã n Ä\n2 0 . ValdenskÃ¡ hereze v M e t Ã¡ c h\n2 1 . AlbigenskÃ¡ hereze\n2 2 . O kacÃÅÃch, kteÅÃ byli upÃ¡leni v PaÅÃÅ¾i\n2 4 . KacÃÅi ve VeronÄ\n2 5 . O kacÃÅi, kterÃ½ ÅÃkal, Å¾e ÄÃ¡bel j e vlÃ¡dcem t o h o t o svÄta, protoÅ¾e stvoÅil svÄt\n2 7 . J a k ÄÃ¡bel odnesl konvrÅ¡e D Ä t Å i c h a za mÄsto L Ã¼ b e c k\n3 4 . J a k Äert hrÃ¡l v n o c i v kostky s rytÃÅem j m Ã© n e m T i e m o a vyrval m u vnitÅnosti\n3 6 . J a k Äert v lidskÃ© p o d o b Ä vÄrnÄ slouÅ¾il rytÃÅi\n3 7 . O t o m , j a k d Ã© m o n pÅenesl rytÃÅe Everharda do JeruzalÃ©ma\n4 0 . J a k Äert, kterÃ½ na sebe vzal p o d o b u knÄze, zavedl rytÃÅe do trnÃ\na tak jej se skuteÄnÃ½m knÄzem znepÅÃ¡telil\n4 3 . J a k Äert za mzdu hlÃdal vinici\n4 7 . KlÃ¡Å¡ternice Bertrada\n5 1 . J a k jeden m n i c h nechtÄl obdÄlÃ¡vat zelnÃ© zÃ¡hony,\na j a k jej pak pokouÅ¡el ÄÃ¡bel v p o d o b Ä Å¾eny.\nV I . SVATÃ P R O S T O T A\n1. M o c prostoty.\n2 . J a k prostÃ½ m n i c h jedl na hradÄ maso a zÃskal tak nazpÄt dobytek,\npatÅÃcÃ j e h o klÃ¡Å¡teru 8. SvatÃ¡ prostota KristiÃ¡na, hospodÃ¡Åe v Brauweileru\n10. Å½ivot slepce Engelberta\n14. J a k francouzsky krÃ¡l Filip uÄinil pÅedstavenÃ½m klÃ¡Å¡tera sv. D i o n y s i a\nprost
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Ã©ho m n i c h a a ctiÅ¾Ã¡dostivÃ© prelÃ¡ty m o u d Å e nechal stranou\n2 2 . J a k j e d n o h o ÄlovÄka potrestal had za to, Å¾e podvedl svou m a t k u\n2 3 . J a k krÃ¡l Filip pÅikÃ¡zal krÃ¡lovskÃ©ho ÃºÅednÃka v PaÅÃÅ¾i zaÅ¾iva pohÅbÃt za to,\nÅ¾e lstivÄ odÅal mrtvÃ©mu ÄlovÄku vinici\n2 5 . J a k byl faleÅ¡nÃ½ p o u t n Ã k spravedlivÃ½m B o Å¾ Ã m soudem obÄÅ¡en,\nprotoÅ¾e skuteÄnÃ©ho poutnÃka obvinil z krÃ¡deÅ¾e\n3 1 . J a k klÃ¡Å¡ternice hledala a naÅ¡la Krista ve Å¡kvÃÅe\nVII. P A N N A M A R I A\nProlog\n1. O vÃ½rocÃch, kterÃ© o blahoslavenÃ© PannÄ M a r i i mluvÃ v mystickÃ½ch znacÃch,\na o dobrodinÃch, kterÃ½ch se skrze ni dostalo lidskÃ©mu pokolenÃ\n2. MariÃ¡nskÃ¡ socha, kterÃ¡ se potila bÃ¡znÃ z B o Å¾ Ã h o soudu\n3. J a k FrÃsko postihla Å¾ivelnÃ p o h r o m a kvÅ¯li neÃºctÄ k TÄlu PÃ¡nÄ\n4 . J a k byl jeden nevzdÄlanÃ½ knÄz sesazen svatÃ½m T o m Ã¡ Å¡ e m z C a n t e r b u r y\na j a k m u p o t o m Panna M a r i a k ÃºÅadu zase d o p o m o h l a\n7. O pomstÄ,\nkterÃ¡\nstihla, nepÅÃ¡tele\nklÃ¡Å¡tera\nv Marienstattu\n8. J a k JindÅich, kanovnÃk u sv. Kuniberta, vstoupil\nna zÃ¡sah Panny M a r i e do klÃ¡Å¡tera\n16. Å½ivot pana KristiÃ¡na, m n i c h a v H i m m e r o d u\n2 3 . J a k dala Panna M a r i a j e d n o m u klerikovi novÃ½ jazyk\n2 4 . J a k Panna M a r i a uzdravila v klÃ¡Å¡teÅe L o c c u m m n i c h a Adama,\nkterÃ½ mÄl na hlavÄ svrab; dÃ¡le o zÃ¡zraÄnÃ½ch uzdravenÃch,\nkterÃ¡ vykonala v Montpellier, a o j e j Ã m obraze v Cernay.\n27. J a k j e d n u vÃ¡Å¾enou panÃ vysvobodilo AndÄlskÃ© pozdravenÃ z nÃ¡silÃ a z cizoloÅ¾stvÃ.\n2 8 . RytÃÅ D Ä t Å i c h , jehoÅ¾ pouta byla roztrÅ¾ena pro zÃ¡sluhy Panny M a r i e\n2 9 . J a k se knÄzi ve vsi Polch zjevila Panna M a r i a a zmÃrnila j e h o dÄs z bouÅky.\n3 0 . J a k svatÃ¡ AlÅ¾bÄta ze S c h Ã¶ n a u pÅi verÅ¡i âVyslyÅ¡ nÃ¡s\" atd. vidÄla,\njak Panna M a r i a prosÃ Krista za jejÃ klÃ¡Å¡ter.\n32. J a k Panna M a r i a polibkem vysvobodila rytÃÅe, kterÃ©ho pokouÅ¡ela touha\
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: npo manÅ¾elce j e h o lennÃho pÃ¡na\n3 3 . J a k Panna M a r i a pÅivedla pohlavkem k rozumu jeptiÅ¡ku,\nkterÃ¡ zahoÅela lÃ¡skou ke klerikovi\n3 4 . Kustodka Beatrix\n3 8 . Å½ivot pana Waltera z B i r b e c h u\n4 3 . JakÃ½ trest stihl hrÃ¡Äe, kterÃ½ se rouhal PannÄ M a r i i\n4 4 . JakÃ½ trest stihl j e d n u dÃ¡mu ve Veldenzu, protoÅ¾e vedla hloupÃ© ÅeÄi\no soÅ¡e Panny M a r i e 4 5 . J a k prÃ¡vÄ tato socha zpÅ¯sobila, Å¾e zase j i n Ã¡ panÃ dostala zpÄt svou dcerku,\nkterou unesl vlk\n4 7 . J a k Panna M a r i a m n i c h u - lÃ©kaÅi odmÃtla dÃ¡t svÅ¯j lektvar,\na kdyÅ¾ se polepÅ¡il, dala m u j e j .\n4 8 . J a k se Panna M a r i a zjevila j e d n Ã© jeptiÅ¡ce a oÅ¡etÅila j Ã a vylÃ©Äila poranÄnou holeÅ.\n5 1 . J a k se Panna M a r i a modlila mÃsto konvrÅ¡e H e Å m a n a , kdyÅ¾ byl unaven,\na j a k pÅedpovÄdÄla j e h o smrt\n5 2 . J a k konvrÅ¡ PÃ¡v vidÄl ve chvÃli smrti Pannu M a r i i\n5 8 . J a k Panna M a r i a zpÅ¯sobila, Å¾e byl popravenÃ½ lupiÄ pohÅben v kostele\n5 9 . J a k jeden m n i c h vidÄl cisterciÃ¡ckÃ½ ÅÃ¡d v krÃ¡lovstvÃ nebeskÃ©m\npod plÃ¡Å¡tÄm Panny M a r i e\nVIII. R Å® Z N Ã V I D Ä N Ã\n1. D Å¯ v o d , p r o Ä se pojednÃ¡vÃ¡ o rÅ¯znÃ½ch vidÄnÃch prÃ¡vÄ v o s m Ã© m oddÃle\n8. J a k se j e d n Ã© pannÄ ukÃ¡zal tÅÃletÃ½ hoÅ¡Ãk Kristus\n9. O m n i c h u Danielovi, j e m u Å¾ se zjevil Kristus na kÅÃÅ¾i a dal m u milost plÃ¡Äe\n2 1 . J a k se sklonil kÅÃÅ¾ pÅed rytÃÅem, j e n Å¾ pro lÃ¡sku k n Ä m u uÅ¡etÅil svÃ©ho nepÅÃtele\n2 4 . O m n i c h u - malÃÅi, kterÃ½ zemÅel na VelkÃ½ PÃ¡tek\n2 5 . Kterak krucifix v kostele svatÃ©ho J i Å Ã v K o l Ã n Ä udeÅil zvonÃka\n2 6 . J a k doÅ¡li p o m s t y rytÃÅi, kteÅÃ svÃ© nepÅÃ¡tele pobili v kostele\n2 7 . O BoÅ¾Ã pomstÄ na damiettskÃ½ch, kteÅÃ UkÅiÅ¾ovanÃ©ho vlÃ¡Äeli na provaze\n2 9 . J a k si Kristus c o b y chudÃ½ muÅ¾ stÄÅ¾oval konvrÅ¡i, Å¾e jej bili\n3 1 . J a k hrabÄ T h e o b a l d myl n o h y Kristu v p o d o b Ä m a l o m o c n Ã© h o\n4 2 . J a k andÄl vysvobodil
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: p a n n u od tÄlesnÃ©ho pokuÅ¡enÃ\n5 1 . J a k se dvÄ jeptiÅ¡ky pÅely o svatÃ©ho J a n a KÅtitele a svatÃ©ho J a n a Evangelistu\n5 3 . J a k nevÄstka prodala paÅ¾i svatÃ©ho J a n a KÅtitele\n5 7 . O medvÄdÃ kÅ¯Å¾i koupenÃ© pro svatÃ©ho O n d Å e j e , kterÃ¡ uklidnila bÄsnÃcÃ m o Å e\n5 8 . O muÅ¾i, kterÃ©ho svatÃ½ J a k u b zachrÃ¡nil pÅed obÄÅ¡enÃm\n5 9 . J a k dÃ¡bel v j e d i n Ã© m okamÅ¾iku pÅenesl rytÃÅe Gerharda d o m Å¯ z Indie,\nz kostela svatÃ©ho T o m Ã¡ Å¡ e\n6 8 . O zubu svatÃ©ho MikulÃ¡Å¡e v Brauweileru\n6 9 . ProÄ se svatÃ½ T o m Ã¡ Å¡ z C a n t e r b u r y stkvÃ zÃ¡zraky vÃce neÅ¾ jinÃ m u Ä e d n Ã c i\n7 0 . O uzdÄ, skrze niÅ¾ se dÄlo m n o h o zÃ¡zrakÅ¯, aÄkoli svatÃ©mu TomÃ¡Å¡i nepatÅila\n7 5 . J a k svatÃ½ M i k u l Ã¡ Å¡ pÅedpovÄdÄl smrt pasÃ¡Äkovi\n8 5 . O tÅech svatÃ½ch pannÃ¡ch, kterÃ© se z VÃ¶lkenrode vrÃ¡tily do K o l Ã n a\n8 7 . J a k jeden muÅ¾ z p o u t n i c k Ã© h o ÅÃ¡du zÃ¡zraÄnÄ zÃskal nÄco\nz ostatkÅ¯ jedenÃ¡cti tisÃc svatÃ½ch panen\n8 9 . O koÅskÃ© kosti, jiÅ¾ ostatky svatÃ½ch panen zÃ¡zraÄnÄ vyvrhly.\n9 0 . J a k j e d n a dÃvka spatÅila pÅi zpÄvu h y m n u T e D e u m laudamus,\nj a k se pÄveckÃ½ sbor vznÃ¡Å¡Ã k nebi\n. . IX. SVÃTOST T Ä L A A KRVE K R I S T O V Y\nProlog\n1. O svÃ¡tosti TÄla a Krve Kristovy: co j e tato svÃ¡tost, jakÃ¡ j e jejÃ podstata, proÄ byla\nustanovena, jakÃ¡ j e jejÃ forma, j a k Ã½ j e zpÅ¯sob p r o m Ä Å o v Ã¡ n Ã a pÅijÃmÃ¡nÃ\n6. J a k knÄz, kterÃ½ si nechal hostii v Ãºstech, aby s nÃ Äaroval, n e m o h l vyjÃt z kostela.\n.\n7. J a k volci prozradili, Å¾e j e na poli ukryto TÄlo PÃ¡nÄ ukradenÃ© v kostele\n8. J a k vÄely postavily TÄlu PÃ¡nÄ basiliku\n9. J a k byla j e d n a Å¾ena potrestÃ¡na o c h r n u t Ã m za t o , Å¾e sypala TÄlo PÃ¡nÄ na zeleninu.\n.\n2 2 . O korporÃ¡lu, kterÃ½ byl polit svÃ¡tostnÃ½m v Ã n e m a nedal se vyprat dÅÃv,\nneÅ¾ se naÅ podÃvala pochybujÃcÃ klÃ¡Å¡ternice\n3 5 . J a k Kristus vlastnÃma rukama podal svÃ¡tost oltÃ¡ÅnÃ\njednÃ© zb
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: oÅ¾nÃ© Å¾enÄ v Brabantsku\n3 6 . J a k Kristus osobnÄ podal vdovÄ HildegundÄ svÃ¡tost oltÃ¡ÅnÃ\n3 7 . J a k se livonskÃ©mu konvrÅ¡i, kterÃ½ touÅ¾il po pÅijÃmÃ¡nÃ, objevila v Ãºstech hostie.\n. . .\n3 8 . Å½ e se totÃ©Å¾ pÅihodilo Erkenbaldovi z B u r b a n u , j e m u Å¾ bylo odepÅeno pÅijÃmÃ¡nÃ,\nprotoÅ¾e zabil svÃ©ho pÅÃbuznÃ©ho\n3 9 . O jeptiÅ¡ce, kterÃ¡ cÃtÃ pÅi svatÃ©m pÅÃjÃmÃ¡nÃ sladkou chuÅ¥\n4 1 . O konvrÅ¡i, kterÃ½ pÅed pÅijÃmÃ¡nÃm vidÄl Krista,\nj a k odkapÃ¡vÃ¡ svou krev do kalichu\n4 2 . J a k jeden konvrÅ¡ vidÄl, j a k knÄz vklÃ¡dÃ¡ do Ãºst j i n Ã© h o konvrÅ¡e krÃ¡snÃ©ho chlapce. . .\n4 6 . J a k zboÅ¾nÃ¡ Å¾ena, kterÃ© bylo odepÅeno pÅijÃmÃ¡nÃ, cÃtila j e h o sladkou chuÅ¥ v hrdle\na jiÅ¾ zdaleka vnÃmala j e h o vÅ¯ni\n4 7 . O Å¾enÄ, kterÃ¡ Å¾ila j e n o m z Tela Kristova\n4 8 . J a k rytÃÅ dÃky m o c i svatÃ©ho pÅijÃmÃ¡nÃ zvÃtÄzil v souboji\n4 9 . O t o m , j a k obÄÅ¡enÃ½ rytÃÅ n e m o h l zemÅÃt, neÅ¾ pÅijal TÄlo PÃ¡nÄ\n5 1 . J a k se jeden rytÃÅ klanÄl T Ä l u Kristovu leÅ¾e v blÃ¡tÄ\n6 5 . O hostii, kterÃ¡ v Belle odskoÄila z korporÃ¡lu, protoÅ¾e v nÃ byl zapeÄenÃ½ hmyz.\n. . .\n6 6 . J a k se na korporÃ¡lu objevila krvavÃ¡ skvrna, protoÅ¾e se jej dotkla tÄhotnÃ¡ jeptiÅ¡ka. .\nX. DIVY A ZÃZRAKY\n1. C o j e zÃ¡zrak, ÄÃ m o c Ã a skrze kterÃ© lidi se divy dÄjÃ a na Ä e m se dÄjÃ.\nC o j e pÅÃÄinou zÃ¡zrakÅ¯\n2 . J a k byl W i n a n d v j e d i n Ã© h o d i n Ä pÅenesen z JeruzalÃ©ma do lutyÅ¡skÃ© diecÃ©ze\n6 . O mnichovi, kterÃ½ pohrdal majetkem a d o t e k j e h o Å¡atu uzdravoval n e m o c n Ã© .\n7. J a k j e d n o h o sedlÃ¡ka v H e m m e r s b a c h u zavÅeli d o pece\na svatÃ½ J a k u b h o vysvobodil\n8. J a k pÅivedla lÃ¡ska opata k t o m u , Å¾e jedl maso\n9 . J a k se m n i c h pustil do shnilÃ©ho masa, protoÅ¾e nechtÄl jÃst maso,\naÄ m u to j e h o opat pÅikÃ¡zal\n1 1 . J a k Albertu Skothartovi p o m o h l vtip vyhnat d Ã© m o n a\n. . . 1 3 . J a k uÅ¾ sklizenÃ¡ vinice vynesla rytÃÅi zÃ¡zraÄnou Ãºro
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: du,\nprotoÅ¾e pÅesnÄ odvÃ¡dÄl desÃ¡tek\n1 4 . J a k konvrÅ¡ova modlitba zpÅ¯sobila, Å¾e se rozbitÃ½ h r n e c zase scelil\n1 5 . J a k se dÃky konvrÅ¡ovÄ posluÅ¡nosti hrÃ¡ch pÅi suÅ¡enÃ na poli\nsÃ¡m od sebe zÃ¡zraÄnÄ obrÃ¡til\n17. J a k se rouhavÃ© pekaÅce tÄsto p r o m Ä n i l o v lejno\n1 8 . O O t o v i ze S c h Ã¶ n b u r g u , kterÃ½ jedl po celÃ½ VelkÃ½ pÅ¯st maso,\na proto j e uÅ¾ po V e l i k o n o c Ã c h jÃst n e m o h l\n1 9 . J a k z poranÄnÃ©ho UkÅiÅ¾ovanÃ©ho u svatÃ©ho G o a r a vytÃ©kala krev.\n2 0 . DalÅ¡Ã p o d o b n Ã½ pÅÃbÄh o krucifixu\n2 1 . J a k zlodÄji ukradli v U t r e c h t u kÅÃÅ¾ a byli povÄÅ¡eni\n2 2 . J a k j e d n a panÃ porodila bez bolesti, protoÅ¾e manÅ¾elovi dala souhlas\nk ÃºÄasti na kÅÃÅ¾ovÃ© vÃ½pravÄ\n2 3 . J a k se slunce rozdÄlilo na tÅi ÄÃ¡sti\n2 4 . JeÅ¡tÄ o zatmÄnÃ slunce a o smrti krÃ¡le Filipa\n2 8 . J a k v Sasku uhodil do divadla blesk\n3 1 . J a k vdova zachrÃ¡nila svÅ¯j d Å¯ m od poÅ¾Ã¡ru tÃm, Å¾e nastavila ohni pivnÃ mÃry.\n3 4 . O c t n o s t n Ã© m klerikovi, kterÃ©ho pomluvila nevÄstka\n3 5 . O cizoloÅ¾nÃ©m rybÃ¡Åi a Å¾havÃ©m Å¾eleze\n3 7 . J a k se ve FrÃsku pÅi hlÃ¡sÃ¡nÃ kÅÃÅ¾ovÃ© vÃ½pravy objevily vzduÅ¡nÃ© kÅÃÅ¾e\n4 1 . J a k se v Sasku m n o h o lidÃ utopilo v zÃ¡plavÄ z deÅ¡tnÃ©ho mraku\n4 3 . J a k byl pohan v B a b y l Ã³ n Ä pokÅtÄn a uzdraven\n4 4 . J a k se d o b r o d i n Ã m kÅtu uzdravil autor t o h o t o D i a l o g u\n4 6 . J a k anglickÃ½ krÃ¡l R i c h a r d pÅestÃ¡l nebezpeÄÃ na m o Å i\n4 7 . SouÅ¾enÃ, kterÃ¡ nastala v naÅ¡Ã dobÄ\n4 9 . ZemÄtÅesenÃ v Brescii\n5 2 . J a k byl jeden ÄlovÄk zÃ¡zraÄnÄ zachrÃ¡nÄn z dolu, kde byl rok zavalen\n5 3 . J a k zadusil popel ÄlovÄka, kterÃ½ se posmÃval popelci\n5 6 . J a k zÃ¡sluhy svatÃ©ho biskupa T o m Ã¡ Å¡ e vysvobodily ptÃ¡Äka ze spÃ¡rÅ¯ luÅÃ¡ka.\n5 7 . J a k holubi uposlechli pokynu a odletÄli\n5 8 . J a k cisterciÃ¡ckÃ½ pÅevor poÅ¾ehnal ÄÃ¡pÅ¯m\n5 9 . O t o m , Å¾e vlaÅ¡tovky se vÅ¾dy vracejÃ do svÃ½ch hnÃzd\n6 0 . J a
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: k byla ÄapÃce zabita za trest pro cizoloÅ¾stvÃ\n6 6 . J a k vlk odvlekl dÃvku do lesa, aby j e h o druhovi vytÃ¡hla z krku kost\n6 7 . J a k pronÃ¡sledovala ropucha D Ä t Å i c h a , ÅeÄenÃ©ho R a k\n6 8 . J a k se v lahvi knÄze - opilce naÅ¡la ropucha\n7 2 . J a k vstoupil do Ãºst spÃcÃ Å¾eny had a vyÅ¡el z nÃ, kdyÅ¾ rodila\n. XI. O U M Ã R A J Ã C Ã C H\n1. C o j e smrt a proÄ se tak nazÃ½vÃ¡; o ÄtyÅech druzÃch umÃrajÃcÃch\n2. S m r t M e i n e r a , knÄze v H i m m e r o d u\n3. S m r t Isenbarda, sakristy tÃ©hoÅ¾ klÃ¡Å¡tera\n4 . S m r t m n i c h a Sigera\n1 1 . J a k zemÅel konvrÅ¡ M e n g o z a j a k na pÅÃkaz opata Gisberta zase oÅ¾il\n13. J a k n a k o n e c projevil lÃtost knÄz, nÄkdejÅ¡Ã benediktin\n14. J a k blahoslavenÃ½ D a v i d pÅedpovÄdÄl m n i c h u Rudigerovi j e h o k o n e c\n16. O konvrÅ¡i, u j e h o Å¾ smrtelnÃ©ho zÃ¡pasu sedÄli havrani, a j a k j e zahnala holubice.\n17. S m r t K o n o n a z M a l b e r g u , m n i c h a v H i m m e r o d u\n18. J a k zemÅel Ludolf, m n i c h z klÃ¡Å¡tera Pforta\n19. J a k se umÃrajÃcÃmu Allardovi, m n i c h o v i v L o c c u m u ,\nzjevil Kristus spolu s M a t k o u a se svatÃ½mi\n2 5 . J a k zemÅel m n i c h z O o s t b r o e k u , kterÃ½ nechtÄl kvÅ¯li neÅÃ¡dnÃ©mu opatovi Å¾Ãt\n2 6 . O posmrtnÃ½ch zÃ¡zracÃch opata, kterÃ½ zahynul v Bavorsku pÅi poÅ¾Ã¡ru\n2 7 . O smrti klÃ¡Å¡ternÃka u svatÃ©ho M a x i m i n a v K o l Ã n Ä\n3 3 . J a k nÃ¡Å¡ m n i c h K o n r Ã¡ d zemÅel potÃ©, co jej zavolal neboÅ¾tÃk R i c h w i n\n3 5 . J a k se konvrÅ¡ z klÃ¡Å¡tera Z i n n a kvÅ¯li penÃzku vrÃ¡til k Å¾ivotu\n3 6 . J a k se jeden m n i c h n e m o h l dostat do nebe,\nprotoÅ¾e si v hodinÄ smrti sundal kÃ¡pi\n3 9 . J a k byla s lichvÃ¡Åem v M e t Ã¡ c h p o h Å b e n a j e h o penÄÅ¾enka\n4 0 . J a k mrtvÃ¡ lichvÃ¡Åka ve F r e c h e n u pÅedvÃ¡dÄla, j a k se poÄÃtajÃ penÃze\n4 1 . J a k d Ã© m o n i v p o d o b Ä havranÅ¯ vyrvali lichvÃ¡Åce z B e r g h e i m u duÅ¡i z tÄla\n4 2 . J a k lichvÃ¡Å D Ä t Å
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: i c h Å¾vÃ½kal v poslednÃm taÅ¾enÃ penÃze\n4 3 . J a k zemÅel klerik Walter, hospodÃ¡Å Lothara, proboÅ¡ta v B o n n u\n4 7 . J a k umÃrajÃcÃmu sedlÃ¡ku JindÅichovi ÄnÄl nad hlavou ohnivÃ½ kÃ¡men,\nj Ã m Å¾ kdysi zabral sousedovi kus pole\n5 6 . J a k spolu dva vesniÄanÃ© po smrti zÃ¡pasili v h r o b Ä\n6 1 . J a k se sprÃ¡vce Å¡pitÃ¡lu dobrovolnÄ utopil\n6 2 . J a k smrt nechala bÃ½t Å¾enu v poslednÃm taÅ¾enÃ a napadla klerika,\nkterÃ½ stÃ¡l vedle nÃ\n6 3 . J a k pÅÃzrak v Å¾enskÃ© p o d o b Ä zabil p o u h Ã½ m pohledem lidi ze dvou statkÅ¯\n6 4 . O zjevenÃ, kterÃ© v B o n n u vyÅ¡lo z h r o b u a veÅ¡lo do j i n Ã© h o\nXII. O P O S M R T N Ã O D P L A T Ä\n1. O posmrtnÃ½ch trestech a o posmrtnÃ© slÃ¡vÄ\n2. J a k Ã½ byl trest lantkrabÄte LudvÃka\n3. J a k byl potrestÃ¡n alemanskÃ½ knÃÅ¾e\n4 . J a k oÅ¾ivoval tÄlo j e d n o h o klerika mÃsto duÅ¡e ÄÃ¡bel.\n. . 7. J a k byl sudÃ z K o l m a r u vhozen do sopky.\n1 2 . J a k krÃ¡l ArtuÅ¡ pozval palermskÃ©ho dÄkana na horu G y b e r\n1 3 . J a k byl hozen do sopky B e r t h o l d , vÃ©voda z ZÃ¤hringen\n1 4 . Trest Fridricha, rytÃÅe z Kellenu.\n15. O JindÅichovi ÅeÄenÃ©m N o d u s , kterÃ½ se po smrti zjevil m n o h a lidem\n1 6 . O turnaji pobitÃ½ch u M o n t e n a k e\n1 8 . J a k zesnulÃ½ rytÃÅ zavÄsil v noci pÅede dveÅe svÃ©ho syna mÃsto ryb hady a ropuchy.\n1 9 . J a k se j e d e n Bavor po smrti zjevil svÃ© manÅ¾elce\na Åekl j Ã , Å¾e m u almuÅ¾ny nebyly nic platnÃ©\n2 0 . J a k Ã© h o trestu se dostalo knÄÅ¾skÃ© k o n k u b Ã n Ä , kterou ulovil ÄÃ¡bel\n2 1 . JeptiÅ¡ka, kterÃ¡ musÃ stÃ¡le nosit v nÃ¡ruÄÃ ohnivÃ© dÃtÄ, kterÃ© zabila\n2 2 . O kardinÃ¡lu J o r d Ã¡ n o v i\n2 3 . Everwachova pekelnÃ¡ m u k a\n2 4 . O Ä i s t c o v Ã½ trest lutyÅ¡skÃ©ho lichvÃ¡Åe\n2 6 . O oÄistcovÃ©m trestu Å¾eny, j m Ã© n e m M a r i e , z FrÃska\n2 7 . O Ä i s t c o v Ã½ trest panÃ, kterÃ¡ se oddÃ¡vala magii\n3 1 . O Ä i s t c o v Ã½ trest opata, kterÃ½ nerad chodil do prÃ¡ce\n3 8 . O Ä i s t e c svatÃ©ho Patrika\n
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 3 9 . O mnichovi, kterÃ½ do t o h o oÄistce veÅ¡el\n4 2 . J a k byl knÄz potrestÃ¡n kvÅ¯li p o u t n i c k Ã© m u plÃ¡Å¡ti\n4 6 . Student, j e h o Å¾ duÅ¡e byla vzata v p o d o b Ä holubice do nebe\n4 7 . O ruce pÃsaÅe z Arnsbergu\n4 8 . O vÅ¯ni, jiÅ¾ vydÃ¡val mistr Petr Cantor.\n4 9 . O kazateli z premonstrÃ¡tskÃ©ho ÅÃ¡du\n5 7 . O templÃ¡Åi Einolfovi\n5 8 . J a k Panna M a r i a dosÃ¡hla t o h o , Å¾e andÄl nezatroubil podruhÃ©\n5 9 . N e b e s k Ã½ JeruzalÃ©m a slÃ¡va svatÃ½ch\nPoznÃ¡mky\nZkratky uÅ¾ÃvanÃ© v poznÃ¡mkÃ¡ch\nSeznam pramenÅ¯ a literatury\nRejstÅÃk osobnÃch jmen\nRejstÅÃk mÃstnÃch jmen\nEdiÄnÃ poznÃ¡mka " .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag1 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "NKC001867619" .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag2 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "OCR (30708)" .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>...
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 49, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:1c6ae25b-9a19-da70-cfa1-2296df24f7eb' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '101180', new value: 'urn:uuid:15393f67-368a-24a4-3712-1eae02e62948')
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:1c6ae25b-9a19-da70-cfa1-2296df24f7eb> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:1c6ae25b-9a19-da70-cfa1-2296df24f7eb> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "533255" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Copyright Â© 2010 - 2014, Perfect System, s.r.o."] ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 1 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "ID 112117359\nTisk Colosseum\nMonty Python Å¾ivÄ (pÅevÃ¡Å¾nÄ)\nnedÄle\n20.7.2014 20:00\nÅADA: 0\n/ MÃSTO: 0\n250 KÄ " .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 53, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:754df8fd-12bc-e436-a916-cc27d84b1e6a' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '101197', new value: 'urn:uuid:562acaa4-52a2-6783-4cfb-4dc0e4e0df82')
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:754df8fd-12bc-e436-a916-cc27d84b1e6a> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:754df8fd-12bc-e436-a916-cc27d84b1e6a> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "TicketFast" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Ticketmaster"] ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 3 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "This is your ticket\nPresent this entire page at the event\nMelkweg Customer number:\nLijnbaansgracht 234 A\n1017 PH Amsterdam 3873571\nLidmaatschap Lubomir Rintel\nTicket price:\nâ¬ 4.00\nService charge:\nâ¬ 0.00\nCustomer name:\nTHIS MEMBERSHIP IS VALID\nFOR ONE MONTH\nAND STARTS:\nFri, 27 June 2014\nGift Cards\nPrice type:\nLid\nMEMBERSHIP MELKWEG\nMEMBERSHIP MELKWEG AMSTERDAM\nBeschikbaar in 3 makkelijke varianten\nTHIS MEMBERSHIP CARD IS NOT VALID\nFOR ADMISSION WITHOUT AN\nADMISSION TICKET\nDigitaal\nDirect\nper email\nbezorgen\nZelf printen\nPrint, geef\ncadeau:\nhet is Ã©cht heel\nmakkelijk!\nPost\nEen\npersoonlijk\nbericht\ntoevoegen\nManieren die het je makkelijker maken als je\niemand een Gift Card cadeau wilt geven\nVALID FOR ALL EVENTS TAKING PLACE\nAT MELKWEG WITHIN SPECIFIED PERIOD\nPLEASE BE SURE THAT THE BARCODE\nIS READABLE\nIF NECESSARY, YOU CAN PRINT THE\nMEMBERSHIP AGAIN\nKoop:\nOnline\nTicketmaster.nl/giftcards\nOf\nBruna, Vomar,\nKruidvat & Albert Heijn\nThe general terms and conditions of the organiser of the event are applicable to the agreement in\nrelation to this ticket. The organiser will submit the general terms and conditions to the client\nupon his/her request.\nFurther it is provided as follows:\nâ¢\nThis ticket is and remains the property of the organiser and is issued to the client under the\ncondition that, without prior written permission from the organiser and/or\nTicket Service Nederland B.V., the admission ticket may not be sold to third parties, nor\nprovided in a commercial way, either directly or indirectly, to third parties, nor offered or\nreferred to - in any way whatsoever- in commercial statements. If any action is taken in\nbreach of this condition above, Ticket Service Nederland B.V. and/or the organiser will be\nentitled to render the admission tickets invalid. In such case, the organiser will also be entitled\nto impose a penalty on the client of â¬ 10.000 per violation, to be paid to the organiser.\nThe holders of invalid admission t
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ickets will be denied entry to the event, without\nany right to compensation.\nâ¢\nOnly the holder of the admission ticket who presents the admission ticket first at the entrance\nof the event will be allowed access to the event.\nâ¢\nOrganiser reserves the right to reschedule or cancel the event. In case of cancellation,\norganiser shall refund the face value of the ticket (service charges or other loss excluded).\nâ¢\nIt is forbidden to bring photographic, film and other recording equipment, glass containers,\nplastic bottles, cans, firework, firearms or any other weapons and/or dangerous objects\nand/or alcoholic drinks to the site where the event takes place on pain of confiscation.\nâ¢\nWheelchair users must be in possession of specific wheelchair tickets.\nThis e-ticket is only valid if printed on A4 without any adjustments to the\nprint dimensions. It can in no way be offered on another device (mobile\nphone, tablet etc.).\nGood quality print is required. E tickets which are not fully printed and / or\ncontain no barcode will be deemed invalid.\n*9LK6IOOBS*\n9435436 ST---217\n62 40 M1616M270614L 0503217 407 This is your ticket\nPresent this entire page at the event\nMelkweg Customer number:\nLijnbaansgracht 234 A\n1017 PH Amsterdam 3873571\nLidmaatschap Lubomir Rintel\nTicket price:\nâ¬ 4.00\nService charge:\nâ¬ 0.00\nCustomer name:\nTHIS MEMBERSHIP IS VALID\nFOR ONE MONTH\nAND STARTS:\nFri, 27 June 2014\nGift Cards\nPrice type:\nLid\nMEMBERSHIP MELKWEG\nMEMBERSHIP MELKWEG AMSTERDAM\nBeschikbaar in 3 makkelijke varianten\nTHIS MEMBERSHIP CARD IS NOT VALID\nFOR ADMISSION WITHOUT AN\nADMISSION TICKET\nDigitaal\nDirect\nper email\nbezorgen\nZelf printen\nPrint, geef\ncadeau:\nhet is Ã©cht heel\nmakkelijk!\nPost\nEen\npersoonlijk\nbericht\ntoevoegen\nManieren die het je makkelijker maken als je\niemand een Gift Card cadeau wilt geven\nVALID FOR ALL EVENTS TAKING PLACE\nAT MELKWEG WITHIN SPECIFIED PERIOD\nPLEASE BE SURE THAT THE BARCODE\nIS READABLE\nIF NECESSARY, YOU CAN PRINT THE\nMEMBERSHIP AGAIN\nKoop
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: :\nOnline\nTicketmaster.nl/giftcards\nOf\nBruna, Vomar,\nKruidvat & Albert Heijn\nThe general terms and conditions of the organiser of the event are applicable to the agreement in\nrelation to this ticket. The organiser will submit the general terms and conditions to the client\nupon his/her request.\nFurther it is provided as follows:\nâ¢\nThis ticket is and remains the property of the organiser and is issued to the client under the\ncondition that, without prior written permission from the organiser and/or\nTicket Service Nederland B.V., the admission ticket may not be sold to third parties, nor\nprovided in a commercial way, either directly or indirectly, to third parties, nor offered or\nreferred to - in any way whatsoever- in commercial statements. If any action is taken in\nbreach of this condition above, Ticket Service Nederland B.V. and/or the organiser will be\nentitled to render the admission tickets invalid. In such case, the organiser will also be entitled\nto impose a penalty on the client of â¬ 10.000 per violation, to be paid to the organiser.\nThe holders of invalid admission tickets will be denied entry to the event, without\nany right to compensation.\nâ¢\nOnly the holder of the admission ticket who presents the admission ticket first at the entrance\nof the event will be allowed access to the event.\nâ¢\nOrganiser reserves the right to reschedule or cancel the event. In case of cancellation,\norganiser shall refund the face value of the ticket (service charges or other loss excluded).\nâ¢\nIt is forbidden to bring photographic, film and other recording equipment, glass containers,\nplastic bottles, cans, firework, firearms or any other weapons and/or dangerous objects\nand/or alcoholic drinks to the site where the event takes place on pain of confiscation.\nâ¢\nWheelchair users must be in possession of specific wheelchair tickets.\nThis e-ticket is only valid if printed on A4 without any adjustments to the\nprint dimensions. It can in no way be offered on another device (mobile\nphone, ta
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: blet etc.).\nGood quality print is required. E tickets which are not fully printed and / or\ncontain no barcode will be deemed invalid.\n*BPQGS- RU*\n9435436 ST---218\n62 40 M1616M270614L 0503217 407 This is your ticket\nPresent this entire page at the event\nMelkweg Customer number:\nLijnbaansgracht 234 A\n1017 PH Amsterdam 3873571\nLidmaatschap Lubomir Rintel\nTicket price:\nâ¬ 4.00\nService charge:\nâ¬ 0.00\nCustomer name:\nTHIS MEMBERSHIP IS VALID\nFOR ONE MONTH\nAND STARTS:\nFri, 27 June 2014\nGift Cards\nPrice type:\nLid\nMEMBERSHIP MELKWEG\nMEMBERSHIP MELKWEG AMSTERDAM\nBeschikbaar in 3 makkelijke varianten\nTHIS MEMBERSHIP CARD IS NOT VALID\nFOR ADMISSION WITHOUT AN\nADMISSION TICKET\nDigitaal\nDirect\nper email\nbezorgen\nZelf printen\nPrint, geef\ncadeau:\nhet is Ã©cht heel\nmakkelijk!\nPost\nEen\npersoonlijk\nbericht\ntoevoegen\nManieren die het je makkelijker maken als je\niemand een Gift Card cadeau wilt geven\nVALID FOR ALL EVENTS TAKING PLACE\nAT MELKWEG WITHIN SPECIFIED PERIOD\nPLEASE BE SURE THAT THE BARCODE\nIS READABLE\nIF NECESSARY, YOU CAN PRINT THE\nMEMBERSHIP AGAIN\nKoop:\nOnline\nTicketmaster.nl/giftcards\nOf\nBruna, Vomar,\nKruidvat & Albert Heijn\nThe general terms and conditions of the organiser of the event are applicable to the agreement in\nrelation to this ticket. The organiser will submit the general terms and conditions to the client\nupon his/her request.\nFurther it is provided as follows:\nâ¢\nThis ticket is and remains the property of the organiser and is issued to the client under the\ncondition that, without prior written permission from the organiser and/or\nTicket Service Nederland B.V., the admission ticket may not be sold to third parties, nor\nprovided in a commercial way, either directly or indirectly, to third parties, nor offered or\nreferred to - in any way whatsoever- in commercial statements. If any action is taken in\nbreach of this condition above, Ticket Service Nederland B.V. and/or the organiser will be\nentitled to render the admission tickets invalid. In
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: such case, the organiser will also be entitled\nto impose a penalty on the client of â¬ 10.000 per violation, to be paid to the organiser.\nThe holders of invalid admission tickets will be denied entry to the event, without\nany right to compensation.\nâ¢\nOnly the holder of the admission ticket who presents the admission ticket first at the entrance\nof the event will be allowed access to the event.\nâ¢\nOrganiser reserves the right to reschedule or cancel the event. In case of cancellation,\norganiser shall refund the face value of the ticket (service charges or other loss excluded).\nâ¢\nIt is forbidden to bring photographic, film and other recording equipment, glass containers,\nplastic bottles, cans, firework, firearms or any other weapons and/or dangerous objects\nand/or alcoholic drinks to the site where the event takes place on pain of confiscation.\nâ¢\nWheelchair users must be in possession of specific wheelchair tickets.\nThis e-ticket is only valid if printed on A4 without any adjustments to the\nprint dimensions. It can in no way be offered on another device (mobile\nphone, tablet etc.).\nGood quality print is required. E tickets which are not fully printed and / or\ncontain no barcode will be deemed invalid.\n*DTWQ 590W*\n9435436 ST---219\n62 40 M1616M270614L 0503217 407 " .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 60, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:595ab0b0-1d57-a85d-6f1e-6446f413f673' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '101228', new value: 'urn:uuid:0a4bbf33-3ecf-5b28-17a6-2c0424d78a50')
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:595ab0b0-1d57-a85d-6f1e-6446f413f673> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:595ab0b0-1d57-a85d-6f1e-6446f413f673> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "Moje spojenÃ" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:subject "Moje spojenÃ" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "CHAPS spol. s r.o."] ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:contentCreated "2014-03-01T22:52:38Z" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 1 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "Moje spojenÃ\nDatum\n2.3.\nOdkud/PÅestup/Kam\nBrno hl.n.\nBratislava hl.st.\nNovÃ© Mesto n.VÃ¡hom\nPÅÃj.\nOdj. Pozn. Spoje\nEC 271 Petrov Â© M R Â³ Â® Âª Â¼\n6:22\nv\n7:50 7:55\nR 603 Äingov Â© M R Â® Â°\n9:03 9:05\nCelkovÃ½ Äas 2 hod 41 min, vzdÃ¡lenost 240 km\nÂ« Dopravce: ÄeskÃ© drÃ¡hy, a.s.; nÃ¡bÅeÅ¾Ã L.Svobody 1222/12, 110 15 Praha 1; +420 840 112 113 (Brno hl.n.->KÃºty Gr.)\nÅ½elezniÄnÃ¡ spoloÄnosÅ¥ Slovensko, a.s.; RoÅ¾ÅavskÃ¡ 1, 832 72 Bratislava 3; InformÃ¡cie zÃskate na ÄÃsle KontaktnÃ©ho centra 18 188 (KÃºty\nGr.->Szob) (EC 271)\nÅ½elezniÄnÃ¡ spoloÄnosÅ¥ Slovensko, a.s.; RoÅ¾ÅavskÃ¡ 1, 832 72 Bratislava 3; InformÃ¡cie zÃskate na ÄÃsle KontaktnÃ©ho centra 18 188 (R 603)\nDatum\n2.3.\nOdkud/PÅestup/Kam\nNovÃ© Mesto n.VÃ¡hom\nBratislava hl.st.\nBrno hl.n.\nPÅÃj.\n14:53\n16:05\n17:37\nOdj. Pozn. Spoje\n14:55\nR 606 SHOPPIE.SK Â© M R Â® Â°\nEC 274 Jaroslav HaÅ¡ek Â© M R Â³ Â® Âª Â¼\n16:10\n17:39\nv\nCelkovÃ½ Äas 2 hod 42 min, vzdÃ¡lenost 240 km\nÂ« Dopravce: Å½elezniÄnÃ¡ spoloÄnosÅ¥ Slovensko, a.s.; RoÅ¾ÅavskÃ¡ 1, 832 72 Bratislava 3; InformÃ¡cie zÃskate na ÄÃsle KontaktnÃ©ho centra 18 188\n(R 606)\nÅ½elezniÄnÃ¡ spoloÄnosÅ¥ Slovensko, a.s.; RoÅ¾ÅavskÃ¡ 1, 832 72 Bratislava 3; InformÃ¡cie zÃskate na ÄÃsle KontaktnÃ©ho centra 18 188\n(Å tÃºrovo->KÃºty Gr.)\nÄeskÃ© drÃ¡hy, a.s.; nÃ¡bÅeÅ¾Ã L.Svobody 1222/12, 110 15 Praha 1; +420 840 112 113 (KÃºty Gr.->Praha hl.n.) (EC 274)\nDatum\n2.3.\nOdkud/PÅestup/Kam\nNovÃ© Mesto n.VÃ¡hom\nVelkÃ¡ n.VeliÄkou\nVeselÃ n.Moravou\nBrno hl.n.\nPÅÃj.\nOdj. Pozn. Spoje\n15:23\nOs 2774\n16:35 16:39\nOs 2754 H L\n16:57 17:01\nSp 1732 Å½urÃ¡Å L\n18:33\nCelkovÃ½ Äas 3 hod 10 min, vzdÃ¡lenost 159 km\nÂ« Dopravce: Å½elezniÄnÃ¡ spoloÄnosÅ¥ Slovensko, a.s.; RoÅ¾ÅavskÃ¡ 1, 832 72 Bratislava 3; InformÃ¡cie zÃskate na ÄÃsle KontaktnÃ©ho centra 18 188\n(NovÃ© Mesto n.VÃ¡hom->Vrbovce Gr.)\nÄeskÃ© drÃ¡hy, a.s.; nÃ¡bÅeÅ¾Ã L.Svobody 1222/12, 110 15 Praha 1; +420 840 112 113 (Vrbovce Gr.->VelkÃ¡ n.VeliÄkou) (Os 2774)\
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nÄeskÃ© drÃ¡hy, a.s.; nÃ¡bÅeÅ¾Ã L.Svobody 1222/12, 110 15 Praha 1; +420 840 112 113 (Os 2754, Sp 1732)\nÂ« jede v 7\nDatum\n2.3.\nOdkud/PÅestup/Kam\nNovÃ© Mesto n.VÃ¡hom\nBratislava hl.st.\nBrno hl.n.\nPÅÃj.\n16:53\n18:05\n19:37\nOdj. Pozn. Spoje\n16:55\nR 608 SpiÅ¡an Â© M R Â® Â°\nEC 272 Avala Â© M R Â³ Â® Âª Â¼\n18:10\n19:39\nCelkovÃ½ Äas 2 hod 42 min, vzdÃ¡lenost 240 km\nÂ« Dopravce: Å½elezniÄnÃ¡ spoloÄnosÅ¥ Slovensko, a.s.; RoÅ¾ÅavskÃ¡ 1, 832 72 Bratislava 3; InformÃ¡cie zÃskate na ÄÃsle KontaktnÃ©ho centra 18 188\n(R 608)\nÅ½elezniÄnÃ¡ spoloÄnosÅ¥ Slovensko, a.s.; RoÅ¾ÅavskÃ¡ 1, 832 72 Bratislava 3; InformÃ¡cie zÃskate na ÄÃsle KontaktnÃ©ho centra 18 188\n(Å tÃºrovo->KÃºty Gr.)\nÄeskÃ© drÃ¡hy, a.s.; nÃ¡bÅeÅ¾Ã L.Svobody 1222/12, 110 15 Praha 1; +420 840 112 113 (KÃºty Gr.->Praha hl.n.) (EC 272)\nVysvÄtlivky znaÄek\n# - pÅestup na metro v - vlak neÄekÃ¡ na Å¾Ã¡dnÃ© pÅÃpoje H - vÅ¯z vhodnÃ½ pro pÅepravu cestujÃcÃch na vozÃku Â© - vÅ¯z vhodnÃ½ pro\npÅepravu cestujÃcÃch na vozÃku, vybavenÃ½ zvedacÃ ploÅ¡inou M - restauraÄnÃ vÅ¯z R - moÅ¾no zakoupit mÃstenku Â³ - ve vlaku Åazen\nvÅ¯z s pÅÃpojkou 230 V Â® - vÅ¯z nebo oddÃly, vyhrazenÃ© pro cestujÃcÃ s dÄtmi do 10 let Â° - Ãºschova bÄhem pÅepravy s moÅ¾nostÃ\nrezervace mÃsta pro jÃzdnÃ kolo L - pÅeprava spoluzavazadel (do vyÄerpÃ¡nÃ kapacity) Âª - pÅeprava spoluzavazadel s povinnou\nrezervacÃ mÃsta pro jÃzdnÃ kolo Â¼ - dÃ¡mskÃ½ oddÃl\nDoporuÄujeme:\nZjistÄte si pÅÃpadnÃ© zpoÅ¾dÄnÃ vlaku na internetu (ikonka\nu vyhledanÃ©ho vlaku) Äi formou SMS:\nâ¢ v sÃti T-Mobile odeÅ¡lete SMS ve tvaru POZ ÄÃslo vlaku napÅ. \"POZ 172\" na telefonnÃ ÄÃslo 4616\nâ¢ v sÃti O2 odeÅ¡lete SMS ve tvaru ZPO ÄÃslo vlaku napÅ. \"ZPO 172\" na telefonnÃ ÄÃslo 999888\nâ¢ v sÃti Vodafone odeÅ¡lete SMS ve tvaru POZ ÄÃslo vlaku napÅ. \"POZ 172\" na telefonnÃ ÄÃslo 7755\nTisknuto z aplikace IDOS, Â© CHAPS spol. s r.o., 01.03.2014 23:52\n1 / 1 " .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 62, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:659a785c-ea9c-aa9a-9e97-d6eab56b5aca' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '101197', new value: 'urn:uuid:562acaa4-52a2-6783-4cfb-4dc0e4e0df82')
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:659a785c-ea9c-aa9a-9e97-d6eab56b5aca> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:659a785c-ea9c-aa9a-9e97-d6eab56b5aca> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "TicketFast" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Ticketmaster"] ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 3 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "This is your ticket\nPresent this entire page at the event\nMASTODON\nFriday, 27 June 2014 18:30 hrs\nMelkweg The Max Customer number: Lijnbaansgracht 234 A\n1017 PH Amsterdam 3873571 Staanplaats Lubomir Rintel Ticket price:\nâ¬ 25.00\nService charge:\nâ¬ 3.40\nOrganisator: Melkweg Price type:\nNORMAAL\nCustomer name:\nDate & time:\nVOOR TIJDSCHEMA ZIE WWW.MELKWEG.NL\nLIDMAATSCHAP VERPLICHT (4,00 EURO)\nGift Cards\nBeschikbaar in 3 makkelijke varianten\nDigitaal\nDirect\nper email\nbezorgen\nZelf printen\nPrint, geef\ncadeau:\nhet is Ã©cht heel\nmakkelijk!\nPost\nEen\npersoonlijk\nbericht\ntoevoegen\nManieren die het je makkelijker maken als je\niemand een Gift Card cadeau wilt geven\nKoop:\nOnline\nTicketmaster.nl/giftcards\nOf\nBruna, Vomar,\nKruidvat & Albert Heijn\nThe general terms and conditions of the organiser of the event are applicable to the agreement in\nrelation to this ticket. The organiser will submit the general terms and conditions to the client\nupon his/her request.\nFurther it is provided as follows:\nâ¢\nThis ticket is and remains the property of the organiser and is issued to the client under the\ncondition that, without prior written permission from the organiser and/or\nTicket Service Nederland B.V., the admission ticket may not be sold to third parties, nor\nprovided in a commercial way, either directly or indirectly, to third parties, nor offered or\nreferred to - in any way whatsoever- in commercial statements. If any action is taken in\nbreach of this condition above, Ticket Service Nederland B.V. and/or the organiser will be\nentitled to render the admission tickets invalid. In such case, the organiser will also be entitled\nto impose a penalty on the client of â¬ 10.000 per violation, to be paid to the organiser.\nThe holders of invalid admission tickets will be denied entry to the event, without\nany right to compensation.\nâ¢\nOnly the holder of the admission ticket who presents the admission ticket first at the entrance\nof the event will be allowed ac
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: cess to the event.\nâ¢\nOrganiser reserves the right to reschedule or cancel the event. In case of cancellation,\norganiser shall refund the face value of the ticket (service charges or other loss excluded).\nâ¢\nIt is forbidden to bring photographic, film and other recording equipment, glass containers,\nplastic bottles, cans, firework, firearms or any other weapons and/or dangerous objects\nand/or alcoholic drinks to the site where the event takes place on pain of confiscation.\nâ¢\nWheelchair users must be in possession of specific wheelchair tickets.\nThis e-ticket is only valid if printed on A4 without any adjustments to the\nprint dimensions. It can in no way be offered on another device (mobile\nphone, tablet etc.).\nGood quality print is required. E tickets which are not fully printed and / or\ncontain no barcode will be deemed invalid.\n*9LK9FOOBS*\n9435436 TM---322\n62 40 M1616140627MA 0503321 406 This is your ticket\nPresent this entire page at the event\nMASTODON\nFriday, 27 June 2014 18:30 hrs\nMelkweg The Max Customer number: Lijnbaansgracht 234 A\n1017 PH Amsterdam 3873571 Staanplaats Lubomir Rintel Ticket price:\nâ¬ 25.00\nService charge:\nâ¬ 3.40\nOrganisator: Melkweg Price type:\nNORMAAL\nCustomer name:\nDate & time:\nVOOR TIJDSCHEMA ZIE WWW.MELKWEG.NL\nLIDMAATSCHAP VERPLICHT (4,00 EURO)\nGift Cards\nBeschikbaar in 3 makkelijke varianten\nDigitaal\nDirect\nper email\nbezorgen\nZelf printen\nPrint, geef\ncadeau:\nhet is Ã©cht heel\nmakkelijk!\nPost\nEen\npersoonlijk\nbericht\ntoevoegen\nManieren die het je makkelijker maken als je\niemand een Gift Card cadeau wilt geven\nKoop:\nOnline\nTicketmaster.nl/giftcards\nOf\nBruna, Vomar,\nKruidvat & Albert Heijn\nThe general terms and conditions of the organiser of the event are applicable to the agreement in\nrelation to this ticket. The organiser will submit the general terms and conditions to the client\nupon his/her request.\nFurther it is provided as follows:\nâ¢\nThis ticket is and remains the property of the organiser and is issued to the cl
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ient under the\ncondition that, without prior written permission from the organiser and/or\nTicket Service Nederland B.V., the admission ticket may not be sold to third parties, nor\nprovided in a commercial way, either directly or indirectly, to third parties, nor offered or\nreferred to - in any way whatsoever- in commercial statements. If any action is taken in\nbreach of this condition above, Ticket Service Nederland B.V. and/or the organiser will be\nentitled to render the admission tickets invalid. In such case, the organiser will also be entitled\nto impose a penalty on the client of â¬ 10.000 per violation, to be paid to the organiser.\nThe holders of invalid admission tickets will be denied entry to the event, without\nany right to compensation.\nâ¢\nOnly the holder of the admission ticket who presents the admission ticket first at the entrance\nof the event will be allowed access to the event.\nâ¢\nOrganiser reserves the right to reschedule or cancel the event. In case of cancellation,\norganiser shall refund the face value of the ticket (service charges or other loss excluded).\nâ¢\nIt is forbidden to bring photographic, film and other recording equipment, glass containers,\nplastic bottles, cans, firework, firearms or any other weapons and/or dangerous objects\nand/or alcoholic drinks to the site where the event takes place on pain of confiscation.\nâ¢\nWheelchair users must be in possession of specific wheelchair tickets.\nThis e-ticket is only valid if printed on A4 without any adjustments to the\nprint dimensions. It can in no way be offered on another device (mobile\nphone, tablet etc.).\nGood quality print is required. E tickets which are not fully printed and / or\ncontain no barcode will be deemed invalid.\n*BPQJP- RU*\n9435436 TM---323\n62 40 M1616140627MA 0503321 406 This is your ticket\nPresent this entire page at the event\nMASTODON\nFriday, 27 June 2014 18:30 hrs\nMelkweg The Max Customer number: Lijnbaansgracht 234 A\n1017 PH Amsterdam 3873571 Staanplaats Lubomir Rintel Ticket price:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nâ¬ 25.00\nService charge:\nâ¬ 3.40\nOrganisator: Melkweg Price type:\nNORMAAL\nCustomer name:\nDate & time:\nVOOR TIJDSCHEMA ZIE WWW.MELKWEG.NL\nLIDMAATSCHAP VERPLICHT (4,00 EURO)\nGift Cards\nBeschikbaar in 3 makkelijke varianten\nDigitaal\nDirect\nper email\nbezorgen\nZelf printen\nPrint, geef\ncadeau:\nhet is Ã©cht heel\nmakkelijk!\nPost\nEen\npersoonlijk\nbericht\ntoevoegen\nManieren die het je makkelijker maken als je\niemand een Gift Card cadeau wilt geven\nKoop:\nOnline\nTicketmaster.nl/giftcards\nOf\nBruna, Vomar,\nKruidvat & Albert Heijn\nThe general terms and conditions of the organiser of the event are applicable to the agreement in\nrelation to this ticket. The organiser will submit the general terms and conditions to the client\nupon his/her request.\nFurther it is provided as follows:\nâ¢\nThis ticket is and remains the property of the organiser and is issued to the client under the\ncondition that, without prior written permission from the organiser and/or\nTicket Service Nederland B.V., the admission ticket may not be sold to third parties, nor\nprovided in a commercial way, either directly or indirectly, to third parties, nor offered or\nreferred to - in any way whatsoever- in commercial statements. If any action is taken in\nbreach of this condition above, Ticket Service Nederland B.V. and/or the organiser will be\nentitled to render the admission tickets invalid. In such case, the organiser will also be entitled\nto impose a penalty on the client of â¬ 10.000 per violation, to be paid to the organiser.\nThe holders of invalid admission tickets will be denied entry to the event, without\nany right to compensation.\nâ¢\nOnly the holder of the admission ticket who presents the admission ticket first at the entrance\nof the event will be allowed access to the event.\nâ¢\nOrganiser reserves the right to reschedule or cancel the event. In case of cancellation,\norganiser shall refund the face value of the ticket (service charges or other loss excluded).\nâ¢\nIt is forbidden to bring photogra
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: phic, film and other recording equipment, glass containers,\nplastic bottles, cans, firework, firearms or any other weapons and/or dangerous objects\nand/or alcoholic drinks to the site where the event takes place on pain of confiscation.\nâ¢\nWheelchair users must be in possession of specific wheelchair tickets.\nThis e-ticket is only valid if printed on A4 without any adjustments to the\nprint dimensions. It can in no way be offered on another device (mobile\nphone, tablet etc.).\nGood quality print is required. E tickets which are not fully printed and / or\ncontain no barcode will be deemed invalid.\n*7HE%5CA Q*\n9435436 TM---321\n62 40 M1616140627MA 0503321 406 " .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 63, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:bc44738d-62c0-6a8c-ce47-434b366b9446' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '101242', new value: 'urn:uuid:822a1936-4d58-7b7a-40b6-d36b80e7a43a')
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:bc44738d-62c0-6a8c-ce47-434b366b9446> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:bc44738d-62c0-6a8c-ce47-434b366b9446> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "INTRODUCTION\n" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Web Guy"] ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 121 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "RAW Intro | Omar Intro | Title Page | Index |\nVersion Notes\n| INTRODUCTION\nYou hold in your hands one of the Great Books of our century fnord.\nSome Great Books are recognized at once with a fusillade of critical\nhuzzahs and gonfolons, like Joyceâs Ulysses. Others appear almost furtively\nand are only discovered 50 years later, like Moby Dick or Mendelâs great\nessay on genetics. The Principia Discordia entered our space-time\ncontinuum almost as unobtrusively as a cat-burglar creeping over a\nwindowsill.\nIn 1968, virtually nobody had heard of this wonderful book. In 1970,\nhundreds of people from coast to coast were talking about it and asking the\nidentity of the mysterious author, Malaclypse the Younger. Rumors swept\nacross the continent, from New York to Los Angeles, from Seattle to St. Joe.\nMalaclypse was actually Alan Watts, one heard. No, said another legend â\nthe Principia was actually the work of the Sufi Order. A third, very\nintriguing myth held that Malaclypse was a pen-name for Richard M. Nixon,\nwho had allegedly composed the Principia during a few moments of\nlucidity. I enjoyed each of these yarns and did my part to help spread them. I\nwas also careful never to contradict the occasional rumors that I had actually\nwritten the whole thing myself during an acid trip.\nThe legendry, the mystery, the cult grew very slowly. By the mid-\n1970âs, thousands of people, some as far off as Hong Kong and Australia,\nwere talking about the Principia, and since the original was out of print by\nthen, xerox copies were beginning to circulate here and there.\nWhen the Illuminatus trilogy appeared in 1975, my co-author, Bob\nShea, and I both received hundreds of letters from people intrigued by the\nquotes from the Principia with which we had decorated the heads of several\nchapters. Many, who had already heard of the Principia or seen copies,\nasked if Shea and I had written it, or if we had copies available. Others wrote\nto ask if it were real, or just something we had i
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nvented the way H.P.\nLovecraft invented the Necronomicon. We answered according to our\nmoods, sometimes telling the truth, sometimes spreading the most Godawful\nlies and myths we could devise fnord.\nWhy not? We felt that this book was a true Classic (literatus\nimmortalis) and, since the alleged intelligentsia had not yet discovered it, the\nbest way to keep its legend alive was to encourage the mythology and the\ncontroversy about it. Increasingly, people wrote to ask me if Timothy Leary had written it, and I almost always told them he had, except on Fridays when\nI am more whimsical, in which case I told them it had been transmitted by a\ncanine intelligence â vast, cool and unsympathetic â from the Dog Star,\nSirius.\nNow, at last, the truth can be told.\nActually, the Principia is the work of a time-traveling anthropologist\nfrom the 23rd Century. He is currently passing among us as a computer\nspecialist, bon vivant and philosopher named Gregory Hill. He has also\ntranslated several volumes of Etruscan erotic poetry, under another pen-\nname, and in the 18th Century was the mysterious Man in Black who gave\nJefferson the design for the Great Seal of the United States.\nI have it on good authority that he is one of the most accomplished\ntime-travelers in the galaxy and has visited Earth many times in the past,\nusing such cover-identities as Zeno of Elias, Emperor Norton, Count\nCagliostro, Guillaume of Aquitaine, etc. Whenever I question him about\nthis, he grows very evasive and attempts to persuade me that he is actually\njust another 20th Century Earthman and that all my ideas about his\nExtraterrestrial and extratemporal origin are delusions. Hah! I am not that\neasily deceived. After all, a time-traveling anthropologist would say just\nthat, so that he could observe us without his presence causing culture-shock.\nI understand that he has consented to write an Afterward to this\nedition. Heâll probably contradict everything Iâve told you, but donât believe\na word he says fnord. He is a ma
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ster of the deadpan put-on, the plausible\nsatire, the philosophical leg-pull and all branches of guerilla ontology.\nFor full benefit to the Head, this book should be read in conjunction\nwith The Illuminoids by Neal Wilgus (Sun Press, Albuquerque, New\nMexico) and Zen Without Zen Masters by Camden Benares (And/Or Press,\nBerkeley, California). âWe are operating on many levels hereâ, as Ken\nKesey used to say.\nIn conclusion, there is no conclusion. Things will go on as they\nalways have, getting weirder all the time.\nHail Eris. All hail Discordia. Fnord?\n-Robert Anton Wilson\nInternational Arms and Hashish Inc.\nDarra Bazar, Kohat 5th edition introduction:\nby Kerry Thornley, Discordian Society Co-founder\nIf organized religion is the opium of the masses, then disorganized\nreligion is the marijuana of the lunatic fringe.\nMost disorganized of all religions, Discordianism alone understands\nthat organization is the work of the Devil. Holy Chaos is the Natural\nCondition of Reality, contrary to popular belief. Theologians cite Order in\nthe Universe as proof of a Supreme Intelligence, but a glance is enough to\nsee that the stars are not actually in neat little rows. (Oh, sure, there is the\nBig Dipper and the Little Dipper - but if they were really connect-the-dot\ndrawings there would be numbers next to the stars.) Theology is just a\ndebate over who to frame for creating reality. What we imagine is order is\nmerely the prevailing form of chaos.\nEvery few thousand years some shepherd inhales smoke from a\nburning bush and has a vision or eats moldy rye bread in a cave and sees\nGod. From then on their followers kill one another at the slightest\nprovocation. Haunted houses called temples are built by one side and torn\ndown by another - and then bloody quarrels continue over the crumbling\nfoundations.\nOrganized religion preaches Order and Love but spawns Chaos and\nFury. Why?\nBecause the whole Material Universe is exclusive property of the\nGreco-Roman Goddess of Chaos, Confusion, Strife, Helter-Skel
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ter and\nHodge-Podge. No Spiritual power is even strong enough to dent Her chariot\nfenders. No material force can resist the temptation of Her Fifth Intergalactic\nBank of the Acropolis Slush Fund for Graft and Corruption.\nAll this was revealed to me in an absolutely unforgettably miraculous\nevent in 1958 or 1959 in a bowling alley in Friendly Hills or maybe Santa Fe\nSprings, California, witnessed by either Gregory Hill or Malaclypse the\nYounger or perhaps Mad Malik or Reverend Doctor Occupant or some guy\nwho must have vaguely resembled one or another of them.\nWith the help of a Chaosopherâs Stone I found the Goddess Eris\nDiscordia in my pineal gland (on Cosmic Channel Number Five) and ever\nsince I have known the answers to all the mysteries of metaphysics,\nmetamystics, metamorphics, metanoiacs and metaphorics. (Before that I\ndidnât even know how to install a plastic trash can liner so it wouldnât fall\ndown inside the first time somebody threw away garbage.) You, too can activate your pineal gland simply by reciting the entire\ncontents of this book upon awakening each morning, rubbing sandalwood\npaste between your eyes each evening upon retiring, banging your forehead\nagainst the ground five times a day, refraining from harming cockroaches\nand meditating (defined as sitting around waiting for good luck).\nWhen your pineal gland finally lights up you will never again, as long\nas you live, have to relax.\nEris Discordia will solve all your problems and She will expect you in\nreturn to solve all Her problems. In these very pages you will learn about\nconverting infidels. Later on, you will be taught how to annoy heretics. You\nwill also be required to resolve Zen-like riddles, such as: If Jesus was\nJewish, then why did he have a Puerto Rican name?\nOnce you become adept at leaning on backsliders, you will qualify for\na calling. Maybe you will be a Chaosopher (who delivers commentaries on\nchaos) or perhaps, instead, a Chaoist (who goes around stirring up chaos) or,\nperchance, a Knower (who
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: knows better than to do either one).\nBut under no circumstances may you become a Prophet. We donât\nintend to jeopardize our nonprophet status.\nWhat we lack in Prophets, however, we make up for in Saints. Only a\nPope may canonize a Saint, but every man, woman and child on this planet\nis a genuine and authorized Pope (genuine and authorized by the House of\nthe Apostles of Eris). So you can ordain yourself - and anyone or anything\nelse - a Saint.\nTimes werenât always so easy. When in 1968 I first declared myself a\nSaint, Gregory Hill said, âThatâs impossible,â insisting, âOnly dead people\ncan be Saints,â adding, âand fictional characters,â guessing, âYou are neither\none.â\nBut it happened that, although I was no longer a believer, I was still\non the membership roles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.\nSo Greg was too late. Me and all the other Mormons were already Saints -\nand some of us living ones - no matter what he said.\nNowadays only the Mormons have more Saints than the Discordian\nSociety. But we plan to catch up with them. Won't you please join our\nSainthood Drive? Moral perfection isn't necessary for Discordian Sainthood.\nYou just have to suffer a lot.\nSo many other privileges of membership in our religion come to mind\nthat I don't know where to begin. For instance, you don't have to get out of\nbed early on Sunday morning to attend church. You can sleep in. How many\nChristian denominations - for all their talk of brotherly love - are that\ncompassionate? You can even be a Discordian in good standing without ever having to\nso much as look at another Discordian - early in the morning or any other\ntime. Thatâs an advantage to mail-order religion that the more conventional\nfaiths try to play down.\nWhat is so unusual about Discordian Abnormail - as we call it - is\ndecentralization. Donât contact me here at Orthodox Discordian Society\nHindquarters! Send your letters, notes, relics, sacraments and writs of\nexcommunication to one another. That,
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: says Discordian Episkopos Olâ Sam\n(36 Erskine Drive, Morristown, NJ 07960), is eristic abnormail - adding:\nâUnfortunately, the majority of eristic abnormail is nothing but inane gossip,\nmasturbatory in-jokes, trivial variations of stale dogma, snide put-downs of\nthose not weird in exactly the same was as âusâ, and similar such garbage ad\nnaseum; and thatâs good too!â (I like the way Olâ Sam always keeps a\npositive attitude.)\nOur outreach program is called aneristic abnormail and is defined by\nOlâ Sam as âweird things sent in fun to those still trapped in the Region of\nThudâ - squares, that is. When some order-bound heathen makes an\nespecially unenlightened public remark, that unsuspecting dolt is likely to\nreceive a Jake - whole mail box full of weird shit from Discordians\neverywhere on the same day. âFor maximum benefit,â says Olâ Sam, âa\ngood Jake should be in response to a particularly gross manifestation of the\nAneristic Delusion, not merely intended to chastise, but to teach and amuse\nas well (or else make them hopping mad). The best Jakes involve a lot of\nDiscordians, all conspiring to contact the subject on Jake Day - a shining\nexample of Discordian accord, as paradoxical as that sounds.â (If you think\nthat sounds paradoxical, wait until you hear about the Discordian accordion.)\nAnother advantage to Discordianism over the worldâs other great\nreligions is that we tell you about the Fendersons. While it is true that you\ndonât have to be a Discordian before becoming a Fenderson, the Taoists - for\ninstance - donât even know about the Fendersons. And those who know do\nnot speak.\nFenderson Discordian Graham Trievel explains that âa Fenderson is a\nmember of a family you can join by saying you are one. Yes, anybody who\nwants to be a Fenderson can be a Fenderson. Just say these three words, âIâm\na Fenderson.â Itâs as simple as that.â\nGenealogy buffs will be interested to know, âOur Fenderson\nforefather can be reached at: S.J. Glew, 5611
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Lehman Road, DeWitt, MI\n48820 ..... Blame him.â\nAll Fendersons add Fenderson to their existing name or they use the\nlast name of Fenderson with entirely new first and/or middle names. âFor example, you can call me Graham Fenderson Trievel, Fenderson Graham\nTrievel, or Graham Trievel Fenderson.â (And you can call me Saint Ignatius\nFenderson.)\nBut you must at all times keep in touch with other Fendersons. âThis,â\nsays Fenderson, âis easy to accomplish as you can make anybody you want a\nFenderson, even if they donât want to be one.â\nWrite Graham Fenderson Trievel about how to get a 1989 Fenderson\nfamily reunion baseball cap at Rt. 113, Box 481, Lionville, PA 19353. But\nhe warns, âIâll be collecting names and addresses of Fendersons for possible\nfuture publication.â\nIf you become a Discordian and also want salvation in the Industrial\nChurch of the SubGenius (Box 140306, Dallas TX 75214) you are free to\nmaintain a duel membership. Or if you live outside of Texas (in some state\nwhere dueling is illegal), you can be an honorary SubGenius and a\ndishonorary Discordian both at once.\nYou might even say SubGeniusism is our sister faith or brother\nreligion - or at least our Marine-Corps buddy theology, because J.R. âBobâ\nDobbs was my Marine Corps buddy in Atsugi, Japan (where he\ndistinguished himself by shooting his own toe while on guard duty -\nalthough he was only aiming for a fly on the tip of his boot). Dobbs want on\nto become a supersalesman and trance medium who until his untimely\nassassination channeled Prescriptures that occasionally mentioned Eris\nDiscordia, if not always as kindly as prudence would dictate.\nOut of these Prescriptures came the SubGenius Church - so named\nbecause you only qualify to join if your IQ is below genius.\nA pipe in his mouth and a maniacal gleam in his eyes were trademarks\nof âBobâ and so his fanatical cult sues for copyright violation anyone whose\neyes gleam in a similar fashion. Other exciting features of the SubGenii\ninclude the
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ir spirited quest for Slack, their brave determination to be\nOvermen, their understandable disgust with Technoboredom, their\nunblushing Crass Commercialism and their keen pride in their Northern\nTibetan abominable snowman ancestry.\nYou can find out more by sending them your bank account.\nIf, on the other hand, you would rather join the Bavarian Illuminati,\nyou have to bury your bank account in a cigar box in your yard. One of their\nunderground agents will find it and contact you.\nOur religion is so completely infiltrated with agents of the Ancient\nIlluminated Seers of Bavaria that if, for instance, you pass out Fair-Play-For-\nSwitzerland flyers for us you are assured of rapid advancement to more\nimportant work for the Illuminati. Both the _Illuminatus!_ trilogy by Robert Shea and Robert Anton\nWilson and the Illuminati Board Game by Steve Jackson mention the\nDiscordian Society almost as often as they speak of the nefarious Bavarian\nConspirators themselves. Prestige of intimate association with the Illuminati\nis enormous because they have absolutely ruled the whole world for the past\nfive thousand years.\nUnlike the Illuminati, who are everywhere, the Right Reverend Jesse\nSumpsâs First Evangelical and Unrepentant Church of No Faith is an\nexclusive Discordian franchise. Upon receiving a precious Mao button that\nsaid, âWe must have faith in the Party and we must have faith in the\nmasses,â Sump exclaimed: âNo faith! No faith in the Party, no faith in the\nmasses, no faith in God and no faith in the ruling class!â and thus the First\nEvangelical and Unrepentant Church of No Faith began. Jesse Sump has\nfaith in Eris Discordia, though, âbecause everybody has just got to believe in\nsomething.â\nPerhaps the chief difference between the Discordian Society and\nSumpâs outfit is one of style. We got it. They donât.\nBut if you like working yourself into a frenzy at camp meetings in\norder to foam at the mouth, speak in tongues, handle snakes, run moonshine\nand experience phantasmagoria
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: , the No Faith Church will make you happy\nas a pig in mud.\nOf course, all the high-church glitter of the\nParatheoianametamystichood of Eris Esoteric is not just yours for the asking.\nWe solicit no donations, demand no tithes, charge no admission, levy no poll\ntax and run only a few nifty religious novelty stores on the side. But certain\nobligations adhere to the more hallowed manifestations of Discordianship.\nEating hot dog buns is prohibited, except on Friday - when it is\ncompulsory. Stepped on cockroaches will earn you no points with our\nBlessed Saint Gulik. You must discipline yourself under a certified\nSlackmaster until you are capable of drinking beer and watching television\nwith total concentration. All bowling alleys are sacred to Discordians and, if\nnecessary, you must give your life to protect them from desecration - if\nanyone ever decides to desecrate bowling alleys. Finally, you must not rest\nuntil all the sheep are brought into the fold. (And when we convert all the\nsheep we are going to the dogs next, then wolves, goats and, at the anointed\nhour, human beings.)\nGoddess also expects you to work on yourself. You must devote your\nfull attention to every task you perform so you will realize - in a flash of\nsudden enlightenment - how confusing it is. You must master one Little\nMoron riddle after another until, with years of study, there is no longer any separation in your perception between subject and object, between you and\nthe Little Moron.\nThen there are bigots, who will persecute you because they hate Eris\nDiscordia, and have no better sense than to judge an entire religion by the\nbehavior of a single deity.\nBut before I was a Discordian, when I entered my room only to be\nreminded by its disarray that it was a mess, I felt a sense of defeat. These\ndays when that happens I just say, âHail Eris!â - our customary salute to any\nembodiment of chaos - and then I cheerfully carry on, secure in the\nknowledge that the constellations look no better.\nBefore I was a Discordian,
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: I wasted a lot of time arguing with\nevangelists about God and Jesus. Now they waste a lot of time arguing about\nEris Discordia with me.\nBefore I was a Discordian, I took life much too seriously. When you\ntake life too seriously you start to wonder what the point of it all is. When\nyou wonder what the point is in life, you fall into a trap of thinking there is\none. When you think there is a point, you finally realize there is no point.\nAnd what point is there in living like that? Nowadays I skip the search for a\npoint and find, instead, the punch lines.\nBefore I was a Discordian, I was distressed by the inefficiency and\ninhumanity of organizations. Now I am vindicated by their inefficiency and\ninhumanity.\nBefore I was a Discordian, I used to be afraid of my own shadow. Ah,\nbut now my shadow is afraid of me!\nHaving at last glimpsed the value of Discordianism, you are hereby\nready to be awed by the importance of the little book you hold in your hands\nthis very moment.\nFive years of Discordian Society activity transpired before the First\nEdition of Principia Discordia rolled off District Attorney Jim Garrisonâs\nmimeograph machine (without his knowledge) in New Orleans in 1964. That\nwas the work of Gregory Hill and Lane Caplinger, a Discordian typist in the\nDAâs office.\nDuring the next five years Greg produced bigger and funnier editions,\nwith a little help from me (but not as much as the enemies of our faith\nsuspect).\nBy no means is the Principia our only scripture. All along Greg has\nbeen writing what he says is a summary of the Universe, but evidently it will\nbe quite some time before he completes it. Additionally, there are piles and\npiles of Discordian leaflets and broadsides cranked out by zealous converts\nfrom everywhere - with new ones arriving in the mail each month - but Goddess only knows where they all are now or remembers what they said.\nThere is also Chaos: Broadsheets of Ontological Anarchism by Hakim Bey\n(Grim Reaper Books) of the Unarmed Expropriation Committee of th
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e John\nHenry McKay Society and Bishop of Persia (in Exile) of the Moorish\nOrthodox Church of America. But out most exalted testament of all is The\nHonest Book of Truth - of which there is, alas, only one copy locked away in\nthe Closed Stacks of the Akashic Records. Only qualified Discordian\nEpiskoposes with activated pineal glands may copy passages from it - and\nthese may only be published when they can be shown beyond a reasonable\ndoubt to have redeeming social value, such as by educating you or arousing\npurient interest.\nBut this Fourth and Fifth Combined Edition of Principia Discordia is\nunquestionably the most influential of all the great, immortal works of\nsignificant literature our classic Greek Goddess has inspired.\nWho would even venture to guess how many wretched and thankless\nlives these few astonishing pages have deprived forever of meaningless\npurpose? Who can say how many seminarians read the Principia and decided\nto change vocations and become clowns, or many landlords it has caused to\nsell their estates and buy yachts or airplanes for smuggling marijuana, or\nhow many politicians it has inspired to vanish alone into the high mountains\nand become sagacious hermits, or how many investment bankers it has\nturned into anarchists?\nSlim Brooks was just an ordinary merchant seaman dwelling in the\nNew Orleans French Quarter until he read Principia Discordia. Then he\nbecame the mysterious Keeper of the Submarine Keys who would never tell\nanyone what submarine or why it was locked.\nRoger Lovin was just a dashing, talented and handsome con artist who\nwas too shallow to settle into any one thing. But for years and years after he\nread the Principia, under his Discordian Name of Fang the Unwashed, he\nconsistently and with unswerving devotion to the task excommunicated\nevery new person any of the rest of us initiated into the Discordian Society.\nRobert Anton Wilson was just a Playboy advisor who wrote safe and\ninsipid answers to inquiries from readers about the size and present\nwherea
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: bouts of John Dillingerâs penis until he read this remarkable tract.\nThen he became Mord the Malignant and wrote a whole library full of\nwidely read books about the Illuminati and how to make Synchronicity work\nfor you in finding quarters on the sidewalk.\nMike Gunderloy was just a compulsive reader of fanzines until the\nfateful day he read Principia Discordia (under the mistaken impression it was another fanzine). Now he is Ukulele the Short of the Discordian Society\nand big-time publisher of Factsheet Five.\nElayne Wechsler was just some broad with a funny bone until she\nread the Principia and asked the question that led to my great definition of\ntheology. âWhy,â she wanted to know, âis the Discordian Society, which\nworships a female divinity, so male dominated?â Recalling that more\nwomen than men are devout about Christianity with its male God and His\nmale Son, I decided that people like religions that blame reality on the\nopposite sex. So let that be a lesson to us males. Behind every great idea\nthere is a broad with a funny bone.\nSo there is no telling how much happier and better adjusted reading\nthis book will make you. Principia Discordia is both a psychological laxative\nand a spiritual corn plaster. Unsolicited testimonials can be mailed to me in\ncare of Out of Order - the sectual organ of the Orthodox Discordian Society\n- at Box 5498, Atlanta GA 30307.\nHow Discordianism will change you is not, however, the real\nquestion. Anybody can be changed by something they read. No wit,\nimagination, creativity, talent or energy is required for that much. How will\nyou change the Discordian Society is the real question - a question you\nshould be asking yourself from page 00001 all the way through page 00075,\na question you should keep asking yourself long after you reverently close\nthe covers of Principia Discordia, wrap it carefully in silk, solemnly return it\nto its golden box and bow five times after resting it in its place of honor on\nyour altar.\nMost neophyte Discordians are e
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ither too cautious or too serious.\nThey constantly ask permission to do this or that like there are rules hidden\naway somewhere in the folds of our robes of office. Or they labor at length\nover ponderous metaphysical schemata with no gags in them, as if the sole\nironclad rule of our Society isnât that you have to be funny, as much as\npossible and as often as possible - or else.\nBut we are indulgent toward monks who catch on in due time. Seldom\ndo I beat anyone with my trusty staff - and certainly never without their help.\nOn the subject of personal encounters with other Discordians - and\nsometimes even the most careful among us cannot avoid them - keep in\nmind the lodge grips of our Disorder. Somewhere in the following pages you\nwill learn the Turkey Curse. Among Zen Buddhists it is said, âWhen you\nmeet another bodhisattva on the road, greet him with neither words nor\nsilence.â That leaves you with a vast selection of barnyard noises from\nwhich to choose. But as you crow like a rooster or quack like a duck or moo like a cow,\nscrutinize your brother or sister Discordian with alert interest - never\ncracking a smile - to see how he or she will respond. An oinking reply that is\ntoo loud indicates a swaggering bravado which falls short of mature eristic\nenlightenment, but that is far better than a feeble and spiritless neigh.\nPerhaps best of all is simply uttering a mondo. That is like picking up\nthe telephone when it rings and saying, âWrong number, please!â However\nmuch you think about a mondo it makes no sense - even clamps and pliers\ncannot get hold of it. Yet at the same time, if it is a good mondo, the longer\nyou think about it the more it seems light it ought to make sense - although\nyou can never figure out why. Beyond that much, a truly great mondo sticks\nto your mind like hot pine pitch - gumming up your thought process for\nweeks on end.\nWhen the Zen Master Joshu was still a monk, his master - Nansen -\nstruck him in answer to some dumb remark or other. Joshu grabbed\nNan
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: senâs arm, glared at the master and said, âFrom now on do not hit people\nby mistake!â Nansen replied as follows: âThe whole world can tell a snake\nfrom a dragon, but you cannot fool a Zen monk.â Thatâs a genuinely great\nmondo.\nFrom this much you can see why meeting other Discordians in person\ncan be harrowing. Besides the pen is only mighter than the sword at a range\ngreater than five feet. When the SubGenius Church held its first Devival,\nReverend Ivan Stang of the Dallas Clench expressed surprise at how nice\nand polite all the fans of his Dobbswork were, adding, âItâs almost\ndisappointing.â Still, the wise take no unnecessary chances.\nAs you can tell, we are much indebted to other religions. Not only\nSubGeniusism and Zen and Taoism have inspired us, but also\nZoroastrianism - which practiced fire worship. We too, pay homage to fire in\ncertain circumstances - such as when it is burning the writings of false\nprophets or is producing inhalable quantities of cannabis smoke. Our\ntradition is rooted in a medieval rite called the Mass of the Travesty in which\nmarijuana was the sacrament. According to The Emperor Wears No Clothes\nby Jack Herer, the Mass of the Travesty âcan be liked to a Mel Brooks,\nSecond City-TV, Monty Python, or Saturday Night Live - e.g., Father Guido\nSarducci-type group - doing irreverent, farcical or satirical take-offs on the\ndogmas, doctrine, indulgences, and rituals of the R.C. Ch. mass and/or its\nabsolute beliefs.â Unfortunately, the humorless Roman Catholic Church\nauthorities of the 15th century thought the Mass of the Travesty was\nheretical - and that was the true story of how marijuana got its bad name,\nwhich it has never since been able to shake off. Actually, the Mass of the Travesty may have been a disguised\nremnant of the original Greek Discordianism. For history indicates there\nmust have been, among those ancient ones, Erisian Mysteries. (But if so,\nthey were never solved.) Eris tells us they existed and were the work of\nMalaclypse the
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Elder, a mystery writer by trade who also tutored the\nphilosopher Diogenes in lamp maintenance, barrel keeping, rock rolling,\npublic masturbation and Cynicism - until Diogenes was with it enough to\nfend for himself.\nNo outpouring of gratitude would be complete without acknowledging\nthe desert religions of the Middle East which keep that part of the world\nalive with action to this day - and from which we inherited our fanatical\ndetermination to be at all times, right or wrong, as unreasonable as possible.\nTranslated into Latin this commitment is the motto on our coins, seals, rings,\nplaques and tomb stones: Semper Non Sequitur!\nMuch of our grandeur is also derived from Hinduism. From the Aryan\nmystery cult we acquired our soma-drinking habit. Soma, in turn, fortified us\nwith the confidence that we are better than people who look different than\nus. From Verdanta we learned how to Sanskrit our temple walls. Tantra\ntaught us our many strange sex secrets. That staying up all night to smoke\nganja and dance and sing can be passed off as religious activity was\nsomething we learned from the Bauls of Bengal. But surely the cult of Kali,\nCosmic Mother, Giver and Taker of Life, resembles Discordianism most.\nWe asked Eris about this and She said Kali is short for the Greek Kallisti,\nwhich was engraved on the party-crashing Golden Apple of Discord dealt\nwith later on in this informative volume. She added that Her own full name\nis actually Eris Kallisti Discordia, but took the Fifth Amendment when we\nasked if this means She and Kali are one in the same.\nOur borrowings from Christianity are so obvious that mention of them\nis almost insulting to whatever modicum of intelligence you possess. But\nfrom that tradition we gained our crafty distrust of the reality principle as\nwell as the rather singular notion of an Only Begotten Son.\nWe asked Goddess if She, like God, had an Only Begotten Son. She\nassured us that She did and gave His name as Emperor Norton I - whom we\nassumed was probably some Byzantine r
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: uler of Constantinople. Diligent\nresearch eventually turned up the historical Norton, as we call Him, in the\nholy city of San Francisco - where He walked his faithful dog along Market\nStreet scarcely more than a century ago.\nGregory Hill has since become the worldâs foremost authority on\nJoshua A. Norton who, on September 17th of 1859, crowned Himself the\nEmperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico. Just before then, He vanished for a number of days - perhaps into the wilderness where maybe\nHe was tempted by the Devil, probably to organize His life and get His\naffairs in order.\nCertainly they looked like thatâs what they needed. For on the day\nbefore his disappearance Norton, heretofore little more than a successful\nbusinessman, cornered the rice market - only to be foiled by the unscheduled\narrival of a whole shipload of rice from the Orient. A lesser man would have\nbeen thrown out of step by that event which for Him became a step to the\nthrone.\nWhen the U.S. Congress failed to obey His Majestyâs Royal Order to\nassemble in the San Francisco Opera House, Norton fired every last member\nof that rebellious organization. Thus, the people of San Francisco knew\nbetter than to incite His Imperial wrath. His Royal Decrees were printed free\nof charge in the newspapers, the currency He issued was accepted in the\nsaloons, local shopkeepers paid the modest taxes He occasionally demanded\nand on at least one occasion a tailor furnished Him with a new set of Royal\nfinery.\nAlthough a madman, Norton wrote letters to Abraham Lincoln and\nQueen Victoria which they took seriously.\nOne night a gang of vigilantes gathered for a pogrom against San\nFranciscoâs Chinatown. All that stood in their way was the solitary figure of\nNorton. A sane man would not have been there in the first place. A rational\nman would have tried to reason with them. A moralist would have scolded\nthem. A man as daft as Norton usually seemed would have loudly ordered\nthem to cease and desist in the name of His Royal Im
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: perial authority. All\nsuch tacks would probably have been futile, and Norton resorted to none of\nthem.\nHe simply bowed His head in silent prayer. The vigilantes dispersed.\nDiscordians believe everybody should live like Norton.\nSo write your legislative representatives demanding harsh laws with\nteeth in them requiring people of all faiths - especially Christians and\nespecially on Sunday - to live as Joshua A. Norton did.\nAbout five years ago I had a dream in which someone was yelling,\nâSIGNS IN THE SKY!â When I looked up I saw balloons and blimps\ncarrying aloft big neon letters that said: âNORTON DIED! WANT NO\nDEAD!â\nBut when Emperor Norton died, tens of thousands of San Franciscans\nflocked to His full Masonic funeral. Pilgrimages to His grave are still\ncommon. Perhaps occasionally the soul of Emperor Norton descends once more\ninto the world to momentarily inhabit the body of an otherwise\nundistinguished infidel. One day I was sitting in a hamburger stand in\nrundown midtown Atlanta. A burned-out speed freak at a nearby table\nlooked at me with a pleasant smile and said, âIâm King of the Universe. I\ndonât know what Iâm doing in a place like this.â\nAnd perhaps thatâs the big attraction of our faith. If you want, you can\nbe King of the Universe. Jesse Sump is Ancient Abbreviated Calif. of\nCalifornia. I am Bull Goose of Limbo and President of the Fair-Play-for-\nSwitzerland Committee. Camden Benares is Pretender to the Throne of\nLesbos. Greg Hill is Polyfather of Virginity-in-Gold. Sabal Etonia is High\nConstable of Constantinople. You can declare yourself Archbishop of\nAbyssinia or Curator of the Moon - we donât care but your mailman will be\nimpressed.\nAccording to L.A. Rollins in Luciferâs Lexicon a Discordian is one\nwho likes to wear Emperor Nortonâs old clothes. If anything could be added\nto that definition, I cannot think what.\nAs I indicated earlier, my own background is Mormon. Since few are\nfamiliar with the off-beat creeds of that unusual sect, Mormonism
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: doesnât\nland itself to broad satire readily. Yet the temptation is forever with me to\nswipe such startling rituals as, say, baptism of the dead.\nBased on the rule that you cannot enter the Celestial Kingdom unless\nyour name is recorded in Salt Lake City, all who passed away without the\nbenefit - at any time in the past - must, for their own good, be sooner or later\nbaptized. (So strong a conviction is this among the Saints that when my\nuncle died and left a lot of unpaid bills my Aunt Lena made off with his\nchurch records one day while doing volunteer secretarial work, secure in the\nfaith his soul would be locked outside the Pearly Gates until or unless she\nbrought them back.)\nBut Mormon baptism of the dead is a cop-out because in spite of\nstressing the importance of complete physical immersion for the living, they\ndunk the deceased by proxy. A Discordian Church of Ladder Night Saints\ncould open graves for the purpose of submerging skeletons and corpses.\nThen it could lower them back down before dawn. That would give us an\nexciting mission which would heighten our commitment by inviting\npersecution - a function served in the early days of Latter Day Saint Church\nhistory by polygamy.\nTechnically the Mormons practiced only polygyny - one husband with\na plurality of wives. Polyandry - one wife with more than one husband - is\nalso a form included by the generic term of polygamy. Discordians are free to practice all varieties of polygamy and polymorphous perversity as well.\nMarriage is an institution which should adjust itself to the needs of\nindividuals and not the other way around. Any Discordian Episkopos may\nperform group marriage ceremonies, short-duration marriages, same-sex\nmarriages and, with special permission, straight monogamous weddings.\nIf Mormonism is out of the mainstream, it still does not rival in that\nway an obscure Japanese religion called Perfect Liberty. May Goddess damn\nme if I am putting you on: Perfect Liberty teaches salvation through playing\ngolf (as close to ou
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r own theory of salvation through nonsense as anyone\nelse has come). For that reason Perfect Liberty owns many of the regular\ngolf courses that dot the U.S. and Japan.\nPersonally, I think we Discordians could work out a similar path to\nliberation via surfing. That sounds like a program that would work for me.\nUnlike Will Rogers, I cannot honestly say Iâve never met a man I didnât like.\nBut certainly I have never met a surfer I didnât like.\nWhen Pope Paul excommunicated Saint Christopher - who happens to\nbe the Patron Saint of Surfers - for what seems to us like the rather\nnegligible fault of never existing, the Discordian Society adopted him, along\nwith Saint Patrick (discharged for the same reason at the same time).\nAlready an experienced beach bum, with many years on the sands of\nFloridaâs Sun Coast, I think I might very well spend the twilight years of my\nlife in the holy land of California mastering the graceful art of riding a\nsurfboard. When I am ready to take on disciples, you can probably find me\nsomewhere along the stretch between Venice and San Diego, praying to Eris\nfor surf. But joining me will entail sacrifices because a Discordian surfer\nwill be prohibited from owning anything but a surfboard, trunks, a\ntoothbrush, a beach towel and an automobile (maybe a hot rod or dune\nbuggy). Because surfing is not just a sport; itâs a lifestyle. And\nDiscordianism is not just a religion; it is a mental illness.\nShould you arrive too late, during the first many years of my next\nlifetime I shall be found in the Simon Bolivar School for Boys of the\nDiscordian Convent of San Medellin, Ciudad de Sandoz, Columbia - where\ninstead of beating pupils for misconduct, the nuns give them blow jobs and\nthen threaten delinquents with a termination of favors. (At least thatâs what\nDiscordian San Juan Batista, Keeper of the Seven Veils, tells us.)\nBut enough of this vocational planning.\nIf the Discordian Society is to become the worldâs next great cargo\ncult it will be due to the efforts
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of the House of Mirrors. Not only have we\nnunneries, but recognized and accepted heresies, powerful lobbies complete\nwith popcorn concessions and everything from progressive belaboring unions to square sewing circles. Many are mentioned in the /Principia/\nproper and I donât think it proper to repeatedly engage in repetitive\nrepetition by repeating things repeated later on because I hate redundancy.\nBut there are also some new ones, such as the Ignorant Rescue\nMission with its rousing slogans: âRescue the ignorant! Save the dead! Cast\nout lepers!â (Members dress in old band or military brass-button jackets and\nhelp attractive females get adequate sex.)\nThere are also the Brunswick Shriners, Moral Regurgitation, Citizens\nagainst Infant Sexuality, the Crack House Integration of the Black Lotus\nSociety, the Misplaced Bolivian Wild Animal Relocation Fund, the Laurel\nFoundation for the Recognition of Unique Achievement, the Gould\nCharitable Trust for Dynamic Population Control, the Patrio-Psychotic\nAnarcho-Materialism Study Group and the Sovereign State of Confusion.\nAlso not mentioned in the Principia - our many business ventures. No\nchurch likes to engage in the unseemly practice of boasting of its great\nwealth, but since I am being paid by the word I will list the names of our\nfinancial assets: the Brooklyn Bridge Holding Company, the Umbrella\nCorporation, the Spare Change Investment Corporation, Junk Mail\nAssossiates, San Andreas Shoreline Properties, the Fast Buck Riding\nAcademy, the Informed Sources News Syndicate, Fly-by-Night Drug\nTransport, Infinite Vistas, Ltd., Everglades Land Investment, Cosa Nostra\nAmusements of New Jersey and the Laughing Buddha Jesus Ranch of Pinga\nGrande, Texas, Inc.\nNo doubt you are a little confused. Jesus, God and the Devil get such\nfrequent billing in our religion - whereas most other faiths never advertise\nthe competition. Thatâs mostly because of the neoGnostical influence of\nSubGeniusism.\nJesus was not the Son of God at all but - as He says a
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: gain and again in\nThe Bible - He was the Son of Man. Actually, His mission was to warn us\nagainst God - a laser-armed computer-robot space station sent to regulate or\ndestroy humanity. (Our very own Dr. Van Mojo finally got rid of YHVH-1\nby sticking hat pins in a tetherball, but thatâs another story.)\nAs for the Devil - that is somebody our religion tried to do without for\na long time. We didnât think we needed a Devil, especially with Eris\nDiscordiaâs reputation being what it is already.\nBut religions without devils are like politicians without enemies or\nperpetual motion machines. If they are possible, they might just work. But\nwho will ever know?\nOur Devil came through the back door after introducing himself as\nMr. Greyface. You will read about him in âThe Curse of Greyface.â After blaming the first few evils on him we realized how handy he was and gave\nhim a lifelong membership before we determined his true identity.\nWhat really fooled us is that his face is gray - and thatâs far from\nbeing his only resemblance to J.R. âBobâ Dobbs, the SubGenius Messiah of\nMediocrity. But then so many gray-flanneled American males look like\nâBobâ, that is hardly evidence of conspiracy.\nOne difference: Greyface never smiles except when he is showing you\nhow stupid you are; âBobâ always smiles except when he is showing you\nhow stupid you are. For that reason the SubGenii call Greyface the Anti-\nâBobâ, but in both our churches seers and sages know he is the Devil.\nNo matter whether he calls himself Greyface or the Anti-âBobâ he\nacts like the Devil, because his most famous line is: âLet me organize it for\nyou!â\nBut no doubt you are also curious about Eris. Where does she hang\nout these days - now that Olympus has gone tourist?\nEris Discordia is in Limbo, where all we virtuous pagans and our gods\nand goddesses go between lifetimes. Think of Key West in the off-season\nand youâve got it.\nImagine an open-air bar at about ten in the morning. An aging\nbarefoot Greek b
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: eauty with an Art Garfunkel hairdo is giving Zeus, the\nbartender, a hard time with a barbed wit that always leaves him bereft of any\nretort besides an extended middle finger.\nAnother attraction of Limbo is a nonstop party for the faithful, but\nZeus has child support bills and Eris never was much of a party animal,\ncontrary to popular belief.\nNor will you find any SubGenii at that party, or anywhere else in\nLimbo. With bikers and Nazis - if they were good Nazis - skinheads and\npillars of the Church of the SubGenius go to Vahallah.\nBad people of every persuasion go to the Region of Thud.\nA sprawling astral subdivision where there is nothing to do but eat and\nwatch television and where all the houses, yards and people look pretty\nmuch alike, Thud keeps up with the Joneses. Most Christians are there, but\nin their creed it is called Paradise.\nOnly souls who, in the eyes of Eris, went out of their way to be a pain\nin the ass during their earthly sojourns are in Hell. Harry J. Aslinger\nqualifies. But still, the perils of Hell are exaggerated. Fire and brimstone are\nsources of heating during cold snaps, but our human rights group, Amnasty\nInterfactional, reports that nothing in Hell is any worse than the hideous\nshade of pink on its walls. There are also such things as Nirvana - an exclusive resort for\nextinguished Zen Masters - and the Happy Hunting Grounds, where\ntraditional Native American braves and warriors are the forest rangers. Dead\ncops (and Gurdjieffians who forgot to remember themselves) go to the\nMoon, a big precinct station in the sky, controlled by space aliens, where\nthere are twice as many laws as here - converted to its present use from what\nwas originally a slain space monsterâs hollow titanium skill.\nYou can only be asking yourself at this point how these guys could\npossibly be taking all this shit seriously. If we werenât serious, do you really\nthink we would have published so many tracts and pamphlets at our own\nexpense for so many years? Do people who are not serious
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: stay awake nights\nthinking up new theologies and scriptures? Who but serious fanatics would\nhave risked their lives by exposing their work to the readership of our first\nmass-circulation publisher, Loompanics?\nLet me answer by asking what being serious has to do with believing\nwhat we write. But that isnât to say we donât at least believe in Goddess -\neven if we are skeptical of what She says. But that is now, after more than\nthree decades of Discordianism. No way did we think there was an Eris\nDiscordia at first. But as Greg says, âAt first I thought I was fucking around\nwith Eris. Now I see that Eris is fucking around with me.â\nA Discordian must believe that Eris Discordia rules the Material\nUniverse - and that She won it from God in a divorce suit during the\nBeforelife, and that the French anarchist Pierre Joseph Proudhon was Her\nattorney at the trial, and that nobody is Her Prophet, and that eating hotdog\nbuns is a sin. All else is a matter of individual conscience.\nGraven images and icons and pictures of Eris are all right as long as\nthey are flattering.\nSafe sex - with a condom, rubber gloves and a wet suit is fine as long\nas you donât fall in love.\nYou may covet your neighborâs ass - providing your neighbor is into\nit.\nYou may drink, but not to escape problems. (Like the Maltafarians of\nthe SubGenius Church, you may only drink to create problems.)\nThere is no prohibition against prayer - which is not to say we think it\nis a wise activity.\nYou donât have to believe in Eristic Avatars to be a Discordian, but it\nhelps. Eristic Avatars are sent down into Reality, the original Rorschach, for\nthe purpose keeping things from becoming so well ordered that they stop\nworking. This they often accomplish by insisting that certain arbitrary\ninterpretations of reality are the only valid ones. That causes Strife which results in Confusion which revitalizes Holy Chaos. Most Eristic Avatars\ndisplay certain signs by which they can be certified, such as employment as\ncivil servan
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ts. So far, the most successful Eristic Avatar has been Confucius.\nEristic Avatars can also be ascertained by the fact that they are always\nignorant of their mission and have no idea they are serving Eris or, for that\nmatter, that they are even promoting confusion.\nThat is made possible by the Law of Eristic Escalation, of which you\nmust be innocent to serve as Eristic Avatar. (For an unknown reason, it does\nnot work as well for those of us who are guilty of it.)\nThis Law pertains to any arbitrary or coercive imposition of order. It\nis: Imposition of Order = Escalation of Chaos.\nFendersonâs Amendment adds that the tighter the order in question is\nmaintained, the longer the consequent chaos takes to escalate, BUT the more\nit does when it does!\nArmed with the Law of Eristic Escalation and Fendersonâs\nAmendment any imbecile - not just a sociologist - can understand politics.\nSo I will translate into the lingua franca of the Western world: An\nimposition of order creates a chaos deficit, which compounds until it is paid\noff (by enduring all the outstanding chaos).\nOf course, Eris thinks all chaos is outstanding. But we mortals find\ntoo much of a good thing a little overwhelming. Thus we cringe when we\nencounter an anerism - a pronouncement, that is, which is innocent of the\nLaw of Eristic Escalation.\nIf you hear that outlawing prostitution will eradicate rape, you are\nlistening to an anerism - a manifestation of Aneristic Delusion. (If you read\nâThe Sacred Chaoâ on pages 00049 and 00050 - instead of skipping over it\nin the recommended way - you will comprehend the anamysticmetaphorics\nof aneristics.)\nAn anerism nearly always enters the world through the mouth of a\npolitician - but it can come by way of any authority figure such as a minister\nor a teacher or a parent or a boss or Ronald McDonald.\nâWe need more laws with stiffer penalties to rid our community of\ndrugs,â says an innocent pawn of Eris. To be sure, these laws make\nsmuggling and selling and buying drugs more risky.
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: That, in turn, drives up\ntheir prices - thus making them more profitable. So more money and work\ngoes into expanding the market for the contraband - in keeping with the Law\nof Eristic Escalation.\nOr, as the Taoist sage Chuang Tzu simply said, âThe more laws there\nare, the more crime there is.â (Identification and elucidation of anerisms is a favorite pastime of\npolitically conscious Discordians - who note that the whole text of my\nâEpistle to the Paranoidsâ on page 00069 is a psychological anerism.\nGoddess punished me for it, about five years later, by turning me into a\nparanoid myself. A conspiracy helped Her. As of this writing, I am still\nparanoid - according to my friends.) (Or are they my enemies?)\nProliferation of crime in the wake of multiplication of laws is more\nthan a matter of expanded definition. Governments are impositions of order\ndesigned to discourage theft and killing. But they wind up taking more in\ntaxes than all the freelance crooks around could steal. Their wars involve\nmore killing than all the meanest toughs and hoodlums can hope to rival.\nLaws were unknown to the True People of Old, says Chuang Tzu. All\nduring the paleolithic and the neolithic there could hardly have been any\nlaws, because the cave paintings in France and Spain depict no battle scenes.\nWe know that in the time of Moses many laws did not seem necessary\nor desirable because the second time he came down from Mount Sinai he\nsaid: âThe good news is I got Him down to ten; the bad news is that one of\nthem is still THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY.â\nIn Limbo there are only five laws: 1) No making anybody do anything\nthey donât want, except mind their own business; 2) No shitting or pissing in\nthe streets; 3) No spitting on the floors; 4) No undated notices on the bulletin\nboard; 5) No eating of hotdog buns. That sounds like a program that will\nwork for me because there is nothing in there against swiping jokes.\nNearly all the graphics in Principia Discordia, by the way, were ripped\noff. (I
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: donât know why, because Greg and I are both passable artists.) The\nDiscordian Society does not condone plagiarism. (Our rates for ills are quite\nreasonable.) Discordians hold all unoriginality in contempt. (Our familiarity\nwith Discordian themes is unsurpassable.) Henceforth, no Discordian shall\nrip off graphics. (Contact me, or Greg, for your eristic artistic needs.)\nAll I can say in our defense is at least we were honest about it. As we\nreached the end of the Third Edition, Greg pasted in a little blurb that\ncredited the graphics to Rip-Off Press - which he snipped out of something\nthat was actually printed by Rip-Off Press. Howâs that for a rip-off?\nYou will also notice an unusual number of unusual rubber stampings\nscattered about among the following pages. That was Greg showing off his\nrubber stamp collection. Few hobbies are as psychologically gratifying -\nespecially when some bureaucrat is making you wait, with his or her back to\nyou for a moment - as collection rubber stamps. This is also an exciting way\nto recoup some of your tax losses. But you must abide by the laws of the\nRubber Stamp Congress. All Discordians are permitted to collect rubber stamps provided they donât mention the Discordian Society if they are\ncaught. Just point out to them that among people of all faiths stamp\ncollecting is a popular hobby. And tell them your religious preference is\nnone of their business. Tell them that collecting stamps in the name of your\nnameless religion is your Constitutional right and then, to make your point,\ntake the Fifth Amendment. They will find themselves in a legalistic\nquandary.\nOn most occasions mentioning your Discordian Society affiliation is\nperfectly acceptable. If perchance, you are idiotic enough to somehow\nfoolishly blunder and end up in the military, insist they stamp\nDISCORDIAN on your dog tags. Because we are sick and tired of hearing\nthere are no Discordians in foxholes.\nYou might also wish to list âDiscordianâ as your religion on job\napplications - esp
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ecially if you are already on unemployment and donât want\nthe damned jobs anyhow.\nA secret method of identifying your Discordianship for the benefit of\nother Discordians is by wearing a pull-off aluminum beer-can tab, strung\nthrough its ring, around your neck. That is called an All-Seeing Eye of Eris\n(complete with Tear) and it will help other members of the Discordian\nSociety keep out of your way.\nOr if you are an extrovert - and are not even ashamed of it - you can\nget up on a soap box and rant for Goddess right out in public. Personally I\nprefer standing on a wooden box but, anyway, you get at least five points for\nevery rant you deliver. Extra points are awarded for handling hecklers with\naplomb - or with anything else besides your fists.\nA secret of dealing with hecklers, incidentally, was imparted to me by\na professional rabble rouser who used to speak in Hyde Park. You memorize\na bunch of standardized put-downs good for all occasions. So no matter what\nyour tormentor says, you can fire back with something like: âHot air makes\na balloon go up. Whatâs holding you down?â\nAnother secret of ranting was revealed by Rev. Ivan Stang when, of a\nrejected submission to The Stark Fist, he said: âIt wandered, but not\nenough.â A fine rant doesnât just wander, it positively meanders. (Use this\nintroduction as a model.) Keep changing the subject so your listeners, with\ntheir short attention spans, wonât get bored. If you change themes between\n45 and 72 times a minute (a rhythm close to the human heartbeat) - and\nmystify them by mixing metaphors - pretty soon those suckers will be putty\nin the palm of your hand at your feet wrapped around your little finger.\nYou can also learn a great deal by studying magnificent orators of the\npast. Huey P. Long taxed Standard Oil ten dollars for each barrel they pumped in Louisiana and then gave them back 90% of it under the table.\nAaron Burr shot Alexander Hamilton.\nMark Anthony kept saying, â...but these are honorable men,â all\nthrough h
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: is speech. Remember how effective that selective repetition was in\nswaying the emotions of the actors in Shakespeareâs play who were cast as\nRoman citizens.\nDo not for a moment think you cannot be an exceptional orator if you\ncan just find some way to keep repeating yourself hypnotically and changing\nthe subject of your speech frequently at the same time.\nWinston Churchill pointed out another attribute of good rhetoric: it is\nsincere. You must yourself really be against the Germans buzz-bombing\nLondon before you can persuade the English people it is a rotten notion.\nNatural aptitude also plays its part. America has known no greater\npublic speaker than Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose son once quipped, âFather\nwanted to be the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral.â\nAnd thatâs important to keep in mind, because if you want to be the bride at\nevery funeral and the corpse at every wedding you just are not made of the\nright ingredients. Your timing is off.\nIn that case you could have better luck with eyeball-to-eyeball\nconversations, the versatile art of one-on-one seduction which you want to\nlearn anyway. Here, too hypnotic repetition is a key to unlimited potential.\nPick any theme out of the air for repeating - a word, a name or a number will\ndo. Let us say, for this example, that you choose the number five into your\npitch. Again and again, five times five, over and over, drive that mother\nhome until your victim is entranced in the Fifth Dimension. Then dazzle\nthem with all the techniques in âA Primer for Erisian Evangelistsâ on page\n00065.\nSuch mood setters as lighting and music are also important. For\nmaximum results, illuminate the room with strobe lights. Play Beethovenâs\nFifth Symphony in the background. They will be putty eating out of your\nhand.\nIf you are repelled by having anything to do with human beings\nwhatsoever - as individuals or in groups - then you were probably meant to\nbe a great Discordian writer such as myself.\nThat being the case, my ad
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: vice to you is consider that rousing literary\nform known as the manifesto. Not only should you read The Communist\nManifesto so you can find our how to get bankers to finance your activities,\nyou should also study the lesser-known but equally great specimens of this\ngenre. What especially comes to mind in this respect is that underground classic anonymous authorship, âManifesto of the Artistic Elite of the\nMidwest.â\nAs it has not yet been anthologized, I reproduce it here in full just as it\nappeared in issue #2 of False Positive (c/o Donna Kossy, Box 953, Allston,\nMA 02134):\nManifesto of the Artistic Elite of the Midwest\nArtistic elite is a misnomer. We claim unity with the American\nMidwest where we were born and raised. We support the secession of\nthe Midwest from the faltering carcass of the American way. We feel\nthat the Midwest should sign its own treaties and create its own\nalliances. We support liberation for Quebec! We donât believe in the\nbalance of terror hypothesis and wish to be counted out of all future\nnuclear war. We believe in the sanity and stability of the Midwest and\nrefute those of either coast who see the heartland as oppressive,\nbackward, uncultured (we are redneck, motherfucker), etc. This is\npropaganda created by the intellectual power elite of the East in their\ncynical and ruthless attempt to keep the chains on middle america. We\nclaim solidarity with the Third World as an exploited people! As one\nof the richest Third World nations we vow to beat our Winebagos in\nplowshares in order to do our part in the growing Third World\nalliance. We call for the cessation of the telecommunications\nmonopoly and destruction of all over the air methods of\npropagandizing. No more Lucy. No more Beaver. No more corporate\npropagandizing for the consumerist ethic. Free TV! A new localized\nmedia system will be created. No more sensationalist news coverage.\nConstant and open exchange of ideas and a refutation of present mass-\nsubscribed theories of the free exchange ideas. No m
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ore enslavement\nto the Marlboro cowboy! No more enslavement to the false illusion of\nAmerican individuality. Real individuality, not hype. No more\nCharlieâs Angels. No more escapism. This is a call for the Midwest\npeoples to be concerned with their own lives, not the lives the West\nthinks we have and the East demands we have. This is a call for\nsolidarity of all Midwestern peoples so that we can refute the ideas of\nthe East, to call a halt to the convenient image of the Midwest as a\npassive land filled with bumpkins and hayseeds. Of easily led puppets,\nof a land easily dominated by the ideas and wills of our English\nspeaking cousins. Weâre not your puppets anymore! We need to\nrestructure our Eastern dominated universities. Solidarity with the\nCanadian Midlands. Solidarity with the Ukraine! An end to the industrial monopoly of the worldâs resources. An end to the blight of\nconsumerism. An end to the present sectioning of the world and unity\nwith all oppressed peoples!\nSponsored by the Organization of Indiana Artistic Elites.\nNote the presence here, in spite of a lack of explicit Discordianism, of\nall the characteristics of an excellent manifesto: mixed emotions expressed\nwith all the vitriolic vehemence of unmixed emotions.\nSo if there is a cause about which you are ambivalent, do like Karl\nMarx did. Pen its manifesto.\nNo Discordian Manifesto yet exists. We need at least five. That will\ngenerate controversy and confuse Greyface.\nMy own favorite Holy Name - Omar Khayyam Ravenhurst - functions\nin that way. It is a walking identity crisis. Anybody can say or do anything in\nthe name of Omar Khayyam Ravenhurst. For better or worse, that never fails\nto confuse the authorities.\nThis tradition started in 1960 when I was basic training clerk in\nMarine Air Base 11. I typed in the Ravenhurst moniker on a training lecture\nroster, listing him as a truck driver in motor transport - serial number\n1369697, rank: private.\nWhen Ravenhurst, Omar K., failed to answer the role call somebody\ncalled
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the captain in charge of motor transport to find out where Ravenhurst\nwas. Of course nobody in the motor pool ever heard of any such private.\nMotor transport called administration. No Ravenhurst on record there,\neither. A clerk-typist from administration Corporal Chadwick, came by to\nask me about the mysterious Marine.\nUpon returning to his desk, Chadwick completed an IRC card - a\ncondensed record - which would have to do until Ravenhurstâs entire file\narrived from his last duty station: Marine Barracks, East British Outer\nCambodia.\nAn unusual man, this Ravenhurst - with his IQ of 157. How many\nother truck drivers spoke 17 languages but, in ten years of service, had never\nbeen recommended for promotion?\nYou would imagine that one glance at such statistics would arouse\nsuspicion. But some days later there occurred within my earshot a\nconversation between two lieutenants and the swaggering staff sergeant who\nheaded basic training (who, so as to protect his identity from ridicule, I shall\ncall Karen Elliot instead of Sergeant Garcia).\nâWhere do you figure he learned 17 languages - including Upper and\nLower Swahili?â one of the officers wondered aloud. âIâll bet his parents were missionaries,â contributed Karen Elliot.\nâMost men make private first class in about six months. This guy has\nbeen a private for ten years! Iâm going to recommend him for promotion,â\nannounced the other lieutenant.\nâYou better have a talk with him first, sir,â Karen Elliot warned. âYou\njust never can tell about them intelligent guys.â\nChadwick, who was lurking nearby, suddenly shouted: âTHERE HE\nIS! THATâS HIM! THATâS RAVENHURST RIGHT THERE!â\nA big chunky truck driver whose nickname was Buddha happened to\nbe dampening the dust in that vicinity with a water-tank equipped with a\nsprinkler in back.\nEager to score some points with the officers, Karen Elliot ran over and\nyelled at the Buddha.\nBuddha stopped the truck and shut off the engine and then said,\nâWhat?â\nâYOU WONâ
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: T GROW ANY GRASS THAT WAY!â Elliot repeated\nwith a weak laugh.\nâOh,â spake the Buddha, before starting up the truck again and\ndriving off.\nStories like that spread rapidly and so did the Ravenhurst name. On\nhis behalf, I for my part answered a survey on improving basic training.\nMore realistic combat conditions on the obstacle course and field training in\nvenereal disease control where among his recommendations.\nLater on, I added to our files an application by Ravenhurst for officer\ntraining school. Reason: âI have been a private for ten years, so the only way\nI expect to be promoted is if I try for second lieutenant.â Across the page\nwas stamped: APPROVED. Nevertheless, for some unexplained reason,\nRavenhurst remained a private.\nAfter I was discharged I ran into Bud Simco, who remained in the\nsame unit a short while longer than me. âAbout a month after you mustered\nout, there was a dress rehearsal for the biggest inspection of the year.\nâBy then Ravenhurst had a wall locker with his name on it and a\nbunk. Somebody even added a touch of realism by putting an old pair of size\nsix shoes with holes in them under Ravenhurstâs bunk.\nâThere was only one other guy in that cubicle and he was pretty bent\nout of shape because Ravenhurst was never there in the mornings to help\nsweep. Once or twice he even brought it up with the top sergeant.\nâWhen the big day came, they even shut down radar center.\nEverybody had to stand inspection. No exceptions. âColonel Fenderson and the top sergeant walked down the isle,\ninspecting one cubicle at a time. It was junk on the bunk,â he added,\nindicating the most thorough inspection there is - with every piece of gear\nspread out neatly on the bunk. âOnly one bunk with bedding on it was\nempty. Only one man was missing.\nâThey wanted to know who Ravenhurst was and, more importantly,\nwhere he was. Nobody knows, but the other guy in his cubicle reminds the\ntop sergeant than Ravenhurst is a malingerer.\nâThen they ask if anybody has ever
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: seen this Ravenhurst. Private\nMonty Cantsin pipes up. Every afternoon Ravenhurst sits right there on his\nbunk.\nâWell then, what does this Ravenhurst look like? Cantsin stretches out\nboth arms and says, âOh, heâs a big mountain of a man!â But just then the\ntop sergeant bends over and picks up these little size six shoes.\nâThey call up motor transport. âFor the hundredth goddamned time,â\nthe captain tells the top sergeant, âthere is nobody named Ravenhurst in\nmotor transport.â So the brass huddle together and decide Ravenhurst must\nhave mustered into squadron without checking in with his assigned work\nstation - so he could just fuck off all the time. So they are ready to hang him\n- as soon as they find him.â\nA futile base-wide manhunt was conducted before Sergeant Karen\nElliot heard they were searching for Ravenhurst. Somehow - perhaps by\nexamining the basic training files - he discovered that Ravenhurst was a\nhoax earlier and now he spilled the beans in exchange, Iâm sure, for many\npoints.\nA few days later a letter of commendation, dictated by Colonel\nFenderson, appeared on the squadron bulletin board - congratulating Private\nOmar Khayyam Ravenhurst for outstanding conduct.\nIn 1968, when Robert Anton Wilson and I decided to form a\nconspiracy with no purpose - so that investigators would never be able to\nfigure out what it was doing - I told him about Ravenhurst and invited him,\nor anyone else he recruited, to do anything, anywhere, any time under the\nalready-ubiquitous name. We decided to call that conspiracy, however\nunoriginally, the Bavarian Illuminati - a caper that culminated eventually in\nthe Illuminatus! Trilogy.\nAs for Ravenhurst, the last I heard was the KGB was trying to find\nhim so they could make him Chairman of the American Communist Party.\nIâm sure they got the wrong Fenderson.\nOmar Khayyam Ravenhurst, Pvt., USMC (Ret.) January 23, 1991 THE MAGNUM OPIATE OF MALACLYPSE THE YOUNGER\nPRINCIPIA DISCORDIA\nOR\nHow I Found Goddess\nAnd What I Did To He
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r\nWhen I Found Her\nBe ye not lost Among Precepts of Order...\nTHE BOOK OF UTERUS 1;5 Some excerpts from an Interview with Malaclypse the Younger by THE GREATER\nMETROPOLITAN YORBA LINDA HERALD-NEWS-SUN- TRIBUNE-JOURNAL-\nDISPATCH-POST AND SAN FRANSISCO DISCORDIAN SOCIETY CABAL BULLETIN\nAND INTERGALACTIC REPORT & POPE POOP\nGREATER POOP: Are you really serious or what?\nMAL-2: Sometimes I take humor seriously. Sometimes I take seriousness humorously.\nEither way is irrelevant.\nGP: Maybe you are just crazy.\nM2: Indeed! But do not reject these teachings as false because I am crazy. The reason\nthat I am crazy is because they are true.\nGP: Is Eris true?\nM2: Everything is true.\nGP: Even false things?\nM2: Even false things are true.\nGP: How can that be?\nM2: I donât know man, I didnât do it.\nGP: Why do you deal with so many negatives?\nM2: To dissolve them.\nGP: Will you develop that point?\nM2: No.\nGP: Is there an essential meaning behind POEE?\nM2: There is a Zen Story about a student who asked a Master to explain the meaning of\nBuddhism. The Masterâs reply was âThree pounds of flax.â\nGP: Is that your answer to my question?\nM2: No, of course not. That is just illustrative. The answer to your question is FIVE\nTONS OF FLAX! FOURTH EDITION\nODD# II/2, xii; 68Chs3136\nPRINCIPIA DISCORDIA\nor\nHOW I FOUND THE GODDESS & WHAT I DID TO HER\nWHEN I FOUND HER\nbeing a Beginning Introduction to\nThe Erisian Mysterees\nWHICH IS MOST INTERESTING\nas Divinely Revealed to\nMy High Reverence MALACLYPSE THE YOUNGER, KSC\nOmnibenevolent Polyfather of Virginity in Gold\nand HIGH PRIEST of\nTHE PARATHEO-ANAMETAMYSTIKHOOD OF ERIS ESOTERIC (POEE)\nDedicated to The Prettiest One - JOSHUA NORTON CABAL -\nSurrealists, Harlequinists, Absurdists and Zonked Artists Melee\nPOEE\nis one manifestation of\nTHE DISCORDIAN SOCIETY\nabout which\nyou will learn more\nand understand\nless\nWe\nare a tribe\nof philosophers, theologians,\nmagicians, scientists,\nartists, clowns,\nand similar maniacs\nwho are intrigued\nwith\nERIS
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nGODDESS OF CONFUSION\nand with\nHer\nDoings\n00001 3 The Sacred Chao (illustration)\n4 Five Commandments (The Pentabarf)\n5 Zen Story\n6 Telegram to Jehova\n7 Birth of The Erisian Movement\n11 Battle Hymn of The Eristocracy\n12 On Prayer\n13 Heaven is down...\n14 Nortonâs Money\n15 Eris - Greek Geneology\n16 Law of Fives\n17 Myth of The Apple of Discord\n19 Erisian Hymn\n20 POEE Chart\n21 POEE Symbol\n22 POEE\n23 Application Form\n24 POEE Priests\n26 Erisian Affirmation\n27 Legionnaire Certificate\n27 St. Gulik\n28 How To Start a POEE Cabal Without\nMessing Around With The Polyfather\n29 Baptismal Rite\n31 Mysteree Oath\n32 The Discordian Society\n33 The Golden Apple Corps\n33 Numeral V Sign\n34 Calendar\n35 Holy Names\n36 Pope Cards\n37 Parable of The Bitter Tea\n38 Sermon on Ethics & Love\n39 Apostles of Eris\n41 How Honest Book of Truth was Revealed\n42 Curse of Greyface\n43 Mandala\n44 Cosmology (Book of Uterus)\n46 Orders of Discordia\n47 Entropy (Norbert Wiener)\n48 Zarathudâs Enlightenment\n49 The Sacred Chao (text)\n52 Hodge/Podge Transformer\n53 Brunswick Shrine\n54 Starbuckâs Pebbles\n55 Eris during 3125 years (Brazil letter)\n56 Cosmogeny (Voidâs Daughters)\n59 Syadastian Chant\n60 Classification of Saints\n61 Occultism\n62 Astrology\n63 Greyface and Negativism\n64 The Turkey Curse\n65 Arguments for Evangelists\n66 \"Sink\" (game)\n67 Chain Letter (Joint Effort)\n68 Avatar Classification\n69 Epistle to the Paranoids\n71 Super Secret Crypto Cypher Code\n72 Illuminati (letter)\n74 Salvation\n00002 THE FIVE COMMANDMENTS (THE PENTABARF)\nThe PENTABARF was discovered by the hermit\nApostle Zarathud in the Fifth Year of the\nCaterpillar. He found them carved in gilded stone,\nwhile building a sun deck for his cave, but their\nimport was lost for they were written in a\nmysterious cypher. However, after 10 wks & 11\nhrs of intensive scrutiny he discerned that the\nmessage could be read by standing on his head and viewing it upside down.\nKNOW YE THIS O MAN OF FAITH!\nI - There is no Goddess but Godd
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ess and She is Your Goddess. There is\nno Erisian Movement but The Erisian Movement and it is The Erisian\nMovement. And every Golden Apple Corps is the beloved home of a\nGolden Worm.\nII - A Discordian Shall Always use the Official Discordian Document\nNumbering System.\nIII - A Discordian is Required during his early Illumination to Go Off\nAlone & Partake Joyously of a Hot Bog on a Friday; this Devotive\nCeremony to Remonstrate against the popular Paganisms of the Day: of\nCatholic Christendom (no meat on Friday), of Judaism (no meat of\nPork), of Hindic Peoples (no meat of Beef), of Buddhists (no meat of\nanimal), and of Discordians (no Hot Dog Buns).\nIV - A Discordian shall Partake of No Hot Dog Buns, for Such was the\nSolace of Our Goddess when She was Confronted with The Original\nSnub.\nV - A Discordian is Prohibited of Believing What he Reads.\nIT IS SO WRITTEN! SO BE IT. HAIL DISCORDIA!\nPROSECUTORS WILL BE TRANSGRESSICUTED.\nTEST QUESTION from TopangaCabal THE TWELVE FAMOUS\nBUDDHA MINDS SCHOOL : If they are our brothers, how come we canât\neat them?\n00004 A ZEN STORY\nBy Camden Benares, The Count of Five\nHeadmaster, Camp Meeker Cabal\nA serious young man found the conflicts of mid 20th Century America\nconfusing. He went to many people seeking a way of resolving within\nhimself the discords that troubled him, but he remained troubled.\nOne night in a coffee house, a self-ordained Zen Master said to him, âGo to\nthe dilapidated mansion you will find at this address which I have written\ndown for you. Do not speak to those who live there; you must remain silent\nuntil the moon rises tomorrow night. Go to the large room on the right of the\nmain hallway, sit in the lotus position on top of the rubble in the northeast\ncorner, face the corner, and meditate.â\nHe did as the Zen Master instructed. His meditation was frequently\ninterrupted by worries. He worried whether or not the rest of the plumbing\nfixtures would fall from the second floor bathroom to join the pipes and\nother trash he was sit
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ting on. He worried how he would know when the\nmoon rose on the next night. He worried about what the people who walked\nthrough the room said about him.\nHis worrying and meditation were disturbed when, as if in a test of his faith,\nordure fell from the second floor onto him. At that time two people walked\ninto the room. The first asked the second who the man sitting there was. The\nsecond replied âSome say he is a holy man. Others say he is a shithead.â\nHearing\nthis, the man was enlightened.\n00005 -\nTHE REVELATION\nTHE BIRTH OF THE ERISIAN MOVEMENT â\n10. The Earth quakes and the Heavens rattle;\nthe beasts of nature flock together and the\nnations of men flock apart; volcanoes usher up\nheat while elsewhere water becomes ice and melts;\nand then on other days it just rains.\n11. Indeed do many things come to pass.\nHBT; The Book of Predications, Chap. 19\nJust prior to the decade of the nineteen-sixties, when Sputnik was alone and\nnew, and about the time that Ken Kesey took his first acid trip as a medical\nvolunteer; before underground newspapers, Viet Nam, and talk of a second\nAmerican Revolution; in the comparative quiet of the late nineteen-fifties, just\nbefore the idea of RENAISSANCE became relevant...\nTwo young Californians, known later as Omar Ravenhurst and Malaclypse\nthe Younger, were indulging in their habit of sipping coffee at an allnight bowling\nalley and generally solving the worldâs problems. This particular evening the main\nsubject of discussion was discord and they were complaining to each other of the\npersonal confusion they felt in their respective lives. \"Solve the problem of\ndiscord,\" said one, the other, \"chaos and strife are the roots of all confusion.\"\nFIRST I MUST SPRINKLE YOU\nWITH FAIRY DUST\nSuddenly the place became devoid of light. Then an utter silence enveloped\nthem, and a great stillness was felt. Then came a blinding flash of intense light, as\nthough their very psyches had gone nova. Then vision returned.\nThe two were dazed and neither moved nor
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: spoke for several minutes. They\nlooked around and saw that the bowlers were frozen like statues in a variety of\ncomic positions, and that a bowling ball was steadfastly anchored to the floor only\ninches from the pins that it had been sent to scatter. The two looked at each other,\ntotally unable to account for the phenomenon. The condition was one of\nsuspension, and one noticed that the clock had stopped.\n00007\nNew Story of Chaos no girdle ever cured\na pregnancy\n-2-\nThere walked into the room a chimpanzee, shaggy and grey about the\nmuzzle, yet upright in his full five feet, and poised with natural majesty. He carried\na scroll and walked to the young men.\n\"Gentlemen,\" he said, \"why does Pickeringâs Moon go about in reverse\norbit? Gentlemen, there are nipples on your chests; do you give milk? And what,\npray tell, Gentlemen, is to be done about Heisenbergâs Law?\" He paused.\n\"SOMEBODY HAD TO PUT ALL OF THIS CONFUSION HERE!\"\nAnd with that he revealed his scroll. It was a diagram, like a yin-yang with\na pentagon on one side and an apple on the other. And then he exploded and the\ntwo lost consciousness.\nERIS - GODDESS OF CHAOS, DISCORD & CONFUSION\nThey awoke to the sound of pins clattering, and found the bowlers engaged\nin their game and the waitress busy with making coffee. It was apparent that their\nexperience had been private.\nThey discussed their strange encounter and reconstructed from memory the\nchimpanzeeâs diagram. Over the next five days they searched libraries to find the\nsignificance of it, but were disappointed to uncover references only to Taoism, the\nKorean flag, and Technocracy. It was not until they traced the Greek writing on\nthe apple that they discovered the ancient Goddess known to the Greeks as ERIS\nand to the Romans as DISCORDIA. This was on the fifth night, and when they\nslept that night, each had a vivid dream of a splendid woman whose eyes were as\nsoft as a feather and as deep as eternity itself, and whose body was the spectacular\ndance of atoms and un
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: iverses. Pyrotechnics of pure energy formed her flowing\nhair, and rainbows manifested and dissolved as she spoke in a warm and gentle\nvoice:\nI have come to tell you that you are free. Many ages ago, My consciousness\n00008 -3-\nleft man, that he might develop himself. I return to find this development\napproaching completion, but hindered by fear and by misunderstanding.\nYou have built for yourselves psychic suits of armor, and clad in them, your\nvision is restricted, your movements are clumsy and painful, your skin is bruised,\nand your spirit is broiled in the sun.\nI am chaos. I am the substance from which your artists and scientists build\nrhythms. I am the spirit with which your children and clowns laugh in happy\nanarchy. I am chaos. I am alive, and I tell you that you are free.\nDuring the next months they studied philosophies and theologies, and\nlearned that ERIS or DISCORDIA was primarily feared by the ancients as being\ndisruptive. Indeed, the very concept of chaos was still considered equivalent to\nstrife and treated as a negative. \"No wonder things are all screwed up,\" they\nconcluded, \"they have got it all backwards.\" They found that the principle of\ndisorder was every much as significant as the principle of order.\nWith this in mind, they studied the strange yin-yang. During a meditation\none afternoon, a voice came to them:\nIt is called THE SACRED CHAO. I appoint you Keepers of It. Therein you\nwill find anything you like. Speak of Me as DISCORD, to show contrast to the\npentagon. Tell constricted mankind that there are no rules, unless they choose to\ninvent rules. Keep close the words of Syadasti: âTIS AN ILL WIND THAT BLOWS\nNO MINDS. And remember that there is no tyranny in the State of Confusion. For\nfurther information, consult your pineal gland. -4-\nNO HURRY\n\"What is this?\" mumbled one to the other, \"A religion based on The\nGoddess of Confusion? It is utter madness!\"\nAnd with these words, each looked at the other in absolute awe. Omar\nbegan to giggle. Mal began to la
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ugh. Omar began jumping up and down. Mal was\nhooting and hollering to beat all hell. And amid squeals of mirth and with tears on\ntheir cheeks, each appointed the other to be high priest of his own madness, and\ntogether they declared themselves to be a society of Discordia, for what ever that\nmay turn out to be. THE BATTLE HYMN OF THE ERISTOCRACY\nby Lord Omar\nVERSE\nMine brain has meditated on the spinning of the Chao;\nIt is hovering oâer the table where the Chiefs\nof Staff are now\nGathered in discussion of the dropping of the Bomb;\nHer Apple Corps is strong!\nCHORUS\nGrand (and gory) Old Discordja!\nGrand (and gory) Old Discordja!\nGrand (and gory) Old Discordja!\nHer Apple Corps is strong!\nVERSE\nShe was not invited to the party that they held\non Limbo Peak; *\nSo She threw a Golden Apple, âstead of turnâd\ntâother cheek!\nO it cracked the Holy Punchbowl and it made\nthe nectar leak;\nHer Apple Corps is strong!\n* \"Limbo Peak\" refers to Old Limbo Peak, commonly called by the Greeks \"Ol Limbâ Peak.\"\n00011\n\"The tide is turning... the enemy is suffering\nterrible losses...\" -Gen. Geo. A. Custer Persons in a Position to Know, Inc.\nON PRAYER\nMAL-2 was once asked by one of his Disciples if he often prayed to Eris. He replied with\nthese words:\nNo, we Erisians seldom pray, it is much too dangerous. Charles Fort has listed many\nfactual incidences of ignorant people confronted with, say, a drought, and then praying\nfervently -- and then getting the entire village wiped out in a torrential flood. 14. Wipe thine ass with What is Written and\ngrin like a ninny at what is Spoken. Take\nthine refuge with thine wine in the Nothing\nbehind Everything, as you hurry along the Path.\nTHE PURPLE SAGE\nHBT; The Book of Predications, Chap. 19\nHeaven is down. Hell is up.\nThis is proven by the fact\nthat the planets and stars\nare orderly in their\nmovements,\nwhile down on earth\nwe come close to the\nprimal chaos.\nThere are four other\nproofs,\nbut I forgot them.\n--Josh the Dill\nKING KONG KABAL
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nIT IS MY\nFIRM BELIEF\nTHAT IT IS\nA MISTAKE TO\nHOLD FIRM\nBELIEFS The Classical Greeks were not influenced\nby the Classical Greeks\nDO NOT\nCIRCULATE\nWHAT WE KNOW ABOUT ERIS (not much)\nThe Romans left a likeness of Her for posterity -- She was shown as a\ngrotesque woman with a pale and ghastly look, Her garment is ripped and\ntorn, and as concealing a dagger in Her Bosom. Actually, most women look\npale and ghastly when concealing a chilly dagger in their bosoms.\nHer geneology is from the Greeks and is utterly confused. Either She was\nthe twin of Aries and the daughter of Zeus and Hera; or She was the\ndaughter of Nyx, goddess of night (who was either the daughter or wife of\nChaos, or both), and Nyxâs brother, Erebus, and whose brothers and sisters\ninclude Death, Doom, Mockery, Misery and Friendship. And that she begat\nForgetfullness, Quarrels, Lies, and a bunch of gods and goddesses like that.\nOne day Mal-2 consulted his Pineal Gland* and asked Eris if She really\ncreated all of those terrible things. She told him that She had always liked\nthe Old Greeks, but that they cannot be trusted with historic matters. \"They\nwere,\" She added, \"victims of indigestion, you know.\"\nSuffice it to say that Eris is not hateful or malicious. But She is mischievous,\nand does get a little bitchy at times.\n*THE PINEAL GLAND is where each and every one of us can talk to Eris. If\nyou have trouble activating your Pineal, then try the appendix which does\nalmost as well. Reference: DOGMA I, METAPHYSICS #3, \"The Indoctrine\nof The Pineal Gland.\"\n00015\nDIRUIT AEDIFICAT MUTAT QUADRATA ROTUNDUS\n-\nHorace The Inside Story!\n00016\nTHE LAW OF FIVES\nThe Law of Fives is one of the oldest Erisian Mysterees. It was first\nrevealed to Good Lord Omar and is one of the great contributions to\ncome from The Hidden Temple of The Happy Jesus.\nPOEE subscribes to the Law of Fives of Omarâs sect. And POEE also\nrecognizes the Holy 23 (2+3=5) that is incorporated by Episkopos Dr.\nMordecai Malignatius, KNS, into his Disco
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rdian sect, The Ancient\nIlluminated Seers of Bavaria.\nThe Law of Fives states simply that:\nALL THINGS HAPPEN IN FIVES, OR ARE\nDIVISIBLE BY OR ARE MULTIPLES OF FIVE,\nOR ARE SOMEHOW DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY\nAPPROPRIATE TO 5.\nThe Law of Fives is never wrong.\nIn the Erisian Archives is an old memo from Omar to Mal-2: \"I find\nthe Law of Fives to be more and more manifest the harder I look.\"\nThe Nagas of Upper Burma say that the sun\nshines by day because, being a woman, it\nis afraid to venture out by night. 00017\n\"YOU WILL FIND that the STATE is the kind of ORGANIZATION\nwhich, though it does big things badly, does small things badly too.\"\n- JOHN KENNETH GALBRAITH\nTHE MYTH OF THE APPLE OF DISCORD\nIt seems that Zeus was preparing a wedding banquet for Peleus and\nThetis and did not want to invite Eris because of Her reputation as a trouble\nmaker. *\nThis made Eris angry, and so She fashioned an apple of pure gold**\nand inscribed upon it KALLISTI (\"To The Prettiest One\") and on the day of\nthe fete She rolled it into the banquet hall and then left to be alone and\njoyously partake of a hot dog.\nNow, three of the invited goddesses,*** Athena, Hera, and Aphrodite,\neach immediately claimed it to belong to herself because of the inscription.\nAnd they started fighting, and they started throwing punch all over the place\nand everything.\nFinally, Zeus calmed things down and declared that an arbitrator must\nbe selected, which was a reasonable suggestion, and all agreed. He sent them\nto a shepherd of Troy, whose name was Paris because his mother had had a\nlot of gaul and married a Frenchman; but each of the sneaky goddesses tried\nto outwit the others by going early and offering a bribe to Paris.\nAthena offered him Heroic War Victories, Hera offered him Great\nWealth, and Aphrodite offered him The Most Beautiful Woman on Earth.\nBeing a healthy young Trojan lad, Paris promptly accepted Aphroditeâs\nbribe and she got the apple and he got screwed.\nAs she had promised, she maneuvered earthly happenin
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: gs so that\nParis could have Helen (the Helen) then living with her husband Menelaus, -2-\nKing of Sparta. Anyway, everyone knows that the Trojan War followed\nwhen Sparta demanded their Queen back and that the Trojan War is said to\nbe The First War among men.\nAnd so we suffer because of The Original Snub. And so a Discordian is to\npartake of No Hot Dog Buns.\nDo you believe that?\n_______________\n* This is called THE DOCTRINE OF THE ORIGINAL SNUB.\n** There is historic disagreement concerning whether this apple was of metalic gold or\nacapulco.\n*** Actually there were five goddesses, but the Greeks did not know of the Law of Fives.\nRemember:\nKING\nKONG\nDied For\nYour Sins\n5. An Age of Confusion, or an Ancient Age, is one in which\nHistory As We Know It begins to unfold, in which Whatever Is\nComing emerges in Corporal Form, more or less, and such\ntimes are Ages of Balanced Unbalance, or Unbalanced\nBalance.\n6. An Age of Bureaucracy is an Imperial Age in which Things\nMature, in which Confusion becomes entrenched and during\nwhich Balanced Balance, or Stagnation, is attained.\n7. An Age of Disorder or an Aftermath is an Apocalyptic Period\nof Transition back to Chaos through the Screen of Oblivion into\nwhich the Age passeth, finally. These are Ages of Unbalanced\nUnbalance.\nHBT; The Book of Uterus, Chap. 3\n00018 DO YOU REMEMBER?\n1. Polite children will always remember that a church is the ______________ of\n_____________.\n00019 OFFICIAL PROCLAMATION\n--\nODD# III(b)/4,i; 18Aft3135\nPOEE DISORGANIZATIONAL MATRIX\nV) THE HOUSE OF APOSTLES OF ERIS\nFor the Eristocracy and the Cabalablia\nA.\nB.\nC.\nD.\nE.\nThe Five Apostles of Eris\nThe Golden Apple Corps (KSC)\nEpiskoposes of The Discordian Society\nPOEE Cabal Priests\nSaints, Erisian Avatars, and Like Personages\nIV) THE HOUSE OF THE RISING PODGE\nFor the Disciples of Discordia\nA.\nB.\nC.\nD.\nE.\nOffice of My High Reverence, The Polyfather\nCouncil of POEE Priests\nThe LEGION OF DYNAMIC DISCORD\nEristic Avatars\nAneristic Avatars\nNOTE: A, B, an
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d C are POEE PROPER; while D and E are POEE IMPROPER\nIII) THE HOUSE OF THE RISING HODGE\nFor the Bureaucracy\nA. The Bureau of Erisian Archives\nB. The Bureau of The POEE Epistolary, and\nThe Division of Dogmas\nC. The Bureau of Symbols, Emblems, Certificates and Such\nD. The Bureau of Eristic Affairs, and\nThe Administry for The Unenlightened Eristic Horde\nE. The Bureau of Aneristic Affairs, and\nThe Administry for The Orders of Discordia\nII) THE HOUSE OF THE RISING COLLAPSE\nFor the Encouragement of Liberation of Freedom, and/or the Discouragement of the Immanentizing of\nthe Eschaton\nA.\nB.\nC.\nD.\nF.\nThe Breeze of Wisdom and/or The Wind of Insanity\nThe Breeze of Integrity and/or The Wind of Arrogance\nThe Breeze of Beauty and/or The Wind of Outrages\nThe Breeze of Love and/or The Wind of Bombast\nThe Breeze of Laughter and/or The Wind of Bullshit\nI) THE OUT HOUSE\nFor what is left over\nA.\nB.\nC.\nD.\nMiscellaneous Avatars\nThe Fifth Column\nPOEE =POPES= everywhere\nDrawer \"O\" for OUT OF FILE\nE. Lost Documents and Forgotten Truths = The Five Fingered Hand of Eris =\nThe official symbol of POEE is here illustrated. It may be this, or any similar device to\nrepresent TWO OPPOSING ARROWS CONVERGING INTO A COMMON POINT. It\nmay be vertical, horizontal, or else such, and it may be elaborated or simplified as\ndesired.\nThe esoteric name for this symbol is THE FIVE FINGERED HAND OF ERIS,\ncommonly shortened to THE HAND.\nNOTE: In the lore of western magic, the\nis taken to symbolize horns, especially the horns of Satan or\nof diabolical beasties. The Five Fingered Hand of Eris, however, is not intended to be taken as satanic, for\nthe \"horns\" are supported by another set, of inverted \"horns.\" Or maybe it is walrus tusks. I donât know\nwhat it is, to tell the truth.\n00021\n\"Surrealism aims at the\ntotal transformation of the mind\nand all that resembles it\"\n-Breton 00022\nPOEE (pronounced \"POEE\") is an acronym for The PARATHEO-\nANAMETAMYSTIKHOOD OF ERIS ESOTERIC. The first part can be taken
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: to\nmean \"equivalent deity, reversing beyond-mystique.\" We are not really esoteric,\nitâs just that nobody pays much attention to us.\nMY HIGH REVERENCE MALACLYPSE THE YOUNGER, AB, DD, KSC, is\nthe High Priest of POEE, and POEE is grounded in his espiskopotic revelations of\nThe Goddess. He is called The Omnibenevolent Polyfather of Virginity in Gold.\nThe POEE HEAD TEMPLE is the Joshua Norton Cabal of The Discordian\nSociety, which is located in Mal-2âs pineal gland and can be found by temporaly\nand spacialy locating the rest of Mal-2.\nPOEE has no treasury, no by-laws, no articles, no guides save Mal-2âs pineal\ngland, and has only one scruple -- which Mal-2 keeps on his key chain.\nPOEE has not registered, incorporated, or otherwise chartered with the State, and\nso the State does not recognize POEE or POEE Ordinations, which is only fair,\nbecause POEE does not recognize the State.\nPOEE has 5 DEGREES:\nThere is the neophyte, or LEGIONNAIRE DISCIPLE.\nThe LEGIONNAIRE DEACON, who is catching on.\nAn Ordained POEE PRIEST/PRIESTESS or a CHAPLIN.\nThe HIGH PRIEST, the Polyfather.\nAnd POEE =POPE=.\nPOEE LEGIONNAIRE DISCIPLES are authorized to initiate others as Discordian\nSociety Legionnaires. PRIESTS appoint their own DEACONS. The\nPOLYFATHER ordains Priests. I donât know about the =POPES=. POEE & ITâS PRIESTS\nIf you like Erisianism as it is presented according to Mal-2, then you may\nwish to form your own POEE CABAL as a POEE PRIEST and you can go\ndo a bunch of POEE Priestly Things. A \"POEE Cabal\" is exactly what you\nthink it is.\nThe High Priest makes no demands on his Priests, though he does rather\nexpect good will of them. The Office of the Polyfather is to point, not to\nteach. Once in a while, he even listens.\nShould you find that your own revelations of The Goddess become\nsubstantially different than the revelations of Mal-2, then perhaps The\nGoddess has plans for you as an Episkopos, and you might consider\ncreating your own sect from scratch, unhindered. Episkoposes are not\ncompe
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ting with each other, and they are all POEE Priests anyway (as soon\nas I locate them). The point is that Episkopos are developing separate paths\nto the Erisian mountain top. See the section \"Discordian Society.\"\nORDINATION AS A POEE PRIEST\nThere are no particular qualifications for Ordination because if you want to\nbe a POEE Priest then you must undoubtedly qualify. Who could possibly\nknow better than you whether or not you should be Ordained?\nAn ORDAINED POEE PRIEST or PRIESTESS is defined as \"one who\nholds an Ordination Certificate from The Office of the Polyfather.\"\nSeek into the Chao if thou wouldst be wise\nAnd find ye delight in Her Great Surprise!\nLook into the Chao if thou wantest to know\nWhatâs in a Chao and why it ainât so!\n(HBT; The Book of Advice, 1:1)\n00024 World Council of Churches Boutique\nNOTE TO POEE PRIESTS:\nThe Polyfather wishes to remind all Erisians the POEE was conceived not as\na commercial enterprise, and that you are requested to keep your cool when\nseeking funds for POEE Cabals or when spreading the POEE word via the\nmarket place.\n00025 THE ERISIAN AFFIRMATION\nBEFORE THE GODDESS ERIS, I (name or holy name), do herewith declare myself a\nPOEE BROTHER of THE LEGION OF DYNAMIC DISCORD.\nHAIL HAIL HAIL HAIL HAIL ERIS ERIS ERIS ERIS ERIS\nALL HAIL DISCORDIA!\nThe presiding POEE Official (if any) responds:\nALL HAIL DISCORDIA!\nTo diverse gods\nDo mortals bow;\nHoly Cow, and\nWholly Chao.\n- Rev. Dr. Grindlebone\nMonroe Cabal HOW TO START A POEE CABAL\nWITHOUT MESSING AROUND WITH THE POLYFATHER\nIf you cannot find the Polyfather, or having found him, donât want anything to do with\nhim, you are still authorized to form your own POEE CABAL and do Priestly Things,\nusing the Principia Discordia as a guide. Your Official Rank will be POEE CHAPLIN for\nTHE LEGION OF DYNAMIC DISCORD, which is exactly the same as a POEE PRIEST\nexcept that you donât have an Ordination Certificate. The words you are now reading are\nyour ordination.\nHOW TO BECOME A POEE CHAPLIN\n1\n2\n
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 3\n4\n5\nWrite the ERISIAN AFFIRMATION in five copies.\nSign and nose-print each copy.\nSend one to The President of the United States.\nSend one to\nThe California State Bureau of Furniture and Bedding\n1021 âDâ Street, Sacramento CA 94814\nNail one to a telephone pole. Hide one. And burn the other.\nThen consult your pineal gland.\nOLD POEE SLOGAN:\nWhen in doubt, fuck it.\nWhen not in doubtâ¦ get in doubt!\n-\n00028 TRIP\n5\n= THE POEE BAPTISMAL RITE =\nThis Mysteree Rite is not required for initiation, but it is offered by many\nPOEE Priests to proselytes who desire a formal ceremony.\n1) The Priest and four Brothers are arranged in a pentagon with the Initiate\nin the center facing the Priest. If possible, the Brothers on the immediate\nright and left of the Priest should be Deacons. The Initiate must be totally\nnaked, to demonstrate that he is truly a human being and not something\nelse in disguise like a cabbage or something.\n2) All persons in the audience and the pentagon, excepting the Priest,\nassume a squatting position and return to a standing position. This is\nrepeated four more times. This dance is symbolic of the humility of we\nErisians.\n3) The Priest begins:\nI, (complete Holy Name, with Mystical Titles, and degrees, designations,\noffices, &tc.), Ordained Priest of the Paratheo-anametamystikhood of\nEris Esoteric, with the Authority invested at me by the High Priest of It,\nOffice of the Polyfather, The House of The Rising Podge, POEE Head\nTemple; Do herewith Require of Ye:\n1) ARE YE A HUMAN BEING AND NOT A CABBAGE OR\nSOMETHING? The initiate answers YES.\n2) THATâS TOO BAD. DO YE WISH TO BETTER THYSELF? The\ninitiate answers YES.\n3) HOW STUPID. ARE YE WILLING TO BECOME\nPHILOSOPHICALLY ILLUMINIZED? He answers YES.\n4) VERY FUNNY. WILL YE DEDICATE YESELF TO THE HOLEY\nERISIAN MOVEMENT? The initiate answers PROBABLY.\n00029 -2-\n5) THEN SWEAR YE THE FOLLOWING AFTER ME: (The Priest\nhere leads the Initiate in a recital of THE ERISIAN AFFIRMATION.) The\nPriest continues: THEN I DO HER
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: E PROCLAIM YE POEE DISCIPLE\n(name), LEGIONNAIRE OF THE LEGION OF DYNAMIC DISCORD. HAIL\nERIS! HAIL HAIL! HAIL YES!\n4) All present rejoice grandly. The new Brother opens a large jug of wine\nand offers it to all who are present.\n5) The Ceremony generally degenerates.\nMORD SAYS THAT OMAR\nSAYS THAT WE ARE\nALL UNICORNS ANYWAY\n00030\n3. And though Omar did bid of the Collector of\nGarbage, in words that were both sweet and\nbitter, to surrender back the cigar box\ncontaining the cards designated by the Angel as\nThe Honest Book of Truth, the Collector\nwas to him as one who might be smitten\ndeaf, saying only: âGainst the rules,\nyâknow.\nHBT; The Book of Explainations, Chap. 2 The Discordian Society has no definition.\nI sometimes think of it as a disorganization of Eris Freaks. It has been called a guerrilla\nmind theatre. Episkopos Randomfactor, Director of Purges of Our Peopleâs Underworld\nMovement sect in Larchmont, prefers âThe Worldâs Greatest Association of What-ever-\nit-is-that-we-are.â Lady Mal thinks of it as a RENAISSANCE THINK TANK. Fang the\nUnwashed, WKC, wonât say. You can think of it any way you like.\nAN EPISKOPOS OF THE DISCORDIAN SOCIETY\nis one who prefers total autonomy, and creates his own Discordian sect as The Goddess\ndirects him. He speaks for himself and for those that say that they like what he says.\nTHE LEGION OF DYNAMIC DISCORD:\nA Discordian Society Legionnaire is one who prefers not to create his own sect.\nIf you want in on the Discordian Society\nthen declare yourself what you wish\ndo what you like\nand tell us about it\nor\nif you prefer\ndonât.\nThere are no rules anywhere.\nThe Goddess Prevails.\nSome Episkoposes\nhave a one-man cabal\nSome work together.\nSome never do explain.\nWhen I get to the bottom I go back to the top\nof the slide where I stop and I turn and I go\nfor a ride, then I get to the bottom and I see\nyou again! Helter Skelter!\n-- John Lennon THE GOLDEN APPLE CORPS\nThe Golden Apple Corps* is an honorary position for The Keepers of The
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nSacred Chao, so that they can put \"KSC\" after their names.\nIt says little,\ndoes less,\nmeans\nnothing.\n* Not to be confused with The Apple Corps Ltd. of those four singers. We thought of it\nfirst.\n00033 HOLY NAMES\nDiscordians have a tradition of\nassuming HOLY NAMES. This is not\nunique with Erisianism, of course. I\nsuppose that Pope Paul is the son of\nMr. & Mrs. VI?\nAnd also TITLES OF MYSTICAL\nIMPORT. FOR YOUR\nENLIGHTENMENT\nTHE PARABLE OF THE BITTER TEA\nby\nRev. Dr. Hypocrates Magoun, P.P.\nPOEE PRIEST, Okinawa Cabal\nWhen Hypoc was through meditating with St. Gulik, he went there\ninto the kitchen where he busied himself with preparing the feast and in\nhis endeavor, he found that there was some old tea in a pan left standing\nfrom the night before, when he had in his weakness forgot about its\nmaking and had let it sit steeping for 24 hours. It was dark and murky\nand it was Hypocâs intention to use this old tea by diluting it with water.\nAnd again in his weakness, chose without further consideration and\nplunged into the physical labor of the preparations. It was then when\ndeeply immersed in the pleasure of that trip, he had a sudden clear voice\nin his head saying \"it is bitter tea that involves you so.\" Hypoc heard the\nvoice, but the struggle inside intensified, and the pattern, previously\nestablished with the physical laboring and the muscle messages\ncoordinated and unified or perhaps coded, continued to exert their\ninfluence and Hypoc succumbed to the pressure and denied the voice.\nAnd again he plunged into the physical orgy and completed the\ntask, and Lo as the voice had predicted, the tea was bitter.\n00037\n\"The Five Laws have root in awareness.\"\n-Che Fung (Ezra Pound, Canto 85)\nThe Hell Law says that Hell is reserved exclusively\nfor them that believe in it. Further, the Lowest\nRing in Hell is reserved for them that believe in\nit on the supposition that theyâll go there if\nthey donât.\nHBT, The Gospel According to Fred, 3:1 A SERMON ON ETHICS AND LOVE\nOne day M
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: al-2 asked the messenger spirit Saint Gulik to approach the\nGoddess and request Her presence for some desperate advice. Shortly\nafterwards the radio came on by itself, and an ethereal female Voice said\nYES?\n\"O! Eris! Blessed Mother of Man! Queen of Chaos! Daughter of\nDiscord! Concubine of Confusion! O! Exquisite Lady, I beseech You to lift\na heavy burden from my heart!\"\nWHAT BOTHERS YOU, MAL? YOU DONâT SOUND WELL.\n\"I am filled with fear and tormented with terrible visions of pain.\nEverywhere people are hurting one another, the planet is rampant with\ninjustices, whole societies plunder groups of their own people, mothers\nimprison sons, children perish while brothers war. O, woe.\"\nWHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THAT, IF IT IS WHAT YOU WANT\nTO DO?\n\"But nobody wants it! Everybody hates it!\"\nOH. WELL, THEN STOP.\nAt which moment She turned Herself into an aspirin commercial and\nleft the Polyfather stranded alone with his species. CHAPTER 5: THE PIONEERS\n= THE FIVE APOSTLES OF ERIS & WHO THEY BE =\n1. HUNG MUNG\nA Sage of Ancient China and Official Discordian Missionary to the Heathen\nChinee. He who originally devised THE SACRED CHAO. Patron of The\nSeason of Chaos. Holyday: Jan 5.\n2. DR. VAN VAN MOJO\nA Head Doctor of Deep Africa and Maker of Fine Dolls D.H.V., Doctor of\nHoodoo and Vexes, from The Greater Metropolitan Yorba Linda Jesus Will\nSave Your Bod Home Study Bible School; and F.I.H.G.W.P., Fellow of the\nIntergalactic Haitian Guerrillas for World Peace. Patron of The Season of\nDiscord. Holyday: Mar 19.\nNOTE: Erisians of The Laughing Christ\nsect are of the silly contention that Dr.\nMojo is an imposter and that\nPATAMUNZO LINGANANDA is the\nTrue Second Apostle. Lord Omar claims\nthat Dr. Mojo heaps hatred and curses\nupon Patamunzo, who sends only Love\nVibrations in return. But we of the POEE\nsect know that Patamunzo is the Real\nImposter, and that those vibrations of his\nare actually an attempt to subvert Dr. Mojoâs rightful apostilic authority by\nshaking him out of his wits.\n3.
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: SRI SYADASTI SYADAVAKTAVYA SYADASTI SYANNASTI\nSYADASTI CAVAKTAVYASCA SYADASTI SYANNASTI\nSYADAVATAVYASCA SYADASTI SYANNASTI\nSYADAVAKTAVYASCA commonly called just SRI SYADASTI\nHis name is Sanskrit, and means: All affirmations are true in some sense,\n00039 -2-\nfalse in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense,\ntrue and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense,\nand true and false and meaningless in some sense. He is an Indian Pundit\nand Prince, born of the Peyotl Tribe, son of Chief Sun Flower Seed and the\nsquaw Merry Jane. Patron to psychedelic type Discordians. Patron of The\nSeason of Confusion. Holyday: May 31. NOTE: Sri Syadasti should not be\nconfused with BLESSED ST. GULIK THE STONED, who is not the same\nperson but is the same Apostle.\n4. ZARATHUD THE INCORRIGIBLE, sometimes called ZARATHUD\nTHE STAUNCH\nA hard nosed Hermit of Medieval Europe and Chaosphe Bible Banger.\nDubbed \"Offender of The Faith.\" Discovered the Five Commandments.\nPatron of The Season of Bureaucracy. Holyday: Aug 12.\n5. THE ELDER MALACLYPSE\nA wandering Wiseman of Ancient Mediterrania (\"Med-Terra\" or middle\nearth), who followed a 5-pointed Star through the\nalleys of Rome, Damascus, Baghdad, Jerusalem,\nMecca and Cairo, bearing a sign that seemed to read\n\"DOOM\". (This is a misunderstanding. The sign\nactually read \"DUMB\". Mal-1 is a Non-Prophet.)\nPatron and namesake of Mal-2. Patron on The Season\nof The Aftermath. Holyday: Oct 24.\n00040 THE HONEST BOOK OF TRUTH\nbeing a BIBLE of The Erisian Movement\nand How It was Revealed to\nEpiskopos LORD OMAR KHAYYAM RAVENHURST, KSC; Bull Goose\nof Limbo; and Master Pastor of the Church Invisible of\nThe Laughing Christ, Hidden Temple of The Happy Jesus,\nLaughing Buddha Jesus (LBJ) Ranch\nFrom The Honest Book of Truth\nTHE BOOK OF EXPLAINATIONS, Chapter I\n1. There came one day to Lord Omar, Bull Goose of Limbo, a Messenger of Our Lady\nwho told him of a Sacred Mound wherein was buried an Honest Book.\n2. And the Angel of Eri
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s bade of the Lord: Go ye hence and dig the Truth, that ye may come\nto know it and, knowing it, spread it and, spreading it, wallow in it and wallowing in it, lie in\nit and lying in the Truth , become a Poet of the Word and a Sayer of Sayings - - and\ninspiration to all men and a Scribe to the Gods.\n3. So Omar went forth to the Sacred Mound, which was to the East of Nullah, and thereupon he worked digging\nin the sand for five days and five nights, but found no Book.\n4. At the end of five days and five nights of digging, it came to pass that Omar was exhausted. So he put his\nshovel to one side and bedded himself down on the sand, using as a pillow a Golden Chest he had uncovered on\nthe first day of his labors.\n5. Omar slept.\n6. On the fifth day of his sleeping, Lord Omar fell into a Trance, and there came to him in the Trance a Dream,\nand there came to him in the Dream a Messenger of Our Lady who told him of a Sacred Grove wherein was\nhidden a Golden Chest.\n7. And the Angel of Eris bad of the Lord: Go ye hence and lift the Stash, that ye may come to own it and, owning\nit, share it and, sharing it, love in it and, loving in it, dwell in it and, dwelling in the Stash, become a Poet of the\nWord and a Sayer of Sayings - - an Inspiration to all men and a Scribe to the Gods.\n8. But Omar lamented, saying unto the Angel: What is this shit, man? What care I for the Word and Sayings?\nWhat care I for the Inspiration of all men? Wherein does it profit a man to be a Scribe to the Gods when the Scribes\nof the Governments do nothing, yet are paid better wages?\n9. And, lo, the Angel waxed in anger and Omar was stricken to the Ground by an Invisible Hand and did not\narise for five days and five nights.\n10. And it came to pass that on the fifth night he drempt, and in his Dream he had a Vision, and in this Vision\nthere came unto him a Messenger of Our Lady who entrusted to him a Rigoletto cigar box containing many\nfiling cards, some of them in packs with rubber bands around, and upon these cards were sometimes
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: written\nverses, while upon others nothing was written.\n11. Thereupon the Angel Commanded the Lord: Take ye this Honest Book of Truth to thine bosom and cherish it.\nCarry it forth into The Land and lay it before Kings of Nations and Collectors of Garbage. Preach from it unto the\nRighteous, that they may renounce their ways and repent. 00042\nCONVENTIONAL CHAOS\nGREYFACE\nIn the year 1166 B.C., a malcontented hunchbrain by the name of Greyface,\ngot it into his head that the universe was as humorless as he, and he began to\nteach that play was sinful because it contradicted the ways of Serious Order.\n\"Look at all the order about you,\" he said. And from that, he deluded honest\nmen to believe that reality was a straitjacket affair and not the happy\nromance as men had known it.\nIt is not presently understood why men were so gullible at that particular\ntime, for absolutely no one thought to observe all the disorder around them\nand conclude just the opposite. But anyway, Greyface and his followers took\nthe game of playing at life more seriously than they took life itself and were\nknown even to destroy other living beings whose ways of life differed from\ntheir own.\nThe unfortunate result of this is that mankind has since been suffering from a\npsychological and spiritual imbalance. Imbalance caused by frustration, and\nfrustration causes fear. And fear makes a bad trip. Man has been on a bad\ntrip for a long time now.\nIt is called THE CURSE OF GREYFACE.\nBullshit makes\nthe flowers grow\nand thatâs beautiful. Climb into the Chao with a friend or two\nAnd follow the way it carries you,\nOver the Waves in whatever you do.\n(HBT; The Book of Advice, 1:3)\n00043 MEANWHILE, at the Chinese Laundromat . . .\nDOGMA I - METAPHYSICS #2, \"COSMOLOGY\" *\nTHE BOOK OF UTERUS\nfrom The Honest Book of Truth\nrevealed to Lord Omar\n- I -\n1. Before the beginning was the Nonexistent Chao, balanced in Oblivion by the Perfect\nCounterpushpull of the Hodge and the Podge.\n2. Whereupon, by an Act of Happenstance, the Hodg
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e began gradually to overpower the\nPodge - - and the Primal Chaos thereby came to be.\n3. So in the beginning was the Primal Chaos, balanced on the Edge of Oblivion by the\nPerfect Counterpullpush of the Podge and the Hodge.\n4. Whereupon, by the Law of Negative Reversal, ** the Podge swiftly underpowered the\nHodge and Everything broke loose.\n5. And therein emerged the Active Force of Discord, the Subtle Manifestation of the\nNonexistent Chao, to guide Everything along the Path back to Oblivion - that it might not\nbecome lost among Precepts of Order in the Region of Thud.\n6. Forasmuch as it was Active, the Force of Discord entered the State of Confusion,\nwherein It copulated with the Queen and begat ERIS, Our Lady of Discord and Gross\nManifestation of the Nonexistent Chao.\n7. And under Eris Confusion became established, and was hence called Bureaucracy;\nwhile over Bureaucracy Eris became established, and was hence called Discordia.\n8. By the by it came to pass that the Establishment of Bureaucracy perished in a paper\nshortage.\n9. Thus it was, in accord with the Law of Laws. -2-\n10. During and after the Fall of the Establishment of Bureaucracy was the Aftermath, an\nAge of Disorder, in which calculation, computations, and reckonings were put away by\nthe Children of Eris in Acceptance and Preparation for Return to Oblivion to be followed\nby a Repetition of the Universal Absurdity. Moreover, of Itself the Coming of Aftermath\nwaseth a Resurrection of the Freedom-flowing Chaos. HAIL ERIS!\n11. Herein was set into motion the Eristic pattern, which would Repeat Itself Five Times\nOver Seventy-three Times, after which nothing would happen.\n* This doctrine should not be confused with DOGMA III - HISTORY #6, \"HISTORIC\nCYCLES,\" which states that social progress occurs in five cycles, the first three (\"The\nTricycle\") of which are THESIS, ANTITHESIS and PARENTHESIS; and the last two\n(\"The Bicycle\") of which are CONSTERNATION and MORAL WARPTITUDE.\n* * The LAW OF NEGATIVE REVERSAL states that if somet
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hing does not happen\nthen the exact opposite will happen, only in exactly the opposite manner from that in\nwhich it did not happen.\nNOTE: It is from this text from The Book of Uterus, that POEE has based its Erisian\nCalendar with the year divided into 5 Seasons of 73 days each. Each of the Five Apostles\nof Eris has patronage over one Season. A chart of the Seasons, Patrons, Days of the\nWeek, Holydays, and a perpetual Gregorian converter is included in this edition of\nPrincipia.\n00045 The seeds of the ORDERS OF DISCORDIA were planted by Greyface into his early\ndisciples. They form the skeleton of the Aneristic Movement, which over emphasizes the\nPrinciple of Order and is antagonistic to the necessary compliment, the Principle of\nDisorder. The Orders are composed of persons all hung up on authority, security and\ncontrol; i.e., they are blinded by the Aneristic Illusion. They do not know that they belong\nto Orders of Discordia. But we know.\n1. The Military Order of THE KNIGHTS OF THE FIVE SIDED TEMPLE. This\nis for all of the soldiers and bureaucrats of the world.\n2. The Political Order of THE PARTY FOR WAR ON EVIL. This is reserved for\nlawmakers, censors, and like ilk.\n3. The Academic Order of THE HEMLOCK FELLOWSHIP. They commonly\ninhabit schools and universities, and dominate many of them.\n4. The Social Order of THE CITIZENS COMMITTEE FOR CONCERNED\nCITIZENS. This is mostly a grass-roots version of the more professional military,\npolitical, academic and sacred Orders.\n5. The Sacred Order of THE DEFAMATION LEAGUE. Not much is known\nabout the D.L., but they are very ancient and quite possibly were founded by Greyface\nhimself. It is known that they now have absolute domination over all organized churches\nin the world. It is also believed that they have been costuming cabbages and passing them\noff as human beings.\nA person belonging to one or more Order is just as\nlikely to carry a flag of the counter-establishment as\nthe flag of the establishment - - just as long as it is a\nflag.\nHIP-2-3
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: -4, HIP 2-3-4\nGO TO YOUR LEFT-RIGHT.... 00047\nTHE FOLLOWING IS QUOTED FROM BERGAN EVANS\nON NORBERT WEINER, NUCLEAR PHYSICIST\nThe second concept Wiener has to establish is that of entropy.\nProbability is a mathematical concept, coming from statistics. Entropy\ncomes from physics. It is the assertion - - established logically and\nexperimentally - - that the universe, by its nature, is \"running down\", moving\ntoward a state of inert uniformity devoid of form, matter, hierarchy or\ndifferentiation.\nThat is, in any given situation, less organization, more chaos, is\noverwhelmingly more probable than tighter organization or more order.\nThe tendency for entropy to increase in isolated systems is expressed\nin the second law of thermodynamics - - perhaps the most pessimistic and\namoral formulation in all human thought.\nIt applies, however, to a closed system, to something that is an\nisolated whole, not just a part. Within such systems there may be parts,\nwhich draw their energy from the whole, that are moving at least\ntemporarily, in the opposite direction; in them order is increasing and chaos\nis diminishing.\nThe whirlpools that swirl in a direction opposed to the main current\nare called \"enclaves\". And one of them is life, especially human life, which\nin a universe moving inexorably towards chaos moves toward increased\norder.\nPersonal\nPLANETARY PI, which I discovered, is 61.\nItâs a Time-Energy relationship existing\nbetween sun and inner plants and I use it in\narriving at many facts unknown to science.\nFor example, multiply nude earthâs\ncircumference 24,902.20656 by 61 and you\nget the distance of moonâs orbit around the\nearth. This is slightly less than actual\ndistance because we have not yet considered\nearthâs atmosphere. So be it. Christopher\nGarth, Evanston.\nâI SHOULD HAVE BEEN A PLUMBER.â\n--Albert Einstein\nIF THE TELEPHONE\nRINGS TODAY...\nWATER IT!\n-Rev. Thomas, Gnostic\nN.Y.C. Cabal \"GRASSHOPPER ALWAYS\nWRONG IN ARGUMENT WITH\nCHICKEN\" - Book of Chan\ncompiled by
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: O.P.U. sect\n=ZARATHUDâS ENLIGHTENMENT =\nBefore he became a hermit, Zarathud was a young priest, and\ntook great delight in making fools of his opponents in front of\nhis followers.\nOne day Zarathud took his students to a pleasant pasture and\nthere he confronted the Sacred Chao while She was contentedly\ngrazing.\n\"Tell me, you dumb beast,\" demanded the Priest in his\ncommanding voice, \"why donât you do something worthwhile.\nWhat is your Purpose in Life, anyway?\"\nMunching the tasty grass, The Sacred Chao replied \"MU\".*\nUpon hearing this, absolutely nobody was enlightened. Primarily\nbecause nobody could understand Chinese.\n* \"MU\" is the Chinese ideogram for NO-THING.\nTAO FA\nTSU-DAN\nFIND PEACE\nWITH A\nCONTENTED\nCHAO\n00048 THE SACRED CHAO\nThe SACRED CHAO is the key to illumination. Devised\nby the Apostle Hung Mung in ancient China, it was\nmodified and popularized by the Taoists and is sometimes\ncalled the YIN-YANG. The Sacred Chao is not the Yin-Yang of the Taoists. It is\nthe HODGE-PODGE of the Erisians. And, instead of a Podge spot on the Hodge\nside, it has a PENTAGON which symbolizes the ANERISTIC PRINCIPLE, and\ninstead of a Hodge spot on the Podge side, it depicts the GOLDEN APPLE OF\nDISCORDIA to symbolize the ERISTIC PRINCIPLE.\nThe Sacred Chao symbolizes absolutely everything anyone need ever know about\nabsolutely anything, and more! It even symbolizes everything not worth knowing,\ndepicted by the empty space surrounding the Hodge-Podge.\nHERE FOLLOWS SOME PSYCHO-METAPHYSICS.\nIf you are not hot for philosophy, best just skip it.\nThe Aneristic Principle is that of APPARENT ORDER; the Eristic Principle\nis that of APPARENT DISORDER. Both order and disorder are man made\nconcepts and are artificial divisions of PURE CHAOS, which is a level deeper\nthan is the level of distinction making.\nWith our concept making apparatus called \"mind\" we look at reality\nthrough the ideas-about-reality which our cultures give us. The ideas-about-\nreality are mistakenly labeled \"reality\"
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and unenlightened people are forever\nperplexed by the fact that other people, especially other cultures, see \"reality\"\ndifferently. It is only the ideas-about-reality which differ. Real (capital-T True)\nreality is a level deeper than is the level of concept.\nWe look at the world through windows on which have been drawn grids\n(concepts). Different philosophies use different grids. A culture is a group of\npeople\n00049 -2-\nwith rather similar grids. Through a window we view chaos, and relate it to the\npoints on our grid, and thereby understand it. The ORDER is in the GRID. That is\nthe Aneristic Principle.\nWestern philosophy is traditionally concerned with contrasting one grid\nwith another grid, and amending grids in hopes of finding a perfect one that will\naccount for all reality and will, hence, (say unenlightened westerners) be True.\nThis is illusory; it is what we Erisians call the ANERISTIC ILLUSION. Some grids\ncan be more useful than others, some more beautiful than others, some more\npleasant than others, etc., but none can be more True than any other.\nDISORDER is simply unrelated information viewed through some\nparticular grid. But, like \"relation\", no-relation is a concept. Male, like female, is\nan idea about sex. To say that male-ness is \"absence of female-ness\", or vice\nversa, is a matter of definition and metaphysically arbitrary. The artificial concept\nof no-relation is the ERISTIC ILLUSION.\nThe point is that (little-t) truth is a matter of definition relative to the grid\none is using at the moment, and that (capital-T) Truth, metaphysical reality, is\nirrelevant to grids entirely. Pick a grid, and through it some chaos appears\nordered and some appears disordered. Pick another grid, and the same chaos will\nappear differently ordered and disordered.\nReality is the original Rorschach.\nVerily! So much for all that. -3-\nThe PODGE of the Sacred Chao is symbolized as The Golden Apple\nof Discordia, which represents the Eristic Principle of Disorder. The\nwriting on it, \"KALLI
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: STI\" is Greek for \"TO THE PRETTIEST ONE\" and\nrefers to an old myth about The Goddess. But the Greeks had only a\nlimited understanding of Disorder, and thought it to be a negative\nprinciple.\nThe Pentagon represents the Aneristic Principle of\nOrder and symbolizes the HODGE. The Pentagon\nhas several references; for one, it can be taken to\nrepresent geometry, one of the earliest studies of\nformal order to reach elaborate development;* for\nanother, it specifically accords with THE LAW OF FIVES.\nTHE TRUTH IS FIVE BUT MEN HAVE ONLY ONE NAME FOR IT.\nPatamunzo Lingananda\nIt also is the shape of the United States Military Headquarters, the\nPentagon Building, a most pregnant manifestation of straightjacket\norder resting on a firm foundation of chaos and constantly erupting\ninto dazzeling disorder; and this building is one of our more\ncherished Erisian Shrines. Also it so happens that in times of\nmedieval magic, the pentagon was the generic symbol for\nwerewolves, but this reference is not particularly intended and it\nshould be noted that the Erisian Movement does not discriminate\nagainst werewolves - - our membership roster is open to persons of\nall races, national origins and hobbies.\n* The Greek geometrician PYTHAGORAS, however, was not a typical\naneristic personality. He was what we call an EXPLODED ANERISTIC\nand an AVATAR. We call him Archangle Pythagoras. 00051\n28 DAY RECORDING\n5. Hung Mung slapped his buttocks, hopped\nabout, and shook his head, saying, \"I do not\nknow! I do not know!\"\nHBT; The Book of Gooks, Chap 1\n00052 BRUNSWICK SHRINE\nIn the Los Angeles suburb of Whittier there lives a bowling alley, and\nwithin this very place, in the year of Our Lady of Discord 3125 (1959*),\nEris revealed Herself to The Golden Apple Corps for the first time.\nIn honor of this Incredible Event, this Holy Place is revered as a Shrine by\nall Erisians. Once every five years, the Golden Apple Corps plans a\nPilgrimage to Brunswick Shrine as an act of Devotion, and therein to\npartake of No Hot Dog B
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: uns, and ruminate a bit about it All.\nIt is written that when The Corps returns to the Shrine for the fifth time\nfive times over, then shall the world come to an end:\nIMPENDING DOOM\nHAS ARRIVED\nAnd Five Days Prior to This Occasion The\nApostle The Elder Malaclypse Shall Walk\nthe Streets of Whittier Bearing a Sign for\nAll Literates to Read thereof: \"DOOM\", as\na Warning of Forthcoming Doom to All\nMen Impending. And He Shall Signal This\nEvent by Seeking the Poor and Distributing\nto Them Precious MAO BUTTONS and\nWhittier Shall be Known as The Region of\nThud for These Five Days.\nAs a public service to all mankind and civilization in general, and to us in\nparticular, the Golden Apple Corps has concluded that planning such a\nPilgrimage is sufficient and that it is prudent to never get around to\nactually going.\n* Or maybe it was 1958, I forget. 00053\nSTARBUCK'S PEBBLES\nWhich\nIs\nReal?\nDo these 5 pebbles really form a pentagon?\nThose biased by the Aneristic Illusion would say yes.\nThose biased by the Eristic Illusion would say no.\nCriss-cross them and it is a star.\nAn Illuminated Mind can see all of these, yet he does not insist that any one is really true,\nor that none at all is true. Stars, and pentagons, and disorder are all his own creations and\nhe may do with them as he wishes. Indeed, even so the concept of number 5.\nCan you chart\nthe COURSE\nto\nCaptain\nValentine's\nSWEETHEART?\nThe real reality is there, but everything you KNOW\nabout \"it\" is in your mind and yours to do with as\nyou like. Conceptualization is art, and YOU ARE\nTHE ARTIST.\nConvictions cause convicts.\n00054\nWhen I was 8 or 9 years old,\nI acquired a split beaver\nmagazine. You can imagine\nmy disappointment when,\nupon examination of the\nphotos with a microscope, I\nfound that all I could see was\ndots. 7. Never write in pencil unless you are on a train or sick in bed. There is\nserenity\nin Chaos.\nSeek ye\nthe Eye\nof the\nHurricane\n.\nA POEE MYSTEREE RITE - THE SRI SYADASTIAN CHANT\nWritten, in some sense,
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: by Mal-2\nUnlike a song, chants are not sung but chanted. This particular one is much enhanced by\nthe use of a Leader to chant the Sanskrit alone, with all participants chanting the\nEnglish. It also behooves one to be in a quiet frame of mind and to be sitting in a still\nposition, perhaps The Buttercup Position. It also helps if one is absolutely zonked out of\nhis gourd.\nRUB-A-DUB-DUB\nO! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Hung Mung.\nSYA-DASTI\nO! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Mo-Jo.\nSYA-DAVAK-TAVYA\nO! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Zara-thud.\nSYA-DASTI SYA-NASTI\nO! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Elder Mal.\nSYA-DASTI KAVAK-TAV-YASKA\nO! Hail Eris. Blessed St. Gu-lik. SYA-DASTI, SYA-NASTI, SYA-DAVAK-TAV-\nYASKA\nO! Hail Eris. All Hail Dis-cord-ia.\nRUB-A-DUB-DUB\nIt is then repeated indefinitely, or for the first two thousand miles, which ever comes first.\n00059 00060\nTHE CLASSIFICATION OF SAINTS\n1. SAINT SECOND CLASS\nTo be reserved for all human beings deserving of Sainthood. Example: St. Norton the\nFirst, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico (his grave near San\nFrancisco is an official POEE shrine.)\nTHE FOLLOWING FOUR CATAGORIES ARE RESERVED FOR FICTIONAL BEINGS\nWHO, NOT BEING ACTUAL, ARE MORE CAPABLE OF PERFECTION.\n2. LANCE SAINT\nGood Saint material and definitely inspiring.\nExample: St. Yossarian (Catch 22, Heller)\n3. LIEUTENANT SAINT\nExcellent Goddess-saturated Saint.\nExample: St. Quixote, (Don Quixote, Cervantes)\n4. BRIGADIER SAINT\nComparable to Lt/Saint but has an established following (fictional or factual).\nExample: St. Bokonon (Catâs Cradle, Vonnegut)\n5. FIVE STAR SAINT\nThe Five Apostles of Eris.\nNOTE: It is an Old Erisian Tradition to never agree with each other about Saints\nEverybody understands Mickey Mouse. Few understand\nHerman Hesse. Only a handfull understood Albert Einstein.\nAnd nobody understood Emperor Norton.\n- Slogan of NORTON CABAL- S.F. Tests By Doctors Prove\nIt Possible To Shrink\n= On Occultism =\nMagicians, especially since the Gnostic and the Quabala influences, have
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nsought higher consciousness through the assimilation and control of\nuniversal opposites - - good/evil, positive/negative, male/female, etc. But\ndue to the steadfast pomposity of ritualism inherited from the ancient\nmethods of the shaman, occultists have been blinded to what is perhaps\nthe two most important pairs of apparent or earth-plane opposites:\nORDER/DISORDER and SERIOUS/HUMOROUS.\nMagicians, and their progeny the scientists, have always taken themselves\nand their subject in an orderly and sober manner, thereby disregarding\nan essential metaphysical balance. When magicians learn to approach\nphilosophy as a malleable art instead of an immutable Truth, and learn to\nappreciate the absurdity of manâs endeavors, then they will be able to\npursue their art with a lighter heart and perhaps gain a clearer\nunderstanding of it, and therefore gain more effective magic. CHAOS IS\nENERGY.\nThis is an essential challange to the basic\nconcepts of all western occult though,\nand POEE is humbly pleased to offer\nthe first major breakthrough in\noccultism since Solomon.\n00061 00062\nPOEE ASTROLOGICAL SYSTEM\n1) On your next Birthday, return to the place of your birth and, at precisely\nmidnight, noting your birth time and date of observation, count all visible\nstars.\n2) When youâve done this, write to me and Iâll tell you what to do next.\nThe theorem to be proved is that if\nany even number of people take seats at\nrandom around a circular table bearing place\ncards with their names, it is always possible\nto rotate the table until at least two people\nare opposite their cards. Assume the\ncontrary. Let n be the even number of\npersons, and let their names be replaced by\nthe integers 0 to n - 1 \"in such a way that the\nplace cards are numbered in sequence\naround the table. If a delegate d originally\nsits down to a place card p, then the table\nmust be rotated r steps before he is correctly\nseated, where r = p - d, unless this is\nnegative, in which case r = p - d + n. The\ncollection of values of
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d (and of p) for all\ndelegates is clearly the integers 0 to n-1,\neach taken once, but so also is the collection\nof values of r, or else two delegates would\nbe correctly seated at the same time.\nSumming the above equations, one for each\ndelegate, gives S - S + nk, where k is an\ninteger and S = n (n â 1)/2, the sum of the\nintegers from 0 to n - 1. It follows that n =\n2k + 1, an odd number.\" This contradicts the\noriginal assumption.\n\"I actually solved this problem\nsome years ago,\" Rybicki writes, \"for a\ndifferent but completely equivalent problem,\na generalization of the nonattacking âeight\nqueensâ problem for a cylindrical\nchessboard where diagonal attack is\nrestricted to diagonals slanting in one\ndirection only. THE CURSE OF GREYFACE AND THE\nINTRODUCTION OF NEGATIVISM\nTo choose order over disorder, or disorder over order, is to accept\na trip composed of both the creative and the destructive. But to choose\nthe creative over the destructive is an all-creative trip composed of both\norder and disorder. To accomplish this, one need only accept creative\ndisorder along with, and equal to, creative order, and also be willing to\nreject destructive order as an undesirable equal to destructive disorder.\nThe Curse of Greyface included the division of life into\norder/disorder as the essential positive/negative polarity, instead of\nbuilding a game foundation with creative/destructive as the essential\npositive/negative. He has thereby caused man to endure the destructive\naspects of order and has prevented man from effectively participating in\nthe creative uses of disorder. Civilization reflects this unfortunate\ndivision.\nPOEE proclaims that the other division is preferable,\nand we work toward the proposition that creative disorder,\nlike creative order, is possible and desirable; and that\ndestructive order, like destructive disorder, is unnecessary\nand undesirable.\nSeek the Sacred Chao - therein you will find the\nfoolishness of all ORDER/DISORDER. They are the same! ERISIAN MAGIC R
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ITUAL - THE TURKEY CURSE\nRevealed by the Apostle Dr. Van Van Mojo as a specific counter to the evil Curse\nof Greyface, the TURKEY CURSE is here passed on to Erisians everywhere for\ntheir just protection.\nThe Turkey Curse works. It is firmly grounded on the fact that Greyface and his\nfollowers absolutely require an aneristic setting to function and that a timely\nintroduction of eristic vibrations will neutralize their foundation. The Turkey\nCurse is designed solely to counteract negative aneristic vibes and if introduced\ninto a neutral or positive aneristic setting (like a poet working out word rhythms)\nit will prove harmless, or at worst, simply annoying. It is not designed for use\nagainst negative eristic vibes, although it can be used as an eristic vehicle to\nintroduce positive vibes into a misguided eristic setting. In this instance, it would\nbe the responsibility of the Erisian Magician to manufacture the positive\nvibrations if results are to be achieved. CAUTION - all magic is powerful and\nrequires courage and integrity on the part of the magician. This ritual, if misused,\ncan backfire. Positive motivation is essential for self-protection.\nTO PERFORM THE TURKEY CURSE:\nTake a foot stance as if you were John L. Sullivan preparing for fisticuffs. Face the\nparticular greyface you wish to short-circuit, or towards the direction of the\nnegative aneristic vibration that you wish to neutralize. Begin by waving your\narms in any elaborate manner and make motions with your hands as though you\nwere Mandrake feeling up a sexy giantess. Chant, loudly and clearly:\nGOBBLE, GOBBLE, GOBBLE, GOBBLE, GOBBLE!\nThe results will be instantly apparent.\n00064 A PRIMER FOR ERISIAN EVANGELISTS by Lord Omar\nThe SOCRATIC APPROACH is most successful when confronting\nthe ignorant. The \"socratic approach\" is what you call starting an argument\nby asking questions. You approach the innocent and simpy ask \"Did you\nknow that Godâs name is Eris and that He is a girl?\" If he should answer\n\"Yes.\" Then he is pro
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: bably a fellow Erisian and so you can forget it. If he\nsays \"No.\" then quickly proceed to:\nTHE BLIND ASSERTION and say \"Well, He is a girl and His name\nis ERIS!\" Shrewdly observe if the subject is convinced. If he is, swear him\ninto the Legion of Dynamic Discord before he changes his mind. If he does\nnot appear to be convinced, then proceed to:\nTHE FAITH BIT: \"But you must have Faith! All is lost without Faith!\nI sure feel sorry for you if you donât have Faith.\" And then add:\nTHE ARGUMENT BY FEAR and in an ominous voice ask \"Do you\nknow what happens to those who deny Goddess?\" If he hesitates, donât tell\nhim that he will surely be reincarnated as a precious Mao Button and\ndistributed to the poor in the Region of Thud (which would be a mean thing\nto say), just shake your head sadly and, while wiping a tear from your eye,\ngo to:\nTHE FIRST CLAUSE PLOY wherein you point to all of the discord\nand confusion in the world and exclaim \"Well who the hell do you think did\nall of this, wise guy?\" If he says, \"Nobody, just impersonal forces.\" Then\nquickly respond with:\nTHE ARGUMENT BY SEMANTICAL GYMNASTICS and say that\nhe is absolutely right, and that those impersonal forces are female and that\nHer name is ERIS. If he, wonder of wonders, still remains obstinate, then\nfinally resort to:\nTHE FIGURATIVE SYMBOLISM DODGE and confide that\nsophisticated people like himself recognize that Eris is a Figurative Symbol\nfor an Ineffable Metaphysical Reality and that The Erisian Movement is\nreally more like a poem than like a science and that he is liable to be turned\ninto a Precious Mao Button and Distributed to The Poor in The Region of\nThud if he does not get hip. Then put him on your mailing list.\n00065 00066\nA GAME\nBy Ala Hera, E.L., N.S.; RAYVILLE APPLE PANTHERS\nSINK is played by\nand people of much ilk.\nPURPOSE: To sink object or an object or a thing- in water or mud or anything you; can\nsink something in.\nRULES: Sinking is allowd in any manner. To date, ten pound chunks of mud were
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: used\nto sink a tobacco can. It is preferable to have a pit of water or a hole to drop things in. But\nrivers - bays - gulfs - I dare say even oceans can be used.\nTURNS are taken thusly: who somever gets the junk up in the air first.\nDUTY: It shall be the duty of all persons playing \"SINK\" to help find more objects to\nsink, once; one object is sunk.\nUPON SINKING: The sinked shall yell \"I sank it!\" or something equally as thoughtful.\nNAMING OF OBJECTS is some times desirable. The object is named by the finder of\nsuch object and whoever sinks it can say for instance, \"I sunk Columbus, Ohio.\" A JOINT EFFORT OF THE DISCORDIAN SOCIETY\nPost Office Liberation Front\nTHIS IS A CHAIN LETTER.\nWITHIN THE NEXT FIFTY-FIVE DAYS YOU WILL RECEIVE\nTHIRTY-ELEVEN HUNDRED POUNDS OF CHAINS! In the meantime -\nplant your seeds.\nIf a lot of people who receive this letter plant a few seeds and a lot of people\nreceive this letter, then a lot of seeds will get planted. Plant you seeds.\nIn parks. On lots. Public flower beds. In remote places. At City Hall.\nWherever. Whenever. Or start a plantation in your closet (but read up on it\nfirst for that). For casual planting, its best to soak them in water for a day\nand plant in a bunch of about 5, about half an inch deep. Donât worry much\nabout weather, they know when the weather is wrong and will try to wait for\nnature. Donât soak them if its wintertime. Seeds are a very hearty life form\nand strongly desire to grow and flourish. But some of them need peopleâs\nhelp to get started. Plant your seeds.\nMake a few copies of this letter (5 would be nice) and send them to friends\nof yours. Try to mail to different cities and states, even different countries. If\nyou would rather not, than please pass this copy on to someone and perhaps\nthey would like to.\nTHERE IS NO TRUTH\nTo the legend that if you throw away a chain letter then all sorts of\ncatastrophic, abominable, and outrageous disasters will happen. Except, of\ncourse, from your seedâs point of view.\n00067 Q
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: uestions\nHave a friendly class talk. Permit each child to tell any part of the unit on\n\"Courtesy in the Corridors and on the Stairs\" that he enjoyed. Name some causes of\ndisturbance in your school.\n00069\nChapter 1, THE EPISTLE TO THE PARANOIDS\n- - Lord Omar\n1. Ye have locked yerself up in cages of fear - - and, behold, do ye now\ncomplain that ye lack FREEDOM!\n2. Ye have cast out yer brothers for devils and now complain ye, lamenting,\nthat yeâve been left to fight alone.\n3. All Chaos was once yer kingdom; verily, held ye domination over the\nentire Pentaverse, but today ye wax sore afraid in dark corners, nooks, and\nsink holes.\n4. O how the darknesses do crowd up, one against the other, in ye hearts!\nWhat fear ye more than what ye have wroughten?\n5. Verily, verily I say unto you, not all the Sinister Ministers of the Bavarian\nIlluminati, working together in multitudes, could so entwine the land with\ntribulation as have yer baseless warnings.\nDespite strong evidence to the contrary, persistant rumor has it that it was\nMr. Momomotoâs brother who has swallowed Mr. Momomoto in the\nsummer of â44. Advertisement\n00070 Dear Brother Mal-2,\nIn response to your request for unclassified agitprop to be inserted in the new edition of the\nPRINCIPIA, hope the following will be of use. And please stop bothering us with your incessant letters!\nEpiskopos Mordecai, Keeper of the Notary Sojac, informs me that you are welcome to reveal that\nour oldest extant records show us to have been fully established in Atlantis, circa 18,000 B.C., under Kull,\nthe galley slave who ascended to the Throne of Valusia. Revived by Pelias of Koth, circa 10,000 B.C.\nPossibly it was he who taught the inner-teachings to Conan of Cimmeria after Conan became King of\nAquilonia. First brought to the western hemisphere by Conan and taught to Mayan priesthood (Conan is\nQuetzlcoatl). That was 4 Ahua, 8 Cumhu, Mayan date. Revived by Abdul Alhazred in his infamous Al\nAzif, circa 800 A.D. (Al Azif translated into Latin by Olaus W
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ormius, 1132 A.D., as The Necronomicon.)\nIn 1090 A.D. was the founding of The Ismaelian Sect (Hashishism) by Hassan i Sabbah, with secret\nteachings based on Alhazred, Pelias and Kull. Founding of the Illuminated Ones of Bavaria, by Adam\nWeishaupt, on May 1, 1776. He based it on the others. Weishaupt brought it to the United States during the\nperiod that he was impersonating George Washington; and it was he who was the Man in Black who gave\nthe design for The Great Seal to Jefferson in the garden that night. The Illuminated tradition is now, of\ncourse, in the hands of The Ancient Illuminated Seers of Bavaria (A.I.S.B.), headquartered here in the\nUnited States.\nOur teachings are not, need I remind you, available for publication. No harm, though, in admitting\nthat some of them can be found disguised in Joyceâs Finneganâs Wake, Burroughs Nova Express, the King\nJames translation of The Holy Bible (though not the Latin or Hebrew), and The Blue Book. Not to speak of\nBen Franklinâs private papers (!), but we are still suppressing those.\nConsidering current developments - - you know the ones I speak of - - it has been decided to\nreveal a few more of our front organizations. Your publication is timely, so mention that in addition to the\nold fronts, like the Masons, the Rothchild Banks, and the Federal Reserve System, we now have significant\ncontrol of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (since Hoover died last year, but that is still secret), the\nStudents for a Democratic Society, the Communist Party USA, the American Anarchist Assn., the Junior\nChamber of Commerce, the Black Lotus Society, the Republican Party, the John Dillinger Died For You\nSociety and the Camp Fire Girls. It is still useful to continue the sham of the Birchers that we are seeking\nworld domination; so do not reveal that political and economic control was generally complete several\ngenerations ago and that we are just playing with the world for a while until civilization advances\nsufficiently for phase five.\nAncient Illuminate
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d Seers of Bavaria\n- The Discordian Society â MALIK to Mal-2 pg. 2\nIn fact you might still push Vennardâs The Federal Reserve Hoax: \"Since the Babylonian\nCaptivity there has existed a determined, behind-the-scenes under-the-table, atheistic, satanic, anti-\nChristian force - worshippers of Mamon - whose underlying purpose is world control through the control of\nMoney. July 1, 1776 (correct that to May 1st, Vennard canât get anything right) the Serpent raised its head\nin the under-ground secret society known as The Illuminati, founded by Adam Weishaupt. There is\nconsiderable documentary evidence to prove all revolutions, wars, depressions, strikes and chaos stem from\nthis source.\" Etc., etc., you know the stuff.\nThe general location of our US HQ, incidentally, has been nearly exposed; and so we will be\nmoving for the first time this century (what a drag!). If you want, you can reveal that it is located deep in\nthe labyrinth of sewers beneath Dealy Plaza in Dallas, and is presided over by the Dealy Lama. Inclosed are\nsome plans for several new potential locations. Please review and add any comments you feel pertinent,\nespecially regarding the Eristic propensity of the Pentagon site.\nOh, and we have some good news for you, Brother Mal! You know that Zambian cybernetics\ngenius who joined us? Well, he has secretly co-ordinated the FBI computers with the Zurich System and\nour theoriticians are in ecstasy over the new information coming out. Look, if you people there can keep\nfrom blowing yourselves up for only two more generations, then we will finally have it. After 20,000 years,\nKullâs dream will be realized! We can hardly believe it. But the outcome is certain, given the time. Our\ngrandchildren, Mal! If civilization makes it through this crisis, our grandchildren will live in a world of\nauthentic freedom and authentic harmony and authentic satisfaction. I hope Iâm alive to see it, Mal, success\nis in our grasp. Twenty thousand years....!\nAh, I get spaced just thinking about it. Good l
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: uck on the Principia. Ewige Blumenkraft! HAIL\nERIS.\nPS: PRIVATE - Not for publication in The Principia. We are returning to the two Zwack Cyphers for\nclassified communications. Herewith is your copy. DO NOT DIVULGE THIS INFORMATION -\nSECURITY E-5. P a r t F i v e\nNONSENSE AS SALVATION\nThe\nGolden\nSecret\nThe human race will begin solving itâs problems on the day that it ceases taking itself so\nseriously.\nTo that end, POEE proposes the countergame of NONSENSE AS SALVATION.\nSalvation from an ugly and barbarous existence that is the result of taking order so\nseriously and so seriously fearing contrary orders and disorder; that GAMES are taken as\nmore important than LIFE; rather than taking LIFE AS THE ART OF PLAYING\nGAMES.\nTo this end, we propose that man develop his innate love for disorder, and play with The\nGoddess Eris. And know that it is a joyful play, and that thereby CAN BE REVOKED\nTHE CURSE OF GREYFACE.\nIf you can master nonsense as well as you have already learned to master sense, then each\nwill expose the other for what it is: absurdity. From that moment of illumination, a man\nbegins to be free regardless of his surroundings. He becomes free to play order games and\nchange them at will. He becomes free to play disorder games just for the hell of it. He\nbecomes free to play neither or both. And as the master of his own games, he plays\nwithout fear, and therefore without frustration, and therefore with good will in his soul\nand love in his being.\nAnd when men become free then mankind will be free.\nMay you be free of The Curse of Greyface.\nMay the Goddess put twinkles in your eyes.\nMay you have the knowledge of a sage,\nand the wisdom of a child.\nHail Eris.\n00074 00075\nTHUS ENDS PRINCIPIA DISCORDIA\nThis being the 4th Edition, March 1970, San Francisco; a revision of the 3rd\nEdition of 500 copies, whomped together in Tampa 1969; which revised the\n2nd Edition of 100 copies from Los Angeles 1969; which was a revision of\nPRINCIPIA DISCORDIA or HOW THE WEST WAS LOST published in
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nNew Orleans in 1965 in five copies, which were mostly lost.\nAll Rights Reversed â Reprint what you like\nPublished by POEE Head Temple - San Francisco\n\"ON THE FUTURE SITE OF BEAUTIFUL\nSAN ANDREAS CANYON\"\nTHE LAST WORD\nThe foregoing document was revealed to Mal-2 by the Goddess Herself through many\nconsultations with Her within his Pineal Gland. It is guaranteed to be the Word of Goddess.\nHowever, it is only fair to state that Goddess doesnât always say the same thing to each listener,\nand that other Episkoposes are sometimes\ntold quite different things in their\nRevelations, which are also the Word of\nGoddess. Consequently, if you prefer a\nDiscordian Sect other than POEE, then\nnone of these Truths are binding, and it is a\nrotten shame that you have read all the way\ndown to the very last word. DISCORDIAN SOCIETY\nDEDICATED TO AN ADVANCED\nUNDERSTANDING OF THE PARAPHYSICAL\nMANIFESTATIONS OF EVERYDAY CHAOS\nDID YOU KNOW THAT YOU HAVE A LOPSIDED PINEAL GLAND?\nWell, probably you do have one, and itâs unfortunate because\nlopsided Pineal Glands have perverted the Free Spirit of Man, and\nsubverted Life into a frustrating, unhappy and hopeless mess.\nFortunately, you have before you a handbook that will show you\nhow to discover your salvation through\nERIS, THE GODDESS OF CONFUSION.\nIt will advise you how to balance your Pineal Gland and reach\nspiritual Illumination. And it will teach you how to turn your\nmiserable mess into a beautiful, joyful, and splendid one. SPECIAL AFTERWORD\nto the Loompanics Edition of Principia Discordia\nG.H. Hill, San Francisco, 1979\nAll Rites Reversed\nReprint What You Like\nINTERVIEW WITH NORTON CABAL\nby Gypsie Skripto, Special Correspondent\nIt has been ten years since I met the mysterious Malaclypse the Younger. I\nwas free lancing for the underground papers and went by POEE Head Temple at\n555 Battery Street to try for an interview.\nI found him in the Temple PO Box busy wrapping up the new Fourth\nEdition of Principia. He seemed impatient with me, insisti
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ng that he didnât have\nthe time or inclination for foolish questions from reporters. Undaunted, I burst\nout with questions like whether he preferred Panama Red or Acapulco Gold and\nhow the fuck did we manage to fit inside of a tiny post office box and other\nthings apropos a naive young semiliterate dropout hippy writer. He asked me if I\nwanted to drop mescaline and fuck all night and said he knew how to turn\nhimself into a unicorn and there might be room for a tiny interview on the cover\nof the Principia if I wanted to work for the Greater Poop so I said sure, OK, Iâve\nnever dropped mescaline in a post office box before.\nIt turned out I was among the last to see Malaclypse. As subsequent\nissues of Greater Poop revealed, he was to disappear and POEE business was to\nbe assumed by his students at Norton Cabal. Professor Ignotum P. Ignotius,\nDepartment of Comparative Realities, was assigned the Trust of the POEE\nScruple and Rev. Dr. Occupant became Keeper of the Box. The newly published\ncopies of Principia were distributed by Mad Malik, Block Disorganizer, who had\ndistribution contacts with the Aluminum Bavariati. Practical relations remained\nin the hands of concept artist G. Hill.\nWhen the 1000 Principias were gone the Greater Poop stopped\npublishing, Head Temple closed down and the Cabal just seemed to evaporate.\nFinally even the box was closed. But over the years I noticed that copies were\nstill circulating, and that independent Discordian Cabals would occasionally pop\nout of nowhere (and still do). And I would wonder what ever happened to\nMalaclypse.\nWhen I read the Illuminatus trilogy I resolved to again find and interview\nthe denizens of Joshua Norton Cabal of the Discordian Society.\n79/11/26\n-1-\nLoompanics NORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nG. Skripto\n* * *\nAs I cabled over Nob to San Franciscoâs Station âOâ Post Office I couldnât\nhelp but wonder at Goddess, hand in assigning street addresses to Her\noutposts. Mal2 had told me that Good Lord Omar always filed everything under\n\"
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: O\" for Out Of File.\n\"Maya is marvelous\" I was thinking when I rapped on the little metal door\nand was greeted warmly by a huge beard who introduced himself as Professor\nIgnotius. He ushered me into a spacious wood paneled and tapestry hung parlor\nwhere three others were laughing and passing around a wine jug. The sunny\none in a tunic was the Reverend Doctor Occupant, the trim khaki and jeans was\nMad Malik and the wine jug claimed to be Hill. I got the recorder on ....\nGYPSIE SKRIPTO [in response to a question]: ...1969 but only briefly. I guess I\nmissed you guys.\nMAD MALIK: No wonder, he was pretty much a one man show then. We were just\nhis students and were usually off on errands. You worked for the Poop?\nGypsie: Well, for one night anyway. The interview is in the Principia.\nREV. DR. OCCUPANT: Malik was the only one he would ever let write for the\nPoop or get on the letterhead.\nGypsie: Did you [Malik] have higher authority than the others?\nMalik: No, [but I was allowed to speak in the Poop] because [Malaclypse the\nYounger] hated politics. He was infuriated with Johnson and Nixon over Viet\nNam because it was turning the renaissance into a political revolution and was\nstealing his sacred thunder. So he trained me in Zenarchy, which he learned\nfrom Omar, and I was the official anarcho-pacifist for the Cabal. Also I was\nliaison to The Ancient Illuminated Seers of Bavaria, the Chicago Discordians.\nLater Omar activated the Hung Mung Cong Tong and ELF, on zenarchist\nprinciples, and also Operation Mindfuck. I was also into those. Though at that\ntime I was masquerading in Greater Poop as a cremated cabbage to throw off\nthe FBI.\nGypsie [to Hill]: Since you wrote it, I take it you are an anarchist?\n79/11/26\n-2-\nLoompanics G. Skripto\nNORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nG.H. HILL: Since then I have given up anarchy. Too many rules - hating the\ngovernment and all that stuff.\nIGNOTUM PER IGNOTIUS: Itâs like hating your own fantasies.\nMalik: [Anarchy] is also standing up and proceeding forward, fantasy
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rule or not.\nThe condition is the same.\nOccupant: Brother needs some wine!\nMalik: We have had this argument before, Reverend Doctor Brother. But wine\nbefore platitudes, fill it up.\nGypsie [to Hill]: And pacifism?\nHill: Iâm not sure I ever was one. Mal2 was not, Malik was. Personally I accepted\nself defense yet I could never reconcile that with the ideal. I finally gave up on\nthat one too. Actually I just gave up on idealism.\nIgnotius: Idealism lives with rules. Realism lives with rocks.\nHill: Yeah. I get along better with rocks.\nMalik: Mal2 once told me that pacifism was a dilemma. If everybody was a\npacifist then everything would be perfect. But nobody is going to be a pacifist\nunless I am first. But if I am and somebody else is not, then I get screwed. He\nsaid that there were five choices under that circumstance. The first was\nnapalming farmers and the second was executing your parents. The third was\nhypocrisy, the fourth was cowardice, and the fifth was to swallow the dilemma.\nZenarchists are trained in dilemma swallowing.\nOccupant: So are other Erisians, like POEE.\nIgnotius: That is characteristic of the Discordian perspective.\nHill: But of course training contradicts Discordian principles.\nMalik: Oh so what. Contradictions are nothing to Discordians.\nOccupant: Dilemma, Schlimemma. [to Gypsie]: What do you think of this, pretty\nmaâam? We donât get to hear your thoughts.\nGypsie: Iâm reporting now, you talk.\nOccupant: Later then?\n79/11/26\n-3-\nLoompanics NORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nG. Skripto\nGypsie: Perhaps. Later.\nOccupant: You are smiling.\nGypsie: Hey, guy, later. [to Hill]: Doesnât this leave you a little schizy?\nHill: Itâs OK, Iâm half Gemini.\nGypsie: Whatâs the other half?\nHill: Taurus. That makes me stubborn schizy.\nIgnotius: Iâm a Whale.\nOccupant: I choose Satyr.\nMalik: Spirits donât have signs.\nHill: A character can have a sign if I want it so.\nOccupant: Well I can have a sign if I want to and screw both of you.\nMalik: Come on Greg, you just think
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: that we are your characters....\nOccupant: You were inhabited by Malaclypse the Younger. He caused you to\ncreate roles and those roles are being performed by us spirits.\nIgnotius: A perfectly normal pagan relationship.\nHill: Well you can look at it like that if you want to, but I created Mal2 to my\nspecifications just as I conceived all the rest of you.\nOccupant: You didnât invent Eris. She caused you to think you created the spirit\nof Malaclypse.\nHill: Oh bull! Besides, I changed her so much the Greeks would never recognize\nher.\nOccupant: Thatâs what She wanted!\nIgnotius: Deities change things around all the time.\nMalik: What you donât realize is that a spirit has a self identity.\nHill: Nope. A spirit is a product of definition and the one who is doing the\ndefining around here is me. Your identity is what I say it is. Just to prove it, Iâm\ngoing to change your name.\n79/11/26\n-4-\nLoompanics G. Skripto\nNORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nSINISTER DEXTER: Itâs OK with me. Fate is fate. I never much liked \"Mad Malik\"\nanyway.\nIgnotius: Besides people confused him with Joe Malik in Illuminatus.\nDexter: I sort of enjoyed the confusion part.\nOccupant: Doesnât prove anything anyway.\nGypsie: That name sounds familiar. Where is it from?\nHill: Its a name I came up with in the old days and never used much. Its on page\n38 of the Principia referring to Vice President Spiro Agnew. I always thought I\ninvented it but now it sounds like a Stan Freberg name now that I think about it.\nIt may have stuck in my preconscious memory from early TV.\nGypsie: Can you use it without his permission?\nHill: If it is his? I donât know. I hope so. It means \"left right\" in Latin and is a\nperfect name for a libertarian anarchist. Actually in my kind of art the question\nof what can I use freely and what can I not is a very trickly problem.\nGypsie: How do you mean?\nHill: Well, take a collage for example. Like the early one on page 36 of the\nPrincipia. Each little piece was extracted from some larger work created
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: by some\nother artist and published and maybe copyrighted. I find them in newspapers\nand magazines mostly. Often from ads. With a collage you select and extract\nfrom your environment and then assemble into an original relationship.\nThe Principia itself is a collage. A conceptual collage. All of it happens\nsimultaneously. But visually it is a montage, passing through time, like a book\ndoes.\nThere is a lot of pirated stuff in the Principia, especially in the margins. But also\nI sympathize with artists who must own and sell their works to earn a living. Art,\nlike knowledge, should be free fodder for everyone. But it isnât. It is perplexing.\nGypsie: Where did all the things in Principia come from?\nHill: Well, a full answer would take a whole book in itself. Most of the writing\ncredited to a name is a true person and almost always a different name means a\ndifferent person. Most of the non-credited, you know, Malaclypse, text is mine\n79/11/26\n-5-\nLoompanics NORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nG. Skripto\nalthough some things credited to either Mal2 or Omar were actually co-written\nand passed back and forth and rewritten by each of us. The marginalia, dingbats\nand pasted in titles and heads and things came from wherever I found them -\nsome of which is original but uncredited Discordian output, like the page head\non 12 and other pages which is from a series of satiric memo pads from Our\nPeoples Underworld Cabal. All page layout is mine and some whole graphics like\nthe Sacred Chao and the Hodge Podge Transformer are mine but mostly I just\nfound stuff and integrated it. Mostly I did concept, say 50% of the writing, 10%\nof the graphics, all of the layout.\nGypsie: Specifically, what are some of the sources?\nHill: Well, the poem on the front cover is by Walt Kelly and was spoken by one of\nhis characters in Pogo. The government seals starting on page 1 are from a\nbook of sample seals from the U.S. Government Printing Office. Western Union\non page 6 got into the act because I used to be a teletype operator an
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d had\naccess to blank forms. Rubber stamps came from all over the place and some,\nlike the apple on page 27, I carved myself. A few I ordered to my specification,\nlike on page 1. The quote on top of page 8 might be from Barnum, Iâm not sure.\nThe jumping man on page 12 is from an advertisement. I recognize the style - a\npopular commercial artist - but I donât know his name. The Chinese on that page\nis a grocery ad, I think. The Norton money on page 14 is historic, plus my little\nadditions. The apple on page 17, as well as the triangle on 23 and the Sacred\nChao on 50 are, believe it or not, pasteups from mimeoqraphs, from Seattle\nCabal. That group produced the best damn mimeography Iâve ever seen. The\nLick Here Box on page 23 is one of many tidbits making the rounds in\nalternative/underground newspapers in those days. Trip 5 page header on 29\nwas a chapter title in one of Tim Learyâs books. The Knight on the bull with the\nTV antenna on his helmet on page 46 came from a very artistic magazine called\nHorseshit and put out by two brothers from Long Beach. I donât remember their\nnames. Wonderful magazine.\nOccupant: Eris told Mal2 what to use and where to find it.\nHill: Yeah, in a way that is right. That is why my name does not appear anywhere\non the Principia and why it was published with a broken copyright - Reprint What\nYou Like. I knew I was taking liberties and didnât want my intentions to be\nmisunderstood. It was an experiment and was intended to be an underground\nwork and that involves a different set of ethics than commercial work.\nGypsie: There are no real names at all?\n79/11/26\n-6-\nLoompanics G. Skripto\nNORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nHill: Oh, some. Camden Benares is a real name because he legally changed his\noriginal name to his Holy Name. Also, instead of using Mordecai Malignatus I\nused Bob Wilsonâs real name on page 12 because Werewolf Bridge was a work\nbefore Discordianism. And of course real people like Neils Bohr crop up in\nquotes.\nGypsie: What do you think about th
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e Principia now? Would you want to change\nit?\nHill: I consider it a successful work and I wouldnât want to change it. In some\nways it is immature and I am not the same person I was 10 years ago, but it\naccomplished the objectives I set for myself and it has the effect I wanted it to\nhave. There are a few errors though.\nGypsie: Like what?\nHill: Oh, I changed a quote from Tom Gnostic on page 61 and I donât think he\never did forgive me for it. Heâs right. Starbuckâs Pebbles should have been\npreceded by the Myth of Starbuck which was being saved for something else and\nnever got used. I should have used it when I had the chance. And then Eris did a\nneat little trick on me by having IBM make the Greek selectric typewriter element\nnot coincide with all the characters on their keyboard. So the little \"kallisti\" that\nfirst appears on the title page and lastly on the back cover came out \"kallixti\"\nand I was too dumb to know the difference.\nGypsie: Will there ever be a Fifth Edition?\nHill: There already is a Fifth Edition, by Mal2. It is a one page telegram that\nreduces everything to an infinite aum. I found it at Western Union where a\nmachine got stuck and kicked out hundreds of pages of nothing but mâs. He\nmade it the Fifth Edition and then left.\nPrincipia/Malaclypse was a very personal work for me and actually took 10 years\nto culminate. It was one single statement that included my adolescence in the\n50âs and my young adulthood in the 60âs. When I finally had the paste-ups done\nI knew that I had finished it. That is why, quote, Malaclypse left. I knew it was\nfinished. I didnât know exactly what it was, but it was done.\nOccupant: See?\nGypsie: Earlier you said that you met your objectives. Just what were those\nobjectives?\nHill: Well, thatâs hard to answer because it kept refining itself over the years. In\n1969 I mainly thought of myself as a cosmic clown and I set out to prove, by\n79/11/26\n-7-\nLoompanics NORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nG. Skripto\ndemonstration, that a deity ca
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n be anything at all.\nIn other words, people invent gods and not the other way around. Later I\ndecided that I was doing some kind of conceptual art.\nIn the 50âs my culture taught me that I was created by and for a deity, a specific\nmale deity, and that all other deities are FALSE. Yet my growing experience\nshowed me that any deity is true in some sense and false in some other sense.\nSo I set out to do what my society told me is impossibleâmake a real religion\nfrom a patently absurd deity.\nIn the 50âs a female deity was blasphemy. In the 70âs a humorous deity is still\nconsidered impossible, ridiculous and blasphemous. As far as Iâm concerned, I\nhave proven my point. Eris is a real deity and even though I donât promote\nErisianism as a serious religion ....\nOccupant: I do!\nDexter: You speak for yourself.\nIgnotius: Here, here.\nHill: ...I do point out that it makes just as much sense from its own perspective\nas all the others do from each of their own perspectives.\nOccupant: I think paganism is a valid spiritual path. I encourage Erisianism\nbecause it makes fun of itself. I think this is healthy.\nIgnotius: If you can live rewardingly with Goddess Eris you can live with any\ndeity, including none or all.\nDexter: I donât much go for the worship business but I agree with Occupant\nabout the spirit of the thing. We live in a time of turmoil, the whole planet is in a\nstate of change. If we, as a species, cower from the confusion then we die with\nthe dying. This is revolution.\nIgnotius: I am an athiest myself. There is no Greg Hill.\n[ laughter ]\nGypsie [to Hill]: What do you think of Illuminatus?\nHill: Oh, I love it. I was finishing Principia when Shea and Wilson were working\non Illuminatus. It took Dell five years to publish it...maybe that is significant.\n79/11/26\n-8-\nLoompanics G. Skripto\nNORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nThe 1969 Discordian Society was a mail network between independent writers of\nvarious kinds. Norton Cabal was just me and my characters and I used the other\ncabals a
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s sort of a laboratory. In return other Discordians would bounce their\nstuff off of me. We would toss in ideas and anybody could take anything out. It\nwas a concept stew. The exchanging of ideas and techniques broadened and\nencouraged all of us.\nI like Illuminatus for the surrealism. A very effective method of writing.\nIgnotius: I got misquoted. Worse, I wasnât even in that scene and if I had been\nthen I would have said something else.\nDexter [to Ignotius]: That was me in that scene.\nIgnotius: Oh, is that what that was?\nDexter: He got our names mixed up.\nHill: He got mixed up about me too, in Cosmic Trigger. Bob says that when\nOswald was buying the assassination rifle, my girlfriend was printing the first\nedition of Principia on Jim Garrisonâs Xerox. It wasnât my girl friend, it was\nKerryâs; it wasnât the First Ed Principia, it was some earlier Discordian thoughts;\nit wasnât Garrisonâs Xerox, it was his mimeograph; and it wasnât just before\nKennedy was shot but a couple of years before that.*\nThe First Ed Principia, by the way, was reproduced at Xerox Corp when\nxerography was a new technology. Which was my second New Orleans trip in\n1965. I worked for a guy on Bourbon Street who was a Xerox salesman by day.\nDexter: I think that George Dorn took too much guff from Hagbard. If someone\npulls a weapon on me, Iâm more inclined to either leave or kill the sonofabitch.\nOccupant: You are supposed to be a pacifist.\nDexter: Iâm speaking figuratively of course. Iâll tell you more tomorrow.\n* I checked this further with Mr. Thornley. He says that the woman in question\nwas not his girlfriend, she was just a friend, and it wasnât a couple of years\nbefore Kennedy was shot but had to be a couple of years after (but before\nGarrison investigated Thornley). --GS\n79/11/26\n-9-\nLoompanics NORTON CABAL INTERVIEW\nG. Skripto\nGypsie [to Hill]: Did you really translate erotic Etruscan poetry?\nHill: Sure, but I used a pen name. I signed it \"Robert Anton Wilson\".\n[A quick rap is hear
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d on the door]\nGypsie: I have only one question left...\nDexter: Iâll get it.\nGypsie: ...what I really want to know is how can we all fit inside of a tiny little\npost office box?\nDexter [to Gypsie]: Itâs a telegram for you, from Mal2.\nGypsie: To me?\n[Paper tearing]\nGypsie [reading]: \"If I told everybody how they could live inside of a post office\nbox then everybody would stop paying landlords and go live inside their post\noffice boxes. It would collapse the building! Can you imagine, post offices\ncollapsing all over the country, the hemisphere, the PLANET! The whole worldâs\ncommunication system would be destroyed. No, no, I must not say. I dare not!\"\n# # #\n79/11/26\n-10-\nLoompanics Fifth Edition\nPRINCIPIA DISCORDIA\nor\nA CATTERPILLERâS PRAISE TO THE BUTTERFLY\nbeing the\nFINAL STATEMENT\nof Malaclypse the Younger\nPublished by Joshua Norton Cabal\nSan Francisco\nAll Rites Reversed This PDF Copy of the Principia Discordia was painstakingly re-scanned and re-\nassembled by the 23 Apples of Eris. It replaces an earlier version we created that had several\nprinting problems, sub-par graphics, and many misspellings.\nThis version is about as perfect as we could make it and still be realistically\ndownloadable (original misspellings by authors were kept). It includes the entire Loompanics\nversion of the Principia Discordia, aside from the blurbs and commercials for other books, as well\nas the IllumiNet versionâs Forward by Lord Omar. Unlike our first attempt at PDFing the\nPrincipia, no Steve Jackson material was included in this version.\nIn addition to this PDF version of the Principia, another almost identical version exists on\nthe 23 Apples of Eris Homepage (which may be found at CastleChaos.Com ) with extensive\nannotations by Net Discordians â we encourage you to check it out. Also, if you liked the scans\nand want any of the pictures, the entire Loompanics version of the Principia is available in JPG\nand DOC format.\nWe would like to extend our most sincere gratitude to everybod
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: y who is responsible for\nthe ideas contained here in the Principia, and also encourage you to leave copies of this\neverywhere you can â replace those useless books you always find in hotel rooms, leave some\nREAL reading material in doctorâs officesâ¦ mail co-workers a page at a time. Whatever strikes\nyour fancy.\n- Prince Mu-Chao, High Mucky-Muck, 23AE\nAMBROSE BIERCE SAYS,\nâSave Your Barcodes!â " .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 94, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:751fe0d6-e600-f6c5-357a-190d73af4f59' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '101341', new value: 'urn:uuid:5c28500d-0b94-a8e9-118f-58816042eb90')
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:751fe0d6-e600-f6c5-357a-190d73af4f59> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:751fe0d6-e600-f6c5-357a-190d73af4f59> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "Power supply pin outs for the Victor V86P laptop computer" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Bruce Appleton"] ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:contentCreated "2011-06-21T13:55:59Z" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: dc:format "application/pdf" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:description "" ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 2 ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "ACT Sirius 1 User Group (UK)\nPower supply pin outs for the Victor V86P laptop computer.\nThe power supply output is rated at 8.5 volts at 4.5 amps. Connection to the laptop is\nvia a square 6 pin socket and plug. Correct orientation is achieved by a raised section\non the moulding on the plug. This prevents incorrect insertion.\nPlug pin designations:\n1 2\n4 5\n3\n6\nPin 1 = Ground\nPin 2 = Ground\nAll connected together ( Common ground )\nPin 3 = Ground\nPin 4 = 8.5 volts\nMust be connected ( Battery Circuit)\nPin 5 = 8.5 volts\nConnected together ( Volts in )\nPin 6 = 8.5 volts\nThe three pins 1, 2, 3 are all common grounds.\nThe pin 4 is part of the battery charge and monitoring circuit and must have a positive\nvoltage applied to it. If not the âBatteryâ LED on the laptop will light and a âBeepâ\nwill be heard. This happens if an internal battery is either not fitted or is discharged.\nThe two pins 5, 6 carry the main power to the laptop.\nOn the plug there is a small exposed section of metal (denoted by the thick line on the\ndiagram above that is a âexternalâ ground and earths to the chassis within the socket.\nThis is not necessary as all grounds including the chassis are connected via the three\npins 1, 2 and 3)\nACT Sirius 1 User Group (UK)\n2 ACT Sirius 1 User Group (UK)\nView of corner of laptop showing power socket\nPin 1 is the lower left hand pin\nPin 4 is the lower right hand pin\nACT Sirius 1 User Group (UK)\nACT Sirius 1 User Group (UK)\n2 " ;
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:tableOfContents "View of corner of laptop showing power socket " .
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:37:29 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:38:06 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Could not mmap pdf file '/home/lkundrak/Documents/8088 Project Book.pdf': Cannot allocate memory
>Sep 28 18:38:06 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task for 'file:///home/lkundrak/Documents/8088%20Project%20Book.pdf' finished with error: Could not get any metadata for uri:'file:///home/lkundrak/Documents/8088%20Project%20Book.pdf' and mime:'application/pdf'
>Sep 28 18:38:33 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: 'file:///home/lkundrak/Documents/linuxalt-usb-reversing.fodp' Not a zip file: No Zip trailer
>Sep 28 18:38:33 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: 'file:///home/lkundrak/Documents/linuxalt-usb-reversing.fodp' Not a zip file: No Zip trailer
>Sep 28 18:38:33 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Got error parsing XML file: No Zip trailer
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 32, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:23c90492-e4fb-37ef-f715-b78c44d832ae' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '102053', new value: 'urn:uuid:c5ee2c39-447e-7ed7-a468-f78c81d8e8b5')
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:23c90492-e4fb-37ef-f715-b78c44d832ae> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:23c90492-e4fb-37ef-f715-b78c44d832ae> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "Microsoft Word - Living Under God's Law  - Christian Ethics.doc" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Sam Galloza"] ;
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:contentCreated "2005-10-05T09:51:05Z" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: dc:format "application/pdf" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 352 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "5\nBook One\nLiving Under Godâs Law: Christian Ethics 6\nPart One: Introductory Considerations 7\nChapter 1: Introduction\nThe Christian life is a rich journey, and it is not easy to describe. Without\nany pretense of comprehensiveness, I try to describe it in this volume as living\nunder Godâs law, in Godâs world, in the presence of God himself. Those of you\nwho have read other books of mine will recognize that triad as indicating\nnormative, situational, and existential perspectives respectively. Those of you\nwho havenât read other books of mine can learn about that triad in the present\nvolume.\nThese three perspectives will provide the main structure of the book. The\nfirst part will be the longestâa treatise on Christian ethics. The second will deal\nwith âLiving in the World: Christ and Culture,â and the third will be âLiving by\nGodâs Grace: Spiritual Maturity.â\nWe begin now with Part One, the treatise on ethics. After some\nintroductory material defining terms and relating ethics to Godâs lordship, I shall\ndiscuss ethics itself under three perspectives: situational (the history of ethical\nthought), existential (a Christian ethical method), and normative (Biblical ethical\nprinciples, following the pattern of the Ten Commandments). But first a couple of\nimportant introductory questions:\nWhy Study Ethics?\nFor the following reasons, at least:\n1. Servants of Jesus are people who have his commandments and keep them\n(John 14:21).\nOver and over again, Jesus tells us, âIf you love me, you will keep my\ncommandments â(John 14:15; compare verses 21, 23, 15:10, 1 John 2:3-5, 3:21-\n24, 5:3). 1 Jesusâ ânew commandmentâ¦ that you love one another: just as I have\nloved you, you also are to love one anotherâ (John 13:34) is to be the mark of the\nchurch, distinguishing it from the world: âBy this all people will know that you are\nmy disciples, if you have love for one anotherâ (verse 35). This is not to say that\nwe are saved by works, obedience,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: or keeping commandments. It is simply to\nsay that if we want to be disciples of Jesus we must be devoted to good works\n(Tit. 3:8; compare Matt. 5:16, Eph. 2:10, 1 Tim. 2:10, 5:10, 6:18, 2 Tim. 3:17, Tit.\n2:7, 14, Tit. 3:14Heb. 10:24, 1 Pet. 2:12.) If we are to be devoted to good works,\nwe must know what works are good and what ones bad. So we need to study\nethics.\n2. The purpose of Scripture itself is ethical.\n1\nScripture quotations in this volume are taken from the English Standard Version. 8\nThe familiar passage 2 Tim. 3:16-17 reads,\nAll Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for\nreproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of\nGod may be competent, equipped for every good work.\nNote the ethical focus here. God breathed out the words of Scripture so that we\nmay be trained in righteousness, so that we may be equipped for every good\nwork. Of course the purpose of Scripture can be stated in other ways as well.\nMany have emphasized that the purpose of Scripture is to bear witness to Christ,\nand that is entirely legitimate (Luke 24:27, John 5:39). But it is plain that Scripture\npresents Christ as one who equips us to be lights in the world (Matt. 5:14), and\ntherefore a great amount of Scripture is devoted to defining and motivating our\ngood works.\n3. In one sense, everything in the Bible is ethical.\nEven when Scripture expounds what we might call doctrinal propositions,\nit presents them as propositions that ought to be believed. That ought is an\nethical ought. Indeed, all the content of Scripture is content that ought to believed\nand acted upon. The whole Bible is ethics. Of course the Bible is not only ethics.\nThe Bible is also narrative, for to understand the history of redemption we must\nhave recourse to everything in Scripture. So the whole Bible is narrative as well\nas ethics. And similarly, the whole Bible is doctrinal truth, wisdom, evangelism,\napologetic, 2 and so on. But clearly we have not understood the Bible until we\nhave
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: understood its ethic.\nThis is another way of saying, as I did in DKG, that theology is âthe\napplication of the Word of God by persons to all areas of life.â 3 Any study or\nteaching of the Bible is an attempt to answer human questions, to meet human\nneeds. Those questions or needs may be relatively âtheoreticalâ (e.g., âWhat is\nthe meaning of ratzah in the sixth commandment?â) or relatively âpracticalâ (e.g.,\nâWhen should I remove life support from my dying father?â). But they are all\npractical in the sense that they deal with human questions and needs. In that\nsense, all theology is addressed to people, to help them think and live 4 to the\nglory of God. So all theology is ethical.\n4. The study of ethics has an enormous importance for our witness to the world.\n2\nSo I call all of these perspectives on the nature of Scripture. See DKG, 191-94. On apologetics\nas a perspective on the whole Bible, see Ezra Hyun Kim, Biblical Preaching is Apologia, a D. Min.\nproject submitted to Westminster Theological Seminary in California, Spring, 2000.\n3\nDKG, 81.\n4\nThinking is part of life and so it too is ethical. It is under the authority of Godâs Word. Thus\nepistemology can be understood as a subdivision of ethics. See DKG, 62-64. 9\nWe live in an age in which people are greatly concerned about ethics. Every\nday, the news media bring to mind issues of war and piece, preserving the\nenvironment, the powers of government, abortion and euthanasia, genetic\nresearch, and so on. Many people seem very sure of the answers to these\nethical questions. But when you probe deeply into their positions, they admit that\ntheir conviction is based on nothing more than partisan consensus or individual\nfeeling. But the Bible does give us a basis for ethical judgments: the revelation of\nthe living God. So ethical discussions open a wide door for Christian witness.\nPeople are far more open to discuss ethics than to discuss theistic proofs, or\neven âtranscendental arguments.â Philosophy does not exci
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: te many people\ntoday, and many are not even open to the simple witness of personal testimony\nand the simple gospel. But they do care about right and wrong. Christians who\ncan talk about ethics in a cogent way, therefore, have a great apologetic and\nevangelistic advantage.\nIt is true that many do not want to hear this witness today. They consider\nChristianity a âreligiousâ position and therefore one that should not be discussed\nin the public square. But this view is utterly unreasonable, and that\nunreasonability should be pressed. Why should religious positions be excluded\nfrom the debate, especially when secular positions have been so helpless in\npresenting a convincing basis for ethical judgments? As I shall indicate in this\nvolume, the main currents of twentieth and twenty-first century thought has\nbecome bankrupt, confessedly unable to provide any basis for distinguishing\nright from wrong. I believe that, despite the political incorrectness of the\nsuggestion, many are hungering for answers and are willing to look even at\nreligious positions to find them.\nAnd I shall argue as well that all ethics is religious, even that ethics that tries\nhardest to be secular. In the end, all ethics presupposes ultimate values. It\nrequires allegiance to someone or something that demands all devotion and\ngoverns all thinking. That kind of allegiance is indistinguishable from religious\ndevotion, even if it doesnât require liturgical practices. So the line between\nreligious and secular ethics is a fuzzy one, and it is arbitrary to use such a line to\ndetermine who is entitled to join an ethical dialogue.\nBut more important than the ability to talk about ethics is the ability to live it.\nThis is true even in our witness to the world. People see how we live. Even\nChristians who are not articulate or eloquent can make, through their actions, a\ngreat impact on others. Jesus comments on the importance of our works to our\nwitness, when he says, âlet your light shine before others, so that they may see\n
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heavenâ (Matt. 5:16).\nWhat Should Be Our Ethical Bias? 10\nBefore we begin our study, there is another question we need to ask. All of\nus are biased in favor of certain conclusions, even at the outset of our study. We\ncannot be neutral. But we ought to be self-conscious, even critical, about our\nbiases.\nThere are those who enter the field of ethics with a goal of dispelling\nlegalism. Perhaps they were raised in a church that imposed all sorts of rules on\nthe kids: donât drink, donât smoke, donât play cards, and they have felt these as a\nbig burden. So as ethicists they want to emphasize our freedom. Often that\nmeans taking the âliberalâ side in ethical controversies.\nOthers enter the field disgusted by the moral decline in our society. These\nmay also be impressed by the rigorousness of Scripture, the high cost of\ndiscipleship. They want to teach an ethic that does not compromise with\nworldliness, a radical ethic of discipline and self-control.\nWe tend to describe the first type of ethic as liberal, the second as\nconservative. Down through the years, ethicists have tended to divide into\nconservative and liberal parties: in ancient Judaism the schools of Shammai\n(conservative) and Hillel (liberal); in Catholicism the Jesuits (liberal) and the\nJansenists (conservative). The liberal tendency to find loopholes in the moral law,\nto justify apparent sin, has given casuistry a bad name. The conservative\ntendency toward harshness and austerity has given moralism a bad name.\nIn this book I urge readers not to side with either tendency. The point of\nChristian ethics is not to be as liberal as we can be, or as conservative. It is,\nrather, to be as biblical as we can be. So this book will seem to be more liberal\nthan the majority on some issues (e.g. worship, cloning, just war, gambling,\ndeceiving) and more conservative on others (e.g. the Sabbath, roles of women,\nstem cell research). Godâs word has a way of surprising us, of not f
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: itting into our\nprearranged categories. Jesus rebuked both the Pharisees and the Sadducees;\nPaul rebuked both legalists and libertines. Understanding Godâs will is rarely\nfalling into lockstep with some popular ideology. We need to think as part of a\ncommunity, listening to our brothers and sisters; but we also need the courage to\nstep aside from the crowd when Godâs word directs us in that way.\nSo in this book I will be drawing some fine distinctions, as theologians are\nwont to do. I do this not to gain a reputation for subtlety and nuance, but simply\nto follow Scripture. My goal is to go as far as Scripture goes, and no farther, to\nfollow its path without deviating to the left or the right. I trust Godâs Spirit to help\nus thread these needles, to help us find the biblical path, even when it is narrow\nand relatively untraveled. May he be with writer and reader as we seek to walk by\nthe lamp of Godâs Word. 11\nChapter 2: An Ethical Glossary\nDefinitions are never a matter of life and death. Scripture gives us no\ndirections for defining English words. So itâs possible for two people to use\ndifferent definitions of a term, without differing in their actual views. One\ntheologian, for example, may define faith as intellectual assent, while insisting\nthat trust always accompanies it. Another may define it as trust, while insisting\nthat intellectual assent always accompanies it. The differences between these\ntwo theologians should not be considered significant at this particular point. We\nmay define terms as we like, as long as our definitions donât confuse people or\nmislead them on substantive issues. 5\nIn this chapter, I will define some important terms, indicating how I will use\nthese terms in this particular book. These definitions are not necessarily best for\nall situations, even for all discussions of ethics.\nEthics and Theology\nThe first group of definitions will relate ethics to other theological\ndisciplines. The earlier ones review discussions in DKG.\nKnowledge of God\nI
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: use this phrase to mean a personal, covenantal relationship with God,\ninvolving awareness of his self-revelation, an obedient or disobedient response\nto that revelation, and the divine blessing or curse upon that response. 6\nThis definition connects our knowledge of God to his lordship (see chapter\n3 of this volume) and to ethics, as I define it below.\nDoctrine\nDoctrine is the Word of God in use to create and deepen oneâs knowledge\nof God, and to encourage an obedient, rather than disobedient, response to his\nrevelation. Or, more briefly, application of the Word of God to all areas of human\nlife.\n5\n6\nCompare the discussions in DKG, 76-77, 215-241.\nDKG, 11-49. 12\nThis definition is built upon the use of the Greek terms didasko, didache,\nand didaskalia, especially as Paul uses them in the Pastoral Epistles. 7 I prefer to\ndefine doctrine, therefore e, not as theological propositions, but as an active\nprocess of teaching that leads to spiritual health: as Paul puts it, âsound\n(hygiainos) doctrineâ (1 Tim. 1:10, 2 Tim. 4:3, Tit. 1:9, 2:1).\nTheology\nI define theology as a synonym of doctrine. 8\nSo theology, too, is an active process of teaching, not first of all a collection of\npropositions. I am not opposed to theological propositions; there are quite a few\nof them in my books. But theological propositions are useful only in the context of\na kind of teaching that leads to spiritual health.\nIn that sense, theology is a practical discipline, not merely theoretical. 9 I do not\ndisparage theory; indeed, my own books are more theoretical than practical. But\nin my definition, theory is not the only kind of theology there is, nor is it theology\npar excellence. Theology takes place, not only in technical books, but also in\nchildrenâs Sunday school classes, evangelistic meetings, preaching, and\ndiscipleship seminars. Theology is the application of the Word to all areas of life.\nAcademic or theoretical theology is one kind of theology, not the only kind. And I\nshall argue later that in Sc
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ripture theory is not more ultimate than practice, nor is\nit the basis of practice; rather, theory and practice are both applications of Godâs\nword, and both enrich one another when they are biblical.\nFor that matter, the line between theory and practice is not sharp. Theory is one\nkind of practice, and âtheoreticalâ and âpracticalâ are relative terms that admit of\ndegrees.\nEthics\nEthics is theology, viewed as a means of determining which human persons,\nacts, and attitudes receive Godâs blessing and which do not.\n7\nIbid., 81-85.\nFor the âtraditional theological programsâ of exegetical, biblical, systematic, and practical\ntheology, see DKG 206-214. For historical theology, see 304-314. All of these are different ways\nof applying the whole Bible. They do not differ in subject matter, but in the questions we ask of\nscripture in each program.\n9\nSee Ibid., 84-85 on the theory/practice relation.\n8 13\nThis formulation defines ethics as Christian ethics. Many will find this\nobjectionable. Given this definition, for example, Aristotle did not write about\nethics! For, in his purportedly ethical writings, Aristotle was not trying to\ndetermine what persons, acts, and attitudes are blessed by the God of the Bible.\nThe same could be said of any non-Christian thinker. It seems absurd to define\nethics in such a way as to exclude all non-Christian writers from the discipline.\nBut, as I said earlier, I donât object to people using a different definition in a\ndifferent context. If I were to discuss ethics with a disciple of Aristotle, for\nexample, I would agree with him to define the topic as, say, the study of right and\nwrong. 10 But I mean my present book to be a distinctively Christian work, and I\nintend to show that non-Christian ethics is flawed, not only in its conclusions, but\nalso in its initial understanding of its task. For that purpose, my theologically\nenhanced definition will be most serviceable.\nNote also that on this definition, ethics is not a branch of theology, but
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: theology\nitself, the whole of theology, viewed in a certain way. All theology answers ethical\nquestions. Even the more theoretical kinds of theology, as we saw earlier, are\nexplorations into what we ought to believe. That ought is an ethical ought. So,\nwhen we ask what we ought to believe about, say, the order of the divine\ndecrees, we are asking an ethical question. 11\nAll theology, then, is ethical. It is also true that the subjects we usually call\nethical, like murder, stealing, and adultery, can be integrated with the rest of\ntheology more thoroughly than in most theological systems. In a theological\ncurriculum, it would be possible to deal with ethical issues (even those issues we\nnormally think of as ethical) throughout, rather than postponing them to a special\ncourse. We could discuss the creation ordinances, the moral laws given to Adam\nand Eve before the Fall, in the course of describing the prefall condition of the\nhuman race. Then we could teach the Decalogue in connection with the Mosaic\nCovenant, ethical methodology in connection with theological prolegomena, and\nso on. But, in fact, theologians (including myself) have tended to avoid the more\npractical kinds of ethical questions in the main curriculum of systematic and\nbiblical theology. So seminaries have come to offer courses in ethics as a\nsupposedly separate discipline. In fact, however, ethics covers the whole range\nof human life and all the teaching of Scripture.\nIn this book, however, I will stick pretty much to the standard subject-matter that\ntheologians have called ethical, that is the subject-matter of the Ten\nCommandments, together with the presuppositions and applications of those\ncommandments.\n10\nOf course, at some point I would have to show the Aristotelian inquirer also that his present\nmethod of ethics is flawed in concept. But I would not insist on making that point at the beginning\nof a conversation.\n11\nCompare the argument in DKG that epistemology can be seen as a branch of ethics, 62-64,\n73-75, 108-
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 109, 149-151, 247-48. 14\nFinally, in this definition, please take note of the triad âpersons, acts, and\nattitudes.â 12 These are the three subjects of ethical predication in the Bible. Only\nthese can be ethically good, bad, right, or wrong. A rock can be good in a non-\nethical sense: e.g. good for use in construction. But a rock cannot make ethical\nchoices; it cannot seek to bring itself, its actions, and its attitudes into conformity\nto Godâs will. So a rock is not a subject of ethical predication. Only rational\ncreatures (God, angels, human beings) are, persons, together with their actions\nand attitudes.\nMetaethics\nMetaethics is a second-order discipline, a theological reflection on the\nnature of ethics. Ethics is about good and bad, right and wrong, blessing and\ncurse. Metaethics is about ethics. Metaethics discusses the nature of right and\nwrong, ethical methods, the presuppositions of ethics, and so on. But as with\nChristian ethics, a Christian metaethic must be subject to Scripture and thus\nmust be theological. In that way, metaethics is a part of theology, and therefore,\naccording to my earlier definition, a part of ethics.\nMorality\nI will use the terms morality and ethics synonymously in this book, though\nthey are often distinguished. Johan Douma, for example, makes this distinction:\nâmorality consists of the entirety of traditional and dominant customs, while ethics\nis reflection upon those customs.â 13 I think, however, that either term can refer\n(descriptively) to human customs 14 and (normatively) to the evaluation of those\ncustoms as right or wrong.\nIt is, of course, perfectly legitimate to reflect on the customs of human life, and I\nwill be doing that in this book to some extent. But I believe that for Christians the\nwork of ethics is essentially theological. Theology does, of course, reflect on\nhuman customs, as do many other disciplines. But theology reflects on those\ncustoms specifically for the sake of applying biblical standards to them. The\n12\nIâm not
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sure whether this threefold distinction should be integrated with the other threefold\ndistinctions of my Theology of Lordship books. And if it is to be so integrated, Iâm not sure exactly\nhow to do it. Both âpersonsâ and âattitudesâ are good candidates for the existential perspective. At\nthe moment, I lean toward the following: person, normative; acts, situational; attitudes, existential.\nOf course, the beautiful thing about these triads is that they are perspectival, so that different\narrangements are possible. For readers who are drawing a blank here, I will explain the\nperspectives in the following chapter.\n13\nDouma, Responsible Conduct (Phillipsburg: P&R, 2003), 3.\n14\nAs in the related terms mores and ethos. 15\nsame is true of ethics and morality in the normative sense, as I shall use the\nterms.\nThe two terms, also, can equally refer de facto to peopleâs moral\nstandards, or de jure to the standards they ought to have. Joeâs ethics (de facto)\nare Joeâs moral standards and/or the ways he applies those standards in his\ndecisions. But from a normative standpoint (de jure), Joeâs ethics, may be wrong,\nunethical, immoral.\nValue Terms\nMoral, Ethical\nIn light of the above discussion, I will treat these adjectives, like the\ncorresponding nouns, synonymously. Both of the terms, however, can be used\neither descriptively or normatively. Descriptively, they mean âpertaining to the\ndiscipline of ethics,â as in the sentence, âthis is an ethical, not an aesthetic\nquestion.â Normatively, they mean âconforming to ethical norms,â as in the\nsentence âSenator Ridenhour is an ethical politician.â\nImmoral, Amoral, Non-moral\nThe word moral can be negated in three different ways. Immoral is usually a\nnormative term, used to criticize a person, act, or attitude as ethically bad or\nwrong. An amoral person is someone who is unable or unwilling to bring ethical\nconsiderations to bear on his decisions. Nonmoral is the opposite of the\ndescriptive meaning of moral above, by wh
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ich we distinguish ethical from\nnonethical topics of discussion. So the question of whether clam chowder should\ncontain tomatoes is usually considered to be a nonmoral question, except\noccasionally by partisans on either side.\nMoralistic\nThis term is very vague, and I will not be using it much, if at all, in this book. It\ncan mean (a) trite or provincial in ethical attitude, (b) self-righteous, (c) putting\ntoo much emphasis on morality, (d) legalistic, putting works in the role that\nScripture reserves for grace, or (e) (in preaching) failing to note or sufficiently 16\nemphasize the redemptive-historical purpose of a biblical text. 15 Usually the word\nis used as a term of reproach, but rarely with any precision or clarity. The word\nhas bad connotations, and people seem to use it mainly for the sake of those\nconnotations, to make an opponent look bad, rather than to bring clarity to a\ndiscussion. We should generally avoid using words in this way.\nValue\nA value is a quality of worth or merit. There are various kinds of value, including\neconomic, aesthetic, medicinal, recreational, and ethical. So ethics may be\nregarded as a division of value-theory. It is important to make distinctions\nbetween ethical values and other kinds of values. Writing a great symphony may\nbe an act of great aesthetic value, but, depending on the motive of the\ncomposerâs heart, it may be of no ethical value, or even negative ethical value.\nFact\nFacts are states of affairs. Statements of fact (âpropositionsâ) claim to assert what\nis the case. Philosophers commonly distinguish, sometimes very sharply,\nbetween facts and values, and those distinctions can be important in ethical\nphilosophy as we shall see. However, it is also important to see the closeness of\nthe relation between fact and value. If a moral principle (e.g., âStealing is wrongâ)\nis true, then it is a fact. Further, statements of fact presuppose moral values. 16\nWhen someone says âthe book is on the table,â he is claiming that his hearers\no
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ught to believe that proposition. And that ought is an ethical ought.\nNorm\nA norm is a rule or standard that determines the ethical rightness or wrongness,\nthe goodness or badness, of any person, action, or attitude. In biblical ethics, the\nultimate norm is Godâs revelation.\nVirtue\n15\nI have discussed redemptive history (=biblical theology) in DKG, 207-212, and I will try later in\nthis book to show its role in ethics.\n16\nSee DKG, 140-41. Also, 71-73, on the relation of facts to interpretations. Note also the texts in\nDKG cited in a previous footnote to show that epistemology is part of ethics. 17\nVirtues are grounds of praise for someone or something. There are non-moral\nvirtues, such as efficiency, skill, and talent. Moral virtues, like love, kindness,\nfidelity, and integrity, are elements of a good moral character. âVirtue ethicsâ is a\nkind of ethics that focuses on these inward character traits. This type of ethics is\noften contrasted with âcommand ethicsâ (focusing on moral rules) and ânarrative\nethicsâ (focusing on a history or story that provides a context for ethical decision-\nmaking). We shall see that as Christians we need not choose among these;\nScripture provides us with divine commands, a narrative-basis of moral choice,\nand a list of virtues, together with Godâs gracious means of conferring those\nvirtues upon us.\nGood\nGood is the most general adjective of commendation. We use the term to ascribe\nany sort of value to anything: aesthetic, economic, etc., as well as ethical. So we\nshould distinguish between moral goodness and non-moral goodness. The most\ncommon form of non-moral goodness may be described as teleological\ngoodness. To be good in the teleological sense is simply to be useful: good for\nsomething, producing a desirable state of affairs. A good hammer is a tool that is\nuseful for pounding nails into surfaces. Pounding nails is its purpose, its telos, its\nend. The hammer is not morally good, for moral goodness (in accord with our\nearlier definitio
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n of ethics) describes a person, action, or attitude that receives\nGodâs blessing. The hammer is not a person, so it does not receive Godâs\nblessing for the jobs it performs.\nWe do sometimes describe human beings as good in a teleological sense. A\ngood plumber, for example, is someone who is skilled at fixing pipes. To say that\nSid is a good plumber is not the same as to say that he is a good person. He\nmay be skilled at fixing pipes, but otherwise a scoundrel. In such a case, we\nusually say he is a good plumber, but a bad person. To be sure, there is some\noverlap between the concepts. If Sid is skilled at fixing pipes, but he overcharges,\nsteals objects from the kitchen, makes an awful mess without cleaning it up, we\nprobably would not call him a good plumber, for fear of being misunderstood. So\nthere is a point where someoneâs ethics disqualifies him even from teleological\ncommendations.\nAnd in some cases moral turpitude compromises a personâs skills. If skilled\nconcert pianist Karl KonzertstÃ¼ck stays up partying all night and arrives at his\nrecital with a hangover, behavior that leads him to make all sorts of mistakes,\npeople will not recognize him that day as a good pianist. And if such behavior\nbecomes a habit, he may entirely lose his reputation, even his skills themselves.\nSo moral evil can imperil teleological goodness. Still, as a matter of definition, it is\npossible to speak of teleological goodness without reflecting on moral goodness. 18\nBoth teleological goodness and moral goodness are important to ethics. For\nmorally good people seek in their actions to achieve goals that are teleologically\ngood. For many ethical philosophers, the highest goal (summum bonum) is\nhappiness, either individual or corporate. Morally good acts, on these views, are\nacts that seek the happiness of self and others. So morally good actions are\nthose that promote teleological goodness.\nScripture describes the highest good theologically: it is the glory of God (1 Cor.\n10:31), the kingdom of G
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: od (Matt. 6:33). We shall see that these goals\nincorporate the happiness of people in various ways. But they are fundamentally\ntheocentric, rather than anthropocentric. These provide the telos, the goal, of the\nbelieverâs ethical actions: moral goodness seeking teleological goodness. So for\nChristians the teleological is theological, theistic, and theocentric.\nRight\nRight is generally synonymous with moral goodness: a good act is a right act. Its\nnuances, however, are somewhat different. Right belongs to the legal\nvocabulary. So when it describes moral goodness, it describes it as conformity to\nnorms, laws, or standards. The corresponding biblical terms tzedek and dikaios\nhave similar associations, and they can be translated just as well as right.\nIn the triad mentioned earlier of the subjects of ethical predication, good applies\nequally to persons, acts, and attitudes, while right applies to actions and\nattitudes, very rarely to persons. We often hear people described as âgood guys,â\nbut not âright guys,â though I often heard the latter phrase when I was growing up\nin the 1940s and 50s. Scripture and theology, however, refer often to\nrighteousness as a virtue, conformity to Godâs standards. 17\nAnother common meaning of right in ethics is âdeserved privilege.â We have a\nright when we have ethical and/or legal permission to do something or to\npossess something. In this sense, right is correlative with obligation. If Joey has a\nright to life, society has an obligation to protect his life. If Susanne has the right to\nan education, someone must provide her with that education. If Jerome has the\nright to free health care, then someone else has the obligation to provide him\nwith that. Of course, it is possible to give up oneâs rights, as Paul does in 1 Cor.\n9:4-6, 12, 15. Rights in this sense are governed by moral and/or legal standards,\nand the emphasis on those standards is what connects this meaning with that of\nthe previous paragraph.\n17\nAs an attribute of God, righteou
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sness refers not only to Godâs character, his conformity to his\nown ethical standards, but also to Godâs actions to redeem his people, his ârighteous deeds.â See\nDG, 451-458. But of course those actions are themselves righteous because they conform to his\nstandards. 19\nObligation, Duty, Ought\nI shall use obligation and duty synonymously. These refer to actions we are\nrequired to do, commanded to do, by an ethical norm. Ought is a verbal form of\nobligation. What we ought to do is what the norm requires of us.\nSome obligations are immediate, requiring us to carry them out right now, at the\nexpense of anything else we may be doing or planning to do. So if we are in the\nmidst of committing a sin, we are obligated to stop immediately. Other obligations\nare more general, things we must do at some time, or within some time-frame,\nbut not necessarily right away. Later we shall discuss obligations that may\nlegitimately be postponed in favor of other duties, such as the obligation to study\nthe Scripture, to pray, to share the gospel with a neighbor, etc.\nSome obligations are individual, some corporate. For example, in Gen. 1:28, God\ntells the human race, represented by Adam, to replenish the earth and subdue it.\nThis is not a command Adam could have fulfilled by himself. He is to play a role,\nwith others playing other roles, in the fulfillment of this command by the whole\nhuman race. Similarly the Great Commission in Matt. 28: Jesus there commands\nthe church, represented by the apostles, to make disciples of all the nations of\nthe earth. None of those eleven men, not even those eleven as a group, could\ncarry out that command by themselves. The command is given to the whole\nchurch, and each individual is to fulfill a different role in the accomplishment of it.\nObligations include their applications. For example, if Sharon is obligated to go to\na meeting on Wednesday, she is also obligated to find and utilize transportation\nthat will get her to that meeting. So when God commands us to glorif
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: y him in all\nthings (1 Cor. 10:31), everything we do ought to be an application of that\ncommand. So everything we do is either a fulfillment of, or a violation of, that\nobligation. In that sense, all our actions are ethical. All of our actions are either\ngood or bad.\nThis is not to say that every choice is a choice between good and bad. We often\nmake choices between two or more goods, as when choosing one cabbage out\nof many at the grocery store. 18 Even a choice of a cabbage involves a choice to\nglorify God or not to; in that sense it is an ethical choice. And of course in that\nchoice as in all choices we have an obligation to choose the right rather than the\nwrong. But in this situation there are actually two choices taking place at the\nsame time: (1) the choice to glorify God, and (2) the choice of one good cabbage\nover another. The first is a choice between good and evil, the second a choice\nbetween two goods.\n18\nI shall argue later that we are never called to choose between two or more wrongs, without the\nopportunity to choose a right alternative. 20\nPermission\nEthical norms regularly permit actions that they do not prohibit. 19 Permission,\nhowever, is not the same as commandment (1 Cor. 7:6). In my earlier example,\nthe ethical norm, Godâs word, does not command me explicitly to choose one\ncabbage over the other (assuming both are equal in relevant respects). But since\nthat norm does not forbid me, explicitly or implicitly, to buy that cabbage, it\nthereby permits that action. Permitted actions are good actions, and so we are\ninclined to say that some good actions are not obligatory, that (1) obligated\nactions and (2) actions not obligated but only permitted form two separate\nclasses of good actions.\nIn one sense, however, these classes of actions overlap. God does not\ncommand me to buy cabbage A rather than cabbage B. But he does command\nme to glorify him, and one way to apply that command is to supply nutritious food\nto my family. So my action is an application of a command,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and as we saw\nearlier, commands include their applications. In that sense, when I buy the\ncabbage I am carrying out a divine command. But the purchase does not\nrepresent the only possible way to obey that command. I might equally well fulfill\nthe command by buying a different cabbage, or by buying carrots or Brussels\nsprouts, or by buying nothing and getting food at another time.\nGeneral and Specific Obligations\nSo we should distinguish between general and specific obligations. Godâs\ncommands in Scripture are always to some extent general. For example, he says\nâHonor your father and your motherâ (Ex. 20:12). In that passage, he does not\nspecify precisely how we are to honor them. Other divine commands supplement\nthis general command by requiring more specific duties, such as providing for\naged relatives (1 Tim. 5:3-8). But even those are not perfectly specific, for even\nthose commands must be applied to our own experience. For example, say that\nJim must find a way to take care of his mother, who is blind and deaf. At that\nspecific level, there are usually several ways of carrying out the norm. Jim could\ntake his mother into his own home. Or he could arrange for his sister to take the\nmother into her home, with Jim rendering financial assistance. Or he could raise\nmoney to provide nursing care for his mother in her own home. Or he could\narrange for some sort of institutional care. Any of these options, and others,\nmight be a godly response to the situation. 20\n19\n20\nA prohibition is, of course, a negative command.\nI donât, of course, have the space here to argue my ethical evaluation of these alternatives. 21\nSo there are different levels of generality and specificity in moral norms. As we\napply the general norms, we usually find that there are a number of options,\npermissible ways of carrying out the norm. But an obligation must be carried out\nin some way, not neglected altogether. So although a specific application may be\npermitted rather than obligatory, we are obligated to
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: choose one or more of those\npermitted alternatives.\nJustice\nThis word brings us back to the legal vocabulary, which I mentioned in\nconnection with the word right. In general, justice is what is morally right. But the\nword tends to be used mostly in social contexts with the predominant meaning of\nfairness or equity. Still more specifically, justice is the integrity of societyâs legal\nsystem. That includes especially the fairness of the courts, as they render\nverdicts and determine penalties.\nPeople disagree, of course, on what constitutes justice or fairness. In todayâs\npolitical dialogue about economics, conservatives argue that justice is equality of\nopportunity, while liberals argue that justice is not achieved until there is also\nsome level of equality of wealth. 22\nChapter 3: Ethics and Divine Lordship\nI donât intend for this book to replace previous works of ethics written from\na Reformed Christian viewpoint. John Murrayâs Principles of Conduct 21 and\nDivorce 22 still serve as a benchmark for exegetical depth in the field. John\nJefferson Davisâs Evangelical Ethics 23 continues to be an invaluable resource\ncorrelating biblical principles with historic and contemporary discussions of\nethical problems. Readers will see that in this volume I have drawn freely from\nthese books, as well as from Johan Doumaâs The Ten Commandments 24 and\nResponsible Conduct. 25 And my philosophical position is, in my judgment, only\nan elaboration of Cornelius Van Tilâs Christian-Theistic Ethics. 26\nThe contribution I hope to make in this volume is to show the relationship\nof the Christian life, including ethics, to Godâs lordship. I have expounded the\nnature of lordship at length in DG, especially in chapters 1-7. In this chapter of\nthe present volume, I will review that discussion and apply it to ethics in a general\nway, laying the foundation for what is to follow.\nThe name Lord (representing the Hebrew terms Yahweh and Adon and\nthe Greek kyrios) is found over 7000 times in most English
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Bible translations,\nusually referring to God or specifically to Jesus Christ. Godâs revelation of the\nname Yahweh to Moses in Ex. 3:14-15 is foundational to the biblical doctrine of\nGod, for Yahweh is the name by which he wants especially to be remembered.\nThe name Lord is found in the main confessions of faith of both testaments\n(Deut. 6:4-5, Rom. 10:9, 1 Cor. 12:3, Phil. 2:11). God performs all his mighty\nworks so that people âwill know that I am the Lordâ (Ex. 6:7, 7:5, 17, 8:22, 10:2,\n14:4, and many other texts).\nAs Lord, God is, first of all, personal, for Lord is a proper name. Thus the\nBible proclaims that the ultimate reality, the supreme being, is not an impersonal\nforce like gravity or electromagnetism, or even a set of superstrings, but a\nperson, who uses the impersonal realities for his own purposes and to his own\nglory. Modern secular thought is profoundly impersonalistic, holding that persons\nare ultimately reducible to things and forces, to matter, motion, time, and chance.\nScripture denies this impersonalism, insisting that things and forces, indeed all\nreality, indeed all value, comes from a supreme personal being.\n21\nGrand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.\nGrand Rapids: Baker, 1961.\n23\nPhiladelphia: P&R, 1985, 1993, 2004.\n24\nPhillipsburg: P&R, 1996.\n25\nPhillipsburg: P&R, 2003.\n26\nPhiladelphia: Den Dulk Foundation, 1974.\n22 23\nSecond, the Lord is a supremely holy person. His personality shows his\nkinship with us, but his holiness shows his transcendence, his separation from\nus. God is above us, beyond usânot in the sense that he is far away, for he is\nintimately close; not in the sense that he is unknown or unknowable, for he\nclearly reveals himself to us; not in the sense that human language cannot\ndescribe him, for he describes himself to us in the human language of\nScripture. 27 God is beyond us, rather, as the supreme person, the universal King,\nthe Lord of all, before whom we cannot help but bow in awe and wonder. And,\nsince our fall into sin, God is also se
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: parate from us as perfect ethical purity must\nbe separate from total ethical depravity (Isa. 6:5, Luke 5:8).\nThird, God as Lord is head of a covenant relationship. In a covenant, God\ntakes a people to be his, redeems them from death, demands certain behavior\non their part, and declares his blessings and curses: blessings if they obey,\ncurses if they disobey. Parallels to this biblical concept of covenant can be found\nin ancient near-eastern literature outside the Bible. A Great King (the âsuzerainâ)\nwould impose a treaty (or covenant) upon a lesser king (or âvassalâ) and would\nauthor a document setting forth its terms. The document, typically, followed a\nstandard literary form:\n1. The name of the suzerain.\n2. Historical prologue: what the suzerain has done to benefit the vassal.\n3. Stipulations: commands, specifying how the vassal king and his people\nmust behave.\na. General: exclusive allegiance to the suzerain (sometimes called\nlove)\nb. Specific laws indicating how the suzerain wants the vassal to\nbehave.\n4. Sanctions\na. Blessings: rewards for obeying the stipulations.\nb. Curses: punishments for disobedience.\n5. Administration: dynastic succession, use of the treaty document, etc.\nExcept for section 5, this is the literary form of the Decalogue. 28 God comes to\nIsrael and gives his name (âI am the Lord your God,â Ex. 20:2), identifying himself\nas the author of the covenant and of the covenant document. Then he tells Israel\nwhat he has done for them (âwho brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the\nhouse of slavery,â verse 2b). Then come the commandments, with sanctions\nembedded in some of them (as in verses 5-6, 7, 12). The first commandment\ndemands exclusive covenant loyalty, and the others show what forms that loyalty\n27\nThis book, like all books in this series, assumes that Scripture is the Word of God and therefore\ninfallible and inerrant in its original form. I plan to argue the point in The Doctrine of the Word of\nGod.\n28\nFor a more detailed discussion
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of this covenant structure and the literary form of the covenant\ndocument, see the very important book of Meredith G. Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority\n(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972). Kline maintains that, not only the Decalogue, but also the Book\nof Deuteronomy, is in its literary form a covenant document. 24\nis to take. Lord, therefore, names God as the suzerain, the head of the covenant\nrelationship.\nThe heart of that relationship is âI will be your God, and you will be my\npeopleâ (Jer. 7:23; cf. Ex. 6:7, Lev. 26:12, Rev. 21:3, echoed in many other\npassages). It is amazing that the same Lord whose holiness separates us from\nhim also reaches out to draw us into the circle of his holiness, indeed to make us\nhis holy people.\nThe Lordship Attributes\nMy study of lordship also indicates that the word Lord in Scripture has\ncertain important connotations. That is, Lord is not only a name of God (though it\nis that) but also a description. Among those connotations, three in particular\nstand out:\n1. Control\nThe Lord announces to Moses that he will deliver Israel from Egypt by a\nmighty hand and a strong arm. He shows his strength in the plagues and in the\ndeliverance of Israel through the sea on dry land, followed by the drowning of the\nEgyptian army. Thus God wins a decisive victory over Egypt, its ruler, and its\ngods, Ex. 12:12, 15:11, 18:11.\nIn his continuing relations with Israel, God regularly connects his lordship\nwith his sovereign power, controlling all things. He is gracious to whom he will be\ngracious, and he shows mercy to whom he will show mercy (Ex. 33:19). What he\nintends to do, he accomplishes. Nothing is too hard for him (Jer. 32:7, Gen.\n18:14). His word is never void of power (Isa. 55:11). His prophecies always come\nto pass. As I argued in DG, Chapter 4, God controls the forces of nature, human\nhistory, human free decisions (including sinful ones). It is he who gives faith to\nsome and withholds it from others, so that he is completely sovereign over\nhuman salvat
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ion. 29 The following passages set forth the comprehensive reach of\nhis sovereign power:\nWho has spoken and it came to pass, unless the Lord has commanded it?\nIs it not from the mouth of the Most High that good and bad come?\n(Lam. 3:37-38)\n38\nAnd we know that for those who love God all things work together for\ngood, for those who are called according to his purpose. (Rom. 8:28)\n29\nFor discussions of how this divine control affects human freedom and moral responsibility, see\nDG, Chapter 8. For a discussion of the problem of evil, see DG, Chapter 9, and AGG, Chapters 6\nand 7. 25\nIn him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined\naccording to the purpose of him who works all things according to the\ncounsel of his willâ¦ (Eph. 1:11)\nOh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How\nunsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! 34 \"For\nwho has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?\" 35\n\"Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?\" 36 For from him\nand through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.\n(Rom. 11:33-36)\n2. Authority\nGodâs authority is his right to tell his creatures what they must do. Control\nis about might; authority is about right. Control means that God makes everything\nhappen; authority means that God has the right to be obeyed, and that therefore\nwe have the obligation to obey him.\nGodâs authority is part of his lordship. When God meets with Moses in\nExodus 3, he gives him a message that has authority even over Pharaoh: Let my\npeople go, that they may serve me. When God meets with Israel at Mt. Sinai, he\nidentifies himself as Lord and then tells them to have no other Godâs before him.\nGodâs lordship means that we must obey his Ten Commandments and any other\ncommandments he chooses to give to us. So Deut. 6:4-6 confesses the lordship\nof God, and then goes on to tell us to obey all his commandments. Jesus, too,\nsays over and over again, in various ways, âif you l
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ove me, keep my\ncommandments.â âWhy do you call me 'Lord, Lord,'â he asks, âand not do what I\ntell you?â (Luke 6:46; compare Matt. 7:21-22).\nGodâs authority is absolute. That means, first, that we shouldnât doubt or\nquestion it. Paul says that Abraham âwavered notâ in his belief in Godâs promise\n(Rom. 4:16-22). Abraham was certainly tempted to waver. God had promised\nhim the land of Canaan, but although he lived there he owned not one square\ninch. And God had promised him a son, who would in turn have more\ndescendants than the sand of the sea. But Abrahamâs wife Sarah was beyond\nthe age of childbearing, and Abraham was over 100 years old before the promise\nwas fulfilled. But Abraham clung to Godâs authoritative Word; so should we.\nSecond, the absoluteness of Godâs authority means that his lordship\ntranscends all our other loyalties. We are right to be loyal to our parents, our\nnation, our friends; but God calls us to love him with all our heart, that is, without\nany rival. Jesus told his disciples to honor their parents (Matt. 15:3-6), but he told\nthem to honor him even more (Matt. 10:34-38). 26\nThird, to say that Godâs authority is absolute means that it covers all areas\nof human life. Paul says, âwhether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to\nthe glory of God,â 1 Cor. 10:31. Everything we do is either to Godâs glory or it is\nnot. God has the right to order every aspect of human life.\n3. Covenant Presence\nSo Godâs lordship means that he controls everything, and that he speaks\nwith absolute authority. But there is also a third element to Godâs lordship, and in\nsome ways this is the deepest and most precious. That element is his\ncommitment to us, and therefore his presence with us.\nThe essence of the covenant is Godâs word that âI will be your God, and\nyou will be my people,â Gen. 17:7. God said that to Abraham, but he also said it\nto Israel under Moses and to the New Testament people of God. He said this\nmany times throughout Scriptu
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: re. This means that the Covenant Lord is one who\ntakes people to be his.\nWhen God takes us to be his people, he fights our battles, blesses us,\nloves us, and sometimes gives us special judgments because of our sins (as in\nAmos 3:2). But most important, he is âwithâ us. He places his name upon us\n(Num. 6:27), to brand us as his. Since we are his children, then, he dwells with\nus (Gen. 26:3, 24, 28:15, 31:3, Ex. 3:12, 4:12, Deut. 31:8, 23, Josh. 1:5, etc.)\nand we with him. In the Old Testament, God literally dwelled with Israel, as he\nplaced his theophany in the tabernacle and the temple. In the New Testament,\nJesus is âImmanuel,â God with us. He is God âtabernaclingâ among us (John\n1:14). And after his Resurrection, he sends the Spirit to dwell in us, as in a\ntemple.\nControl, authority, presence. Those are the main biblical concepts that\nexplain the meaning of Godâs lordship. We can see this triad in the literary form\nof the treaty document, mentioned a few pages ago. Recall that in the treaty the\nGreat King begins by giving his name (in the Decalogue, Lord). Then in the\nhistorical prologue, he tells the vassal what he has done, how he has delivered\nthem, emphasizing his might and power (control). Next he tells them how they\nshould behave as a response to their deliverance (authority). Then he tells them\nthe blessings for continued obedience and the curses for disobedience (covenant\npresence). God is not an absentee landlord. He will be present with Israel to\nbless, and, if necessary, to judge.\nThe Lordship Attributes and Christian Decision-Making\nThe lordship attributes also help us to understand in more detail the\nstructure of Christian ethics. In particular, they suggest a way for\nChristians to make ethical decisions. 27\nHow God Governs Our Ethical Life\nFirst, by his control, God plans and rules nature and history, so that\ncertain human acts are conducive to his glory and others are not.\nSecond, by his authority, he speaks to us clearly, telling us what norms\ngovern o
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ur behavior.\nThird, by his covenant presence he commits himself to be with us in our\nethical walk, blessing our obedience, punishing our disobedience. But his\npresence also provides us with two important means of ethical guidance.\n(1) Because he is present with us, he is able to serve as a moral example.\nâYou shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holyâ (Lev. 19:2, compare\nMatt. 5:48). And (2) he, and he alone, is able to provide, for sinners, the\npower to do good, to set us free from the power of sin (John 8:34-36).\nThe Lordship Attributes Demand Appropriate Response\nWhen we learn of Godâs control, we learn at the same time to trust in\nGodâs plan and his providence. God told Abraham that he would own the\nland of Canaan and have a huge number of descendants. But at the time\nhe owned no land in Canaan, and he and his wife Sarah were far beyond\nthe age of childbearing. Nevertheless, his overall attitude toward the\npromise was one of trust, or faith, as Paul says in Rom. 4:20-21,\nNo distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew\nstrong in his faith as he gave glory to God, 21 fully convinced that God was\nable to do what he had promised.\nFaith in Christ is faith in what he has done and what he has promised to do in the\nfuture. It is trust in Godâs sovereign care for us.\nNext, when we learn of Godâs authority, we learn at the same time to obey\nhim. Says God through Moses,\nNow this is the commandment, the statutes and the rules that the LORD\nyour God commanded me to teach you, that you may do them in the land\nto which you are going over, to possess it, 2 that you may fear the LORD\nyour God, you and your son and your son's son, by keeping all his statutes\nand his commandments, which I command you, all the days of your life,\nand that your days may be long. 3 Hear therefore, O Israel, and be careful 28\nto do them, that it may go well with you, and that you may multiply greatly,\nas the LORD, the God of your fathers, has promised you, in a land flowing\nwith mi
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lk and honey. (Deut. 6:1-3; compare verses 6-9, many similar\nverses in Deuteronomy.)\nThe Psalmist says,\nYou have commanded your precepts to be kept diligently. 5 Oh that my\nways may be steadfast in keeping your statutes! 6 Then I shall not be put\nto shame, having my eyes fixed on all your commandments (Psm. 119:4-\n6).\nGodâs control motivates us to trust, his authority to obey. âTrust and Obey, for\nthereâs no other way to be happy in Jesus,â 30 as the hymn puts it. David says,\nâTrust in the LORD, and do good; dwell in the land and befriend faithfulnessâ\n(Psm. 37:3).\nFinally, when we become aware of Godâs covenant presence, we are\nmoved to worship. Whenever God meets with human beings in Scripture, the\nsituation immediately becomes one of worship: when the King enters, we bow\ndown. Think of Moses at the burning bush (Ex. 3), or Isaiah meeting God in the\ntemple:\nIn the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a\nthrone, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple. 2\nAbove him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered\nhis face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one\ncalled to another and said: \"Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the\nwhole earth is full of his glory!\" 4 And the foundations of the thresholds\nshook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke.\n5\nAnd I said: \"Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and\nI dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the\nKing, the LORD of hosts!â (Isa. 6:1-5).\nWhen the glorified Jesus, appeared to John, the apostle says, âI fell at his feet as\nthough deadâ (Rev. 1:17).\nThree lordship attributes, three mandatory responses: faith, obedience,\nworship. These responses are the foundation of our ethical life. 31\n30\nWords by John H. Sammis, 1887.\nThanks to Mike Christ, who first suggested this triad to me. Iâve modified his formulation a bit,\nadded exposition, and take full re
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sponsibility. Readers who are new to my triads will learn that\nthey can be shuffled and rearranged without problem. Ultimately, as we shall see, each member\nof the triad includes the others. So different arrangements are possible and often edifying.\n31 29\nThe Three Theological Virtues\nFaith, hope, and love are three virtues often brought together by New\nTestament writers (1 Cor. 13:13, Gal. 5:5-6, Col. 1:4-5, 1 Thess. 1:3, 5:8, Heb.\n6:9-11). Christian writers after the New Testament sometimes presented these\nâtheological virtuesâ as supplements to the four âcardinal virtuesâ of Greek\nphilosophy, prudence, justice, temperance, and courage. That gave them a total\nof seven, which, of course, is a desirable number.\nThe idea that Christian morality is a supplement to pagan morality is, I\nthink, an inadequate view, as I plan to argue in more detail at a later point.\nScripture does affirm all seven of these virtues, but it does give some\npreeminence to faith, hope, and love. Love is the highest of these, according to 1\nCor., 13:13, John 13:34-35, and other passages, and occasionally Paul speaks\nof faith and love, without referring to hope (Eph. 1:15, 3:17, 6:23, 1 Tim. 1:14,\n6:11, 2 Tim. 1:13, Philem. 1:5). Faith includes hope, for hope is faith directed to\nGodâs promises for the future. And love, as the summation of Christian virtues,\nincludes both faith and hope. But we can also look at this triad in terms of the\nlordship attributes: faith trusts in Godâs revealed word. Hope looks to Godâs\ncontrolling power, which will accomplish his purposes in the future as in the past.\nAnd love treasures the presence of God in the intimate recesses of the heart and\nthe new family into which God has adopted us.\nNecessary and Sufficient Criteria of Good Works\nWhat is a good work? Reformed theologians have addressed this question\nin response to the âproblem of the virtuous pagan.â Reformed theology\nteaches that human beings by nature are âtotally depraved.â This means,\nnot that they ar
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e as bad as they can be, but that it is impossible for them\nto please God in any of their thoughts, words, or deeds (Rom. 8:8). So\napart from grace none of us can do anything good in the sight of God. Yet\nall around us we see non-Christians who seem, at least, to be doing good\nworks: they love their families, work hard at their jobs, contribute to the\nneeds of the poor, show kindness to their neighbors. It seems that these\npagans are virtuous by normal measures.\nReformed theology, however, questions these normal measures. It\nacknowledges that unbelievers often contribute to the betterment of\nsociety. These contributions are called âcivic righteousness.â Their civic 30\nrighteousness does not please God, however, because it is altogether\ndevoid of three characteristics:\nWorks done by unregenerate men, although for the matter of\nthem they may be things which God commands; and of good use\nboth to themselves and others: yet, because they proceed not\nfrom an heart purified by faith; nor are done in a right manner,\naccording to the Word; nor to a right end, the glory of God, they\nare therefore sinful, and cannot please God, or make a man\nmeet to receive grace from God: and yet, their neglect of them is\nmore sinful and displeasing unto God. (WCF 16.7)\nNote the three necessary ingredients: (1) a heart purified by faith, (2) obedience\nto Godâs word, and (3) the right end, the glory of God.\nThe first is a plainly biblical emphasis. The Confession cites Heb. 11:4 and\nsome other texts. Rom. 14:23 also comes to mind, which says, âFor whatever\ndoes not proceed from faith is sin.â In Jesusâ arguments with the Pharisees, too,\nit is evident that our righteousness must not be merely external (see especially\nMatt. 23:25-26). In describing the necessity of an internal motive of good works,\nScripture refers not only to faith, but especially to love, as in 1 Cor. 13:1-3 and\nmany other passages. We learn from these passages that love is not only\nnecessary for good works, but also sufficient: that
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: is, if our act is motivated by a\ntrue love of God and neighbor, we have fulfilled the law (Matt. 22:40, Rom. 13:8,\nGal. 5:14).\nThe second element of good works, according to the Confession, is\nobedience to Godâs word, to his law. Note the references in the previous section\nto the importance of obeying Godâs word. Certainly obedience to Godâs word is a\nnecessary condition of good works, for disobedience to Godâs law is the very\ndefinition of sin (1 John 3:4). It is also a sufficient condition: for if we have obeyed\nGod perfectly, we have done everything necessary to be good in his sight. Of\ncourse, among Godâs commands are his command to love (see above\nparagraph) and to seek his glory (see the next paragraph).\nThe third element is the right end, the glory of God. Ethical literature has\noften discussed the summum bonum or highest good for human beings. What is\nit that we are trying to achieve in our ethical actions? Many secular writers have\nsaid this goal is pleasure or human happiness. But Scripture says that in\neverything we do we should be seeking the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31).\nCertainly, any act must glorify God if it is to be good, so seeking Godâs glory is a\nnecessary condition of good works. And if the act does glorify God, then it is\ngood; so it is a sufficient condition. 32\n32\nThere is a sense, of course, in which even wicked acts bring glory to God, for God uses the\nwickedness of people to bring about his good purposes (Rom. 8:28). But the wicked person does 31\nSo there are three necessary and sufficient conditions of good works: right\nmotive, right standard, and right goal. 33 Right motive corresponds to the lordship\nattribute of covenant presence: for it is Godâs Spirit dwelling in us who places\nfaith and love in our hearts. Right standard corresponds, obviously, to Godâs\nlordship attribute of authority. And right goal corresponds to the lordship attribute\nof control, for it is Godâs creation and providence that determines what acts will\nand will not le
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ad to Godâs glory. God determines the consequences of our\nactions, and he determines which actions lead to our summum bonum.\nBiblical Reasons to Do Good Works\n1. The History of Redemption\nScripture uses basically three means to encourage believers to do good\nworks. First, it appeals to the history of redemption. This is the chief motivation in\nthe Decalogue itself: God has redeemed Israel from slavery in Egypt, therefore\nthey should obey.\nIn the New Testament, the writers often urge us to do good works because of\nwhat Christ did to redeem us. Jesus himself urges that the disciples âlove one\nanother: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one anotherâ (John 13:34).\nJesusâ love, ultimately displayed on the cross, commands our response of love to\none another. Another well-known appeal is found in Col. 3:1-3:\nIf then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above,\nwhere Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your minds on things\nthat are above, not on things that are on earth. 3 For you have died, and your\nlife is hidden with Christ in God.\nWhen Christ died, we died to sin; when he rose, we rose to righteousness. We\nare one with Christ in his death and resurrection. So those historic facts have\nmoral implications. We should live in accord with the new life, given to us by\nGodâs grace when we rose with Christ. See also Rom. 6:1-23, 13:11-12, 1 Cor.\n6:20, 10:11, 15:58, Eph. 4:1-5, 25, 32, 5:25-33, Phil. 2:1-11, Heb. 12:1-28, 1 Pet.\n2:1-3, 4:1-6.\nnot intend to glorify God by his actions. So 1 Cor. 10:31 speaks of intent as well as action. Cf.\nMatt. 6:33.\n33\nCornelius Van Til, in his Christian-Theistic Ethics cited earlier, was the first to think through the\nsignificance of this confessional triad for ethical methodology. I gratefully acknowledge his\ninfluence upon my formulation here. In fact, Van Tilâs discussion was the seed thought behind all\nthe triads of the Theology of Lordship. 32\nSo the Heidelberg Catechism emphasizes that our good wo
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rks come from\ngratitude. They are not attempts to gain Godâs favor, but rather grateful\nresponses to the favor he has already shown to us. 34\nBut our focus on the history of redemption is not limited to the past. It is\nalso an anticipation of what God will do for us in the future. Godâs promises of\nfuture blessing also motivate us to obey him. Jesus commands us, âseek first the\nkingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to youâ\n(Matt. 6:33). 35\nThis motivation emphasizes Godâs control, for history is the sphere of\nGodâs control, the outworking of his eternal plan.\n2. The Authority of Godâs Commands\nScripture also motivates our good works by calling attention to Godâs\ncommands. Jesus said that he did not come to abrogate the law, but to fuilfill it,\nso\n19\nTherefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments\nand teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of\nheaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in\nthe kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:19)\nSo in their preaching Jesus and the apostles often appeal to the commandments\nof the law, and to their own commandments, as in Matt. 7:12, 12:5, 19:18-19,\n22:36-40, 23:23, Luke 10:26, John 8:17, 13:34-35, 14:15, 21, Rom. 8:4, 12:19,\n13:8-10, 1 Cor. 5:13, 9:8-9, 14:34, 37, 2 Cor. 8:15, 9:9, Gal. 4:21-22, Eph. 4:20-\n24, 6:1-3, 1 Thess. 4:1, 2 Tim. 3:16-17, Tit. 2:1, James 1:22-25, 2:8-13, 1 Pet.\n1:16, 1 John 2:3-5, 3:24, 5:2.\nGodâs commandment is sufficient to place an obligation upon us. We\nshould need no other incentive. But God gives us other motivations as well,\nbecause we are fallen, and because he loves us as his redeemed children.\nThis motivation reflects Godâs lordship attribute of authority. We should\nobey him, simply because he has the right to absolute obedience.\n3. The Presence of the Spirit\n34\nThis motivation is not what John Piper calls the âdebtorsâ ethic,â in which we do good works in a\nvain attempt to pay God back for ou
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r redemption. We can, of course, never do that, and we\nshould not try to do it. See Piper, The Purifying Power of Living by Faith in Future Grace (Sisters,\nOR: Multnomah Publishers, 1995), and the summary discussion on pp. 33-38 of Brothers, We\nAre Not Professionals (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2002). But gratefulness, nonetheless,\nis the only legitimate response to the grace God has given us in Christ.\n35\nThis is what Piper calls âfuture graceâ in the works cited in the previous note. 33\nThirdly, Scripture calls us to a godly life, based on the activity of the Spirit\nwithin us. This motivation is based on Godâs lordship attribute of presence. Paul\nsays,\nBut I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of\nthe flesh. 17 For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the\ndesires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each\nother, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. (Gal. 5:16-18)\nGod has placed his Spirit within us, to give us new life, and therefore new ethical\ninclinations. There is still conflict among our impulses, but we have the resources\nto follow the desires of the Spirit, rather than those of the flesh. So Paul appeals\nto the inner change God has worked in us by regeneration and sanctification. In\nEph. 5:8-11, he puts it this way:\nfor at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk\nas children of light 9 (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and\nright and true), 10 and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. 11 Take\nno part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.\nIn the following verses, Paul continues to expound on the ethical results of this\ntransformation. Compare also Rom. 8:1-17, Gal. 5:22-26.\nSo Scripture motivates us to do good works by the history of redemption,\nthe commandments of God, and the work of the Spirit within us, corresponding to\nGodâs lordship attributes of control, authority, and presence, respectively.\nTypes of Christ
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ian Ethics\nThese three motivations have led Christian thinkers to develop three main\ntypes of Christian ethics: command ethics, narrative ethics, and virtue ethics.\nCommand ethics emphasizes the authority of Godâs moral law. Narrative ethics\nemphasizes the history of redemption. It teaches ethics by telling the story of\nsalvation. Virtue ethics discusses the inner character of the regenerate person,\nfocusing on virtues listed in passages like Rom. 5:1-5, Gal. 5:22-23, and Col.\n3:12-17.\nSometimes a writer will pit these types of ethics against one another,\ndesignating one as superior to the others. I donât see any biblical justification for\nthat kind of argument. As we saw, Scripture uses all of these methods to\nmotivate righteous behavior. And it is hard to see how any of these could function\nwithout the others. It is Godâs commands that define the virtues and enable us to\nevaluate the behavior of characters in the narrative. It is the narrative that shows\nus how God saves us from sin and enables us to keep his law from the heart. 34\nAnd the virtues are define what the redeemed person looks like when he obeys\nGod from the heart.\nWhat Really Matters\nWe can see the same triadic structure in the actual content of biblical\nethics. I shall expound this structure at length later in the book. For now, let us\nnote sayings of the Apostle Paul that intend to show the highest priorities of the\nChristian life. In these passages, he is opposing Judaizers, who think that one\nmust be circumcised to enter the kingdom of God. He replies that neither\ncircumcision, nor uncircumcision, are important, but rather the following:\n1 Corinthians 7:19 For neither circumcision counts for anything nor\nuncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God.\nGalatians 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision\ncounts for anything, but only faith working through love.\nGalatians 6:15 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor\nuncircumcision, but a new creation.\nAs in our previous discu
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ssion, there is a reference in 1 Cor. 7:19 to\nkeeping the commandments of God. It corresponds to Godâs lordship attribute of\nauthority. âFaith working through loveâ in Gal. 5:6 is the work of the Spirit within\nus, and refers to Godâs covenant presence. âNew creationâ in Gal. 6:15 is the\ngreat redemptive-historical change brought about by Jesusâ death and\nresurrection, the powerful work of Godâs sovereign control over history. 36\nFactors in Ethical Judgment\nNow imagine that you are a pastor or counselor, and someone comes to\nyour office with an ethical problem. Basically, there are three things you\nwill need to discuss: the situation, the word of God, and the inquirer\nhimself.\nNormally, we ask first about the situation: âwhatâs your problem? What\nbrings you to see me?â This question is ultimately about Godâs lordship attribute\nof control, for God is the one who brings situations about.\nThen we ask, âwhat does Godâs word say about the problem?â This\ndiscussion invokes Godâs lordship attribute of authority.\n36\nThanks to my colleague Prof. Reggie Kidd for bringing these texts to my attention. 35\nThirdly, we focus on the inquirer, asking how he or she needs to change in\norder to apply Godâs solution to the problem. At this point, we are thinking\nespecially about Godâs presence within the individual. If the person is a non-\nChristian, then evidently he needs to be born again by Godâs Spirit before he can\napply the word of God to his life. If the person is a believer, he may need to grow\nin certain ways before he will be able to deal with the issue before him.\nWe note in such conversations that each of these subjects influences the\nother two. We may start with a âpresentation problem:â âMy wife is angry all the\ntime.â But as we move to a focus on Godâs word, gaining a better understanding\nof Scripture, we may gain a better understanding of the problem as well. For\nexample, Scripture tells us to remove the log from our own eye before trying to\ng
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: et the speck out of anotherâs eye (Matt. 7:3). So the inquirer may come to see\nthat his wife is angry because he has provoked her. So the problem now is not\nonly in her, but in him as well. Reflection on Godâs word has changed our\nunderstanding of the problem.\nBut this new understanding of the problem pushes us to look at more and\ndifferent Scripture texts than we considered in the beginning. As we understand\nthe problem better, we understand better how Scripture relates to it. Scripture\nand the situation illumine one another.\nThen when we move to the third question and ask the inquirer to look\nwithin, he may see even more things in himself that have provoked his wifeâs\nanger. So the problem, the word, and the inquirer have all illumined one another.\nEvidently you cannot understand your problem, or yourself, adequately until you\nhave seen it through what Calvin called the âspectacles of Scripture.â And you\ncanât understand the problem until you see yourself as a part of it.\nAnd you canât understand Godâs word rightly until you can use it, until you see\nhow it applies to this situation and that. This is a more difficult point, but I think it\nis important. If someone says he understands âyou shall not steal,â but has no\nidea to what situations that commandment applies (such as embezzling, cheating\non taxes, shoplifting) then he hasnât really understood the biblical command.\nUnderstanding Scripture, understanding its meaning, is applying it to situations. A\nperson who understands the Bible is a person who is able to use the Bible to\nanswer his questions, to guide his life. As I argued in Chapter 2, theology is\napplication.\nPerspectives on the Discipline of Ethics 36\nIn general, then, ethical judgment always involves the application of a norm to\na situation by a person. These three factors can also be seen as overall\nperspectives on the study of ethics:\n(a)\nThe Situational Perspective\nIn this perspective, we examine situations, problems. This study focuses\non Godâ
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s actions in creation and providence that have made the situations\nwhat they are, hence Godâs lordship attribute of control. The situational\nperspective asks âwhat are the best means of accomplishing Godâs\npurposes?â That is, how can we take the present situation and change it\nso that more of Godâs purposes are achieved?\nGodâs ultimate purpose is his own glory (1 Cor. 10:31). But God has more\nspecific goals as well: the filling and subduing of the earth (Gen. 1:28); the\nevangelization and nurture of people of all nations (Matt. 28:19-20); the success\nof his Kingdom (Matt. 6:33).\nThe situational perspective explores the consequences of our actions. Under\nthe situational perspective, we ask, âif we do x, will that enhance the glory of God\nand his blessing on his people?â So we seek the best means to the ends that\nplease God. So we might describe ethics from this perspective as a Christian\nteleological, or consequential ethic.\n(b) The Normative Perspective\nUnder the normative perspective, we focus on Scripture more directly. Our\npurpose is to determine our duty, our ethical norm, our obligation. So we bring\nour problem to the Bible and ask âWhat does Scripture say about this situation?â\nAt this point we invoke Godâs lordship attribute of authority. Since we are\nfocusing on duties and obligations, we might call this perspective a Christian\ndeontological ethic.\n(c) The Existential Perspective\nThe existential perspective focuses on the ethical agent, the person (or\npersons) who are trying to find out what to do. Under this perspective, the ethical\nquestion becomes, âHow must I change if I am to do Godâs will?â Here the focus\nis inward, examining our heart-relation to God. It deals with our regeneration, our\nsanctification, our inner character. These are all the product of Godâs lordship-\npresence within us.\nInterdependence of the Perspectives 37\nNow we saw in section 5 that knowledge of our situation, norm, and self\nare interdependent. You canât understand t
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he situation fully until you know\nwhat Scripture says about it, and until you understand your own role in the\nsituation. You canât understand yourself fully apart from Scripture, or apart\nfrom the situation which is your environment. And you canât understand\nScripture unless you can apply it to situations and to yourself.\nSo the situational perspective includes the other two. When we\nunderstand the situation rightly, we see that Scripture and the self are\nelements of that situation, facts to be taken account of. So we canât rightly\nassess the situation unless we assess the other two factors.\nSimilarly the normative perspective: to understand Scripture is to\nunderstand its applications to the situation and the self.\nAnd the existential perspective: as we ask questions about our inner life,\nwe find that the situation and the Godâs revelation are both elements of\nour personal experience, apart from which we cannot make sense of\nourselves.\nSo each perspective necessitates consideration of the others. Each\nincludes the others. You can picture the content of ethics as a triangle:\nNormative Perspective\nSituational Perspective\nExistential Perspective\nNow, you can study the ethical triangle beginning at any of the three\ncorners. But as you advance through the triangle, you will meet up with the other\ncorners eventually. That is to say, if you start to study the situation, you will\neventually find yourself studying the norm and the ethical agent. Same with the\nother corners.\nThatâs why I describe these approaches as âperspectives.â I donât think of\nthem as âpartsâ of ethics, as though you could divide the triangle into three 38\ndistinct parts and then do one part first, another second, and another third. No,\nyou canât really study the situation without the norm, and so on.\nSo the triangle represents the whole subject matter of ethics, and the corners\nrepresent different entrances to that subject matter, different emphases, different\ninitial questions. But the goal is alw
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ays to cover the whole triangle with regard to\nany ethical question.\nIn the end, then, the three perspectives coincide. A true understanding of the\nsituation will not contradict a true understanding of the Word or the self. And a\ntrue understanding of each will include true understandings of the others.\nBut if the three are ultimately identical, why do we need three? Why not just\none? The reason has to do with our finitude and sin. God knows all truth\nsimultaneously, from every possible perspective. He knows what the whole\nuniverse looks like to the eye of the snail on my window ledge. But you and I are\nfinite, not omniscient. We can only see a portion of reality at a time. That is to\nsay, we can only see the world from one perspective at a time. For that reason it\nis good for us to move from one perspective to another. Just as the blind man\nhad to move from the elephantâs leg, to its trunk, to its torso, to its head and tail in\norder to get an adequate picture of the elephant, so we need to move from one\nperspective to another to get a full understanding of Godâs world.\nAnd we are sinners in Adam. According to Rom. 1, that means that we have a\ntendency to suppress the truth, to exchange the truth for a lie, to try to push God\nout of our knowledge. Salvation turns us in a different direction, so that we are\nable to seek the truth. But the continued presence of sin in our minds and hearts\nmeans that we need to keep checking up on ourselves, and multiplying\nperspectives is one helpful way to do that.\nIn ethics, the three perspectives I have mentioned are especially helpful. The\nthree perspectives serve as checks and balances on one another. The normative\nperspective can correct mistakes in my understanding of the situational. But the\nopposite is also true: my understanding of the norm can be improved when I\nbetter understand the situation to which the norm is to be applied. Same, mutatis\nmutandis, for the existential perspective.\nMulti-perspectivalism is not relativism. I am not sayin
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: g that any viewpoint is a\nlegitimate perspective. There is in ethics and in other disciplines an absolute right\nand wrong. The procedure I have outlined above is a means for us to discover\nthat absolute right and wrong.\nScripture itself is absolutely right: inspired, infallible, inerrant. But we are\nfallible in our study of Scripture. To understand it rightly we need information\noutside the Bible, including knowledge of Hebrew and Greek grammar, 39\nknowledge of ancient history, and an understanding of those contemporary\nquestions that people pose to Scripture.\nTriperspectivalism and the Reformed Faith\nIn the next chapter I shall apply this threefold scheme to debates between\nChristians and non-Christians on ethical matters. Here, briefly, I should like to\nspeak about debates within the Christian fold.\nI belong to the Reformed theological tradition, and I subscribe, with some\nexceptions, to the Reformed confessions. Many of my readers (though I hope not\nall of them) come from that tradition as well. In this book I shall often quote\nReformed confessions and catechisms and Reformed theologians. I donât think\nthat the Reformed tradition has said the final word in theology, and there are\nsome topics on which I disagree with many Reformed people. Some of those\ndiscussions will appear in this book as well. But in general I think that among all\nthe traditions of Christian theology the Reformed tradition is the closest to\nScripture.\nSome of my Reformed friends think that my triperspectival scheme is\nrelativistic. I have responded to that criticism in the preceding section. Others\nthink it is at best an innovation. I agree that the technical terms are new. But it\nseems to me that the basic ideas are an outworking of traditional Reformed\ntheology.\nThe three categories first caught my interest when I read Cornelius Van Tilâs\ndiscussion of goal, motive, and standard. 37 As I mentioned earlier, Van Til got\nthat triad from the Westminster Confession of Faith. Van Til also spoke much\nabout the i
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nterdependence of revelation from God, nature, and man: we get\nrevelation from God about nature, revelation from nature about God, etc. 38\nMore fundamentally, it is important to understand that Reformed theology has\nalways emphasized strongly Godâs revelation in the creation and in human\npersons (Godâs image) as well as his revelation in Scripture.\nOther branches of the church have often criticized Reformed ethics for being\nmerely an âethics of law.â Certainly Reformed theology has had a more positive\nview of Godâs law than some other theological traditions, such as Lutheranism,\nDispensationalism, and Charismatic theology. And occasionally Reformed writers\nhave emphasized law in such a way as to detract from other aspects of biblical\nethics. But in the inter-tradition debate it is important to make clear that the\n37\nSee the above discussion of the necessary and sufficient criteria of good works.\nVan Til, An Introduction to Systematic Theology (N. P.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing\nCo., 1974), 62-109.\n38 40\nReformed faith at its best has emphasized, not only law, but also a strong view of\nGodâs revelation in creation and in human beings. Calvin and the Reformed\nConfessions typically begin by invoking the teaching of Ps. 19 and Rom. 1, the\nclarity of Godâs revelation throughout the universe. And Calvin, on the first page\nof his Institutes, 39 notes that we cannot know God without knowing ourselves, or\nourselves without knowing God. And he disclaims knowledge of which comes\nfirst.\nSo in the theological debate, Reformed ethicists can rightly insist that their\nethical tradition is not just one-note. Godâs law is our ultimate and sufficient\nethical standard. But we must understand that standard by relating it to the divine\nrevelation in the world and in ourselves. Reformed ethics can account for the\nnuances and subtleties of ethical decision-making, without compromising the\nstraightforward, simply unity of our obligation, namely obedience to God as he\nhas revealed his
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: will in Scripture.\n39\n1.1.1 41\nPart Two: Non-Christian Ethics 42\nChapter 4: Lordship and Non-Christian Ethics\nIn Chapter 3 I examined the general structure of a biblical ethic, based on\nGodâs lordship, particularly his lordship attributes of control, authority, and\npresence. In this chapter, I will use that discussion to indicate the most important\nways in which Christian ethics differs from non-Christian ethics.\nIn general, non-Christian ethics does not affirm the lordship of the God of\nthe Bible. 40 So I will seek here to show how a denial of divine lordship affects\nethics. I will begin, however, with comparisons between Christian and non-\nChristian thought in metaphysics and epistemology, before proceeding on\nspecifically to ethics.\nTranscendence and Immanence 41\nThe lordship attributes will help us to get a clear idea on the concepts of\ntranscendence and immanence that theologians often use to describe the biblical\nGod. These are not biblical terms, but the Bible does speak of God being âon\nhighâ as well as âwith us.â He is both âup thereâ and âdown here.â He is exalted,\nand he is near. When Scripture uses the âup thereâ language, theologians call it\nâtranscendence.â When Scripture speaks of God down here with us, the\ntheologians speak of âimmanence.â\nThere are dangers, however, in the concepts of transcendence and\nimmanence. We can understand those dangers more clearly through the diagram\nbelow. 42\n40\nI shall try to show that by specific examples in later chapters. I realize that there are religions\nlike Judaism, Islam, the Jehovahâs Witnesses and others who would claim to worship the God of\nthe Bible while denying the full supremacy of Christ. So while opposing orthodox Christianity, they\nwould claim to be serving the Lord. I will deal with that claim later on.\n41\nThis section summarizes Chapter 7 of DG.\n42\nIn the first printing of DG, p. 113, the diagram is misnumbered. It should be numbered as here.\nThe diagram as presented p. 14 of DKG is
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: correct. 43\nBiblical Views\nViews\nTranscendence\n(1)\n(2)\nImmanence\nNonbiblical\n(3)\n(4)\nThe left-hand corners, (1) and (2), represent a biblical understanding of\ntranscendence and immanence, the right-hand corners, (3) and (4), common\nnonbiblical views.\nIn Scripture, God is transcendent (1) in that he is exalted as Lord, as King.\nWe should associate transcendence with the lordship attributes of control and\nauthority. He is immanent in the sense that he is covenantally present with us (2).\nSo understood, there is no contradiction, not even a tension, between divine\ntranscendence and immanence.\nSome, however, have misunderstood Godâs transcendence. They think it\nmeans that God is so far away from us that we cannot really know him, so far\nthat human language canât describe him accurately, so far that heâs just a great\nheavenly blur, without any definite characteristics. I represent this view as (3) on\nthe diagram, nonbiblical transcendence. If God is transcendent in that way, how\ncan he also be near to us? That kind of transcendence is incompatible with\nbiblical immanence (2). Iâve illustrated that incompatibility by a diagonal line.\nFurther, in the Bible we can know definite things about God. And despite\nthe limitations of human language, God is able to use human language to tell us\nclearly and accurately who he is and what he has done. These are aspects of\nGodâs immanence in the biblical sense (2), aspects rejected by those who hold\nthe nonbiblical concept of transcendence (3).\nSimilarly with the term immanence. Some theologians speak as though\nwhen God becomes immanent he becomes immersed in the world, hidden in the\nworld, so that he canât be distinguished from creatures (4). Some people even 44\nthink that when you look deep down inside yourself, you discover that you are\nGod and God is you. But thatâs not biblical. God is always distinct from the world,\nfor he is the creator and we are the creature. But God does come to be with us\n(the meaning of Immanuel, the name
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of Jesus in Matt. 1:23), and thatâs\nsomething wonderful and precious.\nSo the nonbiblical view of immanence (4) contradicts the biblical view of\ntranscendence (1), confusing the creator with the creature, and giving Godâs\nsovereign control and authority over to the world. The diagonal line between (1)\nand (4) indicates this contradiction.\nIrrationalism and Rationalism\nLet me now change the labels on the diagram, in order to present a similar\nargument about epistemology, or theory of knowledge. In this version, I am\nreplacing âtranscendenceâ and âimmanenceâ with âirrationalismâ and\nârationalism,â respectively. 43\nBiblical Views\nViews\nIrrationalism\n(1)\n(2)\nRationalism\nNonbiblical\n(3)\n(4)\nSince Scripture teaches us that God is the ultimate controller and\nauthority for human life, he is also the author of truth and the ultimate criterion of\nhuman knowledge. Therefore our knowing is not ultimate, or, as Van Til liked to\nput it, autonomous. Human knowledge is âthinking Godâs thoughts after him,â in\nsubmission to his revelation of the truth, recognizing that revelation as the\nsupreme and final standard of truth and falsity, right and wrong. Non-Christians\n(and Christians who compromise with secular ways of thinking) look at this\nprinciple as irrationalistic. They are appalled at the idea that we should renounce\n43\nFor this discussion, compare DKG, 360-363, and CVT, 231-38. 45\nour intellectual autonomy and accept Godâs Word on his authority alone. To\nChristians, doing this is not irrational at all; rather, it is the way God designed our\nminds to think. But it does involve confessing that human reason is limited,\nsubordinate to Godâs perfect reason. So we can interpret position (1) of the\nrectangle as Christian âirrationalismâ (note the quotes).\nBut of course, we not only believe in the limitations of human reason; we\nalso believe that that under God our reason has great power. For since God has\ncome into our world (2) and has clearly revealed himself t
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: here, we are able to\nknow many things with certainty. Non-Christians tend to see such claims of\nknowledge as rationalistic. How can anybody, they ask, be sure of anything in\nthis confusing world? So I would attach to corner (2) the label, Christian\nârationalism.â Again, note the quotation marks. Christians plead not guilty to the\ncharge of rationalism, because they recognize that Godâs mind is far greater than\nours, and that therefore the realm of mystery (1) is far greater than the realm of\nour knowledge. But they also recognize that by Godâs revelation they have\naccess to real truth.\nIn the current debate between âmodernistsâ and âpostmodernists,â the\nmodernists tend to accuse Christians of being irrationalisticâof believing biblical\ndoctrines without sufficient reason. Postmodernists charge Christians with\nrationalism. They think Christians are arrogant to claim that that they can know\nanything for sure.\nBut when we turn the tables, allowing ourselves as Christians to comment\ndirectly on non-Christian epistemology, we find ourselves saying about them\nwhat they say about us. That is, we say that they are irrationalistic and\nrationalistic. The nonbiblical view of transcendence implies that God either does\nnot exist or is too far away from us to play a role in our reasoning. But if that is\ntrue, we have no access to an ultimate standard of truth. Such a view is skeptical\nor irrationalist, as I would label corner (3) on the diagram. The diagonal line\nbetween (3) and (2) shows the contradiction between these two views: the\nChristian says that God has come near us and has given us a clear revelation of\ntruth. The non-Christian denies that and prefers skepticism.\nBut there is another side to non-Christian reasoning. For everyone who\nrejects divine authority must accept some other authority. Reasoning cannot be\nreasoning without some standard of truth and falsity. The non-Christian either\nassumes the ultimate authority of his own reason (autonomy), or he accepts\nsome autho
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rity other than that of the God of Scripture. In any case, he\nsubstitutes the authority of a creature for that of the creator. He assumes that we\nhave access apart from God to an authority that will allow our reasoning to be\nsuccessful. That position (4) is rationalism, and contradicts the limitations on\nreason asserted by position (1). 46\nSo Van Til argued that unregenerate human beings are rationalists and\nirrationalists at the same time: they claim that their own reason has ultimate\nauthority (rationalism), but they acknowledge nothing that will connect human\nreason with objective truth (irrationalism). 44\nThe rationalist-irrationalist dialectic of non-Christian thought bears on\nethical reasoning specifically, as well as thinking about other matters. As we shall\nsee, non-biblical ethicists often oppose absolutes in general, but they forget their\nopposition to absolutes when they propose their own fundamental ethical\nprinciples, such as love or justice. One egregious example is Joseph Fletcher,\nwho says in his notorious Situation Ethics that âfor the situationist there are no\nrulesânone at all,â but who in the same paragraph proposes a ââgeneralâ\npropositionâ¦namely, the commandment to love God through the neighbor.â Is\nthere a contradiction here between âno rulesâ and the rule of love? Fletcher\nreplies enigmatically that the love commandment âis, be it noted, a normative\nideal; it is not an operational directive.â 45 Evidently he thinks that the love\ncommandment is not a commandment, and therefore not a rule. But this\ndistinction will have to go down as one of the most implausible distinctions of\nethical literature.\nSpecifically Ethical Interpretations of the Rectangle\nI have used the rectangle diagram to illustrate the difference between\nthose who accept, and those who reject, the lordship of the biblical God, in\nmetaphysics (transcendence and immanence) and epistemology (irrationalism\nand rationalism). I will refer to these metaphysical and epistemological\ni
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nterpretations in my critical evaluation of non-Christian ethical systems. There\nare, however, still other interpretations of the rectangle that are more specifically\nethical in their meaning:\n1. Absoluteness and Relevance of the Moral Law\nMost ethical writers would like to discover principles of ethics that are\nabsolute (and so obligatory) and are also relevant (with specific content\nbearing on practical ethical decisions). In a biblical worldview, the law of\nGod, our ethical standard, is absolute (1 on the diagram) because of\nGodâs absolute control and authority. Yet it is also relevant (2) because\nGod reveals it to us in our experience through his covenant presence. He\nis with us in the ethical struggle. He knows the problems we must deal\nwith, and indeed he has designed the moral law with our situation fully in\nview.\n44\nFor more discussion of the ârationalist-irrationalist dialecticâ in non-Christian thought, see my\nCVT, Chapter 17, and DKG, 360-63.\n45\nFletcher, Situation Ethics (Philadelphia: Westminster Press: 1966), 55. 47\nBut those who reject the biblical theistic worldview find it difficult to\nachieve either absoluteness or relevance. The absoluteness of the moral\nlaw, for them, is the absoluteness of an opaque reality, which says nothing\nclearly (3). And relevance becomes the relevance of creatures talking to\nthemselves (4). We shall see that among some non-Christian thinkers the\nauthority of a moral principle is in proportion to its abstractness, that is, its\nirrelevance. The more specific, the more relevant an ethical principle has,\nthe less authority it has. So that in Plato, for example, the highest ethical\nprinciple is abstract Goodness, a goodness without any specific content at\nall. Similarly with Fletcherâs view of love.\nThere is a religious reason for this antithesis between absoluteness and\ncontent. The non-Christian ethicist would like to believe, and would like\nothers to believe, that he has moral standards, and that itâs possible to\nhave moral standa
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rds without God. But he doesnât want to be bound by\nany rules. He wants to be autonomous. So he arrives at the paradoxical\nnotion of absolutes without content: an appearance of moral principle\nwithout any real moral principle at all. The alternative, of course, which\nhas the same motive, is a moral content without authority. So in non-\nChristian ethics there is an inverse proportion between the authority of a\nprinciple and its content, its relevance.\n2. Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility\nIn the Christian understanding, Godâs sovereignty is his lordship. So it entails\nhis control and authority over all things ((1) on the diagram). 46 But his authority\nalso entails human responsibility: what God says, we must do. And his authority\nis not a bare command, for he enters our history in Christ to live our lives and to\nredeem us. So our responsibility is not only a response to Godâs authority (1), but\nalso to his covenant presence (2). Seen in this way, there is no conflict between\ndivine sovereignty and human responsibility.\nThose rejecting this biblical worldview often argue that ethical responsibility\npresupposes total human autonomy, to perform actions that are not caused by\nGod, our environment, or even our own desiresâactions that are totally\nuncaused. This view of freedom is sometimes called âlibertarianism.â I have\nargued that libertarianism is incoherent and that it is not the ground of moral\nresponsibility. 47 When a court examines whether Bill is responsible for committing\nmurder, it cannot possibly use the libertarian criterion, for it would be impossible\nto prove that Billâs action is totally uncaused. Yet some such view is implicit in the\nidea that creatures are autonomous ((4) on the diagram).\n46\nFor discussion of divine sovereignty and human freedom and responsibility, see DG, Chapters\n4, 8, and 9.\n47\nIbid., Chapter 8. 48\nThe only alternative on a nonbiblical worldview, as I see it, is that our actions\nare controlled by some unknown reality ((3) on the
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: diagram). But a being of\nwhom we are wholly ignorant cannot be the ground of our responsibility. Further,\nsince we know nothing of such a force, we must regard it as impersonal. But an\nimpersonal force cannot be the ground of ethical responsibility. We cannot incur\nethical obligations to forces like gravity or electromagnetism. Ethical obligation is\nfundamentally personal, arising out of loyalty and love. 48\n3. Objectivity and Inwardness\nThe Bible teaches that the law of God is objective in the sense that its\nmeaning does not depend on us. It comes from Godâs authoritative word\n(1). Yet God is not pleased with merely external obedience. He wants his\nword to be written on the human heart, where it motivates us from within.\nIn the new covenant (Jer. 31:31-34), God writes his word, his moral law,\non the hearts of his people. That is an aspect of his covenant presence\n(2). So in the Christian worldview, moral standards are both objective and\ninward.\nThose who deny that worldview must seek objectivity in an unknowable\nrealm (3), where the moral standard cannot be known at all, let alone\nobjectively. They seek inwardness by making each person his own moral\nstandard (4). But that dispenses with all objectivity and leaves us with\nnothing to internalize.\n4. Humility and Hope\nGodâs transcendence (1) shows us how small we are and promotes\nhumility. But God has come into our history (2) to promise us, by grace,\ngreat blessings in Christ. We are indeed small; but we are Godâs people\nand therefore great. A non-Christian, however, is either driven to pride\n((4)âbecause he is his own autonomous standard) or to despair ((3)â\nbecause he is lost in an unknown, uncaring universe).\n5. Freedom and Authority in Society\nWe should also consider the implications of lordship in regard to social\nethics. Most of those who write about the role of the state want to achieve\na balance between law and order, on the one hand, and individual\nfreedom on the other. In Scripture, God gives control and authority
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: to civil\nrulers in his name (Rom. 13:1-6), providing a basis for civil law and order.\nThis view of civil authority can be placed in position (1) on our diagram.\nBut the authority of the civil ruler is not absolute; it is limited by Godâs\nhigher authority. Furthermore, God sets standards for civil rulers as for all\nrulers: they are not to be tyrants, to âLord it overâ people, but they are\n48\nCompare my âmoral argument for the existence of Godâ in AGG, 93-102. 49\nrather to serve those whom they rule, as Jesus himself came not to be\nserved, but to serve (Matt. 20:25-28). 49 In this respect, they are to reflect\nGodâs own covenant presence, his covenant solidarity with his people. So\nthey should seek what is best for their subjects. The rulerâs power is also\nlimited by the powers of other God-appointed authorities as in the family\nand the church. So Scripture gives us a charter for limited government and\npersonal liberty. We may place this teaching at point (2) of the diagram.\nNon-Christian social and political philosophy is also concerned about law\nand order on the one hand, and personal liberty on the other. But their\narguments for law and order tend toward the extreme of totalitarianism (as\nin Plato, Hobbes, Rousseau). For they accept no revelation of God limiting\nthe powers of government, and they have no other arguments sufficient to\nestablish such limits. So government becomes an idol, a substitute for\nGod himself. This teaching fits position (4) on our diagram.\nBut if the non-Christian thinker is more interested in personal liberty than\nin law and order, his argument for personal liberty leads naturally to\nanarchy. For, again, non-Christian thought has no recourse to divine\nrevelation that would affirm personal liberty while establishing a limit upon\nit. For the non-Christian defender of liberty, liberty must become an\nabsolute, so that government has no legitimate power at all. Thus political\nchaos adds to the conceptual chaos implicit in position (3).\nOf course, man
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: y non-Christian ethicists have sought a balance between\nlaw and liberty. John Locke is well-known for his balanced approach in\nsuch matters. But although he was primarily a secular thinker, he may\nhave been influenced by Christian writers, such as Samuel Rutherford,\nauthor of Lex, Rex. Rutherford worked out a balance between the state\nand the people, mainly through biblical exegesis. Locke tried to\naccomplish the same balance through an empiricist epistemology. But\nDavid Hume later argued that one cannot derive moral obligations from\nempirical observation, an argument that made Lockeâs political philosophy\nfar less plausible. I shall argue later in this book that no line can be drawn\nbetween the powers and limits of government except by means of divine\nrevelation. So the tension between irrationalism and rationalism in non-\nChristian thought can be seen also as a tension between anarchy and\ntotalitarianism.\nThree Ethical Principles\n49\nJesus here speaks primarily of the apostlesâ role as leaders of the church. But since he\ncompares their work to the work of Gentile civil authorities, he implicitly makes his own\nservanthood the model for Christian civil rulers as well. I shall consider the relation of church and\nstate more fully under the Fifth Commandment. 50\nIn this section I will discuss another aspect of the ethical debate between\nChristians and non-Christians. This debate also concerns the lordship\nattributes.\nMost people who think about ethics, Christian and non-Christian\nalike, are impressed by three principles:\n1. The Teleological Principle: A good act maximizes the happiness of\nliving creatures.\nThat is to say, a good act does good. Christians emphasize that it is good for\nGod, bringing him glory. But Scripture tells us that what brings glory to God\nbrings good to his people: âAnd the LORD commanded us to do all these\nstatutes, to fear the LORD our God, for our good always, that he might preserve\nus alive, as we are this dayâ (Deut. 6:24; compare 10:13). Non-Christian
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ethical\nwriters like Aristotle have also emphasized that doing good brings happiness,\nhowever that may be defined. The ethical life is the good life, the blessed life\n(Psm. 1, Matt. 5:1-11). And of course to live ethically is also to bring blessing to\nothers.\nIn Christian ethics, this insight is based on Godâs lordship attribute of control.\nFor it is God who arranges nature and history so that good acts have beneficial\nconsequences, to himself, to the ethical agent, and to other persons.\nI call this principle the principle of teleology, for it declares that all our\nbehavior should be goal-oriented, that it should seek the glory of God and the\nhappiness of people.\n2. The Deontological Principle: A good act is a response to duty, even at the\nprice of self-sacrifice.\nWe admire people who follow their ethical principles, even at great cost. In\nthe Bible, Abraham obeyed Godâs word, even though it meant leaving his home\ncountry, moving to a place where he was a complete stranger to everybody, even\nthough it meant taking his son Isaac up to a mountain to serve as a human\nsacrifice (Gen. 22:1-19). To do his Fatherâs will, the Lord Jesus gave his very life.\nSo God defines duties for us, absolute norms that take precedence over\nany other consideration. Our duty is what we must do, what we ought to do. So\nthey are necessary. And they are universal, for they apply to everyone. If it is\nwrong for me to steal, then it is wrong for you to steal in the same situation.\nEthics is no respecter of persons.\nThis insight is based on Godâs lordship attribute of authority. For the\nultimate source of human duties is Godâs authoritative word. Some secular 51\nthinkers, such as Plato and Kant, also acknowledged the important of duty. But\nas we shall see, they had a difficult time determining where our duties are to be\nfound, and what our duties actually are.\nI call this principle the principle of deontology, from the Greek verb\ntranslated âowe, ought, or must.â It states that ethics is a matter of
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: duty, of\nobligation.\n3. The Existential Principle: A good act comes from a good inner\ncharacter.\nA good person is not a hypocrite. He does good works because he loves\nto do them, because his heart is good. Scripture emphasizes that the only\nrighteousness that is worth anything is a righteousness of the heart. The\nPharisees cleansed the outside of their cup, their outward acts, but not the\ninside, their heart-motives (Matt. 23:25). Non-Christian writers, such as Aristotle,\nhave also frequently emphasized the importance of character, of virtue, of inner\nrighteousness. But as we shall see they have not succeeded in showing what\nconstitutes virtue or how such virtue may be attained.\nThis insight is based on Godâs lordship attribute of presence, for it is God\nâwho works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasureâ (Phil. 2:12).\nWithout inward regeneration and sanctification, our best works are hypocritical.\nI call this the existential principle, for it says that morality is personal,\ninward, a matter of the heart.\nAre the Three Principles Consistent?\nChristians can gladly accept all three of the principles, insights or intuitions\nlisted above. The God of Scripture is the author of the situation, the Word, and\nthe moral self, so that the three are fully consistent with one another. He ordains\nhistory so that people will find their ultimate blessing in doing their duty. He has\nmade us in his image, so that our greatest personal fulfillment occurs in seeking\nhis glory in history, as his word declares.\nNow many writers appreciate the three principles, or some of them,\nalthough they reject the God of the Bible. But in the absence of the biblical God,\nthese principles are in tension with one another.\nThe teleological principle says that ethical action leads to happiness. Yet\nthe deontological principle says that in order to do our duty, we must sometimes\nsacrifice our happiness. 52\nThe teleological and deontological principles say that our ethical\nresponsibility is objective,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: grounded outside ourselves. But the existential\nsuggests that our goodness is inward, and therefore subjective.\nThe deontological principle says that we are subject to a moral law that\ndeclares our duty, apart from inclination or the consequences of our acts. But the\nteleological and existential principles measure our goodness by the\nconsequences of our actions and our inner life, respectively.\nThe existential principle says that itâs wrong to measure a personâs\ngoodness by anything external to himself. But the teleological and deontological\nprinciples say that one may measure goodness by the consequences and norms\nof actions, respectively.\nNon-Christian thinkers who appreciate the teleological principle tend to be\nempiricists in their epistemology (as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill),\nbasing human knowledge on sense-experience. But philosophers have generally\nrecognized that sense-experience does not reveal to us universal or necessary\nprinciples. It cannot reveal universal principles, because we cannot have sense-\nexperience of the whole universe. And it cannot reveal necessary principles,\nbecause necessity is not something available to the senses. At most, the senses\ntell us what happens, not what must happen, and certainly not what ought to\nhappen. But the deontological principle says that ethics is based on principles\nthat are universal, necessary, and obligatory.\nSo if one tries to hold these principles without God, they inevitably appear\nto be in tension with one another. With God, they cohere, for the same God who\ncontrols the consequences of our acts also declares our duties and also gives us\na new inner life. But without God it seems likely that in some ethical situations\none principle will contradict another. We may, then, have to abandon our duty in\norder to maximize happiness in a situation, or to be as loving as possible (Joseph\nFletcher). Of course, we must then decide what principle will prevail. Non-\nChristian ethicists differ among themselves on that question,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: so among them\nthere are three schools of thought.\nThree Schools of Non-Christian Ethics\nTeleological Ethics\nFor some non-Christian ethicists, it is the teleological principle that\nprevails. For them, what is important is the goal we are pursuing, usually defined\nas happiness or pleasure. That happiness can be individual (as in Epicurean\nhedonism) or both individual and corporate (as in Millâs Utilitarianism). We 53\nmeasure the ethical value of our actions by the consequences of those actionsâ\nto what extent they maximize happiness and minimize unhappiness.\nTeleological ethicists tend to be hostile to the idea that we are bound by\nabsolute rules that take precedence over our happiness, as in deontological\nethics. They also dislike the notion that ethics is subjective, as in existential\nethics. Rather, they think it is something publicâeven subject to calculation. For\nthey believe we can determine what to do merely by calculating the\nconsequences of our actions: the quantity and/or quality of pains and pleasures\nthat action will produce.\nDeontological Ethics\nFor other non-Christian ethicists, it is the deontological principle that\nprevails. For them it is important above all to have access to authoritative norms\nthat govern all human conduct. The teleological principle that we should seek\nhappiness is insufficient, even anti-ethical. We admire, not those who seek their\nown happiness, but those who sacrifice that happiness for a higher principle. And\nto a deontologist, the existential idea that ethics is essentially subjective is\ndestructive of ethics itself.\nSo the deontologist goes in search of absolute ethical principles. For him,\na moral principle must be external to ourselves, universal, necessary,\ntranscendent, indeed god-like. Opponents of this approach believe that\ndeontologists have failed to prove that such principles exist. But deontologists\nbelieve that without such principles there can be no ethics.\nExistential Ethics\nI use the term âexistential ethicsâ to refer
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: to a broad movement, of which\nthe twentieth-century school of writers like Jean-Paul Sartre is only a part. As I\nuse the phrase, existential ethicists are those who are impressed most of all with\nthe existential principle discussed in the last two sections. The most important\nthing about ethics is its inwardness. Goodness is of the heart, of the motive. A\ngood act is an act that actualizes the true self (our essence, in Aristotle and\nIdealism; our freedom, according to Sartre). If there are moral laws or principles\nthey must be affirmed from within. If we seek happiness, it is our own happiness,\nnot a happiness defined by someone else. So it is wrong to judge anyone on the\nbasis of external conduct alone.\nIn the chapters that follow, I will be discussing specific examples of these\ntypes of ethics, as well as some thinkers who attempt to combine them in various\nways. Then I will discuss the general structure of Christian ethics as an ethic\nacknowledging all three principles as âperspectives,â an ethic in which the three\nprinciples are reconciled through divine lordship. 54\nChapter 5: Ethics and the Religions\nIn the first four chapters, I have introduced the subject of ethics, relating it\nto the lordship of God. I suggested that we can fruitfully investigate ethics under\nthree perspectives related to Godâs lordship attributes: the situational, the\nnormative, and the existential. I also used the lordship attributes to distinguish in\ngeneral between biblical and nonbiblical approaches to ethics.\nOutline of the Treatise on Ethics\nIn the rest of my discussion of ethics, I seek to do three things that roughly\ncorrelate with the triads previously expounded. First, I intend to discuss non-\nChristian ethics, to show briefly, but in more detail than was possible in Chapters\n3 and 4, why nonbiblical approaches are insufficient to guide our ethical\ndecisions. In this section, I will be discussing mainly non-Christian metaethical\nsystems, rather than their specific ethical prescriptions, becau
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: se that will enable\nme to focus more precisely on their presuppositions and methods.\nSince most discussion of ethical issues today is based on these\nnonbiblical views, these chapters will indicate the context of current debate, the\nintellectual situation that Christian ethicists must address. So I associate the\ndiscussion of non-Christian ethics with the situational perspective.\nSecond, I would like to set forth a biblical philosophy of ethics, a Christian\nmetaethic, responding to the non-Christian metaethics discussed in the\npreceding section. We can think of this section as a Christian method for making\nethical decisions. That method is, of course, tri-perspectival. So in these chapters\nI will be looking in more detail at the three perspectives, trying to understand how\neach, with the others, helps us to analyze and resolve ethical issues. Since this\nmethod describes the actual subjective process by which we wrestle with ethical\nmatters, I identify it with the existential perspective. 50\nThird, I will try to formulate in general the actual content of a Christian\nethic: the biblical norms that govern our lives. Here, following the traditions of\nmany churches, I shall expound these norms under the headings of the Ten\nCommandments, relating them to ethical teachings throughout Scripture. In line\nwith my general view of theology as application, this discussion will include, not\nonly exegesis of the commandments in the usual sense, but also formulations of\n50\nDKG was organized according to the objects of knowledge (situational), the justification of\nknowledge (normative) and the methods of knowledge (existential). So here again I identify\nmethodology with the existential perspective. But in this case I use a different order of\npresentation: the existential second, and the normative third. 55\ntheir applications to contemporary ethical issues. This discussion will represent\nthe normative perspective on ethics.\nThe reader will note that the tri-perspectival system involves triads within\ntria
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ds within triads. This whole book is tri-perspectival. The ethics section\nprovides the normative perspective to the whole book, but that section itself is\nalso divided into perspectives, as are some of the subsections and sub-\nsubsections. This phenomenon reminds us that the perspectives are not sharply\ndistinct from one another, each including an utterly unique subject matter.\nRather, each perspective includes the other two and therefore draws on the other\ntwo for its content and methodology. At times it is difficult to say what topic\nshould fall under which perspective. Indeed, most of the time it really doesnât\nmatter, except for purposes of pedagogical organization. For example, you can\nthink of a tree in the front yard as an element of your environment (situational),\nas a fact that demands your belief (normative), or as an element of your\nexperience (existential). Each perspective brings out something important about\nthe tree. None of them can adequately deal with the treeâs reality without the help\nof the other two.\nEthics and Religion\nSo first on our agenda is to discuss non-Christian approaches to ethics.\nAmong these non-Christian approaches are some that are connected with the\ngreat religions of the world, such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam and Judaism.\nOthers purport to be secular, non-religious, such as the predominant schools of\nwestern ethical philosophy: Aristotelianism, utilitarianism, deontologism, and so\non.\nSecular philosophies, of course, do not demand church attendance or\nparticipation in religious ceremonies. But in other respects, they are religious.\nRoy Clouser, in his The Myth of Religious Neutrality, 51 discusses the difficulty of\ndefining religion. What, he asks, do the great religions of the world have in\ncommon? That question is more difficult that it might seem, Clouser argues. 52 We\nmight think that all religions include ethical codes, but Shinto does not. We might\nthink that all religions acknowledge a personal supreme being; but Buddhism and\nHinduism
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: do not. Or we might propose that all religions demand worship. But\nEpicureanism and some forms of Buddhism and Hinduism do not. Clouser\nconcludes, however, that it is nevertheless possible to define religious belief, and\nhe suggests the following:\nA religious belief is any belief in something or other as divine.\n51\n52\nNotre Dame and London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1991.\nSee his discussion in ibid., 10-12. 56\nâDivineâ means having the status of not depending on anything else. 53\nClouserâs definition of divine does not suffice to define fully the biblical God, or,\nfor that matter, the gods of other religions. But it does define an attribute of the\nbiblical God, 54 an attribute also ascribed to absolutes of other religious traditions.\nAll systems of thought include belief in something that is self-sufficient, not\ndependent on anything else. In Christianity, the self-sufficient being is the biblical\nGod. In Islam, it is Allah; in Hinduism, Brahman. Clouser points out that in Greek\npolytheism the gods are not divine according to his definition, because they\ndepend on realities other than themselves. The flux from which all things come,\ncalled Chaos or Okeanos, is the true deity of the ancient Greek religion. 55 Even\npurportedly atheistic religions like Therevada Buddhism have deities in Clouserâs\nsense. Therevada holds that the Void, the ultimate Nothingness, sometimes\ncalled Nirvana, is not dependent on anything else. 56\nBut such a definition of religion makes it impossible for us to distinguish\nsharply between religion and philosophy, or indeed between religion and any\nother area of human thought and life. 57 Philosophies also, however secular they\nmay claim to be, always acknowledge something that is divine in the sense of\nânot depending on anything else.â Examples would be Thalesâ water, Platoâs\nForm of the Good, Aristotleâs Prime Mover, Spinozaâs âGod or Nature,â Kantâs\nNoumenal, Hegelâs Absolute, the Mystical of Wittgensteinâs Tractatus. In the\ne
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: pistemological sphere, also, philosophers typically acknowledge human reason\nas self-sufficient in the sense that it requires no justification from anything more\nultimate than itself. When they appear to deny autonomous reason (as with the\nSophists, Duns Scotus, Hume, existentialism, and postmodernism), they typically\nexalt autonomous will or feeling, as we shall see in the next chapters, so that will\nor feeling become divine.\nThe biblical point to be made here is that nobody is really an atheist, in the\nmost serious sense of that term. When people turn away from worship of the true\nGod, they donât reject absolutes in general. Rather, instead of the true God, they\nworship idols, as Paul teaches in Rom. 1:18-32. The great division in mankind is\nnot that some worship a god and others do not. Rather it is between those who\nworship the true God and those who worship false gods, idols. False worship\nmay not involve rites or ceremonies, but it always involves acknowledgement of\naseity, honoring some being as not dependent on anything else.\n53\nIbid., 21-22.\nCalled aseity in DG, Chapter 26.\n55\nClouser, Myth, 25.\n56\nIbid., 26-27.\n57\nThe same result follows from some other recent attempts to define religion, such as Paul\nTillichâs definition of religion as âultimate concern,â and William Tremmelâs âaffirmation of\nunrestricted value.â Clouser opposes these definitions in Ibid., 12-16, but they also imply that all\nhuman thought is religious.\n54 57\nNow in this chapter I will discuss the ethics of what we usually call the\nworldâs religions, and then in the following chapters I will focus on what are\nusually called the traditions of secular ethics. As weâve seen there can be no\nsharp distinctions between these. The systems discussed in this chapter might\nbe called âmore explicitly religiousâ and those in the next chapters âless explicitly\nreligious,â but the difference is in the trappings, not the essence. It is a difference\nof degree, not a radical difference. The more
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: explicitly religious systems typically\nadvocate worship, observe religious holidays, promote prayer and ceremony.\nThe less explicitly religious systems do not. But the two are agreed in basing\ntheir thinking and living on something that is not dependent on anything else.\nEthics Based on Fate\nIt should not surprise readers too much that I divide the ethical\napproaches of the worldâs religions into three types: ethics based on fate\n(situational), ethics as self-realization (existential), and ethics as law without\ngospel (normative). These are perspectives, for each of the worldâs religions can\nbe characterized in all three of these ways. But some religions emphasize one,\nsome the other. The first type is impressed most by what we called in Chapter 4\nthe teleological principle. The second type stresses the existential principle, and\nthe third the normative principle. In this section we will look at the first emphasis.\nIn polytheism, as Clouser points out, the gods themselves are not\nultimate. They are not a se; they do not exist independently. Nor do they serve as\nultimate ethical authorities. Indeed, they are frequently guilty of ethical\ntransgressions. They are jealous, angry, mischievous, rebellious, adulterous, and\nso on. What is actually divine in Clouserâs sense is something impersonal. As we\nsaw earlier, Clouser says that the true self-existent being in Greek religion is that\nprimal flux called Chaos or Okeanos. Greek literature also speaks of âfateâ\n(moira, ate) as the ultimate determiner of life and death.\nIs fate another name for Chaos, or is it something even more ultimate?\nHard to say. The literature uses the language of fate to indicate what directs\nnature and history, the language of chaos to indicate the unpredictable\nmovement that is nature itself. But if there is no personal supreme being, what\ndoes it mean to say that fate âdirectsâ history? Rather, it seems that fate is a\nsynonym for âwhatever happens,â as in âwhatever will be, will be.â And Chaos,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: or\nChance, is another name for whatever happens. Fate is whatever happens,\nconceived as a rational process; change is whatever happens, conceived as an\nirrational process. Fate and chance are the same, but they represent a\nrationalistic and an irrationalistic vocabulary, respectively. 58\nReference to impersonal fate as an ultimate can be found also in Egyptian\n(maat), Babylonian (me) and Confucian (tien=heaven) texts. In Confucian (and\nsome expressions of Greek) religion, fate is powerful in its own right, working\nvengeance against those who defy it. In Egypt, Babylon, and some other Greek\nsources, there is more of an emphasis on the enforcement of this impersonal law\nby gods and human rulers. That notion encourages hierarchicalism in society: the\nEgyptian Pharaoh, for example, is the link between heaven and earth, the\nabsolute arbiter of right and wrong. Some Chinese texts regard the emperor\nsimilarly.\nSo these systems tend to require an epistemology strongly based in\nhuman authority. How do we know what is right and wrong? By the word of\nPharaoh, the emperor, or perhaps the priests, scribes, or Confucian scholars.\nHow do they know it? Either by revelation from a god or by their own observation\nof the processes of nature. If revelation comes from a god, it is based on the\ngodâs observations of these processes. For fate itself does not speak, since it is\nimpersonal. It does not reveal anything. It just makes things happen, or, perhaps,\nagain, fate itself is simply the sum-total of what does happen.\nSo the epistemology of ethics in fatalistic systems is essentially empirical,\nbased on experience of what happens in the world. When people do right, fate\nrewards them; when they do wrong, it punishes them. But then we must define\nright behavior as what gets rewarded by fate, and wrong behavior as what gets\npunished. This is the way that the teleological principle is taken by those who\nhold a fatalistic view of ethics. Right behavior brings happiness, and wrong\nbehavior brings pain, becaus
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e fate ensures it. Therefore, we should do right and\navoid doing wrong. There are several serious problems with this view:\n1. One problem with this epistemology, of course, is that fate, so far as\nanyone can observe it, is inconsistent. Sometimes people who seem to live moral\nlives are rewarded, sometimes not. Sometimes the wicked are punished,\nsometimes rewarded. These religions do sometimes posit afterlives in which\nsuch injustices are eliminated. But the afterlife is not an element of empirical\nknowledge for human beings. The gods, of course, may have some empirical\nknowledge of what happens to human beings in the afterlife. But until the gods\nthemselves receive proper recompense for their own good and bad deeds,\ninjustice continues. And as long as there is injustice, there is empirical\nuncertainty as to what fate decrees to be good and bad. So it is unclear how a\ngod, or Pharaoh, or a priest, actually knows what fate has determined to be right\nor wrong.\n2. But the problem is even worse than that. I would argue that it is not only\nhard for people to learn right and wrong on this basis; it is impossible. For many\nhave observed that ethical principles must be universal, necessary, and\nobligatory. Universal means that the principle must apply to everyone without\nrespect of persons. If it is wrong for me to covet, it is also wrong for you (in the 59\nsame situation) to covet. But empirical knowledge is never universal. Our\nexperience is never omniscient; it never exhausts the universe.\nNecessary means that the principle must be obeyed. It is not optional. And\nit does not just happen to be mandatory. But empirical knowledge cannot discern\nnecessity. As David Hume said, from sense experience you can discern that one\nbilliard ball moves when another one does. But sense experience does not tell\nyou that the second ball had to move.\nObligatory means that those who violate the ethical principle are ethically\nwrong, morally guilty. But this quality, no more than the others can be discerned\nthro
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ugh mere sense experience.\n3. But the problem is not just a weakness in our sense experience, as if\nour moral perception could be improved by better vision or hearing, perhaps by\nsuper vision and super hearing, the vision and hearing of a god, perhaps. For the\nattempt to derive moral principles from impersonal realities is even a violation of\nlogic. Impersonalist views of ethics fall prey what G. E. Moore called âthe\nnaturalistic fallacy.â 58 Mooreâs discussion builds on an argument in David Humeâs\nTreatise of Human Nature 59 to the effect that one cannot deduce ought from is.\nThat is to say, from premises about what is, about factual observations, you\ncannot deduce conclusions about what you ought to do. For example, you cannot\nreason from âIce cream tastes goodâ to âyou ought to eat ice cream,â or even\nfrom âimmunizations prevent diseaseâ to âyou ought to be immunized.â According\nto Hume and Moore, facts of nature do not carry with them moral obligations.\nFacts can be learned through observation and scientific method. But moral\nobligations cannot be seen and heard. They cannot be observed. No scientific\nexperiment can identify them. âOughtness,â right, and wrong are mysterious,\ninvisible. You can see a thief walk into a bank, put on a ski mask, take out his\ngun, demand money, put it in his bag, and walk out. When you see that, you say,\nâthat was wrong.â But you donât actually see the wrongness of it. So, although\nyou may believe strongly that what the thief did was wrong, you cannot deduce\nthe wrongness of his action from a mere description of the visible events.\nSome have directed this argument also against Christian ethics. Some\nhave claimed that to reason from âGod says x is wrongâ to âx is wrongâ is an\nexample of the naturalistic fallacy, for Godâs speaking is a fact, âx is wrongâ a\nmoral obligation, and we may never deduce obligations from mere facts.\nThat objection calls for more analysis. Why is the naturalistic fallacy a\nfallacy?
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Why is it that is does not imply ought? Evidently because there is no\nought in the premise, but there is an ought in the conclusion, as in:\n58\n59\nMoore, Principia Ethica (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1903).\n3.1.1. 60\nArgument 1\nPremise: x is pleasurable.\nConclusion: We ought to do x.\nBut the following is not a fallacy:\nArgument 2\nPremise: x is morally right.\nConclusion: we ought to do x.\nThe reason argument 2 is not a fallacy is that in effect there are oughts both in\nthe premise and in the conclusion. The term âmorally rightâ is equivalent to the\nphrase âwhat we ought to do.â Now argument 2, like argument 1, can be\ndescribed as âdeducing a value from a fact,â but in the two types of argument the\nfactual premises are very different. In argument 2, the fact in the premise is, we\nmight say, a moral fact. So we should formulate the naturalistic fallacy more\nprecisely as follows: one may deduce moral conclusions from moral facts, but not\nfrom nonmoral facts.\nNow consider this argument:\nArgument 3\nPremise: God says stealing is wrong.\nConclusion: Stealing is wrong.\nThe Christian claims that this argument is not a naturalistic fallacy, because the\npremise is a moral fact, not a nonmoral fact. There is an ought implicit in the\npremise. For what God says is never a mere fact; it is also a norm. Godâs word\nbears his lordship attributes of control, authority, and presence, and his authority\nmakes whatever he says normative for us. So whatever he says, we are\nobligated to believe, and whatever he commands, we are obligated to do.\nWhatever God says is normative. That is, to whatever he says, there is an ought\nattached. Argument 3 is not a naturalistic fallacy, then, because it is an argument\nfrom moral fact to moral conclusion, from one ought to another.\nBut what about religious fatalism, the type of ethical system we are\ndiscussing in this section? For a religious fatalist, we learn morality from this kind\nof argument:\nArgument 4\nPremise: Fate rewards people who d
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: o x.\nConclusion: People ought to do x. 61\nThus appears the teleological principle, as it fits into a fatalistic system. âA\ngood act maximizes happinessâ means that we determine the good by deciding\nwhat sorts of acts bring about a happy fate.\nIs this a naturalistic fallacy, or does it reason from ought to ought? Well, is\nthere an ought in the premise? Not in any obvious way. The fact that an\nimpersonal process prospers people who behave in a certain way doesnât make\nthat behavior obligatory, or even right.\nThat is even true of personal processes of a similar kind. Think of persons\nwho give rewards to people who serve them. Josef Stalin, for example, gave\nhandsome rewards to many of those who murdered his enemies. Does that\nmake their conduct morally right? Obviously not. Even less should we allow the\napparent preferences of an impersonal fate (but how can an impersonal principle\neven have preferences?) to dictate our moral obligations.\nSome writers, ancient and modern, have praised the courage of those\nwho have defied what seemed to be their fate, however hopeless their defiance\nmay have been. For these writers it is opposition to fate, the struggle against it,\nthat is morally praiseworthy. Prometheus became a hero by defying Zeus, and\nwe admire Antigone for her hubris in opposing fate. So it seems to be at least an\nopen question as to whether following fate, even if we could follow it, is a morally\nadmirable course of action. But if fate, unlike the biblical God, is not fit to be a\nmoral standard, then argument 4 is a naturalistic fallacy.\nThe fundamental question is whether any impersonal principle provides a\nsufficient basis for morality. In my judgment, the answer is no. Even if the\nuniverse were governed by an impersonal principle, and even if it were possible\nfor people to discern what kinds of behavior that principle rewarded or punished,\nit would remain an open question of whether we ought to practice the rewarded\nbehavior. And I cannot imagine any reason why we should fe
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: el morally bound by\nthe dictates of any impersonal principle at all. Impersonal principles, like gravity,\nelectromagnetism, and the like, have the power to push us around, but they donât\nhave the power to tell us what we ought to do. To claim they do is a naturalistic\nfallacy.\nIf morality cannot be based on anything impersonal, where can we find a\nbasis for it? In the realm of the personal, of course. We learn our moral principles\nin a personal context: at motherâs knee, in school, in church, in national\ncelebrations. By their very nature, moral principles presuppose an interpersonal\ncontext. Virtues like loyalty, love, courage, and kindness presuppose a society.\nTypically, people come to believe in loyalty, for example, as a moral virtue,\nbecause they have grown up in a home in which parents were loyal to one\nanother and to their children, and in which it therefore did not seem unreasonable\nfor parents to expect the same from their children. Similarly obedience and love. 62\nIt should not be hard to understand how the modern breakdown of the family has\nled to uncertainty about obligations.\nSo children learn morality from their parents, not by appealing to some\nimpersonal principle. But of course parents are morally as well as intellectually\nfallible. So, as they mature, children often find themselves looking for a higher\nstandard. If children learn morality from their parents, where did their parents\nlearn it? How did our first parents learn it? And who makes the rules, ultimately,\nthat govern all parents and all children? Evidently someone who is not fallible, for\nhe or she must stand as the very criterion of right and wrong. But that criterion\nmust be someone, not something, if it is to commend our ultimate loyalty,\nobedience, and love. 60\nThe absolute moral standard must be an absolute person. And the only\nabsolute person anybody knows about is the God of the Bible. The Bible is\nunique in teaching that the supreme moral authority is an absolute person. Other\nreligions and philos
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ophies proclaim absolutes, but those absolutes are not\npersonal. Still other worldviews, like polytheism, teach the existence of\nsupernatural persons, but these are not absolute. But if morality must be based\non one who is both personal and absolute, then the God of the Bible is the only\nviable candidate. 61\nI conclude, then, that fatalist religions cannot supply an adequate basis for\nmorality. It is not clear why anyone should think that the workings of fate are\nmorally consistent, how one can know the dictates of fate, or, even if we could\nknow those dictates, why they would have any moral authority at all.\nTo claim a knowledge of morality from observing fate is a rationalist claim,\nfor it exalts the powers of the human mind far beyond anything we can\nlegitimately claim to know. It is also irrationalist, because if the universe is\nultimately impersonal (review Chapter 3), then it is impossible to know anything\nabout our moral responsibilities. So in this kind of ethic, we have a good\nillustration of Van Tilâs rationalist/irrationalist dialectic (review Chapter 4).\nEthics as Self-Realization\nAnother type of âmore explicitly religiousâ ethics can be found in the monist\nreligions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism. Monism is the view that all\n60\nNote here an important triad indicating the nature of ethical obligation.\nThis paragraph summarizes the moral argument for the existence of God given in AGG, 89-\n118. Of course, in addition to Christianity, Islam and Judaism also worship gods that are absolute\nand, in some respects, personal. But that is because they are influenced by the Bible. In this\nrespect, Islam and Judaism are âChristian heresies,â like Sabellianism, Arianism, and the\nJehovahâs Witnesses. See subsection âEthics as Law Without Gospel,â below.\n61 63\nthings are ultimately one. In the west, ancient Gnosticism was essentially\nmonistic, and that worldview is echoed in neoplatonism and medieval mysticism.\nPeter R. Jones has also identified modern movements, k
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nown as âNew Ageâ\nthinking in the 1980s and â90s, which he now refers to as âneo-paganism,â as\nessentially monistic. Jones is a student of Gnostic texts, and he argues that\nthese modern movements are virtually equivalent to Gnosticism. 62\nSince on their view everything is essentially one, monists believe that if\nGod exists he is essentially one with the universe, not a being distinct from it. In\nScripture, there is a sharp distinction between creator and creature. But monism\ndenies that fundamental distinction. Indeed, for many monists, God is a name for\nour true inner self. When we gain a really deep insight into ourselves, we\ndiscover that we are God and he is us. This idea is what I described in Chapter 4\nas ânonbiblical immanenceâ (4 on the rectangular diagram). Popularly this view is\ncalled âpantheism.â\nBut monism also expresses itself in terms that suggest nonbiblical\ntranscendence (3 on the rectangle), somewhat like the deism of the\nEnlightenment period. For the Gnostics, the supreme being was so far from the\nworld that he could not be named or known by human beings. He, or it, 63 is such\na vast mystery that we can have nothing like a personal relationship with him.\nIndeed, he can have nothing at all to do with the material world, because any\nrelationship with matter would compromise his perfect spirituality.\nClearly such monism presents the sharpest possible contrast with biblical\nChristianity. (See positions 1 and 2 on the rectangle.) Yet Elaine Pagels and\nother recent theologians have tried to influence the church to accept ancient\nGnostic texts as equal in authority to the canonical Scriptures. 64 The church\nshould not accept such advice.\nThese twin emphases on transcendence and immanence formally\ncontradict one another, and critics of Gnosticism from the Church Father\n62\nSee Peter R. Jones, The Gnostic Empire Strikes Back (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1992), Spirit Wars\n(Escondido: Main Entry, 1997), and Capturing the Pagan Mind (Escondido: Main Entry, 2003).\nFollo
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: wing the Star Wars theme, Jones originally considered calling the third book The Return of\nthe Rabbi. He has also written various popular summaries of his thought which are available at\nhttp://www.spirit-wars.com/index.html. I am greatly indebted to Jones for the ideas presented in\nthis section, though I take full responsibility for their formulation.\n63\nAlthough monism sometimes describes its supreme being in personal terms, its basic view is\nthat the supreme being is too transcendent for any human characterization to apply. So that\nsupreme being should not be considered either personal or impersonal. But since that supreme\nbeing is not clearly personal, monism involves all the same difficulties I ascribed to fatalism in the\nprevious section. A basis for ethics must reside in a being who is not only personal, but who\nreveals himself as personal by, among other things, declaring to us his ethical standards. Or put it\nthis way: like fatalism, monism basically tells us that the standard of ethics is âall of reality.â But an\nexamination of reality-in-general does not lead to conclusions about what we ought to do.\n64\nSee Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (New York: Vintage, 1989). 64\nIrenaeus to the present have pointed that out. 65 On the other hand, there is at\nanother level a coherence between these two themes. For if God is not distinct\nfrom the world (nonbiblical immanence), then of course we are unable to specify\nany distinctive characteristics that may belong to him (nonbiblical\ntranscendence).\nThese forms of immanence and transcendence collaborate to destroy any\nbiblical notion of ethical responsibility. If we are God (nonbiblical immanence),\nthen we are responsible to nobody except ourselves. If we cannot know God\n(nonbiblical transcendence), then, again, we cannot be responsible to him. Thus\nmonistic systems erase all three perspectives of ethics: (1) The normative,\nbecause in monism there is no ultimate distinction between right and wrong. (2)\nThe situational, because the world as w
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e experience it is an illusion. So one\nseeks detachment from things rather than a God-glorifying use of them. (3) The\nexistential, because the self, and other selves, are also illusory. In this area too,\nmonism emphasizes detachment rather than, as in Scripture, love. Thus personal\nand social ethics become meaningless.\nNevertheless, Eastern religions and western Gnosticisms do emphasize\nethics. As with religious fatalism, they teach many ethical precepts that are not\ntoo different from those in Scripture. We should not be embarrassed on this\naccount, for Scripture itself tells us in Rom. 1 and elsewhere that God has\nrevealed the knowledge of his moral law to everyone in the world. Though people\nrepress and disobey this law, they cannot escape it entirely.\nBut it is important for us to understand the role that ethics plays in monistic\nworldviews. Essentially for these systems ethics is a discipline by which we can\nescape from the illusion of plurality and can become conscious of our oneness\nwith God and with the whole world. By ethical and other disciplines, we ascend\non a ladder of knowledge to a realm above ethics. It is therefore a tool of self-\nrealization, a means by which we can be aware of the real nature of the world.\nOf the three principles we discussed in Chapter 4, therefore, monists are\nmost impressed with the existential principle, the principle that ethics is primarily\na matter of the inner life of the self, a means of self-enhancement.\nThe trouble is, that these ethical disciplines, if successful, carry each\nperson to a realm in which ethical distinctions, like right and wrong, good and\nevil, have no meaning. If the world is one, then good and evil are one, and right\nand wrong are one. And without such contrasts, there is no such thing as good,\n65\nIn Against Heresies, Irenaeus also criticized the Gnostic system in epistemological terms. If\nGod is so mysterious that nobody can know him, then where do the Gnostics get their secret\nknowledge? But if the Gnostics are themselve
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s divine, and we are all divine, then why do we\nneed the knowledge the Gnostics claim to provide? Thus he exposes the Gnostics as both\nrationalists and irrationalists at the same time. As we saw in chapter 4, rationalism and\nirrationalism emerge from unbiblical immanence and transcendence, respectively. 65\nor evil, or right, or wrong. On these views, ethics is part of our quest for the trans-\nethical.\nBuddhism, for example, puts much emphasis on right living. But the goal\nof right living is to achieve Nirvana, a kind of Nothingness, in which there is no\nmore suffering. Nirvana takes away the curse of perpetual reincarnation, in which\nsouls are born and reborn in different forms according to the karma gained from\ntheir good or bad deeds. We might be inclined to charge Buddhism with being\negoistic in that it makes ethics a tool of personal salvation. We must remember,\nhowever, that the Mahayana tradition of Buddhism encourages altruism, referring\nto the image of Buddha, about to enter Nirvana, who instead turns around to offer\nassistance to others. But we should ask, nevertheless, why the Buddha should\nhave made such a decision. If the whole point of ethics is to achieve Nirvana,\nwhy should any altruistic purpose deter one from that goal? We should commend\nthe altruism of Mahayana. But Buddhism, in the final analysis, has no basis for\naltruism, or for any other moral principle.\nAs another example: the ancient Gnostics were divided into two ethical\ncamps. Some were ascetic, denying to themselves pleasures and possessions,\nbecause they sought escape from the material world into the spiritual oneness of\nthe supreme being. Others, however, were libertine, denying themselves no\npleasures at all, because they believed that ultimately the material world was an\nillusion and unimportant. Doubtless some tried to find a happy medium between\nthese extremes. But what principle could guide such a decision? Again, we see\nhow monism makes it impossible to specify moral distinctions.\nThe root problem may
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: be stated thus: in monism, ethics is subordinate to\nmetaphysics and epistemology. For the monist, our problem is epistemological\ndeception as to the metaphysical nature of the world and ourselves. The remedy\nis to overcome that deception and to recognize that we are essentially one with\neverything that is. For the Christian, the problem is very different: God made\nhuman beings different from himself, but reflecting his glory. But they disobeyed\nhim, creating an enmity with God that must be relieved through sacrifice. In\nChristianity, the problem is a problem with an interpersonal relationship, a\nrelationship between finite persons and the infinite person. It is about ethics: love,\nobedience, sin, redemption. In monism, the issue is fundamentally impersonal:\ndispelling illusions about metaphysical separations.\nSo, as with the religious fatalist, the monist has no personal basis of\nethics. His sense of obligation must come from the impersonal nature of the\nuniverse itself. In the previous section of this chapter, however, we saw how an\nimpersonal reality can provide no basis for ethical standards.\nEthics as Law Without Gospel 66\nMy critique of fatalism and monism has centered on the impersonalism of\nthose positions. A worldview in which the highest reality is impersonal is\nincapable of providing a basis for ethical decisions. But what of religions other\nthan Christianity that do base their ethics on the revelation of a personal\nabsolute? This would include traditional Judaism, Islam, and Christian heresies\nsuch as the Jehovahâs Witnesses and theological liberalism. 66\nWe should note that the reason why these religions affirm an absolute\npersonal God is because they are influenced by the Bible. As I mentioned earlier,\nit is a remarkable fact that belief in a personal absolute is not found in any\nreligion or philosophy except those influenced by the Bible. Traditional Judaism,\nof course, adheres to what Christians call the Old Testament. Christians and\nJews deeply disagree as to how that
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: book should be interpreted, but they do\nshare the belief that that book is the authoritative word of God.\nFrom a Christian point of view, Judaism is a Christian heresy. Christian\nheretics (like Sabellians, Arians, Jehovahâs Witnesses, and many in the tradition\nof theological liberalism) claim to believe the Bible, but they interpret it in ways\nthat deny the essence of the Gospel, or they pick and choose what to believe in\nScripture, ending up with a deeply unbiblical theology. The dispute between\nChristians and Jews is in this respect the same.\nIslam, too, may be understood as a Christian heresy. Its founder,\nMohammed, initially respected the âpeoples of the book,â the Jews and\nChristians. He sought to promulgate the monotheism of Scripture among his own\npeople. But eventually he produced another book, the Quâran, which denied\nmany fundamental teachings of Scripture, such as Jesusâ deity and his atoning\ndeath. Even then, Muslims regarded Scripture as a divine revelation, but argued\nthat it had been corrupted during the centuries of its transmission. 67 They\nrespected Jesus as a prophet, believed in his Virgin Birth, his miracles, and his\nreturn at the final judgment. 68 Indeed, they turned to the Bible for their own\napologetic purposes, for they argued that biblical prophecy predicts the coming of\nMohammed.\nSo, as with Judaism, the debate between Christianity and Islam is to some\nextent exegetical, to show that (1) the Bible does not, in fact, predict the coming\nof Mohammed, for the passages at issue fit only Jesus, and that (2) it is\n66\nFor an account of liberal Christianity as a heresy, indeed as a religion radically contrary to\nChristianity, see J. Gresham Machen, Christrianity and Liberalism (New York: Macmillan, 1923).\nAlthough liberalism since Machenâs time has taken on a much more orthodox sound, it still, in my\njudgment, falls prey to Machenâs brilliant critique. I expect to develop an elaborate critique of\ntheological liberalism in my forthcoming Doctrine of the W
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ord of God.\n67\nThis claim, of course, is not easily defended. For example, it is unlikely in the extreme that all\nthe NT references to Jesusâ atoning death are the result of textual corruption.\n68\nSo it has been rightly said that Muslims believe more about Jesus than many liberal\nProtestants. 67\nimpossible to argue that the biblical text was corrupted to the extent that Muslims\nbelieve.\nBut both Islam and Judaism do claim to base their ethics on the revelation\nof a personal absolute, indeed on the revelation of the God of Scripture. So we\ncannot argue against Judaism and Islam in quite the same way we argue against\nfatalism and monism. Theological liberals sometimes do and sometimes do not\nclaim to believe in such a basis for ethics. When they do not, their positions\namount to religious fatalism or monism. When they do, however, we must deal\nwith them differently.\nI say that we cannot argue against these positions in âquiteâ the same way\nas we argue against fatalism and monism. Nevertheless, there are significant\nparallels between fatalism and monism on the one hand, and Judaism, Islam,\nand liberalism, on the other. For the defections of these religions from Scripture\naffect their doctrine of God to some extent. Most obviously, these religions are\nUnitarian, not Trinitarian. They deny the full deity of Christ and therefore see God\nas a oneness without plurality. 69\nWithout a doctrine of plurality in God, these religions have less ability to\nregard God as the ultimate ethical standard and exemplar. In discussing fatalism,\nI pointed out that virtues like loyalty, mutual submission, and love, require a\nsociety for their exhibition. They are interpersonal virtues, not merely personal\nones. A Unitarian god cannot exemplify these until he creates finite persons to\nrelate to. But when he does that, his loyalty, submission, and love are relative to,\ndependent on, the creation. With regard to these virtues, the Unitarian god is not\nthe ultimate standard, not even divine, in Clouserâs
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sense.\nFurther, a Unitarian concept of God easily slips into an impersonal\nconcept: (1) Theologies based on Judaism, Islam, and liberal Christianity,\ncommonly view Godâs transcendence in the nonbiblical way shown in (3) of the\nrectangular diagram of Chapter 4. On this view, human concepts of God are,\nstrictly speaking, impossible. We cannot regard God as personal or as\nimpersonal. But we have seen that ethics requires a clearly personal concept of\nGod. 70\n69\nIn practice, of course, Unitarian religions almost always treat their god as impersonal. An\nunrevealed personal god is functionally equivalent to an unrevealed impersonal god. Why do\nUnitarian religions veer toward impersonalism? Because to think of God as personal requires\nsome detailed revelation expressing his attributes and actions. We canât know that God is\npersonal unless he speaks to us and shows us that he is. But Unitarianismâs view of\ntranscendence denies that such a revelation is possible.\n70\nAccording to Islam, we cannot know God, only his will. But as I have argued, the ethical\nauthority of revelation is based on a personal relationship with its author. Islam does not offer\nsuch a personal relationship. 68\n(2) In Islam, the biblical doctrine of predestination becomes a form of\nfatalism, in which free human choices have no ultimate effect on the course of\nevents. 71 But such fatalism is mechanical, not personal.\n(3) In some Jewish and liberal theologies, the opposite problem occurs, in\nwhich God himself is so limited by human free will that he cannot even know the\nfuture in an exhaustive way. In those theologies, God is not the sole origin of\nwhat occurs (contrary to Eph. 1:11 and Rom. 11:36). He is himself subject to the\ncreated world. Given such assumptions, it is gratuitous to posit God as the sole\nsource of ethical standards. 72\nSo Judaism, Islam, and the Christian heresies are not immune to the\ncharge of impersonalism that I have brought against fatalism and monism. But\neven if we assume that these religion
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s do believe (as they sometimes claim) in a\npersonal God, there is yet more to be said.\nThese religions, indeed all religions except biblical Christianity, are\nreligions of works-righteousness. That is, they are religions in which the\nmembers try to seek moral status by doing good works. This principle is directly\nopposed to the biblical gospel, which says that even our best works are\ninsufficient to gain favor with God. Isaiah 64:6 reads,\nWe have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous\ndeeds are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our\niniquities, like the wind, take us away.\nIn Rom. 8:8, the apostle Paul says that they that those who are âin the flesh,â that\nis, those who have not had their sins forgiven through the atonement of Christ,\nâcannot please God.â In Scripture, our only hope, therefore, is in Christ. Paul\nsays,\n23\nfor all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified\nby his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25\nwhom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by\nfaith (Rom. 3:23-25a).\nSo salvation is entirely by Godâs grace, his free gift, not by our works:\nFor by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own\ndoing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may\nboast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good\n71\nFor my own account of the relationship between divine foreordination and human freedom, see\nDG, Chapters 4, 8, 9, and 16.\n72\nI am, here, of course, referring to the theological movement called open theism, which I have\ncriticized extensively in No Other God (Phillipsburg: P&R, 2001). 69\nworks, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them\n(Eph. 2:8-10).\nIn Judaism, Islam, and the Christian heresies (and the same may be said\nalso of fatalism and monism) there is no doctrine of salvation by divine grace.\nRather, people are expected to lead good lives, hoping that God will a
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ccept\nthem. But this doctrine of works righteousness leads either to pride or despair. It\nleads to pride on the part of those who think they can meet Godâs requirements\non their own. This is, of course, a pride based on self-deception. People with this\nambition are quite ignorant of Godâs standards, and they flatter themselves\nbeyond measure to think they have measured up even to a minimal\nunderstanding of Godâs requirements. They have suppressed (Rom. 1:18) their\nvery knowledge of themselves, of the vast number of ways in which they have\nfallen short of Godâs perfection.\nThe doctrine of works righteousness also leads to despair, among those\nwith better spiritual perception. They see the huge discrepancy between what\nGod requires and what they have done, and they lose all hope of attaining\nfellowship with God.\nIt is only the cross of Christ that can put to rest that pride and despair.\nGodâs grace brings us fellowship with God that is not based on our works, so we\nmay not boast (Eph. 2:8). And it brings us into deep fellowship with God as he\nsees us in his beloved Son, so we may not despair.\nWhen Christians discuss ethics with Jews, Muslims, liberals, indeed with\nfatalists and monists, they should try hard to direct the conversation to the cross.\nFor that is the most important issue, in the final analysis, and the most urgent for\nany inquirer. We should be willing to discuss metaphysics and epistemology as\nabove, to question whether non-Christian religions have a basis for ethical\nclaims. As Francis Schaeffer used to say, we should be ready to give honest\nanswers to honest questions. But in the end the Gospel is by far the most\nimportant thing.\nAll three types of non-Christian religions offer us, at most, law without\ngospel. Religions of the third type have a special focus on law, their application of\nthe normative principle. As we shall see in later chapters, I donât believe that law\nand gospel are separated in Scripture itself, in the manner presented, for\nexample, in Lut
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: heran theology. In Scripture, the law is the law of the God who\nsaves, the law of the kingdom of God. The gospel is the message that that\nkingdom is coming and that therefore God will save his people. But there is\nsomething of a law/gospel distinction between general and special revelation.\nRom. 1 teach us that God makes his moral standards, his law, known to all\npeople through natural revelation. It does not teach that he also reveals therein\nthe way of salvation. Rather, âfaith comes from hearing, and hearing through the\nword of Christâ (Rom. 10:17). And of course our salvation comes, not through 70\nkeeping the law, but by receiving the grace of Christ, known only through special\nrevelation. 73\nGrace is only possible in a universe governed by an absolute person.\nImpersonal forces, like gravity and electromagnetism, treat everybody equally,\naccording to the sheer force of whatever laws they obey. If you place your hand\non a live wire, you will receive a shock, whether you are righteous or wicked. The\nlive wire does not make a loving decision to give some people a free gift of\nelectrical-shock immunity. So impersonalist systems tend to be universalisticâto\nsay that everyone will be saved in some way or other, or, as in secular\nimpersonalisms, that we shall all be equally destroyed by natural forces.\nChristianity is not universalistic, for according to Scripture human beings are\nultimately in the hands of a thoroughly personal God. He decides, for his own\nreasons and personal affections, who will be saved and who will be lost. 74\nSo those apparently personalist religions that promulgate law without\ngospel have a view of ethics that is not much different from that of impersonalist\nreligions. For all three forms of non-Christian religion, ethics is obedience to law\nwithout hope of forgiveness for sin. And in all three forms, even the law is\nquestionable, because we cannot specify its content in an impersonalist\nuniverse.\n73\nI shall have more to say about the distinction between gene
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ral and special revelation when we\nconsider more fully the normative perspective of Christian ethics. Of course special revelation\npresents the gospel, but it also presents law, integrated with gospel. We do not understand the\nfull force and depth of the law except through the gospel, and we do not understand how good\nthe good news is, apart from law.\n74\nI have addressed objections to predestination and reprobation in DG, Chapters 9 and 16. 71\nChapter 6: The Existential Tradition\nHaving looked at three forms of âmore explicitly religiousâ approaches to\nethics, I now turn to âless explicitly religiousâ approaches, usually called secular\nethics. I shall deal with these at somewhat greater length, since they dominate\nthe ethical discussions of our own time.\nPhilosophy and Ethics 75\nAround 600 BC, an intellectual movement appeared in Miletus, in Asia\nMinor, that was eventually called philosophy. That movement spread widely\nthroughout the Greek-speaking world, and then to other nations. Philosophy\nmeans âlove of wisdom,â and in one sense it is the Greek heir to the genre of\nwisdom teaching that was common in the ancient near east. The Bible contains\nwisdom literature, in the books of Job, Proverbs, the Song of Songs, and\nEcclesiastes.\nBut there is a great difference between Greek philosophy and wisdom\nliterature, particularly the wisdom literature of Scripture. The traditional wisdom\nteachers sought to gather and catalogue the wise sayings of respected people.\nBiblical wisdom does this too, but emphasizes that there is an authority higher\nthan any human teacher: âThe fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; all\nthose who practice it have a good understanding. His praise endures forever!â\n(Psm. 111:10; cf. Prov. 1:7, 9:10, 15:33.)\nIn contrast, the Greek philosophers sought to understand the world\nwithout reference to religion or tradition, and certainly without reference to the\nGod of Scripture. Their chief authority was human reason, acting independently\nfrom revelatio
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n and tradition. That view of reason I describe by the phrase\nrational autonomy. Although the Greek philosophers differed on a great many\nthings, they all agreed on the principle of rational autonomy. For them, reason\nwas the ultimate standard of all truth, and the good life is the rational life. Except\nduring the medieval period, this principle of rational or intellectual autonomy has\ndominated the history of philosophy down to the present day.\nNevertheless, the Greeks also understood to some extent the limitations\nof human reason. They were concerned about the nature of error and deception.\nIf human reason is the ultimate standard of truth, why isnât it omniscient? Why,\n75\nIn Chapters 6-8 I have drawn on my essay, âGreeks Bearing Gifts,â which will appear in Andrew\nHoffecker, ed., Revolutions in Worldview (Phillipsburg: P&R, forthcoming). That essay deals with\nthe metaphysical and epistemological views of the Greek philosophers as well as their ethical\nteaching, so readers might find it useful as a context for what I say here. I also recommend the\nother essays in the Hoffecker book, which deal in a similar way with other periods in the history of\nwestern thought. 72\nindeed, is it so often mistaken? Their most common answer was this: if reason\nitself is our ultimate guide, then its failures must be failures, not of reason itself,\nbut of the universe. The problem is not in the knower, but in what he seeks to\nknow; not in the subject, but in the object of knowledge. 76 We fall into error,\nbecause the world in which we live is in some measure unknowable.\nHere we see the rationalist and irrationalist motifs that we discussed in\nChapter 4, as they appear in Greek philosophy. Suppressing the revelation of\nGod in the creation (Rom. 1), the Greeks give to human reason a divine\nauthority. But when it fails, they attribute that failure to the nature of the world.\nBut then the philosophical task proves impossibly difficult: the attempt to give a\nrational account of an irrational universe. Th
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: us appears the rationalist-irrationalist\ndialectic that I discussed in Chapter 4.\nThe Greeks differed among themselves as to the balance between\nrationalism and irrationalism. Parmenides was a kind of textbook rationalist. He\nwas so confident about human reason that he denied the existence of anything\nthat reason couldnât handle, such as, in his view, change. The Sophists were\ntextbook irrationalists, holding that there is no objective truth at all, but only truth\nâfor meâ and âfor you.â But the Sophists were nevertheless good Greeks, seeking\nto live according to reason, at least according to each personâs individual reason.\nâMan is the measure of all things,â said the Sophist Protagoras. 77\nThe Existential Focus\nIn the next few chapters, I will focus on the views of ethics that have\nemerged in the history of philosophy. These chapters will discuss three traditions\nin philosophical ethics that correspond more or less to the three perspectives we\nhave been discussing. They also represent emphases respectively on the\nexistential, teleological, and deontological principles as I discussed them in\nChapter 4.\nThis chapter discusses the existential tradition, which focuses on ethics as\na phenomenon of the inner life. Of the three principles mentioned in Chapter 4,\nexistential ethics values most the principle that âa good act comes from a good\ninner character.â This principle is a biblical one. A good ethical character implies\nthat we should affirm our ethical principles from within. Hypocritical obedience is\nnot the obedience God honors. He wants his word to be written on our heart. If it\nis written there, then our behavior will be a kind of self-realization. Our behavior\nwill display what we are, deep inside. As we saw in Chapter 3, God motivates our\nbehavior by asking us to become what we are: regenerate sons and daughters of\n76\nSee the discussion of subject and object in DKG, 9-10, 69-71.\nFor a fuller discussion of the Greek philosophers, see my essay âGreeks Bearing
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Gifts,â in\nAndrew Hoffecker, ed., Revolutions in Worldview (Phillipsburg: P&R, forthcoming).\n77 73\nGod, dead to sin and alive in Christ. So he wants our behavior to display what we\nare at the most fundamental level.\nSecular forms of existential ethics honor these principles to some ways,\nparody them in others. But in secular forms of existential ethics the existential\nprinciple tends to become an absolute, opposed to the teleological and\ndeontological principles. Human subjectivity becomes the test of all moral truth, if\nsuch truth even exists.\nNo thinker is an absolutely pure example of any of these three tendencies.\nThe reason is that ethics by its very nature requires all three perspectives. One\ncan try to reject a perspective, but it always shows up somewhere. So, in secular\nexistential ethics, our inner subjectivity is made to play all three roles: motive,\ngoal, and standard. Existential ethicists make this move at the price of\nincoherence, of course.\nI shall discuss some secular thinkers like Aristotle who actually try to\nprovide a balance between the three perspectives. Without God, Aristotle fails to\nbring the perspectives into a coherent mutual relationship. And his example\nshows us why lesser thinkers have tried to eliminate one or two of the\nperspectives in favor of the third, even though in the end they have not been able\nto escape the threeness of the ethical enterprise.\nBut for now we must look at the existential tradition, which focuses on the\ninner life, and which tends in various ways to see the inner life as the whole of\nethics.\nThe Sophists\nThe earliest Greek philosophers were not much interested in ethics, at\nleast as far as we can tell from the texts available to us. They focused on\nmetaphysics, and, especially with Parmenides, Heraclitus, and the atomists,\nepistemology. But in the time of the Sophists, ethics became a subject of much\ninterest.\nThe Sophists were educators in fifth and fourth century Greece who went\nfrom one city to another teaching young men
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the skills needed for success in\npublic life: rhetoric, grammar, history, science, art, and the virtues of character\nthat lead to public admiration. These teachers had many clients, for the\ntraditional aristocracy was losing ground to the mercantile class, creating\nopportunities for upwardly mobile sons of wealthy families. Also, there was much 74\npolitical upheaval, raising philosophical questions about the ground and\nlegitimacy of political rule. 78\nThus philosophy took a new turn. No longer were philosophers mainly\nconcerned with the structure of the natural world. Now human nature and the\nproblems of human society became prominent.\nIf oneâs main concern is getting along with various political factions, then\nrelativism will have a strong appeal, as we know from contemporary politics. If\nthere is no absolute or objective truth, no truth that everyone must acknowledge,\nthen oneâs convictions are free to move here and there, with every wave of\npolitical opinion. So it is not surprising that the Sophists were relativists.\nWe learn about them mainly through the dialogues of Plato, an\nunsympathetic witness, to be sure, but most likely a fair one. According to Plato,\nthe Sophist Protagoras, for example, advocated acceptance of traditional ways of\nthinking, not because they were true, but because we need to use them to gain\npower and acceptance. Gorgias denied the existence of objective truth and so\nwanted to substitute rhetoric for philosophy. Thrasymachus taught that âjustice is\nthe interest of the stronger,â so that laws are (and should be) means by which the\nstrong keep the masses subordinate. Callicles held, on the contrary, that laws\nare the means used by the masses to check the power of the strong. Critias, later\ndescribed as the cruelest of the thirty tyrants, said that a ruler must control his\nsubjects by encouraging fear of nonexistent gods.\nSocrates, as Plato presents him in the same dialogues, replies that\nindifference or hostility to objective truth is unacceptable. For
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: one thing, the\nSophists themselves are making assertions of fact. If there is no objective truth,\nthen the Sophistsâ positions are not objectively true, and there is no reason for\nanyone to listen to them. This argument has been a standard answer to\nrelativism ever since, and we still hear it used over against, for example,\ncontemporary postmodernism.\nFurther, Socrates argues, justice cannot merely be the interest of the\nstronger. For the interest of the stronger is not what makes it just, as opposed to\nunjust. There must be some other quality that defines justice, that serves as a\ncriterion to evaluate the conduct of rulers.\nThus Socrates refutes the irrationalism of the Sophists, or rather shows\nthat such irrationalism is self-refuting. But the Sophists were also rationalists in\nthe typical Greek way. Consider Protagorasâs statement that âman is the\nmeasure of all things.â This statement expresses the Sophistsâ irrationalism:\nreality is what any man thinks it is. But it is also rationalistic, for it makes human\nreason the ultimate criterion of truth and falsity, right and wrong. One asks, how\n78\nFor more extensive discussion of the political and social background of Sophism, see Gordon\nH. Clark, Thales to Dewey (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1957), 46-48. 75\ncould Protagoras know this, especially given his overall relativism? He asserts\nrational autonomy arbitrarily. That is, he asserts rationalism irrationalistically, as\nhe asserts irrationalism rationalisticallyâby the measure of his own mind.\nNo other course was open to the Sophists, for they were skeptical about\nthe traditional gods and would not consider the God of biblical theism.\nI describe the Sophists as representatives of the existential tradition of\nethics. The existential principle links ethics with character and in general with\nhuman inwardness. But when non-Christian philosophers use this principle, they\ntend to absolutize human subjectivity and make it, not only essential to ethics,\nbut the ultimate source of e
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: thical norms. So the secular existential ethicist seeks\nto avoid any suggestion that ethical decisions must be based on an external,\nobjective norm. The Sophists had no appreciation of the normative principle\n(âethics seeks objective dutiesâ) or the situational principle (âethics maximizes the\nhappiness of human beingsâ). As I argued in Chapter 4, the three principles are\nin tension with one another, unless the biblical God holds them together. So non-\nChristian ethicists tend to deny one or two of these principles. The Sophists\nessentially denied all but the existential principle.\nThere is much that is attractive about the existential type of ethics. Indeed,\nif I werenât a Christian, I would probably be an existentialist, a kind of relativist or\nskeptic. In Dostoevskyâs terms, if God doesnât exist, isnât everything permitted?\nYet, because of Socratesâ and Platoâs arguments, the existential tradition has\nbeen the least popular among professional philosophers through the disciplineâs\nhistory, though in modern times it seems to have become a favorite of the man\non the street. The more predominant schools of philosophical thought have\nbelieved that a objective knowledge is indeed possible, though they have found it\nvery difficult to agree on how it is possible. But we shall look at those arguments\nin the next two chapters.\nIn the centuries following the Sophists, schools of Skepticism emerged.\nPyrrho (365-270 BC) argued a kind of epistemological agnosticism, and the\nSkeptics of the Academy (the school founded by Plato!) went even farther,\narguing that truth could not be found. After that, skepticism virtually died as an\noption for respectable philosophers.\nHume and Rousseau\nBut in the modern period, relativism and skepticism came again into their\nown. David Hume (1711-1776), who was skeptical of many things, including the\nis-ought inference (see Chapter 5), could find no basis for ethics except in âa\nmoral senseâ that generates feelings of approval and disapproval
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: . 79 As with the\n79\nSee Hume, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (1751). 76\nSophists, for Hume ethical standards are wholly inward, subjective rather than\nobjective. Similarly, Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), father of\nRomanticism, thought that everything good in the world is the outworking of good\nfeelings.\nKarl Marx\nKarl Marx (1818-1883) has had, perhaps, the greatest influence on politics\nand world history of any philosopher in the last two hundred years. Most people\nbecome Marxists, in my view, for ethical reasons. They find in Marx a thinker who\ncares about the poor and actually has a plan to do something for them.\nBut it is important to keep in mind that Marx is a thoroughgoing ethical\nsubjectivist. He thinks that ethical standards are relative to oneâs class. In his\nview, ethical systems are tools of political movements, aiming to promote the\ninterest of one class against another. There is one ethic for the bourgeois (the\nowners of the means of production), another for the proletariat (the workers in the\nindustrial plants). When the proletariat initiates revolution, good is what promotes\nthat revolution and evil is what hinders it. And once the proletarian revolution is\nvictorious, good is what promotes progress to the classless society (the Marxist\neschaton) and evil is what retards it.\nSpecific ethical standards may change as the interests of oneâs class\nchange. What is good today may be evil tomorrow. American Communists\npraised Hitler when he made a pact with Stalin. When Hitler broke that pact,\neverything he did was evil.\nWhich ethic is right? To Marx, there is no such thing as objective rightness\nin ethics, though he makes much of scientific objectivity in formulating his\neconomic determinism. When idealistic young people are attracted to Marxism\nfor ethical reasons, it is pastorally important to remind them that for a Marxist\nethics is ultimately negotiable. Class interest is supreme, and ethics is a tool of\nclass interest. When we look at Marxism fro
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: m that perspective, it appears less\nthan noble.\nNevertheless, Marx often speaks as though his ethical judgments were\nobjective. For example, he famously condemns Christianity as âthe opiate of the\npeople.â He regards it as an ideology concocted by the rich to keep the workers\nin their place, to make them satisfied with their present lot and heavenly reward,\nso that they do not resort to revolution. Christians may protest that the gospel\nhas contributed much over the centuries to the welfare of the poor and of society\nin general. But Marx replies that even such âpropheticâ Christianity should be\nopposed, for it does more harm than good. It kindles false hopes of reform, 77\npacifies the masses, and therefore retards revolution, the only approach that can\nbring about real change.\nThat sounds like an ethical critique of Christianity. Essentially he is saying\nthat Christianity is the religious ethic of a particular class, used to oppress\nanother class. But we must remember that Marxâs own alternative ethic is just an\nethic of another particular class, designed, once that class comes to power, to\noppress any rival class. Marx gives no reason except class allegiance to prefer\nMarxist ethics to Christian.\nWe can see in Marx the rationalist-irrationalist dialectic. Marx denies\nobjective ethics (irrationalism), but he preaches a moralistic alternative, together\nwith critiques of opponents, with a dogmatic assurance (rationalism). 80\nFriedrich Nietzsche\nNietzsche (1844-1900) has had a huge influence on twentieth-century\nthought, especially the postmodern movement. Like them, he is rather skeptical\nabout the existence of ultimate truth (though he admits the importance of the\nparticular truths of ordinary life) and of the power of language to communicate\nit. 81 Like Marx, he believes that there is no disinterested search for truth.\nIntellectual inquiry is inevitably self-serving. We seek knowledge for its utility; but\nwe cannot be sure even about the utility of knowledge. We must reconcil
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e\nourselves, therefore, to irresolvable disagreement. 82\nSo in the field of ethics Nietzsche is well-known for his view that traditional\nmorality is not objectively true, but is only a vehicle of the âwill to power,â by\nwhich some people oppress others. His position in this regard is identical to that\nof Marx, though Nietzsche does not share Marxâs emphasis on class warfare.\nNietzscheâs own moral stance is, in his words, âBeyond Good and Evil.â 83 He\nurges a âtransvaluation of all values.â In his view, since God is âdeadâ as a factor\nin the lives of modern people, it is wrong for us to bind ourselves with moral\ntraditions from the past. We should recognize that God is dead and be honest\nand joyful about the will to power.\nIt is interesting to compare Nietzsche with Marx on the subject of\nChristianity. Marx thought that Christianity was a religion of the rich, aiming to\nsuppress the poor. Nietzsche, however, saw it as a âslave religion,â arising from\n80\nSee Marx and Friedrich Engels, The Communist Manifesto (1848), Marx, Das Kapital (1887).\nNietzsche, âOn Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense,â in Philosophy and Truth: Selections from\nNietzscheâs Notebooks of the Early 1870s, ed., trans. By David Breazeale (New Jersey:\nHumanities Library, 1990), 79-97.\n82\nNietzsche, The Joyful Wisdom (New York: Ungar, 1960).\n83\nNietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil (London: Allen and Unwin, 1967), On the Genealogy of\nMorals, in The Birth of Tragedy and the Genealogy of Morals (New York: Anchor Books, 1990).\n81 78\nthe self-interest of the weak and oppressed, expressing their secret hatred and\nenvy of those more favored. Nietzscheâs view is nearly the precise opposite of\nthat of Marx, which suggests that the moral relativism of both men may be\nunsuited to making any cogent moral observations.\nThe difference between Marx and Nietzsche on Christianity is like the\ndifference between the Sophists Thrasymachus and Callicles on the subject of\njustice and law. As Thrasymachus taught tha
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t justice is the interest of the\nstronger, so Marx taught that Christianity was the attempt of strong classes of\npeople to impose their bondage on the workers. And as Callicles thought that\nlaws are a device by which the masses could check the power of the strong, so\nNietzsche thought that Christianity was a slave-religion, bent on frustrating the\nambitions of superior people. Both wanted Christianity to be abolished. But with\nwhat could Christianity be replaced, in their view, except by another ideology\nsupporting class warfare (Marx) or the superman (Nietzsche)? 84\nLudwig Wittgenstein\nWittgenstein (1889-1951) was born in Austria, but taught at Cambridge in\nEngland. The only book he published during his lifetime was the Tractatus\nLogico-Philosophicus. 85 In that book he argued that a language that was truly\nperfect, purified by the logical innovations of Bertrand Russell, could serve as a\nperfect picture of the world.\nIn the history of western philosophy, the twentieth century is the century of\nlanguage. Both in Anglo-American and in European schools of thought (which\nwere very different), language was the central item of discussion. The attention of\nphilosophers shifted from the nature of the world as such to the language in\nwhich the world was discussed. They hoped, perhaps, that this shift of attention\nwould enable them to make progress on issues where there had been a notable\nlack of progress since the time of the Greeks. Nietzsche had already made the\nstudy of language central to philosophy and Wittgenstein pioneered this\napproach in the English-speaking world.\nIn Wittgensteinâs approach, every sentence in a truly perfect language\nshould refer to a fact in the universe, and he thought that we could identify facts\nonly by sense experience. Our knowledge of facts, he thought, was built up, bit\n84\nThe name of Kierkegaard also comes up in discussions of an existential approach to\nphilosophy. Certainly Kierkegaard put a major emphasis on the importance of human subjectivity\nin the
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: making of decisions. I am convinced, however, that Kierkegaard is first of all a Christian.\nRelating the existential to the Christian elements of Kierkegaardâs thought is an interesting, but\ndifficult process. So reluctantly I leave him out of this discussion, since my main purpose here is\nto mention thinkers who seem to be more or less pure examples of the existential tradition.\n85\nLondon: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1921, 1963. Cf. his âLecture on Ethicsâ (1929), available\nat http://www.kolumbus.fi/m.sipola/ethics.htm and other web sites. 79\nby bit, by simple (âatomicâ) sensations leading to more complex ones, etc. So in\nthe perfect language all complex sentences would be reducible to simple ones\nreporting simple facts, based on simple sensations.\nThis fundamentally empirical approach, of course, rendered ethics\nproblematic (to say nothing of metaphysics and religion). For, as Hume and\nMoore had pointed out, the attempt to deduce ethical principles from empirical\nfacts is a fallacy. So for Wittgenstein, ethical principles fell outside the\ncompetence of the perfect language. And what cannot be said in the perfect\nlanguage, Wittgenstein thought, cannot be said at all.\nWittgenstein was not, however, willing to throw out ethics altogether. He\nwas himself an ethically sensitive person. So he described ethics (together with\nGod, the self, the world) as among those things that âcan only be shown, not\nsaid.â We feel, in other words, that ethical, religious, and metaphysical language\nare about something important, but we cannot really put that into words. These\nunsayable realities, for Wittgenstein, belong to the âmysticalâ realm.\nSuch is the place of ethics in the system of the Tractatus. It is hard to\nimagine that from this system we could receive any assurance as to what is right\nor wrong. Essentially it is a form of what I have described as secular existential\nethics, beset by the same problems as the ethics of the Sophists, Hume,\nRousseau, Marx, and Nietzsche.\nBut Wittgens
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tein himself saw the weaknesses in this approach. For\ntechnical reasons I wonât enter into here, Wittgenstein, even as he was writing\nthe book, came to see that his system was essentially contradictory. He had\nbeen trying to show the relation between language and the world; but on the\ncriteria he had developed for the perfect language, the relationship between\nlanguage and the world was one of those things that could not be spoken. It was\nunsayable, mystical. So Wittgenstein recognized that the whole Tractatus was\nbasically an attempt to say something unsayable. Hence the famous closing\nlines,\nMy propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands\nme finally recognizes them as senseless when he has climbed out through\nthem, on them, over them. (He must so to speak, throw away the ladder,\nafter he has climbed up on it.) He must surmount these propositions; then\nhe sees the world rightly. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof must one be\nsilent. 86\nThus ethics, with metaphysics, religion, and the whole of philosophy, passes into\nsilence.\n86\nTractatus, sections 6.54, 7.0. 80\nThe Tractatus is a remarkable example of how rationalism passes into\nirrationalism. Wittgenstein begins by trying to accommodate all reality into the\nform of a perfect language (rationalism); but he discovers that in this system\nnothing can be known or communicated (irrationalism).\nBut Wittgenstein eventually departed from this way of thinking and entered\na new phase, sometimes called âthe later Wittgenstein.â 87 In his later thought,\nWittgenstein abandons the attempt to reduce all reality to the confines of a\nperfect language. Rather he adopts a much more liberal view of language, noting\nthat language has many functions, not only the function of stating facts. In most\nof the cases where we speak of âmeaning,â he says, we refer to the use of words\nin the activities of human life. So religion and ethics are no longer in the sphere\nof the unsayable. They can certainly be said. But Wittgenstein is rather
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: dogmatic\nsometimes about the proper use of these words, insisting, for example, that\nreligious language should never be used in critique of scientific language, or vice\nversa. His irrationalism continues in his new liberality, his rationalism in his often\ndogmatic insistence on propriety. In neither his earlier nor his later phases does\nWittgenstein give us any help in determining standards of right and wrong. In the\nend, for him such standards are merely a component of our subjectivity.\nEmotivism\nFrom around 1920-1950, the dominant philosophical movement in the\nEnglish-speaking world was logical positivism. Logical positivism, first formulated\nby a group of scientists and philosophers centered in Vienna (the âVienna circleâ)\nand Berlin (âthe Berlin circleâ) sought to limit knowledge to what could be learned\nthrough scientific method. Many of these thinkers fled from the Nazis to the\nUnited States, among them Rudolf Carnap, Herbert Feigl, Carl Hempel, Moritz\nSchlick. The English philosopher A. J. Ayer popularized their work in his\nLanguage, Truth, and Logic. 88\nThe logical positivists had read Wittgensteinâs Tractatus with appreciation,\nbut they were repelled by its mysticism and wanted instead to establish human\nknowledge on a scientific basis.\nThis group emphasized the âverification principle,â namely that a sentence\nhas no âcognitive meaningâ unless it can be verified by observations or scientific\n87\nMany posthumously published texts of Wittgenstein reflect this later approach. The standard\nexposition is the Philosophical Investigations (New York: Macmillan, 1953, 1968), which\nWittgenstein was actually preparing for publication at the time of his death. An easier introduction\nis The Blue and Brown Books (Oxford: Blackwell, 1964), student transcripts of lectures that\nWittgenstein dictated to his classes in the early 1930s.\n88\nNew York: Dover, 1946. 81\nmethod. âCognitive meaningâ is the ability of a sentence to state a fact, truly or\nfalsely. So, the positivis
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ts reasoned, much language we normally take to be\nfactual, including the language of metaphysics, religion, and ethics, is âcognitively\nmeaningless.â That is to say, such language is incapable of stating any fact,\neither truly or falsely. Wittgensteinâs Tractatus had said that such language is\nmystical; the logical positivists thought that it was without cognitive meaning. In\nthe end, the two positions were not far apart.\nLogical positivism appeared to be a radical challenge to Christian faith,\nand it instilled some fear in believers who were aware of this movement. The\npositivists were not just saying that Christianity was false. They were saying it\nwas neither true nor false, that it neither asserted nor denied any factual content.\nWhat, then, happened to ethics in this philosophy? Like Wittgenstein, the\nlogical positivists were not ready to dismiss ethics altogether, especially given the\ndevastating evils of Naziism. But they could not admit that ethics was cognitively\nmeaningful, that it was capable of stating facts. There could be no moral facts,\nbecause there was no observational or scientific way of verifying them. (Thus the\nlogical positivists echoed the teaching of Hume and Moore that we cannot reason\nfrom âisâ to âought.â)\nRather, they sought to reinterpret ethical language as something other\nthan factual. Rudolf Carnap argued that ethical statements were disguised\nimperatives. Moritz Schlick said that ethical statements were rules for behavior,\nanalogous to rules of procedure in science. But the most prevalent view in the\nmovement came to be that of C. L. Stevensonâs Ethics and Language. 89\nStevenson argued that ethical statements may be characterized by two\ndistinctive elements: (1) They are expressions of emotion. When I say that\nstealing is wrong, for example, I am saying that I donât like stealing. (2) They\nrecommend to others the feelings expressed. So âstealing is wrongâ means âI\ndonât like stealing, and you shouldnât like it either.â This v
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: iew is not much different\nfrom Humeâs attempt to base ethical judgments on âfeelings of approbation.â\nSo the predominant logical positivist view of ethics came to be called\nâemotivism.â But it never gained many followers, even in the philosophical\ncommunity, for reasons such as these:\n1. It became evident to most philosophers, secular as well as Christian,\nthat the verification principle was deeply flawed. The positivists were not able to\nagree on one formulation of it. Some formulations seemed too narrow, for they\nended up excluding some scientific language; other formulations seemed too\nbroad, for they included some language of religion and metaphysics. Eventually it\nbecame obvious that the main goal of the positivists was, not to understand how\nthe term âmeaningâ is used in human life, but rather to come up with a âprincipleâ\nthat would glorify science but disparage metaphysics and religion. Philosophers\n89\nNew Haven: Yalke University Press, 1944). 82\ncame to see the verification principle as an ideological tool, rather than an\naccurate reflection of what really constitutes meaning.\n2. Further, like Wittgensteinâs Tractatus, logical positivism fell into\ncontradiction. For the verification principle itself could not be verified by any kind\nof observation or scientific method. What observation or experiment could\npossibly verify the principle that cognitive meaning is limited to verifiable\nstatements? The conclusion, then, is that the verification principle itself is\ncognitively meaningless, perhaps, like ethical language on this view, an\nexpression of the positivistsâ emotions. As the Tractatus proved to be\nâunsayable,â so logical positivism proved to be âemotive.â\n3. Emotivism itself, as a view of ethics, ran into many problems, chiefly\nthat it abolishes any kind of serious ethical discussion. In an ethical dispute one\nmay, of course, on an emotivist view, debate the facts concerning which the\nfeelings are expressed. And the disputants may draw one anot
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: herâs attention to\nfeatures of those facts that might change attitudes. But in the end, once the facts\nare known and agreed to, if I like stealing and you donât, there is nothing more to\nbe said. And why, on this view, should anybody ever agonize over a moral\ndecision? If you know how you feel, but you are still uncertain of what is right,\nthen you are simply confused. But this is a most implausible account of the moral\nlife.\nExistentialism\nDuring the twentieth century, language analysis was the dominant\napproach to philosophy in the English-speaking world. Wittgenstein and logical\npositivism were early examples. In the later part of the century, this emphasis\ncontinued, but with less extravagant claims. Anglo-American language analysts\ntend now to work in a more piecemeal way, trying to clarify this or that specific\nproblem, without relying on big, global theories of the universe, of meaning, or of\nethics.\nAcross the English channel, a different type of philosophy emerged, also\nconcerned with language, but with different emphases and preoccupations.\nExistentialism 90 is an approach with roots in the thought of Kierkegaard and\nNietzsche, developed by thinkers such as Martin Heidegger, Karl Jaspers, and\n90\nUp to now, I have been using the term âexistentialâ to designate a long tradition of philosophical\nethics, a tradition in which the âexistential principleâ is valued over the other two. Twentieth-\ncentury existentialism is a specific development in this tradition, but a development significant\nenough that I have given its name to the whole tradition of which it is a part. 83\nJean-Paul Sartre. There are significant differences between these thinkers, but I\nwill confine myself to Sartre, who is by far the clearest writer of the group. 91\nAristotle taught that in our ethical choices we seek to realize our essence.\nIn his view, the essence of a human being is to be a rational animal. So in every\ndecision and action (that is, in our âexistenceâ) we should seek to express ou
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r\nrational nature. So in our ethical life we seek to realize our essence. Essence\ndetermines, or should determine, our existence. Essence comes first, then\nexistence.\nI shall discuss Aristotleâs view more thoroughly in Chapter 7. I mention him\nhere only by way of contrast with Sartre. Sartre defines existentialism as the view\nthat, contrary to Aristotle, existence precedes essence. In his view, mankind has\nno essence, because there is no God. We have no defined purpose or nature.\nTherefore, we are thrown into existence without any manual to direct our lives.\nWe simply act.\nAs the Greeks said âcount no man happy until he is dead,â Sartre\nenvisions that after a person has lived his life it will then be possible to describe\nhim, indeed evaluate him. Only then can he be said to have an âessenceâ or\nânature.â We can speak similarly about the whole human race: only after the last\nhuman being has died will it be possible (presumably, for another race) to\ndescribe the essence of humanity, what we really were.\nSo as essence precedes existence for Aristotle, existence precedes\nessence for Sartre. That, to Sartre, is the view that results when we take atheism\n(Nietzscheâs death of God) with proper seriousness. Sartre strives in his\nphilosophy to develop a consistently atheistic view of things.\nOn this basis, he thinks, we are radically free. We are not determined by\nanything within us or outside of us. Nor are we subject to any authority from\noutside ourselves. Even if an angel tells us what to do, says Sartre, we must\ndecide whether to obey or not, and we must decide to interpret his words in one\nway rather than another. So our thinking is autonomous, as with the rational\nautonomy of the ancient Greeks.\nNevertheless, Sartre wants to make some general statements about how\nhuman beings are unique. What unique quality can we have, if we have no\nessence? Sartre answers, human beings are unique, in that we incorporate\nnonbeing within ourselves. Not being (that would be an essence) bu
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t nonbeing.\nWe are unique in what we are not, and in our relation to other things that are not.\n91\nSee Sartre, Being and Nothingness (New York: Philosophical Library, 1956). A good\nintroduction to the movement is Walter Kaufmann, ed., Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre\n(New York: New American Library, 1975). 84\nThe relation between being and nonbeing has been a perplexing problem\nthrough the history of philosophy. Parmenides thought the very idea of nonbeing\nwas irrational: how can there be anything that is not? It seems that whenever you\ntry to imagine, or conceptualize, or define nonbeing, you always turn it into\nsomething, into being. The title of Sartreâs main philosophical work Being and\nNothingness indicates that he intends to deal with this problem in a fresh way.\nFor Sartre, nonbeing is a unique property of human beings. Among all\nbeings, we alone are able to represent to ourselves things that âare not.â We can\nconceive of the past, even the distant past, which, of course, no longer is. We\ncan conceptualize and make plans for the future, which as of now is not. 92 We\ncan also think about things that are possible but not actual and may never be.\nThus we employ our faculty of imagination creatively in art, science, and personal\nlife. Through our interaction with nonbeing, we rise far above animals and plants\nin what we can accomplish.\nMost significantly for Sartreâs ethics, we are able to distinguish ourselves\nfrom what we are not, from our environment. The world exists en soi, in itself. It is\nâsolid,â definable. Rocks and trees can be defined and described. Of course,\nsince God does not exist, they no more have predefined essences than human\nbeings have. But they lack the human consciousness of nonbeing, so they play\ndefinable, predictable roles in the human universe. Only a human being exists\npour soi, for himselfâself-conscious and conscious of his uniqueness. So our\nrelation to nonbeing reinforces our lack of essence.\nSo our decisions are radically free.
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: We are never forced, by our essence\nor by our past, by our heredity, environment, or past experience, to choose in a\ncertain way. At every moment, we freely choose to be what we are. There are\nlimits, of course, but those limits themselves are chosen. If I choose to go to\nmedical school and the admission requirements are too high, then I face a limit.\nBut it is a limit, because it frustrates a desire that I have freely chosen. If I hadnât\nfreely decided to seek medical training, my failure to be admitted would not be a\nlimit to me.\nDeath is, of course, usually thought to be the ultimate limit. But, Sartre\nsays, it is a limit only insofar as I freely choose to value life.\nWe usually think that an existential type of ethic will deny the notion of\nresponsibility, since responsibility seems to presuppose an objective, external\nnorm. Indeed, we wonder how there can be such a thing as responsibility with no\nGod to be responsible to. But Sartre surprises us. Though he denies the\nobjective norm, and though he denies God, he places a great emphasis on\nresponsibility.\n92\nAnd what then, indeed, is the present? If we think of it as a knife-edge moment between past\nand present, we cannot really think about it until it is past. That thought would suggest that past,\npresent, and future, are all nonbeing. We live in a universe of nonbeing, rather than being. 85\nHe says that since all our limits are freely chosen, we have no excuses for\nthe things we do. We freely choose what we do, indeed what we are. If someone\ngrows up in a poor family and enters a life of crime, his poverty is no excuse. He\nhas freely chosen to violate the law. Although I disagree with his overall position,\nhis discussion of responsibility is often illuminating.\nNot only are we responsible for particular decisions and actions, but we\nare responsible also in a more general sense, according to Sartre. For in every\nchoice we make, we choose a certain image of mankind. Our choices, too, affect\nthe choices of other people, which can
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lead to large consequences for the whole\nhuman race. Since the âessenceâ of mankind comes at the end of its history,\nrather than the beginning, each of us thus contributes to that essence, in every\nchoice we make. So we are responsible, not only for our own actions, but for the\nultimate value of mankind.\nYet few people recognize their vast responsibility, or the extent of their\nfreedom. Indeed, when we do glimpse our freedom, we sometimes recoil from it\nin fear. In some ways, we would rather be en soi than pour soi. We would rather\nbe solid, definable, predictable, than to be radically free. We like our excuses.\nWe would prefer to think of ourselves as beings who are determined and defined\nby their past. That en soi kind of status gives us status, a kind of dignity, a kind of\npower, and plenty of excuses. We would rather be beings than nonbeings.\nIt would be nice, of course, to be both pour soi and en soi, to have both\npure being and pure nonbeing, both being and freedom, both essence and\nexistence. But Sartre says this is impossible. In Christian theology, God has both\nessence and existence, and his essence is identical to his existence. But Sartre\nthinks this concept of God is self-contradictory and therefore this God cannot\nexist. No one can have both a perfectly defined nature (essence) and perfect\nfreedom (existence).\nBut human beings try to be godlike, seeking essence along with their\nexistence. In Sartreâs view, this is mauvaise foi (bad faith, sometimes translated\nâself-deceptionâ). In bad faith, we deny our freedom. We pretend that we are\nmere objects, determined by our past or by our station in life. 93 We deceive\nourselves into thinking that we are not responsible for our actions in Sartreâs\nsense. To live like that is âinauthentic existence.â\nRather, Sartre would have us live in a way that expresses our freedom,\nour nonbeing. 94 In his novels, lead characters often act out-of-character, violating\n93\nThe Idealist school of philosophy, which Sartre opposes, th
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ought that our ethical\nresponsibilities could be deduced from our station in life. If you are a butler, you are bound to\nbehave as a butler; if a waiter, a waiter, and so on.\n94\nSartre again opposes Aristotle, but their principles are very similar. Aristotle calls on us to\nrealize our essence. Sartre calls us to realize our freedom. Sartre has, in effect, replaced 86\nthe expectations of society. We need, he thinks, to overturn the conventions, to\ndo things, occasionally at least, that the world will consider bizarre, even morally\nrepugnant.\nSome observations:\n1. Sartre, no less than Gnosticism (Chapter 5), reduces ethics to\nmetaphysics. For the Gnostics, our task is to rise to a higher level of being. For\nSartre, it is to express our nonbeing. But both are equally impersonal\ncharacterizations of ethics. I have argued that ethics is essentially a matter of\npersonal relationships: relationships between people and other people, and\nbetween people and God. Sartreâs attempt at a consistently atheistic ethic\ndestroys any legitimate basis for ethical behavior. The notion that ethical\nbehavior is acting out-of-character is ludicrous.\n2. Contrary to Sartreâs claim, his position is devastating to human\nresponsibility. He is helpful in emphasizing the central role of free choice in our\nethical decisions. 95 But why should we value one free choice above another?\nContrary to Sartre, responsibility is necessarily answerabilityâa personal\nrelationship.\n3. Sartre claims to set us free from all moral rules (irrationalism); yet, he\nstigmatizes a certain kind of behavior as inauthentic, thus claiming for himself the\nauthority to legislate in the field of morals (rationalism).\nPostmodernism\nThe postmodern school (including such thinkers as Jean-Francois\nLyotard, Jacques Derrida, Jacques Lacan, Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, and\nRichard Rorty) has not focused much attention on ethics, but in the late twentieth\ncentury it became famous for its skepticism about âgrand narrativesâ or\nworldview-
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: based thinking. Certainly its influence on ethics, as on many other\ndisciplines, is to commend what I have called the existential perspective above\nany notion of historical goals (situational) or transcendent norms (normative).\nThese thinkers come largely from backgrounds in linguistics, reacting\nagainst the structuralist linguistics of the 1960s and â70s. In their view, there is no\nmaster-structure common to human minds that generates all language. Nor does\nlanguage refer to reality in any direct way. When we ask for the meaning of a\nAristotleâs âessenceâ with âfreedom,â namely, a lack of essence, a nonbeing. But is this freedom\nreally something different from an essence? Has not Sartre made the old philosophical mistake of\ntrying to define nonbeing (as freedom in this case) and thus turning it into a kind of being?\n95\nHowever, his concept of libertarian freedom is unbiblical and incoherent. See DG, Chapter 8. 87\nword, we get, as a definition, other words. So words refer to other words, not to\nany objective reality.\nSo the task of the philosopher is âdeconstruction:â to break down the\nconnections people think they are making between language and reality. Indeed,\nnobody can serve as an authority as to the meaning of a piece of language. Even\nthe author is incompetent to tell what his language means. For once he writes or\nspeaks it, it enters into a community, and the meaning of his words is determined\nby the hearers. To people in that community, the text may convey much that is\ncontrary to the author's intention, such as racial prejudice, gender oppression,\netc. It may thus refute its own ostensible purpose, once deconstructed. Thus it is\nhopeless to try to find objective truth in language.\nLike Nietzsche, postmodernist writers tend to see language as an\nexpression of the will to power. Like Marx, they tend to read everything in the\ncontext of class warfare. Once deconstructed, language tends to be almost\nentirely about oppressors trying to dominate their victims and vict
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ims trying to\nfight back. So the discussion quickly turns to racism, feminism, species-ism, and\nso on.\nThese are, of course, ethical topics. But the views of postmodernists on\nthese topics are rarely argued, only presupposed. The postmodern conception of\nlanguage rules out patient and careful argumentation about such topics, for every\nargument is a piece of language demanding deconstruction. Such arguments are\ndismissed as mere exercises of power.\nThe problem is not that postmodernists are skeptics in a general way.\nThey oppose âgrand narratives,â but not âlittle narratives.â They debunk large\nworldviews, but they claim to accept the simple facts of everyday experience. But\nethics requires a worldview, a grand narrative. It is not just about simple facts of\neveryday experience. Rather, as we have seen, it claims to deal with principles\nthat are universal, necessary, and obligatory. If we reject worldview thinking, as\npostmodernism does, then we reject ethics in any meaningful sense of the word.\nI do not deny that language expresses the will to power. Scripture often\nspeaks of the power of Godâs word, not only its meaningful content (Isa. 55:11,\nRom. 1:16). Human beings as Godâs image use the power of their language for\nboth good (Rom. 1:16) and evil (Gen. 11:5-7), and they certainly have used it to\noppress other people. It is also true that often when people think they are simply\nstating objective facts, they are stating them in such a way as to increase their\npower over others.\nBut language is not only power. It is also meaning. 96 It not only makes\nthings happen, but it communicates truth or falsehood from one person to\n96\nIn Doctrine of the Word of God I plan to explore the triad power, meaning, and presence as it\ndescribes Godâs word and also as it describes human language generally. Godâs word is the 88\nanother. 97 The first does not in any way exclude the second. So we must not only\nobserve what language does to people, as postmodernists do; we must also\ndiscuss
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: in meaningful words what language ought to do.\nFurthermore, postmodernism, like many other ideologies, tends to exempt\nitself from its own critique. If arguments against postmodernism must be\ndeconstructed as attempts to gain power, why shouldnât arguments in favor of\npostmodernism be deconstructed the same way? But if all such arguments are to\nbe deconstructed, then truth about such issues (even the âlittleâ ones, if\npostmodernists are willing to discuss them) will permanently elude us.\nConclusion\nThe existential tradition in secular ethics focuses on the inner life. That\nfocus is legitimate in itself. Much of ethical importance takes place within us, in\nthe heart, as Scripture says. But secular ethics misuses the existential\nperspective by absolutizing the authority of the human mind, will, and feelings. It\naffirms rational autonomy, and, when it sees the limitations of reason, it replaces\nor supplements it with autonomous human will or feeling. It is rationalistic when it\nclaims authority for autonomous reason, irrationalistic when it denies the\nknowability of the world and the inaccessibility of moral standards. Thus this\ntradition is unable to provide any meaningful standards for ethics.\npower that creates and controls the world (Psm. 33:6), the communication of his truth (John\n17:17), and the place of his dwelling with us (John 1:1-14).\n97\nTo put it in technical philosophical terms, language is illocutionary as well as perlocutionary. 89\nChapter 7: The Teleological Tradition\nThe second major tradition in secular ethics is often called teleological.\nThis term is from the Greek telos, which means goal or purpose. This tradition\nunderstands ethics as a selection of goals, and of means to reach those goals. In\nthe secular version, the goal is usually human happiness or, more narrowly,\npleasure.\nSecular teleological ethics values what I called in Chapter 4 the\nteleological principle: âa good act maximizes the happiness of living creatures,â\nbut it is less impressed with the
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: existential and deontological principles.\nTeleological thinkers are dissatisfied with the subjectivism of the existential\napproach. They are not content to rely on subjective feelings of approval and\ndisapproval for ethical guidance; they seek something more objective, a basis for\nthose feelings. But they are not impressed either by the abstruse reasonings or\nreligious revelations that lead to the norms of deontological ethics, which we shall\nconsider in the next chapter. Rather, they want a basis for ethics that is simple\nand practical, one that is easily explained and intuitively persuasive.\nIn their view, the ultimate basis of ethics is, simply, human happiness.\nThat is the goal of ethics, what an ethical decision should seek to achieve, hence\nthe term teleological. An act is right if it maximizes happiness and minimizes\nsuffering. So to determine what to do, we only need to anticipate the\nconsequences of our proposed actions. Thus teleological ethics is often called\nconsequentialist. This seems to be a simple, practical, and persuasive method of\nevaluating decisions.\nIt is important here to review the distinction I made in Chapter 2, between\nmoral and non-moral uses of good. In teleological ethics, the goal is a good in the\nnon-moral sense. It is a state of affairs that is desirable, i.e. happiness.\nHappiness is not a moral good, because it is a quality, not a person. Moral goods\nare persons, actions, and attitudes that receive Godâs blessing. They are always\npersons, or the acts and attitudes of persons. Happiness is not a person, but a\nquality of a state of affairs. So happiness is not a moral good, but it is a good. It is\na valuable state of affairs. In teleological ethics, it is often called the summum\nbonum, or highest good.\nIn a teleological ethic, morally good decisions are means of achieving\nhappiness. So moral goods are instruments to achieve nonmoral goods.\nAs we shall see, the Bible affirms the importance of considering the goals\nor purposes of our action. The utmost g
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: oal, the summum bonum, is the glory of\nGod (1 Cor. 10:31). Scripture also teaches us to consider the consequences of\nour choices (Luke 13:3, 5, for example). And it affirms the importance of\nmaximizing the happiness of others (as Luke 10:27). But unlike secular 90\nteleological ethics, Scripture also affirms the authority of Godâs moral norms and\nthe importance of the character of the heart.\nCyrenaicism\nAristippus (b. 435 BC), founder of the Cyrenaic school, is one of the\nearliest teleological ethicists in ancient Greece. We donât know very much about\nhis specific formulations, but the views developed in the Cyrenaic school\nrepresent a fairly crude teleologism, compared to the more nuanced versions of\nEpicurus and Aristotle. The very simplicity of Cyrenaicism, however, makes it\nuseful as an introduction to students of the teleological approach.\nFor the Cyrenaics, the highest good is the greatest amount of pleasure\nand the least amount of pain. This view is called hedonism, after the Greek word\nfor pleasure. Now in teleological ethics, the most difficult question is how different\nkinds of pleasures should be evaluated. How does one compare the pleasure of\neating ice cream with the pleasure of listening to Beethoven, or mastering golf, or\nraising a child?\nThe Cyrenaics faced this problem and answered it squarely: The best\npleasures are the most intense. They saw pleasures as immediate sensations,\nlike food, massage, sex, or drugs. Further, the Cyrenaics refused to engage in\ndelayed gratification. For them, short-term pleasures should not be sacrificed to\nlong-term. So, naturally, rumors spread about immorality running rampant among\nthe Cyrenaics.\nEpicurus\nEpicurus (341-270) presents a somewhat more sophisticated version of\nteleological ethics. Metaphysically, he is an atomist, following Democritus (460-\n370) who taught that reality is reducible to tiny bits of matter in motion.\nDemocritus thought that the atoms moved in vertical tracks parallel to one\nanother. But if that is so, how
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: do they ever collide to form objects? Epicurus\nanswered this problem by saying that occasionally the atoms âswerveâ from the\nvertical. This swerve is unpredictable, random. In Epicurusâ view, it not only\naccounts for the formation of objects, but also for human free will. 98\n98\nThis appears to be the origin of the concept of libertarian freedom, which I criticized extensively\nin DG, Chapter 8. Many have argued that this kind of freedom is the ground of moral\nresponsibility. But is that at all likely? Imagine that an atom swerved randomly somewhere in your\nhead and made you steal $500. Would you feel guilty? More likely you would feel like a victim of a\nrandom eventâlike being struck by lightning. You didnât do anything to make the atom swerve.\nRather, the swerve is something that happened to you, like being struck by lightning. How can a 91\nWhat place is there in such a materialistic system for ethics? 99\nEssentially, Epicurusâs ethic is that we should avoid pain and seek pleasure\n(which he defines as the absence of pain). Unlike the Cyrenaics and some later\nEpicureans, Epicurus prefers long-term to short-term pleasures, mental to\nphysical pleasures, pleasures of rest to pleasures of movement. He valued\nespecially ataraxia, calmness without disturbance from outside the self.\nThere are several problems with this view: (1) In the normal sense of\nâpleasure,â there are many things that human beings value more. One example is\nsacrificing oneâs life to save the life of another. Epicurus gives us no good\nreason to pursue pleasure rather than some other value. (2) If we define pleasure\nso broadly as to include all other values, including self-sacrifice, then it loses its\nmeaning. It doesnât distinguish pleasurable from non-pleasurable activities. (3)\nEven if it is true that people value pleasure in some sense above all else, it is a\nlogical jump to say that we ought to value pleasure above all else. 100 But the\nought is what ethics is all about. I doubt that anyone can derive
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: an ethical ought\nfrom a materialistic philosophy. Matter in motion simply cannot tell us what we\nought to do. It cannot motivate that loyalty, obedience, and love that are the\nground of obligation.\nEpicurus believed in the existence of the Olympian gods, but he held that\nthey have achieved such bliss that they have no interest in getting involved in\nhuman history. So we need not fear them, nor expect any benefit from serving\nthem.\nAristotle\nAristotle (384-322) is such a great thinker that he almost deserves a\nchapter to himself. It seems inappropriate to discuss him in a chapter along with\nAristippus, Epicurus, and Mill, for his thought is far more sophisticated that theirs\nand immensely more influential. Certainly too, Aristotleâs ethics is more than\nmerely teleological. But I do believe it is essentially teleological. Aristotle makes\nthe best case that can be made for a secular teleological ethic.\nThe greatest philosophers (among whom I include Plato, Aristotle,\nAquinas, and Kantâhonorable mention to Augustine and Hegel) 101 are thinkers\nhuman being be blamed for a mental accident? If libertarian freedom exists, it is not the ground of\nmoral responsibility. Rather, it destroys responsibility.\n99\nYou should not believe the rumors that the Greeks hated matter. Some of them did, among\nthem the Platonists and Gnostics. But the Epicureans and Stoics were materialists.\n100\nRecall the discussion of the naturalistic fallacy in Chapter 5.\n101\nI am inclined to add Socrates to this list, but he wrote no books, and therefore his thoughts are\ndifficult to disentangle from those of his student Plato, who is our main source of information\nabout him. 92\nwho do not align themselves with one school of thought, but who creatively bring\ntogether ideas from many schools into impressive worldviews. That was certainly\ntrue both of Aristotle and his teacher Plato. 102\nAristotle accepts Platoâs distinction between form and matter. Matter is the\nstuff of the world; form is what gives to that stuff
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: its qualities: shape, color, truth,\nbeauty, moral virtue, and, especially purpose (telos). Plato separated form and\nmatter into two worlds. Aristotle demythologizes Plato, teaching that form and\nmatter are aspects of everything in this world, except for the Prime Mover,\nAristotleâs godlike first principle, which is pure form, without matter.\nThe forms in each thing define its essence, nature and purpose. The\nnature of a human being is to be a rational animal. Now the highest good\n(summum bonum) for any being is the realization or actualization of its particular\nnature. Aristotle, therefore, is a philosopher of self-realization, which we generally\nassociate with the existential tradition. He is, as I said earlier, a complex thinker,\nrather than a follower of any single tradition. But I think that for him the\nteleological principle is more fundamental than the existential.\nSince manâs nature is to be a ârational animal,â Aristotle held the view of\nall the Greek philosophers, that manâs highest good is the life of reason.\nComplete, habitual exercise of our rational nature constitutes âhappinessâ\n(eudaimonia). Happiness is complete well-being. 103 Unlike the Cyrenaics and\nEpicureans, Aristotle says that happiness is not pleasure, though pleasure\naccompanies it as a secondary effect.\nAristotle, like Plato, distinguishes three aspects of the soul, the vegetative,\nthe sensitive (perhaps roughly equivalent to Platoâs âspiritedâ), and the rational.\nWe share the first with plants, the second with animals; the third is unique to\nhuman beings. Moral virtues are qualities of the rational soul.\nAristotle distinguishes moral from intellectual virtues. Moral virtues pertain\nto the will, intellectual to reason. We learn the moral virtues, courage,\ntemperance, and justice, from imitating others who exemplify these qualities.\nSuch imitation leads us in time to form good habits, and those habits form a good\ncharacter. The intellectual virtue is prudence, 104 and that comes from teaching.
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nAristotle distinguishes philosophic wisdom (disinterested, contemplative) from\n102\nOf Plato and Aristotle it has been said that no teacher ever had a greater student and no\nstudent a greater teacher.\n103\nThe Greek eudaimonia is perhaps more like our term âblessednessâ than like the usual English\nuse of âhappiness.â We usually think of happiness as an emotional state. But the Greeks took it\nmore objectively: those benefits that entitle one to pleasant emotions.\n104\nPrudence, courage, temperance and justice are often called the âfour cardinal virtuesâ of\nclassical philosophy. Some Christians added to these faith, hope, and love, the âtheological\nvirtues,â to make seven. 93\npractical wisdom (wisdom to make decisions leading to happiness). One who has\nwisdom, he thinks, will seek moderation in all things.\nSo it is often possible to determine our specific duties by calculating the\nmean between two extremes. For example, a buffoon makes a joke out of\neverything; a boor takes everything too seriously. But wit is the âgolden meanâ\nbetween these extremes. Aristotle didnât offer any precise formula for defining the\nextremes or locating the mean. Doubtless he knew that with a bit of cleverness\nany act could be justified as being between two extremes (e.g. robbing one bank\nas the mean between robbing many and robbing none). And he did see that\nsometimes a right decision might be on one extreme, such as the very decision\nto do right rather than wrong. But he assumed that the wise man would be able\nto furnish a proper context for these judgments.\nThere is a question as to how we can begin to acquire moral virtues.\nAristotle teaches that we need to have virtuous dispositions to perform virtuous\nacts; but we need to perform moral acts in order to form the habits that produce\nvirtuous dispositions. 105 Aristotle is aware of this circularity and counsels readers\nto begin the process by doing things that âresembleâ virtuous acts. But how one\ngets from resemblance to actuality
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: is a mystery.\nThe Christian revelation has an answer: Godâs grace creates moral\ndispositions in sinners and enables them to follow those dispositions. And it also\nanswers another major problem in Aristotleâs ethics. For Aristotle assumes that\nwe can learn our moral obligations simply by observing our own natures and\nwhat makes us happy. This is the root of the ânatural lawâ tradition in ethics. But\nas David Hume pointed out, one cannot derive moral obligations from natural\nfacts. One canât infer what we ought to do from statements of what is the case;\nwe cannot derive âoughtâ from âis.â The fact that we are rational does not prove\nthat we ought to live according to reason; the fact that we seek happiness does\nnot imply that we ought to seek it. Scripture points to Godâs revelation as the\nsource of our knowledge of ethical obligation. For God is both fact and value. To\nknow him is to know at the same time the ultimate source of reality and the\nultimate source of ethical obligation.\nTypical of the Greek philosophers, Aristotle thinks that human reason is\nsufficient to derive moral obligations from natural facts. That is the extent of his\nnormative perspective. His emphasis on disposition and character is an element\nof existential ethics, within an overall teleological emphasis: For him ethics is\nseeking happiness by rational cultivation of virtues. Aristotleâs thought has a\nbetter balance between the three perspectives than most secular thinkers. But\nthe balance is precarious. He has no adequate way to derive moral principles\n(normative), so he has no sufficient justification for choosing happiness as a\nmoral goal (situational) or for identifying those dispositions (existential) that the\nethical agent should cultivate.\n105\nThe emphasis on disposition is another existential element in Aristotleâs thought. 94\nUtilitarianism\nThe most influential modern version of teleological ethics is utilitarianism,\nthe system developed by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) 106 and John S
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tuart Mill\n(1806-1873). 107 Utilitarianism differs from Epicureanism chiefly in its view that the\ngoal of ethics is not only the pleasure of the individual, but the âgreatest pleasure\nfor the greatest number.â That is called the âprinciple of utility.â For Bentham, this\nbroader goal is a consequence of individual self-interest. For Mill, it is based on a\nsocial instinct common to mankind.\nBentham measures pleasures in mainly quantitative ways, as did the\nancient Cyrenaics. Mill distinguishes qualities of pleasure, as did Epicurus.\nIn theory, utilitarianism is a simple, practical system. There is one\nprinciple, one goal to be sought, namely the greatest pleasure for the greatest\nnumber. A good act furthers that principle; an evil act impedes it. A good act will\nmaximize pleasure and minimize pain. And evil act will do the reverse.\nIt would seem, then, that (perhaps with computers unavailable to Bentham\nand Mill) we could simply âcalculateâ the goodness or badness of an act by\ncalculating the pleasures and pains produced by it. Indeed, Bentham spoke of\nthe âhedonistic calculus.â This emphasis is typically modern. It fits especially well\ninto the political culture of democracy, in which the pleasures and pains of an\nelectorate can be quantified by polls and votes.\nFor that reason, perhaps, along with others, utilitarianism seems to be\nalmost routinely assumed in contemporary discussion of ethical issues. And we\nmay, perhaps, blame utilitarianism somewhat for the tendency of politicians to\nsee their work as providing more pleasures for this or that group in their\nconstituency. âWhat have you done for________________?\" (fill in the blank with\nthe middle class, the poor, small business, women, minorities, families,\nconservatives, liberals, Christians, non-Christians, etc., etc.) seems to be the\nmain question politicians strive to answer.\nOne theoretical question discussed by recent utilitarians is whether the\nprinciple of utility should be applied to each of our individual
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: actions, or to the\nrules used to govern those actions. Does the principle ask us to judge what pains\nand pleasures each act brings about, or does it ask us merely to determine what\ngeneral ethical rules will lead to the greatest predominance of pleasure over\n106\nBenthamâs most accessible work is An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation\n(London: The Athlone Press, 1970).\n107\nSee especially his essay, âUtilitarianism,â anthologized in many volumes, such as Mill,\nUtilitarianism and Other Essays (London: Penguin Books, 1987). 95\npain? Those who choose the first alternative are called âact-utilitarians,â and\nthose who choose the second are called ârule-utilitarians.â 108\nSome evaluations follow, which, of course, will overlap the comments I\nmade earlier about Epicurus:\n1. Both Bentham and Mill assume that everyone by nature seeks pleasure\nand flees from pain. But is that true? People do sometimes sacrifice themselves\nfor others, by an instinct that may be more fundamental than the desire to seek\npleasure and avoid pain. Recall, too, Nietzscheâs contention that people really\nseek power more than they seek pleasure.\n2. Now in the face of such objections as those in (1), utilitarians are\nsometimes inclined to stretch the definition of pleasure to include such things as\nself-sacrifice and the exercise of power. But if that definition is stretched too far,\neverything we do becomes pleasure, even choices that lead to great suffering. If\neverything is pleasure, then nothing is. And it becomes unclear just what we are\ntrying to calculate when we seek to calculate pleasures.\n3. The naturalistic fallacy argument applies more obviously to teleological\nethics than to any other approach. For even if it is obvious that human beings do\nseek pleasure in all their choices, it by no means follows that they ought to do so.\n4. Further, the move from an individualistic approach (Epicurus) to a\ncorporate one (Bentham, Mill) requires justification. It certainly is not obvious,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: as\nBentham thought, that maximization of everyoneâs pleasure is needed for\nindividual pleasure. Nor is it obvious, as Mill thought (reverting to the existential\nperspective), that we have some natural instinct to promote the collective\npleasure of mankind. And even if we do seek the welfare of society, it is not\nthereby evident that we ought to.\n5. Is it always right to maximize the happiness of a community? What if\nthe majority in a country take great pleasure in murdering a minorityânot merely\na theoretical possibility in the twentieth century and beyond? Most ethically\nreflective people would answer no, but utilitarianism, taken consistently, would\nanswer yes. For utilitarianism, in the final analysis, the end justifies the means.\nThis is sometimes called the âswine troughâ objection to utilitarianism, that it\njustifies behavior that any civilized person would deplore. Now the later utilitarian\nHenry Sidgwick responded to this objection by adding to the principle of utility a\nprinciple of justice, or fairness. 109 This principle tells us to seek not only a\nmaximum amount of pleasure, but also an equal distribution of it. But (a) this\nprinciple has no basis in the overall utilitarian scheme. It is a deontological\nprinciple, not a teleological one. But why should we seek fairness or equality? If\n108\nRichard B. Brandt introduced this distinction. See his Ethical Theory (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:\nPrentice Hall, 1959).\n109\nSee Sidgwick, The Methods of Ethics (N.Y.: Macmillan, 1901). 96\nnot on a utilitarian basis, then on what basis? (b) It certainly is not intuitively\nobvious. The argument between maximizing pleasures for the whole society and\nequally distributing them to all members of society continues today, notably in\neconomic contexts: is it best to maximize opportunity, or to insure equality of\nwealth? It is hard to see how this argument could ever be resolved apart from a\nreligious revelation. (c) Sidgwick does not produce an adequate method of\nresolving conflicts between his
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: two principles, those conflicts that produced the\nvery problem that the principle of justice was designed to resolve.\n6. Utilitarians greatly underestimate the difficulty of calculating the\npleasures and pains likely to result from an action. (a) There are so many kinds\nof pleasure and pain. Among pleasures, consider listening to Brahms, eating a\ncherry pie, running a marathon, falling in love, having your local baseball team\nwin the world series, solving a philosophical problem. It is inconceivable that any\nmethod could compare these in a way sufficiently quantitative as to permit\ncalculation. We can measure a feeling of cold or hot, by wind chill calculations\nand such, but even that is precarious. (People often feel differently when they\nexperience the same wind chill.) But how can we measure the pleasure of\nwatching a sunset, or looking at the Grand Canyon? (b) To measure the\nconsequences of an action, we would need to trace its effects into the indefinite\nfuture and throughout the universe. One action, after all, can have enormous\neffects, years later and miles away. Imagine Columbus trying to calculate the\neffects of his decision to sail west.\nIt turns out, then, that utilitarianism, advertised as a simple and practical\nmethod for evaluating courses of action, in fact requires divine omniscience. Only\nGod can make the calculation required. As with secular existential ethics, the\nutilitarian ethicist must put himself in the place of God. We can now understand\nwhy many utilitarians retreat from act-utilitarianism to rule-utilitarianism: it seems\nso much easier to evaluate the consequences of rules than the consequences of\nindividual acts. But unless the rules come from God, we have no reason to think\nthat any rule will, throughout all history and throughout the entire universe, lead\nto more pleasure than pain.\nJohn Dewey\nDewey (1859-1952) 110 is essentially a teleological ethicist, but he\nintroduces much more flexibility into the traditional teleological concepts of\nmeans and ends.
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: In doing so, he reveals some of the complications that in my\nview make impossible any hedonistic calculus.\n110\nSee Dewey, Ethics (New York: Holt, 1932), also his Reconstruction in Philosophy (New York:\nNew American Library, 1950). 97\nDewey accepts the basic utilitarian model of ethics: choosing a goal and\nthen the means to achieve it. But he rejects the idea that the goal is something\nfixed: pleasure or happiness. Dewey insists that pleasure is only one of many\ngoals we seek, including health, wealth, power, learning, justice, entertainment,\nfriendship. Further, our goals change from time to time. As our goals change, of\ncourse the means also change.\nOur ethical life is not, according to Dewey, a matter of choosing a goal and\nthen enduring any means to achieve it. Some goals are highly desirable, but the\nmeans are so difficult or unpleasant that we decide the goal is not worth the effort\nand we shift to another goal. Means and goals influence one another in a\ndialectical way. No goal is absolutely fixed.\nSo in Deweyâs view, ethics is not an orderly, simple process, such as that\nenvisioned by Bentham and Mill. He sees goodness as the meaning experienced\nwhen a person wrestles with conflicting impulses, but somehow reaches a point\nof action.\nI am tempted to describe Deweyâs ethic as existential, because, as with\nAristotle and Idealism, self-realization plays a major role. Self-realization\ndescribes the process of bringing together all the incompatible impulses into what\nhe calls an âorderly release in action.â But Dewey insists that even self-realization\nitself should not be considered a fixed goal, only a criterion for evaluating other\ngoals. Since he sees the decision-making process in terms of means and goals, I\nregard him as primarily teleological.\nBut in a way his approach also serves as a refutation of teleological ethics,\neven a reductio ad absurdum. With ever-changing goals and ever-changing\nmeans leading to a flux of incompatible impulses that somehow leads to action\n
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (perhaps an axe murder), it is impossible to imagine what an ethical discussion\ncould ever be about. Dewey is right to say that in fact our goals change and that\nwith no revelation to guide us we cannot define happiness or pleasure as an\nabsolute the way utilitarianism does. But if he is right, his point serves as a\ndeconstruction of teleological ethics and leaves little distance between\nteleological ethics and existential ethics. All of this leaves us hungry for an ethical\nnorm. The philosophers to be considered in the next chapter earnestly try to\nsupply one. 98\nChapter 8: The Deontological Tradition\nIn our survey of âless explicitly religiousâ non-Christian ethics, we now\ncome to the last of the three major traditions. Deontological comes from the\nGreek deo, translated owe, ought, or must. So a deontological ethicist is\nconcerned above all with the normative perspective of ethics, ethics as\nobligation. He is impressed with what I called in Chapter 4 the âdeontological\nprinciple,â namely, âa good act is a response to duty, even at the price of self-\nsacrifice.â He is less impressed with the teleological and existential principles.\nDeontologists tend to be contemptuous of people who do good in order to gain\npleasure or happiness (teleological) or to express their inner inclinations\n(existential). In the deontologist view, seeking happiness is never morally\nvirtuous; indeed it detracts from the moral quality of any action. So when a writer\ndespises pleasure and exalts principle or self-sacrifice, he is probably a\ndeontologist.\nScripture also calls us to self-sacrifice (Matt. 16:24-26) and warns us\nagainst the deceits of pleasure (2 Tim. 3:4, Titus 3:3). But Scripture distinguishes\nbetween godly and ungodly pleasures. Godly pleasures are not only good, they\nare motivations to pursuing holiness. Often in the same passages where\nScripture warns us against ungodly pleasures, it promises the rewards of the\nkingdom of God to those who obey (Matt. 6:28-33). So Scripture does not ag
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ree\nwith secular deontologism. For Scripture, duty and happiness are not opposed,\nbut in the long run reinforce one another.\nDeontologists seek to find ethical norms that are universal, necessary, and\nobligatory. They usually accept the argument of Hume, Moore, 111 and others, that\nsuch norms cannot be found through sense experience (as in teleological ethics)\nor introspection (as in existential ethics). The problem set before the\ndeontologist, therefore, is to find some other source of ethical knowledge.\nChristians have such a source in the revelation of God. But secular deontologists\nreject that possibility as well. Of course, they fail to find what they are seeking,\nand that failure is a main reason for the popularity of teleological and existential\nalternatives. Then the deontologist criticizes the other positions for their lack of\nany ethical norm at all, and the argument continues back and forth.\nBut there is more. The deontologist must not only find an absolute ethical\nstandard. He must also show how that standard can be used to tell us in specific\nterms what is right and wrong. In other words, he must show how his standard\ncontains ethical content. One major problem for the deontological movement is\nthat once the philosopher identifies the source of ethical norms, that source turns\nout to be so abstract and vague that nothing specific can be derived from it. A\nnorm that says nothing is, of course, no norm at all. But for deontologism,\n111\nIndeed, I will be discussing Mooreâs position later in this chapter. 99\nanything less than the ultimate source of norms lacks authority. So the more\nauthority, the less content, and vice versa.\nThe problem is that, denying the authority of Godâs revelation, secular\ndeontologists cannot locate the ethical norm in a personal absolute. So they try in\nvarious ways to find impersonal sources of ethical authority. As I argued earlier\nand will continue to argue, that cannot be done. So the secular search for an\nabsolute norm must inevitably fail.
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Either there will be no norm at all (existential\nethics), or an inadequate one (teleological ethics), or an authoritative norm with\nno content (deontologism).\nIn the final analysis, this is a religious difficulty. Deontologists, like all\nthose who lack the saving grace of God, do not really want to hear Godâs voice.\nWith the pagans of Rom. 1, they suppress divine revelation. You can suppress\nrevelation either by denying that there is an ultimate norm, by embracing an\ninadequate norm, or by embracing an âultimateâ norm that turns out to have no\ncontent. In either case, you are left alone, to do what you want to do. Thus\ndeontological and teleological ethics revert to existential. Rationalism reverts to\nirrationalism. Ethics reverts to human autonomy.\nPlato\nIn my view, the deontological tradition begins with Plato (427-347 BC),\nbut, like his pupil Aristotle, he is much more than a member of a particular ethical\ntradition. Plato is one of the greatest thinkers in the history of philosophy, with\ninterests in many questions of metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics. And he\ndeals with many aspects of ethics other than the deontological. I shall indicate\nteleological and existential themes in my account of his ethical thought. If the\nreader would like to begin with simpler versions of deontologism, I suggest that\nhe move on to the next sections, on Cynicism and Stoicism, and come back to\nPlato later on.\nFor all his complexity nevertheless, Platoâs thinking about ethics may be\nsummarized as the search for an adequate ethical norm, a deontological quest.\nWith his mentor Socrates, he was stimulated to ethical reflection by the relativism\nof the Sophists, whom I discussed in Chapter 6. It cannot be true, he thought,\nthat ethical virtue is whatever the individual wants it to be. But then what is it?\nIf we are to attain moral knowledge, we must be able, contrary to the\nSophists, to attain knowledge. That knowledge must be objective, not relative to\nevery knower.\nPlatoâs epistemology begi
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ns with the observation that we can learn very\nlittle from our sense organs. So far, he agrees with the Sophists. Our eyes and 100\nears easily deceive us. But the remarkable thing is that we have the rational\nability to correct these deceptions and thus to find truth. It is by our reason also\nthat we form concepts of things. We have never, for example, seen a perfect\nsquare. But somehow we know what a perfect square would be like, for we know\nthe mathematical formula that generates one. Since we donât learn the concept of\nsquareness by sense experience; we must learn it from reason. Similarly\nconcepts of treeness, horseness, humanity, justice, virtue, goodness, etc. We\ndonât see these, but somehow we know them.\nThese concepts Plato calls Forms or Ideas. Since we cannot find these\nForms on earth, he says, they must exist in another realm, a world of Forms, as\nopposed to the world of sense. But what are Forms, exactly? In reading Plato we\nsometimes find ourselves thinking of the form of treeness as a perfect, gigantic\ntree somewhere, which serves as a model for all trees on earth. But that canât be\nright. Given the many different kinds of trees, how could one tree serve as a\nperfect model for all of them? And even if there were a gigantic tree somewhere,\nhow could there be a gigantic justice, or virtue, or goodness? Further, Plato says\nthat the Forms are not objects of sensation (as a gigantic tree would be). Rather\nthey are known through intelligence alone, through reason. Perhaps Plato is\nfollowing the Pythagoreans here, conceiving the Forms as quasi-mathematical\nformulae, recipes that can be used to construct trees, horses, virtue, and justice\nas the Pythagorean theorem can be used to construct a triangle. I say âquasi,â\nbecause Plato in the Republic said that âmathematicals are a class of entities\nbetween the sensibles and the Forms.â 112 Nevertheless, he does believe that\nForms are real things and are the models of which things on earth are copies.\nThe Forms, then, are p
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: erfect, immaterial, changeless, invisible, intangible\nobjects. Though abstract, they more real than the objects of our sense\nexperience, for only a perfect triangle, e.g., is a real triangle. And the Forms are\nalso more knowable than things on earth. We may be uncertain as to whether a\nparticular judge is just, but we cannot be uncertain as to the justice of the Form\nJustice. As such, the Forms serve as models, exemplars, indeed criteria for\nearthly things. It is the Forms that enable us to know the earthly things that\nimitate them. We can know that someone is virtuous only by comparing him with\nthe norm of Ideal Virtue.\nThe Forms exist in a hierarchy, the highest being the Form of the Good.\nFor we learn what triangles, trees, human beings, and justice are when we learn\nwhat each is âgood for,â its purpose. 113 Everything is good for something, so\neverything that exists participates in the Form of the Good to some extent. The\nworld of Forms, therefore, contains not only formulae for making objects, but also\nnorms defining the purposes of objects. This is a teleological element in Platoâs\n112\nDiogenes Allen, Philosophy for Understanding Theology (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1985), 20.\nAllenâs further comments on this issue are helpful.\n113\nAs with Aristotle, Platoâs Good is what I called in Chapter 2 a non-moral good. Yet, for Plato,\nmoral goods like virtue are exemplifications of this non-moral goodness. 101\nethics, and it is not hard to see how it influenced his student Aristotle, who we\ndiscussed in the previous chapter.\nIn Euthyphro, Socrates argues that piety cannot be defined as what the\ngods desire. For why should they desire it? They must desire it because it is\ngood. So piety is a form of goodness, and goodness must exist independently of\nwhat gods or men may think or say about it. So it must be a Form. We should\nnote, however, that if courage, virtue, goodness, etc. are abstract forms, then\nthey have no specific content. To know what is good, for Plato, is to know the\
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nForm of Goodness. But Goodness is what all individual examples of goodness\nhave in common. How, then, does it help us to know specifically what is good\nand what is bad?\nAny time we try to define Goodness in terms of specific qualities (justice,\nprudence, temperance, etc.) we have descended to something less than the\nForm of Goodness. The Form of Goodness serves as a norm for human\ngoodness, because it is utterly general and abstract. Any principle that is more\nspecific is less normative, less authoritative. Such is the consequence of trying to\nunderstand goodness as an abstract Form rather than, as in biblical theism, the\nwill of a personal absolute. 114\nHow do we know the Forms, located as we are in this defective, changing\nworld? Here Plato reflects the subjectivism of the Sophists and Socrates: we look\nwithin. Here, Platoâs ethic takes on an existential cast. We find within ourselves\nrecollections of the Forms. Recollections? Then at one time we must have had\nexperience of the Forms. When? Not in this life, where our experiences are\nlimited to imperfect and changing things, but in another life before this one. So\nPlato embraces the Pythagorean-Orphic doctrine of reincarnation. We lived once\nin a world in which the Forms were directly accessible to us. Then we âfellâ from\nthat existence into the sense-world, into bodies. Our knowledge of the Forms\nremains in memory, but sometimes it has to be coaxed out of us by Socratic\nquestioning. One famous example is in Platoâs Meno, where Socrates asks\nquestions of an uneducated slave boy, leading him to display a knowledge of\ngeometry nobody expected him to have.\nBut Platoâs major interest, like that of Socrates, was to tell us how to live.\nHis metaphysics and epistemology are all a prelude to his ethics and political\ntheory. But it is in these areas that he is most disappointing. His Socrates\ndiscusses at length the nature of justice and courage, but comes to no firm\nconclusion. He does conclude that the definition of virtue is know
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ledge. One\nnever does wrong except out of ignorance. If one knows what is right, he will\n114\nAnd if anyone asks the relation of goodness to the God of the Bible, the answer is as follows:\n(1) Goodness is not something above him, that he must submit to; (2) nor is it something below\nhim, that he could alter at will, but (3) it is his own nature: his actions and attributes, given to\nhuman beings for imitation. âYou therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfectâ\n(Mt. 5:48). 102\nnecessarily do it. But most of Platoâs readers through the centuries (including his\npupil Aristotle) have dismissed this statement as naÃ¯ve, and Christians have\nfound it superficial in comparison with the Bibleâs view of human depravity.\nAnd if virtue is knowledge, knowledge of what? Knowledge of the Good?\nBut good is more difficult to define than virtue is. Like all Forms, it is abstract. So\nhow can it settle concrete ethical disputes, such as whether abortion is right or\nwrong? For Plato, to live right is to know the Good. But to say that is to leave all\nspecific ethical questions unanswered.\nPlato did come to some specific recommendations in the area of politics.\nBut these recommendations have been almost universally rejected by later\nthinkers. In the Republic, he divides the body politic into groups corresponding to\nthe divisions of the soul. In his ideal state, the peasants are governed by the\nappetitive soul, the military by the spirited, and the rulers by the rational. So the\nrulers of the state must be philosophers, those who understand the Forms. Such\na state will be totalitarian, claiming authority over all areas of life. The upper\nclasses will share their women communally, and children would be raised by the\nrulers. Art will be severely restricted, because it is a kind of shadow of reality. It\ndoes not convey knowledge of the world, only conjecture, the lowest form of\nopinion. Images detract from knowledge of Beauty itself (the Form) and they can\nincite to anarchy. Donald Palmer s
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ays that Platoâs Republic âcan be viewed as a\nplea that philosophy take over the role which art had hitherto played in Greek\nculture.â 115\nMost all modern readers look at these ideas with distaste. Where did Plato\nget them? It would not be credible for him to claim that he got them by\ncontemplating the Good. Rather, the whole business sounds like special\npleading. Plato the philosopher thinks that philosophers should rule. He is rather\nlike a Sophist here, claiming to be the expert in the means of governance. But he\ncertainly has not shown that philosophers in general have any of the special\nqualities needed to govern. And the Sophists denied what Plato claims: access to\nabsolute truth. We may applaud Platoâs rejection of relativism. But his absolutism\nis what makes him a totalitarian. He thinks the philosophers have Knowledge, so\nthey must rule everything.\nPlato engages in special pleading, because he has no non-arbitrary way\nof determining what is right and wrong. But as weâve seen, once one identifies\nGoodness as an abstract form, one cannot derive from it any specific content. So\nPlatoâs ideas about ethics and politics lack any firm basis or credibility.\nThe picture should be clear by now. Though Plato is far more\nsophisticated than most secular thinkers, his position, like theirs, incorporates\nrationalism and irrationalism. He is rationalistic about the Forms, irrationalistic\nabout the sense world. For him, reason is totally competent to understand the\n115\nPalmer, Looking at Philosophy (Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Co., 1988), 73. 103\nForms, incompetent to make sense of the changing world of experience. Yet he\ntries to analyze the changing world by means of changeless forms, an irrational\nworld by a rationalistic principle. Eventually, in Parmenides, he has the integrity\nto admit that his fundamental questions remain unanswered.\nWith Plato, as with other philosophers we have considered, the tension\nbetween rationalism and irrationalism has a religious root. I
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f Plato had known the\nGod of Scripture, he would have known in what fundamental ways our reason is\ncompetent, yet limited. And he would have understood that the world of change\nis knowable, but not exhaustively, because God made it that way. He would also\nhave been able to consult Godâs revelation for ethical guidance, rather than\nteaching his students to rely on the abstract form of the Good, which has nothing\nspecific to say to them. The deficiencies of Platoâs system reinforce my main\nthesis about ethics, that an adequate ethical norm can come only from an\nabsolute person.\nCynicism\nAs I described in the last chapter a fairly crude version of teleological\nethics, Cyrenaicism, so I will mention here a fairly crude version of deontological\nethics. The relative simplicity of Cynicism may help some readers better to\nunderstand the deontological approach.\nAntisthenes (435-365 BC) is said to have founded this school of thought.\nThe Cynics, like Plato, held that virtue is knowledge, and so they emphasized\nthat it is worthwhile for its own sake, apart from any pleasure that may attend it.\nDoing good to achieve pleasure, they said, is morally worthless. So our task in\nlife is to free ourselves from any desire for pleasure. The Cynics practiced self-\ndiscipline, renounced their possessions, and in some cases fled from civilization\naltogether, living out in the countryside. They seemed to insist on lives of\nnonconformity to the point of principle. 116 Others charged that they were living\nlike dogs. Hence the name Cynic, from the Greek word for dog.\nI call this school deontological, because it rejected pleasure (contrary to\nteleological ethics) and insisted on objective knowledge (contrary to existential\nethics). But it is not clear from the rather fragmentary accounts we have of this\nmovement where it was that they sought to find the knowledge of virtue. Perhaps\nthey attempted to derive their ethical norms from the mere negative proposition\nthat pleasure is not a worthy goal of life.\nObvio
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: usly, this is not a sufficient source of ethical norms, but in a way it\nprovides a capsule view of the deontological movement. Lacking Godâs word,\ndeontologists have sought ethical truth largely by negation. Plato sought it by\n116\nIs this, after all, the âauthentic existenceâ of Jean-Paul Sartre? 104\nnegating the specificities of this changing world to posit an unchanging\nabstraction, the Form of Goodness. Kant, as we shall see, tried to derive moral\nnorms from the very idea of universality in contrast with non-universality.\nStoicism\nStoicism was founded by Zeno of Cyprus (334-262 BC). Like the\nEpicureans, but unlike most other Greek philosophers, the Stoics were\nmaterialists, teaching that only physical objects were real. But they\nacknowledged many differences within the broad category âmatter.â The soul was\nmade of very fine matter, rocks and dirt out of coarser matter. Even virtues are\nmaterial, but they can exist in the same place as other matter, so virtues can be\nin the soul. Gordon Clark suggests that the Stoicsâ âmatterâ is more like a field of\nforce than like a hard stuff. 117 Or perhaps: for the Stoics, to say that something is\nmaterial is simply to say that it really is, that it has being. Perhaps for them\n(whether or not they were aware of it), the proposition âreality is materialâ was\ntautological.\nFor the Stoics, knowledge begins in self-authenticating sensations.\nGeneral skepticism about sense-experience defeats itself, they thought, for it can\nbe based only on the experiences it presumes to doubt. The combination of\nempirical epistemology and deontological ethics is unusual in the history of\nphilosophy. But the Stoics also seek to do justice to the importance of reason.\nThey teach that the mind must conceptualize its sense-data, and, as it does, it\nreflects the rational order of the world itself (the logos).\nThe world is a single reality, governed by its own world-soul. This\npantheistic God rules all by natural law. As Platoâs Republic was ruled by
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: a\nphilosopher king, so the world of the Stoics is ruled by a divine philosopher king.\nEverything happens by law, so the Stoics took a fatalistic attitude toward\nlife. Aristotle, like present-day open theists, had said that propositions about the\nfuture were neither true nor false, because the future was not an object of\nknowledge. The Stoics held, on the contrary, that if I say âthe sun will rise\ntomorrowâ and it does, that proposition was already true when I uttered it.\nTherefore, the rising of the sun had to happen. Furthermore, everything that has\nhappened will happen again and again, ad infinitum, for, given infinite time,\neverything possible must take place, again and again. This doctrine is known as\nthe eternal recurrence.\nSo the Stoics sought to act in accord with nature. That is, they sought to\nbe resigned to their fate. Their ethic was one of learning to want what one gets,\nrather than of getting what one wants. As the Cynics had emphasized, pleasure,\n117\nClark, Thales to Dewey (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1957), 158-160. 105\nhealth, and life are good only insofar as they contribute to virtuous character. In\nthemselves they are worthless.\nDespite the fatalism of the Stoics, they did not advocate passivity.\nContrary to Epicurus, they sought involvement in public life (the emperor Marcus\nAurelius was a Stoic). They taught, as did all Greek thinkers, that one should live\naccording to reason, which is also according to nature and according to the\nuniversal structure of society. They considered human society to be a universal\nbrotherhood, although we are told that the Stoic emperor Marcus Aurelius did not\ntreat his Christian subjects with much brotherly love.\nStoicism is one major source, after Aristotle, of natural law thinking in\nethics. Again, I ask David Humeâs question: how does one reason from the facts\nof nature to conclusions about ethical obligation? The lack of a true theistic\nposition made the answer to this question, for the Stoics as for Aristotle,\nimpossible.\nS
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ome observations:\n1. The Stoics, like all of the Greeks, urge us to live according to reason,\nbut they donât show us why we ought to do so. If we are not to follow reason for\npleasureâs sake, why should we follow it?\n2. What does reason actually tell us to do? As with Plato, I fear that\nStoicism offers us an ethical norm (reason) with no specific content.\n3. As a materialist, fatalistic system, Stoicism is not capable of finding any\nadequate moral norm. As I have often argued, the ultimate moral norm must be\npersonal.\nImmanuel Kant\nKant (1724-1804) 118 represents the most famous and influential modern\nform of deontologism, just as Bentham and Mill represent the most famous and\ninfluential modern forms of teleologism. Kant is, however, a great philosopher\n(like Plato and Aristotle) in a way that Bentham and Mill are not. Kant is\nimportant, not only for his ethical theory, but also for his metaphysics, his\nepistemology, and his theology. 119 It is not too much to say that Kant\n118\nKantâs ethical thought is found mainly in his Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals and in\nhis Critique of Practical Reason. These have appeared in many editions. For his metaphysical\nand epistemological thought, the standard works are the Critique of Pure Reason and the\nProlegomena to Any Future Metaphysic.\n119\nHis book Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone is a landmark of liberal theology. 106\nrevolutionized all these disciplines, and that his work has become the starting\npoint of all modern discussions of these subjects.\nKant might seem to be an unlikely deontologist. Deontologists tend to\nfavor rationalism over irrationalism, as with Plato, Cynicism, and Stoicism. But\nKant, at one level of his thought, is a skeptic. He holds that the world as it really\nis, apart from our experience, is unknowable. This real world he calls the\nânoumenal,â or the âthing in itselfâ (ding an sich).\nHis early training in philosophy was in the circles of European rationalism,\nspecifically under Christian
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Wolff, a disciple of Leibniz. The goal of the\nrationalistic tradition at the time was to reduce human knowledge to a deductive\nsystem following the model of mathematics. But Kant did something unusual for\na continental European: he read the writings of a British philosopher, specifically\nDavid Hume. 120 Kant says that Hume roused him from his dogmatic slumbers. It\nseemed to Kant that Humeâs skepticism threatened mathematics and science.\nFrom then on his goal was to develop a philosophy that would rescue those\ndisciplines.\nHe concedes to Hume that the world as such, the noumenal, cannot be\nknown. But he insists that it is possible to know the world as it appears to us, the\nâphenomenal.â So as Plato divided the world into Form and Matter, Kant divided\nit into Noumenal and Phenomenal. As Plato sought to do justice to both the\nrationalism and the irrationalism of his own time by distinguishing radically\ndifferent realms, so did Kant. Kantâs distinction, however, is almost opposite to\nPlatoâs. For Plato, the unknowable world is the world of our experience, but for\nKant the world of experience is the knowable world. For Plato, the world beyond\nour experience is the world that is supremely knowable. For Kant, that world is\nnot knowable at all.\nHow is it possible to know the world of our experience? Kant offers here a\nvery complicated discussion that would draw us far from ethics. Essentially,\nthough, Kant argues that the basic structures of experience (essentially what\nPlato called the Forms) are the work of the human mind, the mind imposing its\ncategories on the raw data of experience. Causality, identity, unity and plurality,\neven space and time, are the work of the mind. The mind does not discover\nthese in the real world, but it contributes them to its experience. 121\n120\nSince the 1600s, the English Channel has proven to be a major dividing point among\nphilosophical schools.\n121\nI forget where I heard or read this illustration, but it is a good one. A row of intelligent jelly
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: jars\nare debating the philosophical question of why the jelly inside them always has a cylindrical\nshape. It seems that there are no physical or chemical properties in the jelly that necessitate that\nshape. But one jelly jar, more intelligent than the others, suggests that the jelly is cylindrical, not\nbecause of any property of the jelly, but because of the properties of the jars. So Immanuel Kant\nsays that our experience is what it is, not because of something in it, but because of something in\nus. 107\nIn a sense, then, for Kant, the human mind replaces God as the creator of\nthe world. Of course, what the mind creates is structure, not raw material; form,\nnot matter. But nothing can be said about the raw material apart from its\nstructure. Similarly, the Greeks found it difficult to distinguish between matter and\nnothingness. So for Kant the mind creates everything that can be spoken of. The\nrest is unknowable. 122\nKant is a remarkably clear example of the rationalist-irrationalist dialectic.\nHe is rationalist about the phenomena, irrationalist about the noumena. We know\nnothing about the real world, he says in effect, but we know perfectly the world of\nour experience, because we have created it. But if we have no knowledge of\nnoumena, how is it that we can know what the phenomena âreallyâ are? And\ndoes not Kant claim at least some knowledge of the noumenal world, namely that\nit exists, that it serves as a limit to knowledge, and that it is that of which the\nphenomena are appearances? All the traditional arguments against skepticism\ncan be brought against Kantâs view of the noumena, and all the traditional\narguments against rationalism against his view of the phenomena.\nAt any rate, we might expect from his epistemology and metaphysics that\nKant would favor an extreme version of existential ethics, in which no knowledge\nis possible, but we may freely live by our subjective preferences. And there is an\nexistential element in Kantâs thought, as there was in Platoâs. But Kant sur
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: prises\nus: the chief theme in his ethics is deontological.\nFor Kant, the important thing about ethics is duty. But how do we learn\nwhat our duties are, without a personal God to tell us? 123 The challenge for Kant\nis to find an impersonal source of ethical norms that contains specific contentâ\nwhat Platoâs Idea of the Good could not provide. And how can we find such a\nnorm, given the rationalist-irrationalist thrust of Kantâs epistemology?\nKantâs argument is ingenious, if nothing else. He begins by asking an old\nphilosophical question: is there anything that is good at all times, in all\ncircumstances? The Greeks had noticed that boldness, for example, is\nsometimes good and sometimes bad. When it is good, we call it courage; when it\nis bad (as when a soldier elects to fight 500 enemy soldiers singlehanded) we\ncall it foolishness. Pleasure, too, can be a good or bad thing, given the\ncircumstances. But is there anything that is always good, that can never be bad?\nPlato thought the only reality in that category was the abstract Form of the Good.\nBut we saw that this answer proved ethically unfruitful. Kant wants to do better.\nKantâs answer is that the only thing that is unequivocally good is a good\nwill. Nobody ever criticizes anybody for having a good will (except perhaps\nironically: âIâm so tired of Mrs. Brown; she has such a good will!â).\n122\nKantâs noumenal is very much like Wittgensteinâs mystical, which I discussed in chapter 6.\nKant explicitly rejects the idea of authoritative divine revelation in his Religion. Indeed, that is\nthe main point he makes in that particular book.\n123 108\nThe emphasis on the good will is the existential element in Kantâs ethics.\nNote that he seeks to improve on Plato by invoking a more personalistic concept.\nA good will must be the will of a person, not of an abstract reality.\nBut what is a good will? Kant says it is a will that does its duties, moreover\nthat does its duties for dutyâs sake. That is, a good will doesnât do its du
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ty to gain\npleasure or happiness (as the teleological tradition imagined), nor out of its own\ninclination (as the existential tradition thinks), but simply because it is duty. Here\nKantâs deontologism comes to the fore.\nBut then it becomes important to know what our duties are, again, without\nGod to tell us. Kant, like the Greeks, thinks that we can find our duties by a\nrational process. For Kant it goes like this. There are two kinds of imperatives,\nhypothetical and categorical. Hypothetical or conditional imperatives contain âifâ¦\nthen,â for example, âif you want to paint the wall, you must put newspapers on the\ncarpet.â The imperative âyou must put newspapers on the carpetâ is not for\neveryone, in all situations. Rather, it is only for people to whom the condition\napplies. If you donât want to paint the wall, you have no obligation to spread the\nnewspapers.\nIn ethical discussion, we sometimes make use of hypothetical imperatives,\nsuch as, âif you want to prevent war, you should negotiate.â Kant sees\nteleological ethics as relying on hypothetical imperatives, as: âif you want\nhappiness, you should avoid murder.â But in Kantâs view, such hypothetical\nimperatives are not fundamental to ethics. They are, if valid at all, applications of\nour basic duties, not the basic duties themselves.\nThe basic duties, the fundamental responsibilities from which all others\nare derived, are categorical, not hypothetical. That is, they are not based on any\nconditions or any particular life-situation. They are always binding, in every\nsituation, under all conditions. That is to say that ethical principles must be\nuniversally and necessarily binding. If it is wrong for me to steal, then it is also\nwrong for you, or for any rational agent anywhere in the universe.\nBut if ethical duties are unconditional and universally binding, then we\ncannot discover them through sense experience, which only discerns part of the\nuniverse and which cannot distinguish conditional from unconditional
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: .\nSo how does Kant propose to discover categorical imperatives? He says\nthat an ethical principle is categorical if someone can consistently will its\nuniversal application. As we saw above, Kant believes that ethical principles\nmust be universally binding. Now we see that he wants to derive the content of\nthose principles from the very idea of universality. Or, as your mother probably\ntaught you, when you are considering a course of action, ask yourself âwhat if\neverybody did it?â 109\nKantâs clearest example concerns promises. Consider the principle, that\nwe may break promises whenever it is in our interest. Can that principle be\napplied universally? Kant says no, because if everybody is free to break their\npromises, the very word âpromiseâ would have no meaning. By definition, a\npromise is a pledge that we are obligated to keep. A pledge we are not obligated\nto keep is not a promise. So if everybody thinks they can break their promises\nwhenever they want, there is no difference between promises and non-promises,\nand the concept of a promise becomes meaningless. So, Kant concludes, we\nmay not break our promises when that is in our interest, and that implies the\npositive norm, that we must keep our promises. That positive norm is a\ncategorical imperative.\nAnother example concerns cruelty. Consider the principle that we may be\ncruel to others whenever we like. If that principle is universal, then it implies that\nnot only may I be cruel to someone else when so inclined, but also that anyone\nelse has the right to be cruel to me. That principle is intolerable: nobody desires\nto be treated cruelly, Kant thinks (in the days before Sado-masochism became a\nstaple of culture). So the prohibition of cruelty is a categorical imperative.\nThese two examples are somewhat different. In the first, Kantâs critique\nconcerns the destruction of a concept, namely promise, rendering it meaningless.\nSomeone might object that such a result is not a bad thing, that the idea of\npromises should indeed
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: be banished from the world. A Nietzsche might chafe at\nthe very idea that we should be expected to bind ourselves with words; away with\nit! We may disagree with Nietzsche, but such a view is not contradictory or\nmeaningless in any obvious way, as Kant seems to think it is. Of course it would\nbe contradictory to bind oneself with a promise and to think oneself unbound by\nit. But it is not contradictory to oppose the very idea of promising, or to prefer to\nuse âpromiseâ in a lesser sense, for a relative, not absolute commitment.\nThe strength of Kantâs argument, paradoxically, is really an appeal to\ninclination. Kant would, evidently, not like to live in a world without promises. I\nwouldnât either. But that inclination is emotional, not based on a Kantâs logical\nargument.\nThe cruelty example is even more obviously an appeal to inclination. Of\ncourse I would not like to live in a world in which someone had the right to be\ncruel to me. Such a world would be unpleasant in the extreme. But I donât think it\nwould be contradictory for someone else to prefer a world like that. Indeed, that\nseems to be precisely the sort of universe preferred by Mafia dons and drug\nlords: I have the right to torture and kill you, and if it turns out that you will torture\nand kill me, well, thatâs just business.\nKant also wants to avoid any appeal to the consequences of actions. But\nhis arguments ask âwhat would the world be like if this maxim is universalized?â 110\nTo ask that is to ask, precisely, the consequences of universalizing the maxim in\nquestion.\nKant also provides broader examples of categorical imperatives, which he\nconsiders summaries of all the others. I paraphrase them as follows:\n1. Act according to ethical principles that you can will to be universally\nfollowed.\n2. Act according to principles that you could will to be universal laws of\nnature.\n3. Act so as to treat human beings always as ends, never as mere means.\nI shall not try to explain the distinction between the first two
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: . Essentially they\nindicate the principle described earlier, by which Kant tests ethical maxims. It is\ninteresting, however, to see these principles laid out in this form. For it becomes\nclear that Kant is really asking us, in our moral judgments, to think like God. In\ntraditional theology, it is God who wills principles to be universal, even to be laws\nof nature. In Kantâs thought, man replaces God. We saw that earlier in his\nmetaphysics, in which manâs mind in effect creates the world. We see that here\nin his ethics as well.\nThe third principle is based on an argument like the argument against\ncruelty I discussed above. Kant would like to live in a world in which human\nbeings are always treated as ends. But Vito Corleone and Tony Soprano (to say\nnothing of Hitler, Stalin, Osama Bin Laden, and Pol Pot) might prefer a different\nkind of world. Kantâs argument, again, is more existential than deontological. It\ndoesnât constitute a rigorous demonstration of any moral principle.\nIn the end, Kantâs moral norm is as empty as Platoâs Good. It cannot prove\nanything to be morally obligatory. Nor, argues Alasdair MacIntyre, is Kantâs\napproach capable of establishing moral restrictions on anyoneâs conduct:\nIn fact, â¦with sufficient ingenuity almost every precept can be\nconsistently universalized. For all that I need to do is to characterize the\nproposed action in such a way that the maxim will permit me to do what I\nwant while prohibiting others from doing what would nullify the maxim if\nuniversalized. Kant asks if I can consistently universalize the maxim that I\nmay break my promises whenever it suits me. Suppose, however, he had\ninquired whether I can consistently universalize the maxim, âI may break\nmy promises only whenâ¦â The gap is filled by a description devised so\nthat it will apply to my present circumstances but to very few others, and to\nnone such that if someone else obeyed the maxim, it would inconvenience\nme, let alone show the maxim incapable of consistent uni
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: versality. It\nfollows that in practice the test of the categorical imperative imposes 111\nrestrictions only on those insufficiently equipped with ingenuity. And this\nsurely is scarcely what Kant intended. 124\nFor example, let us test the maxim, âI may break my promises only when I\npromise my son Johnny to buy him a car for his birthday.â Is that universally\napplicable? Sure. Itâs fine for absolutely anyone to break that particular promise\nto Johnny. Just kidding, son. But there is nothing logically contradictory in such a\nuniversalization.\nOthers have observed that Kantâs method can be used to justify trivial\nduties. What about the maxim that everyone should wear red socks? There\nseems to be no contradiction in universalizing this principle. Does that mean that\nwe have a duty to wear red socks? But we could also argue similarly that we\nhave a duty to wear blue socks. These principles together create a contradiction;\nbut individually each one passes Kantâs test.\nSo Kantâs ingenious and strenuous effort to derive ethical norms from the\nprinciple of universality must be judged a failure. In the end, he gives us no more\nassurance of what is right or wrong than any other secular thinker. He tries to\nprovide an absolute norm without God, which is to say, from impersonal\nprinciples. But again impersonalism fails to provide universal, necessary,\ncategorical imperatives.\nThere is a place for God in Kantâs philosophy, but Kantâs God is not the\nsource of moral norms. If God exists, for Kant, he exists in the noumenal realm,\nso nobody can know whether he exists or not. Nevertheless, Kant says, it is best\nfor us to act as if God exists, for a number of reasons. One of these is that there\nis a connection between moral behavior and happiness. He rejects the notion\nthat we should follow moral principles in order to achieve happiness. Rather we\nshould do our duty simply for dutyâs sake. But if we do our duty for dutyâs sake,\nthen, objectively, we deserve happiness. However, in this
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: world, the righteous\nare often unhappy, while the wicked flourish. So Kant thinks we should assume\nthe existence of an afterlife, in which a personal God rewards good and punishes\nevil. Again, he doesnât say that such a thing can be proved, only that we should\ncarry on our moral life as if it were true. Otherwise, he seems to think, morality\nitself is incoherent. This is sometimes called Kantâs âmoral argument for the\nexistence of God.â But, unlike other traditional theistic arguments, it does not\npurport to be a demonstration, only a piece of practical advice.\nSome evaluative comments, by way of summary:\n1. Kant pushes human rational autonomy to new heights, in effect\nidentifying the mind of man with the mind of God, both in his metaphysics, his\nepistemology, and his ethics.\n124\nMacIntyre, A Short History of Ethics (New York: Macmillan, 1966), 197-98. 112\n2. The rationalism and irrationalism of Kantâs phenomena/noumena\ndistinction affect his ethics. If we cannot know the real world, how can we be sure\nof what our duties are? If our experience is virtually created by the mind, how can\nethical norms be anything more than the human mind proclaiming duties to itself?\n3. Kantâs principle that a good will does its duty for dutyâs sake, not for\nhappiness or out of inclination, may sound pious, but it is not biblical. Scripture,\nas we saw in Chapter 3 and earlier in this chapter, often motivates our ethical\nbehavior by referring to its consequences (Godâs glory, human rewards and\npunishments), and by invoking the new inclinations given us in regeneration.\n4. Although Kant is right to say that moral principles must be universal, I\nhave shown that we cannot discover those principles merely by testing each\nmaxim for universal applicability.\n5. The universality argument cannot justify any concrete moral norms. So\nKantâs deontologism is as empty as those of the Greeks.\n6. Kant claims to avoid any appeal to consequences (teleological) or\ninclination (existential). But he tests th
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e universality of maxims by showing\nprecisely the consequences of their universal affirmation. And in the end he\njudges these consequences according to his inclinations: his desire to live in a\nworld in which such things as promises exist, cruelty does not, and everyone\ntreats everyone else as an end.\nIdealism\nIdealism is the name usually given for the school of philosophy that\nfollowed Kant and had a large influence 125 into the early twentieth century. G. W.\nF. Hegel (1770-1831) is usually regarded as the leading figure in the movement,\nbut in Germany Fichte and Schelling were also prominent names, and in Britain\nlater on, T. H. Green, F. H. Bradley, and Bernard Bosanquet. 126\nAs with Aristotle, Plato, and Kant, Idealist philosophy is difficult to fit into\nany of our defined schools of ethics. It is a very impressive blend of ideas, with\n125\nEven on both sides of the English channel! As I mentioned in an earlier note, it has been rare\nin the last few centuries for a philosophical movement to be prominent both on the continent and\nin Britain.\n126\nIt is interesting to note how many modern philosophical movements have three prominent\nmembers: Continental rationalists Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz; British empiricists Locke,\nBerkeley, Hume; German Idealists Fichte, Schelling, Hegel; British Idealists Green, Bradley,\nBosanquet; American Idealists Royce, Bowman, Blanshard; Pragmatists Peirce, James, Dewey;\nExistentialists Heidegger, Jaspers, Sartre; Process philosophers Alexander, Whitehead,\nHartshorne; Boston personalists Bowne, Brightman, Bertocci. I havenât aligned these triads with\nmy three perspectives, but I will not promise not to. 113\naffinities to many previous philosophical movements. For a secular system, it\nprovides a remarkable balance between teleological, existential, and\ndeontological themes. But I think the ethical appeal of Idealism is its doctrine of\nthe absolute. This is an impersonal absolute, to be sure, but nevertheless a kind\nof absolute. And the idea of an absolut
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e fits into deontological ethics far better\nthan any other kind of ethics. Also, as we shall see, the notion of duty is\nimportant to idealist ethicists.\nIdealism rejects the Kantian noumenal. Kant, as we saw, was inconsistent\nin his denial that we know the noumenal. But if the noumenal really is\nunknowable, then we cannot make any use of it in our philosophy. Consistently,\nwe cannot even affirm that it exists. So the idealists dropped that concept. But\nonce you drop the noumenal, what is left? The phenomenal, of course. But then\nthe phenomenal is not merely an âappearanceâ of something else. Rather, it is\nreality. It is the âthing in itself.â So the idealist rejects Kantâs skepticism and\nadopts Hegelâs affirmation of rationalism: the real is the rational and the rational\nis the real.\nNevertheless, Hegel is chastened by Kantâs critiques of reason. Reason\ndiscovers the truth, he tells us, not by simple observation (Hume) or by logical\ndeduction of a mathematical-linear type (Leibniz), but by a method he calls\ndialectical. âDialecticâ is related to the concept âdialogue.â Platoâs dialogues seek\nto approach the truth by putting two or more viewpoints up against one another.\nAs the deficiencies of each become evident, the truth begins to shine through.\nSimilarly, Hegelâs method seeks to find truth by self-criticism.\nHereâs how it works. You start with one idea, then you begin to see\ndefects in that idea, so that the opposite seems more adequate. But then you\nbegin to see defects in the second idea as well, and more virtues in the first, and\nthat meditation propels you to a third view that incorporates the truth of the first\ntwo ideas, but also rises above them to show you more than you knew before. 127\nIn other words, Hegel admits with Hume and Kant that our rational ideas\nhave their inadequacies, that they are mixed with error. But he proposes that\ninstead of falling into skepticism, we use these inadequacies to help us move on\nto greater levels of knowledge. Err
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: or, therefore, is a bad thing, but it also has its\npositive aspects.\nHegel develops a philosophy of vast complexity by using this method. He\nbelieves that he has discovered, not only a useful way to learn things, but the\nvery mind of the universe itself. The dialectic, he thinks, is the road to absolute\ntruth, so it reflects perfectly the movements of nature and history. Or, to put it\nbetter, the movements of nature and history reflect dialectical thought. (Historical\nevents also proceed through conflict to resolution, making progress to greater\n127\nHegelâs disciples and interpreters labeled these three steps âthesis, antithesis, synthesis.â\nHegel himself used this language occasionally, but did not stress it. 114\nand greater levels of civilization.) Indeed, the dialectic is the very mind of God,\nthe mind of the absolute. Hegelâs absolute is a pantheistic sort of deity, coming to\nself-consciousness through human thought. So the eventual outcome of the\ndialectic is that we will be identical with the divine mind.\nOne problem with this epistemology is that any idea we have today will be\nnegated by another idea, suggested that today we do not have any ideas we can\ncall true. Hegel thought that the process of dialectical negation had ended in his\nphilosophy, and that therefore his philosophy would never be transcended by\nanother. Similarly, he thought that the Prussian state had reached the pinnacle of\nhistorical development and would never be replaced by a superior order. But\nmost readers have not accepted Hegelâs claims in these regards. So we face the\nquestion, if nobody has reached the pinnacle, how do we know that our present\nideas are anywhere near the truth? And how do we choose between one idea\nand another, if they are all subject to negation and synthesis? For idealism, there\nis a sense in which we will not have any truth until the end of the process (a kind\nof eschaton) when we achieve omniscience and our thought becomes fully\nidentical to that of the absolute. In other w
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ords, you canât know anything until you\nknow everything. Thus Hegelâs rationalism devolves into irrationalism.\nThe specifically ethical teachings of idealism are presented more clearly\namong the British idealists than among the German ones. The following\ndiscussion is based on F. H. Bradleyâs Ethical Studies. 128 There is a large dose of\nexistential ethics in Bradley, who emphasizes that morality is something\nirreducibly personal. Only persons have obligations; only persons can be\nobedient or disobedient to ethical norms. The reader will understand from earlier\ndiscussions that on this point I emphatically agree.\nBradley teaches that in ethics one is concerned primarily with developing\ninner character. How one changes the world or responds to moral principles are\nsecondary considerations. When I paint a fence, my ultimate goal is not to have a\npainted fence, but rather my own inward satisfaction at completing my task. So,\nas Aristotle taught, ethical behavior is essentially self-realization. The point of\nethics is not to change the world, but to change ourselves. As with Kant, the only\nunequivocal good is the good will. Ethical reflection and action can direct the will\nin a better direction.\nBut unlike Kant, the idealists see the good will, not as a will that looks to\nits duty in the abstract, but that also looks to its inclinations and environment.\nSelf-realization involves all of these, which should not be set against one another\nas in Kant. For example: Should we not admire a person who enjoys doing right,\nwho does it out of inclination, as much or more than we admire someone who\ndoes his duty merely for dutyâs sake?\n128\nOxford: The Clarendon Press, 1927. 115\nSo for idealism, self-realization involved relating oneself to a context: to\nour own inclinations and happiness, to the needs of other people, to the physical\nenvironment (which can enable or prevent us from doing good), ultimately to the\nwhole universe. So, as in Hegelâs metaphysics, in which you donât know one\nth
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ing until you know how it is related to everything, so in ethics, you cannot attain\nyour highest level of self-realization until you take into account your relation to\nthe whole universe.\nBradley, however, narrows the context a bit, in his chapter âMy Station and\nIts Duties.â For him the point of ethics is to find your station and to perform the\nduties associated with that station. Your station may be your nationality, your\noccupation, your social class, your place in a family or organization. Fathers have\nduties different from their children. Kings have duties different from those of\nrailroad engineers, and so on. In Bradleyâs view, you do have some choice as to\nwhat station you occupy, though those choices are limited by birth, education,\neconomic status. But if you are a lieutenant in the navy, you must perform the\nduties prescribed for a lieutenant. If you are a butler, you must do the things\nbutlers are supposed to do, and so on.\nSo idealism, like Kant, focuses on duties, and on that account I call it\ndeontological, though idealists also speak positively about self-realization\n(existential) and achieving happiness (teleological). But it offers us no more\nreliable means of discovering our duties than did Kant. We may evaluate idealist\nethics as a global epistemology (Hegelâs dialectic) or as a view of individual\nvocation (Bradley). Hegelâs dialectic seeks to bring about an identity between\nourselves and the absolute, and it devolves into rationalism and irrationalism.\nHegelâs absolute is impersonal, so it is no more suited as an ethical authority\nthan Platoâs Good.\nBradleyâs theory of individual vocation appears to give us specific norms\nfor conduct. But Bradleyâs view is too obviously a reflection of his time. He wrote\nin England, at a time when social classes were rigidly defined and distinguished.\nEveryone knew how a king, or a prime minister, or a general, or a butler, or a\nstreet cleaner was supposed to behave. And if one stepped out of bounds,\npeople shuddere
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d over the impropriety. But in a time like ours, where people\nmove rapidly upward and downward on the social scale, in a multiethnic and\nmulticultural society, in an age where new vocations are being created every day,\nwhere even gender roles are disputed, it is not evident that the âdutiesâ of\nparticular âstationsâ have moral weight. Nor is it clear how Bradleyâs view helps\nus in trying to come to grips with the moral debates of our time, on abortion, pre-\nemptive war, womenâs rights, and so on. A follower of Bradley would probably\ntake conservative positions on social issues generally. But if he wished to make a\npersuasive case, he would have to do more than to say that his position is\ndictated by his station in life. Conservative as its conclusions may be, that kind of\nargument is essentially relativistic, like Marxâs view that morality is relative to\noneâs social class. 116\nMoore and Prichard\nI have mentioned several times G. E. Moore (1873-1958) as the one who\ncoined the term ânaturalistic fallacy.â Moore used the naturalistic fallacy argument\nmainly against utilitarianism. In its place, he adopted a kind of deontologism\nknown as Intuitionism.\nIn Principia Ethica, 129 Moore wrestles with the definition of goodness. 130\nWe cannot define goodness as pleasure, as the utilitarians do, he says, because\nit always makes sense to ask if a particular pleasure is in fact good. He says the\nsame about all other definitions that have been proposed. Again and again he\nreiterates that we cannot define goodness as x, because it is always an open\nquestion whether x is in fact good. This is Mooreâs famous âopen question\nargument.â So Moore concludes that goodness is indefinable.\nI suspect that the problems in defining goodness arise, not because\ngoodness is indefinable, but because there are so many different sets of values\nin our society. If everyone agreed that goodness was pleasure, then it would not\nbe an open question as to whether a pleasure was in fact good, though t
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: here\nwould probably be open questions as to what was actually (or most) pleasurable.\nSimilarly, if everybody agreed that goodness is âwhat God approves,â then it\nwould not be an open question whether something approved by God was\ngood. 131\nBut let us follow Mooreâs argument further. Not only is goodness\nindefinable, according to Moore, but it is impossible to derive such goodness\nfrom any ânaturalâ state of affairs. âNaturalistic fallacyâ is his name for the mistake\nof trying to do this. Moore never quite defines what he means by ânaturalâ in this\ncontext. Evidently, pleasure would be an example of such a natural state. But I\nhave given reason to doubt whether a definition of goodness in terms of pleasure\nis necessarily wrong. In the end, for Moore, the ground for the distinction\n129\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971, originally published in 1903.\nAt this point, non-moral goodness.\n131\nSome have suggested that if we define goodness as what God approves, then it is\nmeaningless to say that what God approves is good. It would be as if I defined âworldâs greatest\nshortstopâ as âRTS theologian,â and then claimed to be the worldâs greatest shortstop. My\nstatement would be true, given that definition, but it would also be silly and misleading. I think the\nproblem is simply that in the shortstop/RTS case there is a blatant misuse of language. That is\nnot evidently so in the first case. If we define goodness as what God approves, then of course all\ngoodness, including Godâs own, will be judged according to his standards. I fail to see any\nproblem in that. Someone might object that if Godâs acts are to be evaluated by his own\nstandards, he could do something that to us would be monstrously wrong. In reply: Scripture tells\nus that Godâs goodness is similar to the goodness he requires of us, because we are made in his\nimage. âYou therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfectâ (Matt. 5:48).\n.\n130 117\nbetween natural and nonnatural i
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s intuition. But there are problems with his view\nof intuition, as we shall see below.\nStill, as Iâve indicated often in the last few chapters, I do think that the\nphrase ânaturalistic fallacyâ does name a real problem in the secular ethical\nliterature. Perhaps it can better be described more simply as a failure to justify\nthe use of ought.\nBut Moore goes on: If goodness may not be derived from any natural state\nof affairs, what is it? Moore answers, it is a simple and unanalyzable (because\nindefinable) property of various states of affairs. And how do we discover\ngoodness? By intuition, hence the label âintuitionismâ for his position.\nMoore isnât very clear on how this is done. He speaks of holding\nsomething before the mind, contemplating it, and thereby identifying it as good or\nbad. The picture is something analogous to sense-experience. But of course\nMoore rejected the idea that goodness could be derived from sense experience.\nSo his concept of intuition is mysterious. 132\nIt is hard to imagine on this view how people could actually debate\nwhether something is good. Once the parties âhold those facts before their\nminds,â they can only report to one another what they intuit. Perhaps, as with\nemotivism, they can argue about the facts to which the intuitions are directed. But\nonce everyone agrees about those facts, there can really be no argument about\ntheir goodness or badness, even though intuitions may disagree. Rather, each\nparty can only appeal to his own intuition as a supreme authority.\nAs with Bradley, intuitionism flourished in Britain at a time of strong moral\nconsensus within the society. It was a post-Christian age, but an age in which\ntraditional Christian morality (âborrowed capitalâ in Van Tilâs terms) continued to\ncarry weight. So it is not surprising that when people discussed moral issues,\nholding the facts before their minds, their intuitions led to conclusions more or\nless in accord with the Bible. But when society became more pluralistic, lead
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ing\nto the hyper-pluralism of today, that consensus broke down, and intuitionism\nbecame implausible. 133\nBut the situation was even worse than that. Moore himself appealed to\nintuition mainly to establish the goal of behavior, that is the good. He agrees with\nthe utilitarians that ethics is a matter of choosing a goal and then the means to\n132\nIâm inclined to think that philosophers speak of intuition when they think they know something,\nbut donât know how. Nevertheless, the concept of intuition is not entirely useless. See DKG, 345-\n46.\n133\nI heard a story once, but have forgotten the source, about the chaos that ensued when D. H.\nLawrence, advocate of sexual liberation, visited a genteel ethical discussion group of Mooreâs\ntime. Maybe the story is apocryphal, but imagining the clash of values helps us to see what the\nloss of consensus must have been like. After Lawrence and others like him, it was no longer\npossible to gain ethical assurance simply by holding a state of affairs before the mind. 118\nattain it, but he disagrees with them as to the manner of choosing the goal. So\nregarding the goal, Moore is deontologist. But in choosing the means to achieve\nthat goal, Moore follows the usual teleological-utilitarian pattern.\nBut a student of Moore, H. A. Prichard, 134 argued that on this construction\nthe end justifies the means. But (intuitively!) we know that cannot be right. A\ngood end does not justify using wicked means to achieve it. So Prichard adopted\na view even more consistently intuitionist: we need intuition, not only to evaluate\nthe end, but also to evaluate the means. We need intuition all across the board,\nin any evaluation of any decision, action, or goal.\nThis view implies, of course, that we must invoke intuition countless times\neach day.\nWe should commend Moore and Prichard for understanding the\nimportance of authoritative ethical norms. But their intuition is really an asylum of\nignorance. In one sense, what they call intuition is really conscience, the faculty
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nGod has given us for determining good and evil. But conscience must be\ninformed by Godâs revelation, lest it be ignorant, immature, or even âsearedâ (1\nTim. 4:2). In secular intuitionism, there is no objective source of ethical truth.\nIntuition becomes virtually a synonym for personal inclination, and this form of\ndeontologism becomes indistinguishable from existential ethics.\nIt is not surprising, then, that the philosophy of language analysis, of which\nMoore was a founder, led next to Wittgensteinâs mystical understanding of ethics\nand the positivistsâ emotivism, which we discussed in Chapter 6.\nDeontologism continues to show up in ethical philosophy from time to\ntime. An example is John Rawlsâ (1921--) A Theory of Justice 135 which opposes\nutilitarianism and emphasizes the importance of âfairness.â Rawls argues that\neach person is entitled to the most extensive liberty compatible with the same\nliberty for others, and that inequalities are justified only to the extent that they are\nnecessary to help the disadvantaged. Yet the foundation for these moral norms is\nunclear and unpersuasive. Deontologism is right to say that we need to have\nmoral norms beyond our subjectivity and the happiness of mankind. But it has no\nclear idea of how such knowledge can be gained.\nConclusions on Non-Christian Ethical Philosophy\nWe have investigated three types of non-Christian ethical philosophy,\nexistential, teleological, and deontological. Permit me to summarize this material\nin the following comments:\n134\n135\nSee his Moral Obligation (London: Oxford, 1949).\nCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971. 119\n1. We have seen that the better thinkers, like Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and\nHegel, combine emphases from more than one of these perspectives. But even\nthey tend to favor one and disparage the other two, and that tendency is even\nmore pronounced among the lesser ethicists. This is understandable, because\nonly God can guarantee the coherence of the three perspectives. The biblical\
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nGod declares the moral law (deontological), and he creates human beings to find\ntheir happiness (teleological) in obeying that law. He also makes us so that at our\nbest we will find Godâs law our chief delight (existential). So God made all three\nperspectives, and he made them to cohere. But if a thinker seeks to formulate\nethics without God, he has no guarantee that the three perspectives will cohere.\nFor all he knows, human happiness may require a life contrary to all moral rules,\nor to keep the moral law we must sacrifice all our happiness and inclination. So\nhe must choose which perspective to follow in case of conflict, which will almost\ncertainly take place. Thus non-Christian thinkers tend to lose the unity and\nbalance of the three perspectives.\n2. Nevertheless, we have seen that each ethical thinker must deal with the\nthree perspectives, even if he prefers one to another. Kant, for example, seeks to\navoid any teleological considerations. Yet to establish his categorical imperatives\nhe must consider the consequences of denying them, and consequential\nreasoning is the essence of teleological ethics. Teleological thinkers, in turn,\nmust give some consideration to moral norms, even though they tend to reduce\nthese norms to happiness or pleasure, and though they give no adequate\naccount of why their norms are obligatory. Every ethicist must give some\nconsideration to norms, goals, and feelings, whatever he may choose to\nemphasize. So there is a tension in each system between its focus on a\nparticular perspective and its need to do justice to all of them.\n3. No non-Christian ethicist does justice even to his own favorite\nperspective. Deontologists advocate an empty norm, one without definable\ncontent. That norm gives no clear guidance, and it prevents the lesser principles\nfrom giving us clear guidance, since they are relativized by the ultimate norm.\nThus there really is no norm at all, and we are no better off than we would be\nwith a teleological or existential ethic.\nTeleologica
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: l ethics tries to be empirical, concrete, practical. It wants to\navoid any reference to mysterious, transcendent principles. But the basis for\napplying their principles, like the principle of utility, is ultimately mysterious. And\nthe calculation involved in making ethical choices requires superhuman insight.\nExistential ethics tries to do justice to the inner life, but it gives no\nguidance adequate for our self-realization.\n4. All non-Christian systems involve rationalism and irrationalism:\nrationalism in the claim that the human mind can determine what to do without 120\nGodâs help, irrationalism in claiming that ethics is ultimately based on\nunknowable chance or fate. Rationalism leads to dogmatic certainty about an\nabsolute, but that absolute is empty, and hence irrational. Irrationalism, however,\nis asserted by a would-be autonomous claim, and is therefore rationalistic. If\nirrationalism is true, then there is such a thing as truth, and irrationalism cannot\nbe true.\n5. This epistemological confusion leads to a proliferation of different\nviewpoints as to the norms and goals of ethics. What is the goal of human life?\nPleasure? Power? Self-realization? Contentment?\n6. The non-Christian approach leads to the abandonment of ethics itself.\nThe story of twentieth-century ethics is that philosophers have abandoned their\ntraditional role (since Plato) of teaching us how to live. The main ethical thinkers\nof the twentieth century (with the exception of existentialism, which is\ninconsistent in this regard) donât try to tell us how to live, but rather they examine\nthe language and reasoning of the discipline of ethics. In other words, they have\ngiven up ethics for metaethics. Their concern is not to defend ethical principles,\nbut rather to show us what an ethical principle is. Their message to us is, âif you\nhappen to hold any such things as ethical principles, hereâs what they are.â\nThe reason for this development is not hard to see. If there is no norm or\nduty available to human bei
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ngs by the revelation of a personal God, then there is\nno way that any ethical philosopher, or anyone else, can tell us what to do.\n7. Since non-Christian ethics is helpless to do justice to its own concerns,\nit is wholly unable to bring objections against Christianity. Traditionally, non-\nChristians have often objected to the morality of Scripture, even to Godâs actions\n(such as commanding Joshua to destroy the Canaanites). They have objected on\nethical grounds to the imputation of Adamâs sin, to election and reprobation, to\nthe substitutionary atonement, to Hell. And they have argued vigorously the\nâproblem of evil,â that a holy God should not have permitted evil in his\nuniverse. 136 But the non-Christian has no basis for raising these objections, since\nhe cannot himself make a meaningful distinction between good and evil.\n8. Yet there are elements in non-Christian ethical thought that can be\nuseful for Christians. (a) Because of Godâs general revelation, the non-Christian\nhas considerable knowledge of Godâs precepts (Rom. 1:32, 2:14f) and\nsometimes sets forth that knowledge in spite of himself. (b) Non-Christian\nthought shows, as we have seen, the importance of doing justice to the three\nperspectives. (c) Non-Christian thought is often more sensitive than Christian\nthought to the complexities of the ethical life and of human decision-making.\nBut in the end, nobody has the right to argue an ethical principle unless\nthey are willing to listen to the God of Scripture. As we have seen, moral norms\n136\nFor my response to the problem of evil, see DG, Chapter 9. 121\ncan come only from a personal absolute, and the Bible is the only written\nrevelation that presents such a God to us. So we must now turn to Scripture to\nhear the word of the Lord. 122\nPart Three: Christian Ethical Methodology 123\nSection 1: The Normative Perspective\nChapter 9: The Organism of Revelation\nThe main point of Part Two, Chapters 4-8, is that non-Christian ethics is\nincapable of providing a basis for mora
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: l decision. Nevertheless, we live in a world\ndominated by non-Christian views of ethics. This world is our situation, our\nethical environment. So I considered Part Two in terms of the situational\nperspective, though we also discussed other perspectives in that connection.\nIn this and the following chapters, Part Three of the treatise on ethics, I\nshall attempt to show how a Christian ethic provides the basis for ethical\ndecisions that was lacking in non-Christian approaches.\nChristian ethics, as I have indicated, is triperspectival. It seeks to honor all\nthree perspectives, not just one or two as is usually the case in non-Christian\nethics. For the three perspectives represent Godâs Lordship. They are Godâs\nLordship attributes, his control, authority, and presence, manifest to us as his\nrevelation. In Part Three, I shall indicate how these perspectives function in our\nethical decisions, particularly how they relate to one another in grounding these\ndecisions. This discussion can be called methodology, or simply a Christian\ndecision-making procedure. Since it describes a subjective process by which we\nmake decisions, Part Three represents as a whole the existential perspective.\nBut of course the decision-making procedure involves all three perspectives.\nIn general, a Christian ethical decision is the application of Godâs\nrevelation (normative) to a problem (situational) by a person (existential). Recall\nthe âthree factors in ethical judgmentâ in Chapter 3. There we considered as an\nexample a counseling situation: the counselor must ask about the problem,\nGodâs word, and the personal needs of the counselee. But we also saw there that\nthe counselor cannot fully understand one of these factors without the others. So\neach includes the other two. That is to say, they are perspectives.\nIn this chapter I will begin with the normative perspective. Under the\nnormative perspective, the ethical question is, what does Godâs word tell me to\ndo? To answer that question, as we shall see, w
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e will need to understand the\nsituation about which the question is asked, and the person who is asking it. But\nthe focus will be on Godâs revelation, the source of the norms that will govern our\ndecision.\nThis discussion could be called a Christian deontological ethic or\ncommand ethic. But unlike secular versions of deontologism, our standard\ncomes, not from an abstraction, an impersonal fate, or chance, but from the word\nof the living God. 124\nWhat is Godâs revelation? We evangelicals answer, almost involuntarily,\nScripture. Certainly Scripture is Godâs word, his revelation, infallible and\ninerrant. 137 And Scripture has a special place of prominence among other kinds\nof revelation, as we shall see. But Scripture is not all there is of revelation. There\nare words of God that are not in the Bible, such as (1) the words God speaks to\nall the forces of nature to direct their ways (Ps. 147:14-18, 148:7-8), (2) the living\nword, Jesus, who is not contained within the Bible, though the Bible contains\nsome of his words (John 1:1-14), (3) the words Jesus spoke in the flesh that\nwere not recorded in Scripture, and (4) the words of prophets and apostles that\nwere not recorded in Scripture. 138\nI believe that the unique importance of Scripture can best be seen, not by\ndenying the existence of other forms of revelation, but rather by showing the\nprecise relationships between Scripture and those other forms. As we look at\nthose other forms, we shall see that we can make no use of them apart from\nScripture. So by mentioning other forms, we do not detract from the uniqueness\nof Scripture, but we enhance it.\nSo Godâs revelation forms an organism, a unity of many self-\nmanifestations, many norms. Ultimately, revelation includes everything, for all\nreality manifests God. So the normative perspective, like the other perspectives,\nis a perspective on everything. Yet we shall see that within that universal\norganism of revelation, Scripture plays a leading role. Let us now look at some\naspects of
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: that organism.\nGod Himself as Ethical Norm\nIn our discussion of the naturalistic fallacy in Chapter 5 and later, I\nindicated that it is not a naturalistic fallacy to argue, âGod commands x, therefore\nwe must do x.â This argument might seem like a forbidden argument from is to\nought, from fact to obligation. But that is not so, for God is not only a fact, but a\nnorm. That is the case because anything God says is normative, obligatory. His\nword is authority as well as power and presence.\nGodâs very nature is normative. That is to say, authority is an aspect of the\nlordship that defines him. This is evident from our previous discussions of the\nnature of lordship.\n137\nI cannot in this book discuss in detail the reasons for holding this fundamental article of faith. I\nhope to enter that discussion in Doctrine of the Word of God, forthcoming. It should be evident,\nhowever, that if ethics is to be based on the will of a personal-absolute God, it must be possible\nfor human beings to have access to his words. He must speak to us. And, as Cornelius Van Til\npointed out, such a God can speak to us only with supreme authority.\n138\nThe slogan of the Trinity Foundation (www.trinityfoundation.org) is âThe Bible alone is the\nWord of God.â This slogan is unbiblical. 125\nScripture also teaches this fact by its identification of God as light: âThis is\nthe message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and\nin him is no darkness at allâ (1 John 1:5). Note also the many applications to\nJesus of the metaphor of light (Matt. 4:16, Luke 1:79, 2:32, John 1:4-9, 3:19-21,\n8:12, 9:5, 12:46, 1 John 2:8, Rev. 21:23). When people see God, they see a\ngreat light, often described as the glory. That glory also radiates from Jesus on\nthe mount of transfiguration (Matt. 17:2). 1 John 1:5 associates that physical light\nwith Godâs moral purity.\nBut light does not only refer to Godâs moral excellence, but also to the\ncommunication of that excellence, the revelation of it, to human be
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ings. The light\nof Godâs essence is a light that we are to walk in: âBut if we walk in the light, as\nhe is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his\nSon cleanses us from all sinâ (1 John 1:7). The light is our ethical guide: âYour\nword is a lamp to my feet and a light to my pathâ (Ps. 119:105). The light reveals\ngood and evil (John 3:19-21). So we should not walk in darkness (Matt. 6:22-23,\nJohn 8:12, 12:46, Rom. 13:12, 1 Cor. 4:5, 2 Cor. 6:14). To dwell in the light is to\ndwell with God; to dwell in darkness is to be apart from him. Indeed, we are to be\nthe light (Matt. 5:14, Eph. 5:8).\nSo, by his very nature, God is not only ethically pure, but he inevitably\nreveals that moral purity to human beings, calling them to live in accord with it.\nWhen sinners see God in Scripture, they are often filled with a sense of moral\nguilt (Isa. 6:5, Luke 5:8). Godâs very being is ethically normative.\nIn every form of revelation, God reveals himself. All revelation bears the\nlordship attribute of presence. So in every form of revelation, God reveals his\nethically normative being. In DG, 470-475, I argued that Godâs word is always\none with God himself. 139 All revelations of God manifest his presence, as well as\nhis authority and controlling power. The speech of God, his word, has divine\nattributes, attributes of righteousness (Ps. 119:7), faithfulness (verse 86),\nwonderfulness (verse 142), truth (same verse, and John 17:17), eternity (Ps.\n119:89, 160), omnipotence (Gen. 18:14, Luke 1:37, Isa. 55:11), and perfection\n(Ps. 19:7-11). It is an object of worship (Ps. 56:4, 10, 119:120, 161-62, Isa. 66:5).\nAnd indeed, Godâs word is God (John 1:1).\nSo human ethical responsibility is essentially this: the imitation of God. We\nare made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27). That image is a fact. It is our\nnature, the fact that distinguishes us from all other creatures and gives us a\nspecial relationship to God. Rather than to be ârational animals,â as in Arist
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: otle,\nour essence is to be like God. But just as God is both a fact and a norm, so our\nnature as his image is both a fact and a norm. Because God has dominion over\nall things, we are to have an analogous dominion, under him (Gen. 1:28). Even\nafter the fall, we are to be holy as he is holy (Lev. 11:44, 1 Pet. 1:15-16), perfect\n139\nAnd I will argue this in more detail in Doctrine of the Word of God. 126\nas he is perfect (Matt. 5:48). We are to work six days and rest the seventh, for\nthat is what God did (Ex. 20:11). We are to reflect the light of Godâs moral purity\n(above).\nThe imitation of Christ (imitatio Christi) is also a major theme in biblical\nethics. We are to love one another, as Jesus first loved us (John 13:34-35, 1\nJohn 4:9-11). We are to follow Jesus (Matt. 16:24, 19:21). We are to wash one\nanotherâs feet, according to his example (John 13:14-15). We are to be sent into\nthe world as he was sent (John 17:18, 20:21). We are to value one another\nabove ourselves, as Jesus did (Phil. 2:5-11). Even Jesusâ sufferings and death\nare exemplary (1 Pet. 2:21, 1 John 3:16). So Paul speaks of himself as an\nimitator of Christ (1 Cor. 11:1).\nWe should carefully distinguish biblical imitation of God from coveting\nGodâs prerogatives. Recall that Satan tempted Eve by telling her, âyou will be like\nGodâ (Gen. 3:5). In one sense, as we have seen above, being like God is the\nheart of godliness. But Satan was suggesting that Eve could be like God in\nanother way, by rebelling against him and placing herself on the throne. There\nare some attributes and acts of God that we can never imitate. We are not\nomniscient or omnipotent; we cannot create a universe; we cannot redeem a\nrace of sinners. None of us can ever be an ultimate ethical authority. 140\nAt the most basic level, then, God himself is our source of ethical\nobligation. Our ultimate norm is personal, not impersonal. We have ethical duties,\nbecause God is intrinsically worthy of obedience and imitation, and because all\ncreatures are
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: inevitably confronted with the revelation of his standards.\nThe Word of God as Norm\nHow, then, does God reveal his ethical norms to us? Godâs revelation, his\nword, comes to us in a number of specific forms that we can summarize under\nthree categories: the word that comes through nature and history, the word that\ncomes through persons, and the word written, which correspond to the three\nperspectives, situational, existential, and normative, respectively.\n1. The Word Through Nature and History\n140\nCf. John Murray, Principles of Conduct (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 176-77). 127\nFirst, Godâs word is revealed through nature and history. 141 Scripture\nteaches that the heavens declare the glory of God (Ps. 19:1). Paul in Rom. 1:18-\n21 says,\nFor the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all\nungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness\nsuppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them,\nbecause God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely his\neternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since\nthe creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are\nwithout excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as\nGodâ¦\nSo the creation clearly conveys some significant truths: Godâs existence, his\nnature, his wrath against sin. Later (verse 32) Paul indicates that pagans know\nfrom Godâs revelation that those who do certain things are worthy of death. So\nthis revelation has ethical content.\nIs it a naturalistic fallacy for them to derive ethical content from the created\nworld? No, because the derivation is not from valueless facts, but from the\nauthoritative revelation of the true God that comes to them through the creation.\nHowever, when non-Christians try to argue from the data of natural revelation to\nreach ethical conclusions, they typically omit any reference to God as the source\nof the data. And when the argument is presented simply as an argument from the\nfacts and n
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ot from God, it is a naturalistic fallacy and should be dismissed on that\naccount.\nOne thing is lacking in Godâs revelation through nature. Scripture never\nindicates that it teaches people the way of salvation. That knowledge comes from\nthe gospel, and the gospel comes through preaching (Rom. 10:13-17). So we\nmight say that nature teaches only law, not gospel. 142 Nevertheless, the gospel is\nrevealed through history, specifically through redemptive history, those events by\nwhich God saves his people from sin. Those events form the content of gospel\npreaching. So history as a whole does convey the gospel. But only those in\nproximity to redemptive events can learn from them the way of salvation. 143\n141\nThe âthroughâ is important. We should not make the mistake of thinking that nature and history\nare the word of God. The word of God is God himself, not something in the creation. But the word\nmakes itself known through creaturely means, including nature and history.\n142\nI shall discuss this topic at greater length later on.\n143\nOn the whole, my category of ârevelation given through nature and historyâ is identical to the\ntraditional category of âgeneral revelation.â But there is a difference. Revelation given through\nnature and history, taken as a whole, includes both law and gospel, for the gospel is a segment of\nhistory, that segment we call redemptive history. But general revelation, understood in the\ntraditional way, is that portion of Godâs revelation in nature and history that does not include the\ngospel. Redemptive history is hard to classify, either on the traditional general/special scheme or\non my general/special/existential scheme. Since Godâs revelation in redemptive history is a\nrevelation in event, rather than word, we are inclined to want to call it general. But since it has\nredemptive content, we are inclined to call it special. To some extent these are artificial 128\nAnother limitation in natural revelation is this: Unregenerate people view it\nwith hostil
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ity. So they suppress the truth (Rom. 1:18), exchange it for a lie (verse\n25), and God gives them up to their depravity (verses 24, 26, 28). So without\ngrace, general revelation does not help them. But natural revelation is sufficient\nto make them guilty, to take away all excuses (verse 20).\nBut for the believer, natural revelation is important also in other ways: (1) It\ngives us information useful in interpreting Scripture, such as ancient culture and\nlanguages. (2) It shows us the contemporary situation to which we must apply\nthe Scriptures. (3) It gives us regular occasion to glorify God for his creation (Ps.\n19) and providence (Ps. 104, 146, 147).\nNote here the overlap between the normative and situational perspectives.\nWhen we ask where we go to find Godâs norms, one biblical answer is, go to the\nsituation, namely nature and history. As I said earlier, there is a sense in which\neverything is normative.\nIf the created world did not reveal God, Scripture itself would be useless.\nFor we cannot interpret Scripture unless we can understand the situations from\nwhich Scripture arose and the situations to which we seek to apply it. If the\ncreated world did not reveal God clearly, it would thereby cast doubt on the\nethical conclusions we seek to derive from Scripture. So general revelation, as\nScripture, is necessary, authoritative, clear, and sufficient for its own purposes. 144\n2. Revelation Through Persons\nSince revelation is thoroughly personal, persons are fully appropriate\nmedia of Godâs revelation. As revelation through nature and history is sometimes\ncalled âgeneral revelation,â 145 so I often describe revelation through persons as\nâexistential revelation.â\nSome revelation comes to human beings through personal appearances\nof the divine persons of the Trinity. When God appears in visible form, that\nrevelation is called theophany. When the Son of God took on flesh and dwelled\namong us (John 1:14), that revelation is called incarnation. When God the Holy\nSpirit comes to r
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: eveal God in and to us, that revelation is called by various\nnames, depending on its function: inspiration (2 Tim. 3:16), illumination (1 Cor.\n2:9-12), demonstration (1 Thess. 1:5), revelation (Eph. 1:17).\ncategories, and it doesnât matter much which we use to describe redemptive history. But we\nshould be aware of the ambiguity of this category of revelation.\n144\nAn important article emphasizing this point is Cornelius Van Til, âNature and Scripture,â in N.\nB. Stonehouse and Paul Woolley, eds., The Infallible Word (Phila.: Presbyterian and Reformed,\n1946, 1967), 263-301.\n145\nBut see an earlier note for a difference between revelation through nature and history and the\ntraditional concept of general revelation. 129\nExistential revelation, however, also includes revelation through human\npersons. Human beings are in Godâs image, so we are revelation. That image is\nnot lost, but marred or defaced by the fall. But Godâs grace renews that image in\nthe image of Christ. In this renewal, God writes his word on our heart (Jer. 31:33-\n34; cf. Deut. 6:6, Prov. 3:3). This means that there is a change in our most\nfundamental dispositions, so that our deepest desire is to serve God.\nAs the Spirit illumines the Scriptures and writes Godâs word on our heart,\nhe truly reveals God to us. The term reveal in Scripture does sometimes refer,\nnot to special revelation, nor to general, but to the enlightenment of individuals,\nso that they actually come to know and appropriate Godâs truth (Matt. 11:25-27,\nEph. 1:17). 146 This is an important form of existential revelation.\nBecause of redemption, human beings can serve as revelation in still\nanother way: as examples for imitation. We saw earlier the importance of\nimitating God and Christ in our ethical lives. But one major means of growth to\nChristians is other Christians who serve as godly examples. Because he imitates\nChrist, Paul sets himself before us as someone we should imitate: âBe imitators\nof me, as I am of Christâ (1 Cor. 11:1; cf. 4:
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 16, Phil. 3:17, 1 Thess. 1:6). He tells\nTimothy, in turn, to be an example for his congregation to follow (1 Tim. 4:12).\nThe main requirements for elders and deacons in 1 Tim. 3:1-13 and Tit. 1:5-9 are\nqualities of character, doubtless because these men are expected to serve as\nexamples to the other members of the church. And Scripture mentions many\nBible characters as positive or negative examples (1 Cor. 4:16, 10:1-12, Phil.\n3:17, 1 Thess. 1:6, 2 Thess. 3:7-9, Heb. 6:11-12, 11:1-12:2, 13:7, James 5:17-\n18).\nSo imitation appears to be an important means of sanctification according\nto Scripture: imitating God, Jesus, Paul and other Bible characters, oneâs own\nchurch officers. Of course some discernment is needed. Human role models,\neven Bible characters apart from Christ, sometimes stray from Godâs path. Not\neverything they do is worth imitating. And some things they do are appropriate in\ntheir own situation, but should not be imitated in our own time, such as Joshuaâs\nferocity in slaughtering Canaanites. But those facts do not discourage biblical\nwriters from emphasizing the importance of imitation.\nThis is one reason why I dissent from the views of some who oppose\nâexemplarism.â These 147 have argued that we should preach Scripture\nexclusively as a redemptive-historical narrative and never, ever point to a Bible\ncharacter as a moral example. On the contrary, I think that biblical writers often\n146\nEvangelicals usually prefer the word illumination to the word revelation in describing this work\nof the Spirit. Thus they set themselves over against certain kinds of dialectic and charismatic\ntheology. But the texts I have cited warrant the term revelation in this connection.\n147\nSee Sidney Greidanus, Sola Scriptura: Problems and Principles in Preaching Historical Texts\n(Toronto: Wedge Publishing Foundation, 1979). See also many articles and sermons in the\npublication Kerux. 130\npresent the characters in their narratives as positive or negative examples. Saul,\nfor instance, is l
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: argely a negative example, David a positive one. God has given\nus these examples as an important means to our ethical and spiritual growth.\n3. The Word as Spoken and Written Language\nGodâs word also comes to us as human words and sentences. This is\nsometimes called âspecial revelation.â 148 This revelation includes, first, the divine\nvoice, spoken directly to human beings, as to Adam and Eve, to patriarchs such\nas Noah and Abraham, to all the people of Israel gathered around Mt. Sinai in\nEx. 19-20, to Moses, and to other prophets and apostles.\nClearly the revelation spoken directly from Godâs own mouth is of supreme\nauthority. No one has a right to find fault with it. So it must be regarded as\ninfallible and inerrant. Who would dare to stand before God at Mt. Sinai and\ncriticize his words?\nSecond, verbal revelation includes the words God speaks to us through\nthe prophets and apostles. Theologians sometimes say that when God speaks\nthrough a human being his words have less authority than when spoken directly.\nBut according to Deut. 18:18-19, Godâs word in the mouth of a prophet is truly\nGodâs word, with the full authority of Godâs word:\nI will raise up for them a prophet like you [like Moses, JF] from\namong their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall\nspeak to them all that I command him. 19 And whoever will not listen to my\nwords that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.\nAccording to Jer. 1:9-10, the word in the mouth of the prophet has authority even\nover ânations and kingdoms:â\nThen the LORD put out his hand and touched my mouth. And the LORD\nsaid to me, \"Behold, I have put my words in your mouth. 10 See, I have set\nyou this day over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break\ndown, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.\"\nThird, verbal revelation includes the words God speaks to us through the\nwritten words of prophets and apostles. Written revelation is part of the covenant\n148\nAgain, the triad I
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: am using doesnât quite match the triad general/existential/special. âSpecial\nrevelationâ can mean (1) any revelation in human words and sentences, or (2) revelation with\nredemptive content, whether in words or events. In sense (2) there was no special revelation\nbefore the Fall; in sense (1) there was. In sense (2), the events of redemptive history (as\ndistinguished from the written account of redemptive history) are part of special revelation; in\nsense (1) they are not. I hope to sort out these issues a bit in Doctrine of the Word of God. In this\nbook, however, I will treat the two triads as roughly synonymous. 131\nGod made with Israel at Mt. Sinai in Ex. 19-20. In chapter 3, I mentioned the\ndocuments that had constitutional authority in ancient middle eastern covenant\narrangements. To violate the terms of the document was to violate the covenant.\nSimilarly, the covenant between God and Israel under Moses included a\ndocument that served as Israelâs fundamental law, namely the Ten\nCommandments. When Moses returned from speaking with God, he brought\nwith him two stone tablets containing those. The Ten Commandments are, in\nliterary form, an ancient near eastern suzerainty treaty. 149\nIn this document, God speaks to Israel in the first person. He calls the\ndocument âthe law and the commandments which I have written for their\ninstructionâ (Ex. 24:12). Later we read,\nAnd he [God, JF] gave to Moses, when he had finished speaking with him\non Mount Sinai, the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written\nwith the finger of God (Ex. 31:18).\nMoses destroys the tablets to show Godâs anger over Israelâs false worship in Ex.\n32. But God replaces them, again emphasizing his authorship of them:\nThe LORD said to Moses, \"Cut for yourself two tablets of stone like the\nfirst, and I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets,\nwhich you broke (Ex. 34:1; cf. Deut. 4:13).\nGod ordered Moses put this second edition of the Decalogue into the ark of the\ncovenant
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (Ex. 25:16, 40:20), the holiest place in Israel. In the ancient near east,\ncovenant documents were traditionally placed in sanctuaries. So from the\nbeginning, Godâs revelation was âholyâ Scripture.\nAs theologians sometimes discount Godâs indirect revelation through\nprophets, they even more disparage written revelation, thinking that it has much\nless authority than the direct utterance of the divine voice or the oral voice of the\nprophet. But Scripture itself draws no distinction between the authority of oral and\nwritten revelation. The praises given to Godâs law, statutes, testimonies, words,\ncommandments, etc. in the Old Testament are directed to Godâs written word,\nthe laws of Moses (Ps. 19:7, Ps. 119). Paul tells the Corinthians, âIf anyone\nthinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I\nam writing to you are a command of the Lordâ (1 Cor. 14:37), and so he places\nhis written words on the highest level of authority. The famous New Testament\npassages on biblical authority only summarize this theme that goes back to\nMoses:\nAll Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for\nreproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of\nGod may be competent, equipped for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17).\n149\nFor the elements of that literary form, see Chapter 3. 132\nAnd we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will\ndo well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day\ndawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all,\nthat no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. 21\nFor no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke\nfrom God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet. 1:19-21).\nSo Scripture, Godâs written word, is no less authoritative than the divine\nvoice heard directly from Godâs lips. As such, it has a unique role in the organism\nof revelation. The point is not that the B
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ible is more authoritative than Godâs word\nin nature or through persons. Everything God says has the same authority,\nnamely supreme authority. But the Bible has a unique role within the organism of\nrevelation, in the following ways:\n1. It is the document of the covenant and therefore the court of final\nappeal for Godâs people. Like the United States of America, and unlike Great\nBritain, the church has a written document as its fundamental law, its\nconstitution.\n2. Since Jesus ascended to heaven and the prophets and apostles have\npassed away, the Bible remains as our sole means of access to their words. And\nwe need their words to find eternal life (John 6:68) and to live lives useful to God\n(Matt. 7:24-27).\n3. Without Godâs grace, we inevitably suppress and distort the truths of\nnatural revelation (Rom. 1:18-32). We can interpret nature rightly, therefore, only\nwhen we hear and believe the message of the gospel. But that is available only\nin Scripture. So we need Scripture if we are rightly to interpret any other form of\nrevelation. As Calvin says, we need Scripture as our âspectaclesâ to see the\nnatural world correctly. 150\nThe Unity of the Word\nThe same God speaks in all forms of the word, and his message is\nconsistent in all of them. In Ps. 19:1-11, we see the unity between natural\nrevelation and the written word:\nThe heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims\nhis handiwork. 2 Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals\nknowledge. 3 There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not\nheard. 4 Their measuring line goes out through all the earth, and their\nwords to the end of the world. In them he has set a tent for the sun, 5\n150\nInstitutes, 1.6.1. 133\nwhich comes out like a bridegroom leaving his chamber, and, like a strong\nman, runs its course with joy. 6 Its rising is from the end of the heavens,\nand its circuit to the end of them, and there is nothing hidden from its heat.\n7\nThe law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; th
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e testimony of\nthe LORD is sure, making wise the simple; 8 the precepts of the LORD are\nright, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure,\nenlightening the eyes; 9 the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever;\nthe rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether. 10 More to be\ndesired are they than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey\nand drippings of the honeycomb. 11 Moreover, by them is your servant\nwarned; in keeping them there is great reward.\nI think the point here is that Israel should keep the written law, because it is just\nas firmly established as Godâs revelation in the heavens and the earth. The two\nforms of revelation come from the same creator, from the one who controls the\nwhole world, from east to west. Note also Ps. 147:15-20:\nHe sends out his command to the earth; his word runs swiftly. 16 He gives\nsnow like wool; he scatters hoarfrost like ashes. 17 He hurls down his\ncrystals of ice like crumbs; who can stand before his cold? 18 He sends out\nhis word, and melts them; he makes his wind blow and the waters flow. 19\nHe declares his word to Jacob, his statutes and rules to Israel. 20 He has\nnot dealt thus with any other nation; they do not know his rules. Praise the\nLORD!\nAgain, God tells Israel that his word to Jacob has the same majesty and power\nas the workings of nature. Indeed, the written word, Godâs statutes and rules, are\na great gift to Israel that God has not given to any other nation. All nations know\nof Godâs natural revelation, but only Israel has the privilege of knowing his written\nword.\nScripture also serves as the content of existential revelation. The âlawâ\nwritten on the heart is not something different from the law of Scripture. It is the\ncontent of Scripture itself, transferred to a new medium. So the example that\ngodly people provide for us is the content of Scripture, translated into their\ndecisions and actions, applied to their situations.\nSo the written word displays its prominence as the document of
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the\ncovenant. But in other ways, the three forms of revelation our dependent on one\nanother. Natural and personal revelation are dependent on Scripture, as\nexplained above. But Scripture is also dependent on them in a way. We cannot\nunderstand Scripture without natural revelation, for to interpret the Bible we need\nto have a knowledge of ancient history, language, and of the contemporary\nsituations to which Scripture must be applied. And we cannot understand 134\nScripture unless our minds and hearts are made ready for it, by natural ability\nand by the supernatural work of the Spirit. 135\nChapter 10: Attributes of Scripture\nIn Chapter 9 I began to discuss the normative perspective of Christian\nethics. I first discussed God himself as the fundamental norm. Then I discussed\nmore specifically the word of God as norm and distinguished various forms of the\nword. We saw then that within the organism of revelation Scripture, the written\nconstitution of Godâs covenant, plays a focal role.\nIn this chapter, then, I will look at Scripture more specifically, 151 making\nethical applications of various attributes or qualities of Scripture. In the Reformed\ntradition, writers have sometimes spoken of four of these attributes: necessity,\nauthority, clarity, 152 and sufficiency. 153 Four is not a good number for me, since it\nis not evenly divisible by three. Of course, Scripture has a great many attributes,\nand if we need more, some are readily at hand. The point is to choose some that\nillumine important theological and ethical issues.\nSo I have settled on six, two triads, 154 adding power and\ncomprehensiveness to the traditional list. The first triad is power, authority, and\nclarity, three qualities of Scripture as Godâs speech. The second, showing the\nimportance of Scripture to our decisions in life, is comprehensiveness, necessity,\nand sufficiency. In each triad, we may regard the first member as situational, the\nsecond normative, and the third existential, though I confess that the scheme\ngets st
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: retched a bit in the second triad.\nIn what follows, I shall discuss these qualities one by one, particularly as\nthey bear on ethics.\nPower\nGodâs word, according to Scripture, not only says things, but also does\nthings. Godâs word brought the universe into being (Gen. 1, Psm. 33:3-6, John\n1:3). It directs the course of nature (Ps. 147:15-18, 148:5-8, Heb. 1:3). No word\nof God will ever be void of power (Gen. 18:14, Luke 1:37). 155\n151\nNote the pattern of discussion, from general to particular: God as norm, the word of God as\nnorm, Scripture as norm, and (later) various parts and aspects of Scripture as norms.\n152\nOr, if you prefer a ten-dollar word, perspicuity.\n153\nSee again Cornelius Van Til, âNature and Scripture,â in N. B. Stonehouse and Paul Woolley,\neds., The Infallible Word (Phila.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1946, 1967), 263-301. Van Til also\nmakes use of this foursome in An Introduction to Systematic Theology (N. P.: Presbyterian and\nReformed, 1974), 133-136, and in A Christian Theory of Knowledge (N. P., Presbyterian and\nReformed, 1969), 41-71.\n154\nI should get some credit for resisting the temptation to make three.\n155\nThis is the literal translation of these two texts. 136\nWe see the power of the word also in the preaching of the prophets and\napostles. So Isaiah ascribes divine omnipotence to the word of prophecy (Isa.\n55:11). Paul says that the word of the gospel is âthe power of God for salvation to\neveryone who believesâ (Rom. 1:17). Elsewhere too, the New Testament speaks\nof the preached word as something living and growing (Acts 6:7, 12:24, 19:20,\nHeb. 4:12-13), accomplishing Godâs saving purpose (Acts 20:32, 1 Thess. 1:5,\n2:13). But the word is also powerful sometimes to harden hearts, (Isa. 6:9-13,\nMatt. 13:14-15, Acts 28:26-27).\nScripture is the place where we can find that preaching today. It is no less\npowerful in written form than it was on the lips of the apostles. The message of\nScripture still sanctifies, and sometimes it still hardens. The w
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ritten word restores\nthe soul and makes wise the simple (Ps. 19:7).\nWhen we go to Scripture for ethical guidance, it is important for us to\nremember that it is not only a text, an object of academic study. As we saw in\nChapter 9, it is the presence of God among us and therefore a book that cannot\nbe tamed. It will never leave us the same. If Godâs grace has gripped us, and we\nare ready to respond in faith and obedience, then Godâs word will be powerful to\nsanctify our hearts. But if we come to Scripture with skepticism or indifference, or\nif we regard it as a mere object of academic inquiry, that experience will affect us\nfor the worse.\nSo when we bring an ethical question to Scripture, we should not only\nexegete its passages carefully, but we should also be open to change. We\nshould say to God in our hearts, âspeak, Lord, for your servant hearsâ (1 Sam.\n3:9-10). We should go to Scripture for the power of the word, not only for its\ninstruction.\nAuthority\nSince Scripture is Godâs word, it has supreme authority, for God cannot\nspeak otherwise than with supreme authority.\nThe story of redemptive history is the story of the authoritative word of\nGod and manâs response to it. In Gen. 1:28, Adamâs first recorded experience is\nthe experience of hearing the word of God, that word defining his nature and\ntask. In Gen. 2:17, Godâs word utters the specific prohibition that will determine\nwhether Adam and Eve are faithful children of God. They fall by their disobedient\nresponse to that word, and the rest of the biblical story shows how God deals\nwith that fall.\nAll of Godâs redemptive promises and covenants come by word: to Adam,\nNoah, Abraham, Moses, David, the prophets, Jesus, the apostles. When God\ndelivers Israel from slavery in Egypt, he gives to them a written word, placed in\nthe holiest part of the sanctuary. That written word stands as the ultimate 137\nstandard of their covenant faithfulness. As we saw in Chapter 9, it has no less\nauthority than Godâs own voice, spoke
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n directly from heaven.\nBut Godâs people sin again against Godâs law and reject his loving\npromises. So prophets bring more words of God to condemn their sin, but also,\namazingly, to reiterate the promises. In the death of Christ, God both judges sin\nand fulfills his promise. Jesus dies in the place of sinners and gains for them\nGodâs forgiveness and eternal life. The story of Jesusâ redemption is the gospel,\nand that too is a word that comes with the supreme authority of God. Those who\nbelieve are saved; those who do not believe are condemned (John 3:18). Jesusâ\nwords are the words of eternal life (John 6:68).\nJesusâ words are the supreme test of discipleship (John 12:47-48). If we\nlove him, we will keep his commandments (John 14:15, 21, 23, 15:10, cf. 1 John\n2:3, 5:3, 2 John 6).\nJesus wrote no books, but by sending the Holy Spirit he empowered his\napostles to remember what he said (John 14:26), to learn all the truth, and to\nknow what will happen in the future (John 16:13). The apostles proclaim the\nauthoritative message of the gospel, demanding repentance and faith in Godâs\nname (Acts 2:38). The authority of their word is not limited to their oral preaching,\nbut also attaches to their written words (1 Cor. 14:37, 2 Thess. 3:14).\nThe written word, therefore, is the word of God himself, breathed out of his\nmouth (2 Tim. 3:16). As such, it cannot be anything less than supremely\nauthoritative. Such supreme authority certainly includes infallibility and inerrancy.\nIt places upon us an ethical obligation to believe everything Scripture says and to\nobey everything Scripture commands. 156\nClarity\nSince Scripture is Godâs word, it is his communication to us. In Scripture,\nGod speaks, not primarily to himself or to the angels, even to the winds and\nwaves, but to us human beings. God cannot fail to accomplish his purpose, so\nhis communication cannot be anything less than successful. If words are unclear,\nthey fail to communicate; they are not communication. So Scripture must be
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nclear.\nScripture represents that clarity by describing how near God is to us in his\nword. So the clarity of Scripture represents the existential perspective, the\nlordship attribute of divine presence. God says to Israel,\n156\nI shall, of course, have much more to say about the authority of Scripture in The Doctrine of\nthe Word of God (forthcoming). So I have intentionally kept this section short, even though the\nmatter is extremely important. 138\nFor this commandment that I command you today is not too hard\nfor you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who\nwill ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do\nit?' 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will go over\nthe sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?' 14 But the\nword is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you\ncan do it (Deut. 30:11-14).\nPaul paraphrases this passage to speak of the presence of Christ in the gospel:\nBut the righteousness based on faith says, \"Do not say in your heart, 'Who\nwill ascend into heaven?'\"(that is, to bring Christ down) 7 or \"'Who will\ndescend into the abyss?'\"(that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8 But\nwhat does it say? \"The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart\"\n(that is, the word of faith that we proclaim) (Rom. 10:4-8).\nIn these passages, the clarity of Godâs word engages our responsibility. If\nwe disobey or disbelieve, we cannot complain that God hasnât spoken clearly.\nLike Godâs word in nature (Rom. 1:20), the clarity of his word in the gospel\nimplies that we are without excuse. So the clarity of Godâs word has an ethical\nthrust.\nTo speak this way, however, raises problems. For it seems that in some\nrespects Scripture is obviously unclear. Many people claim that Scripture is too\nhard for them to understand, and that therefore it is unclear to them. And\nScripture itself notes certain kinds of unclarity:\n1. Scripture is unclear to the unregene
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rate. As I indicated earlier, the word\nhardens them, until the Spirit changes their heart (Isa. 6:9-10, 28:9-13, 1 Cor.\n2:6, 14-16, 14:21, 2 Cor. 3:14-16, 2 Pet. 3:16).\n2. Some doctrines of the faith are mysterious (Job 38-42, Rom. 11:33-36).\nAlthough we can speak of them, even regenerate people cannot understand\nthem in depth. This is the limitation of our finitude.\n3. All parts of Scripture are not equally clear. Peter says of Paulâs letters\nthat âThere are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the\nignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other\nScripturesâ (2 Pet. 3:16). Of course, the ignorant and unstable are themselves\nresponsible for twisting the teaching of Paulâs letters. But Peter also says that the\ninherent difficulty of Paulâs writing is a factor in the misunderstanding. So the\nWestminster Confession of Faith says, âAll things in Scripture are not alike plain\nin themselves, nor alike clear unto allâ (1.7). 139\nHow can we reconcile our confession of the clarity of Scripture with these\nsenses in which Scripture is unclear? The Confession answers this way:\nAll things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto\nall: yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and\nobserved for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some\nplace of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in\na due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient\nunderstanding of them (1.7)\nSo the Confession makes a distinction between those things ânecessary to be\nknown, believed, and observed for salvationâ and those that are not. The former\nmust be clear; the latter are not. And the Confession adds another limitation on\nthe clarity of Scripture: Many things in Scripture, even among those necessary\nfor salvation, cannot be understood by everybody without help. Understanding in\nthose cases comes through âa due use of the ordinary means.â Those means\npresumably inclu
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: de the normal educational resources by which we learn to\ninterpret language, and the special resources of the church such as preaching,\nteaching, and prayer. So if you are a regenerate person, and there is something\nin Scripture you donât understand, that is either because (1) the matter is not\nnecessary to salvation, or (2) you havenât made a due use of the ordinary means.\nAs to (1), I hesitate to try to distinguish in Scripture between what is\nnecessary to salvation and what is not. 157 Certainly the atonement is necessary\nto salvation in a way that the number of Davidâs troops is not. It seems that God\ncould have redeemed us as easily if David had 100 fewer troops, but he could\nnot have redeemed us without the atonement. But there are certainly some gray\nareas here, such as the sacraments.\nAnd there is another ambiguity. Does ânecessary to salvationâ mean that\nthe event is necessary to the accomplishment of salvation, or that our knowledge\nof the event is necessary for our own personal salvation? People often speak of\nthings necessary to salvation in the latter sense. But if infants can be regenerate\n(Luke 1:41, 44, WCF 10.3; cf. 2 Sam. 12:23), then a person can be saved without\nhaving any conscious propositional beliefs at all. So in this second sense, the\nnecessity for salvation, even of the doctrine of the atonement, is not an absolute\nnecessity. 158\n157\nTheologians have tried to make such distinctions also in regard to biblical inerrancy (teaching\nthat the Bible is inerrant only in matters necessary to salvation) and, as we shall see, to biblical\nsufficiency. But since salvation in Scripture is a historical process, and most of the Bible narrates\nthat history, it is very hard to draw lines in Scripture between what is necessary and not\nnecessary for salvation.\n158\nI do believe, however, that an adult of normal intelligence should not be admitted to church\nmembership unless he has some knowledge of the atonement, knowledge sufficient to make a\ncredible profession of tru
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: st in the finished work of Christ alone for salvation. 140\nThe Confession has a legitimate point, however, that is not affected by\nthese perplexities. Possibly, it could be better stated this way: that those\ndoctrines of Scripture most necessary to salvation (in the first sense) tend to be\nthe most clearly taught.\n(2) of course reflects the polemics of the Reformation period. The Roman\nCatholic Church withheld the Scriptures from the laity, thinking that the laity could\nnot possibly understand them without the guidance of the teaching magisterium\nof the church. The Confession does not deny the importance of teaching. It does\npresuppose that in its reference to ordinary means. But it says that our need of\nteaching does not justify withholding the Scriptures from ordinary people. For any\nadult of normal intelligence can understand the basics of the atonement, for\nexample, if he is willing to undergo some simple instruction.\nBut I would add a third reason why believers sometimes find Scripture to\nbe unclear. That is (3) that believers differ greatly from one another in their\ncallings and responsibilities. When a child is four years old, there is not much of\nthe Bible that he understands, even if he makes maximum use of the ordinary\nmeans of grace available to him. Even those doctrines like the atonement which\nare most easily described as necessary to salvation may be obscure to our four-\nyear-old believer. 159 How can it be that such a believer is baffled by the clear\nword of God? The answer should be obvious: A four-year-old child is not able to\nmaster the doctrine of the atonement, and he is not responsible to do that. He is\nnot called to that kind of reflection. He is called to obey his parents, a biblical\ncommand that he can understand well enough, and with their guidance to grow in\nhis knowledge of the Bible.\nI noted earlier that the clarity of Scripture has an ethical application. It\ntakes away excuses and establishes our responsibility to grasp what Godâs word\nsays. But a four-yea
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r-old child has much less responsibility of this sort, than, say,\na twenty-year-old with normal mental gifts.\nThat reflection suggests a principle: the clarity of Scripture is relative to\noneâs responsibilities. A fourteen-year-old has more responsibility than he did ten\nyears before. And he will find that Scripture is clear enough (with âa due use of\nthe ordinary meansâ) to advise him of those additional responsibilities. As he\nincreases in age, he will increase in responsibility. And if he listens diligently to\nGodâs word, he will find that Scripture becomes proportionately clearer to him.\nOf course, responsibility changes, not only with age, but also with\nvocation. Ordinarily, a pastor is responsible to understand Scripture at a deeper\nlevel than the steelworker in his congregation. The pastor has been given greater\nopportunities to study Scripture, and to whom much is given, from him much is\n159\nHe may well be able to sing, âJesus loves me, he who died, heavenâs gates to open wide.â But\nthe imputation of Christâs active righteousness, as distinguished from an infusion of\nrighteousness, will probably escape his understanding. 141\nrequired (Luke 12:48). The steelworker is responsible to know Scripture well\nenough to carry out his responsibilities; the pastor for his. Neither can claim as\nan excuse for dereliction that Scripture is unclear.\nScripture, then, is clear enough to make us responsible for carrying out\nour present duties to God. That principle seems to me to summarize what the\nBible implies about its own clarity.\nComprehensiveness\nNow let us move on to the second triad of attributes: comprehensiveness\n(situational), necessity (normative), and sufficiency (existential). As I indicated,\nthese express various kinds of importance that Scripture has for our lives,\nparticularly for our ethical decisions. The first triad focuses more on the actual\ncontent of Scripture. So the second triad shows how the first triad is important to\nus. In brief, then, the second triad
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: asserts that the first triad is comprehensive,\nnecessary, and sufficient. The power of the word is comprehensive, necessary,\nand sufficient; the same is true of the authority and clarity of the word.\nThe first attribute in the second triad is comprehensiveness, 160 which I\ndefine as the relevance of all Scripture to all of life. That is, Godâs truth is given to\nus in the whole Bible, not just parts of it, and that truth spreads out to cover all of\nhuman life. Since the focus is on the breadth of human life in all its contexts and\nenvironments, I link comprehensiveness with the situational perspective.\nThe first part of this definition is that all Scripture is our standard, not just\nparts of it. So, when tempted by Satan, Jesus quotes Deut. 8:3, âMan shall not\nlive by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of Godâ (Matt.\n4:4). And Paul says, âAll Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for\nteaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the\nman of God may be competent, equipped for every good workâ (2 Tim. 3:16-17).\nAll of it.\nThis concept is sometimes called tota scriptura, âby all of Scripture,â which\ncorrelates nicely with sola scriptura, âby Scripture alone,â which we will consider\nunder sufficiency.\nIf Scripture were a merely human book, then, of course, we could pick and\nchoose what we find ethically useful. But since Scripture is the word of God, we\nmay not do that. Rather, we must hunger for every word that falls from Godâs lips,\nas Peter said to Jesus, âLord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of\n160\nThanks to Noy Sparks, a student of mine, who suggested that I add comprehensiveness to\nnecessity and sufficiency. 142\neternal lifeâ (John 6:68). As with the writer of Psalm 1, the word should be our\nchief delight, so that we hate to see any part of it fall to the ground.\nDoes this mean that we are to treasure the genealogies, descriptions of\nrituals, mÃ©langes of apocalyptic symbols? Yes. This
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: does not mean that we need\nto pore over Leviticus, hunting for some kind of deep edification in each individual\nverse. Some texts do produce profound edification in a single verse, like John\n3:16. Others edify chiefly by our consideration of the larger context. Lev. 3:3-4\nmay not mean much to us today (though it meant a great deal to Aaron). But the\nOld Testament sacrificial system as a whole, of which Lev. 3:3-4 is a part, is\nimmensely important. For it tells us what kind of death our savior died.\nSo 2 Tim. 3:16-17 tells us that all Scripture is useful, and, specifically, that\nit is ethically useful. It is useful that we may be competent, equipped for every\ngood work. We shall later discuss various parts and aspects of Scripture that\nhave special importance for ethics: law, wisdom, and so on. But in that\ndiscussion we must be careful of losing the forest for the trees. Every particular\nstatute or ethical maxim in Scripture must be related to the whole. To cite an\nobvious example, in Joshua 5:2, God calls Joshua to circumcise all the males in\nIsrael. Does he call the church to do that today? No, because in 1 Cor. 7:19, Gal.\n5:6, and Gal. 6:15, Paul says that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matter.\nEvidently there has been a change in Godâs requirements between Josh. 5:2 and\n1 Cor. 7:19. The question before us, then, in making our own decisions, is not\nultimately what Joshua 5:2 says, but what the whole Bible says. All ethical\nquestions, in the final analysis, are questions about what the whole Bible saysâ\nto people about a situation.\nThe second part of the comprehensiveness of Scripture is that the Bible\nrefers to all aspects of human life. In 1 Cor. 10:31, Paul says, âSo, whether you\neat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.â That âwhateverâ\nincludes everything. Compare Rom. 14:23, âwhatever does not proceed from\nfaith is sin,â marking the âwhatever,â and Col. 3:17, âAnd whatever you do, in\nword or deed, do everything in the name of the
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God\nthe Father through him,â similarly. Another âwhateverâ occurs in Col. 3:24.\nThis second aspect of comprehensiveness is related to the first in this\nway: If only some passages or themes of Scripture were ethically useful, then\nScripture would apply only to those parts of human life treated in those passages\nor themes. Conversely, if Scripture only addressed some aspects of human life,\nwe would have to dismiss as irrelevant what it appears to say about other\nmatters. But in Scriptureâs view of its own mission, the whole word applies to the\nwhole world.\nGodâs Lordship is comprehensive. God demands that every aspect of life\nbe under his authority. Scripture also puts the same issue in terms of love: âYou\nshall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with 143\nall your mightâ (Deut. 6:4-5; cf. Mark 12:30). God demands our complete\nallegiance, obedience, and passion. So everything we do should be done to his\nglory.\nGodâs salvation is also comprehensive. âTherefore, if anyone is in Christ,\nhe is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has comeâ (2\nCor. 5:17). Regeneration is radical, affecting our thinking, will, emotions, actions.\nAnd redemption even stretches out to the cosmos:\nFor I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth\ncomparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation\nwaits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the\ncreation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who\nsubjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its\nbondage to decay and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of\nGod (Rom. 8:18-21).\nFor in him [Christ] all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and\nthrough him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in\nheaven, making peace by the blood of his cross (Col. 1:19-20).\nChristians sometimes say that the Bible is silent on this o
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r that matter:\ndiet, exercise, tax increases, nuclear proliferation, auto repair, the need for\nstoplights, etc. But although there are many subjects that Scripture does not\nexplicitly mention, it speaks of everything implicitly. It does that by providing\nprinciples for every ethical decision. Scripture doesnât mention abortion, for\nexample, but it forbids murder and treats unborn children as human persons. So\npro-life Christians rightly argue that the Bible prohibits abortion.\nOften those principles are very general, of course. Scripture does not tell\nme, even implicitly, what brand of soap to buy. But it tells me that when I buy\nsoap I should buy it to the glory of God. And by not prescribing a brand, it gives\nme the freedom to buy any of several brands. So even in this case, Scripture\nprescribes the difference between good and bad, defining the moral quality of my\naction.\nCertainly the comprehensiveness of Scripture rules out attempts to limit\nthe scope of biblical revelation. As I mentioned in the previous section, many\ntheologians have tried to limit the content or authority of Scripture to narrowly\nreligious matters (âmatters necessary to salvationâ). That would allow us to think\nautonomously in matters other than religion. So some have concluded that\nScripture is not inerrant, clear, or sufficient, in matters other than salvation,\nnarrowly conceived.\nBut Scripture will not be so confined. God is Lord over all, and salvation\nrenews all areas of thought and life. So Godâs authority extends to anything he 144\nchooses to speak to us about. Scripture, as his word, also has comprehensive\nauthority. If God wants to tell us in his word some things about the history of\nIsrael that contradict a scholarly consensus, he has the right to do so, and we\nshould stand with him against the scholars. Changing our thinking about such\nmatters may well be part of the comprehensive renewal that God brings to us in\nChrist. In any case, it is the word of our Lord, and he must be true, though every
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nman a liar (Rom. 3:4). So if God wants to tell us in Scripture that evolution is\nfalse, we should stand with him and against the consensus of scientists. 161 If God\nwants to tell us that abortion is wrong, we should stand with him and not with\ncontemporary opinion makers.\nSo to say that Scripture is comprehensive is to say that the whole word\napplies to the whole world. We need to take a broad view of ethics which\nencompasses the whole Bible and the whole creation.\nNecessity\nThe second member of our second triad is the necessity of Scripture. The\nthird will be the sufficiency of Scripture. Students of logic are familiar with the\ndistinction between necessary and sufficient conditions. If A is a necessary\ncondition of B, then B canât exist without A. If A is a sufficient condition of B, then\nA canât exist without B. To say that Scripture is necessary to the Christian life is\nto say that we canât live without it. To say that Scripture is sufficient is to say that\nScripture provides all the ultimate norms we need, so that if we donât have\nsufficient norms, it can only be because Scripture doesnât exist.\nAt this point we shall look at the necessity of Scripture. The WCF presents\nthe necessity of Scripture in the first section of its first chapter:\nAlthough the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do\nso far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men\nunexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God,\nand of his will, which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the\nLord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal himself, and to\ndeclare that his will unto his church; and afterwards, for the better\npreserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure\nestablishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the\nflesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly\nunto writing: which maketh the Holy Scripture to be most necessary; those\n161\nThis is not to say t
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hat Scripture is a âtextbook of science.â For the most part, Scripture does\nnot focus on the usual subject matter of the sciences. And, as we shall see in the next chapter,\nwe need both scriptural and extra-scriptural data to do the work of science. But Scripture does\nsay a number of things that are relevant to science, and what it says must be heeded. 145\nformer ways of God's revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.\n(1.1).\nThe Confession bases the necessity of Scripture on the inadequacies of\nnatural revelation and the insecurities of other forms of word-revelation. But I\nbelieve that the necessity of Scripture may also be derived from the very lordship\nof God in covenant with us.\nWhat does ânecessity of Scriptureâ mean? Simply that without Scripture\nwe have nothing: no Lord or Savior, no faith, hope, or love. Remember that the\nterm Lord refers to an absolute personal being who makes a covenant with a\npeople. That covenant takes the form of a written document. There is no such a\nthing as a wordless covenant, or a wordless Lord. The Lord is a person who\nissues commands to other persons called servants. Immediately after the\nconfession of Godâs Lordship in Deut. 6:4-5, God demands that the people of\nIsrael study and obey his words:\nHear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 You shall love the\nLORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your\nmight. 6 And these words that I command you today shall be on your\nheart. 7 You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of\nthem when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and\nwhen you lie down, and when you rise. 8 You shall bind them as a sign on\nyour hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. 9 You shall\nwrite them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.\nSimilarly, Jesus in Luke 6:46 asks, âWhy do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and not do\nwhat I tell you?â\nMany would like to confess Jesus as Lord, without confessing the Bible as\nhis
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: word. But that is to empty the very idea of lordship. Because the Lord is\npersonal, he speaks to his creatures. Because he is supremely authoritative, he\nspeaks to them with supreme authority. Because he is the covenant lord, he\nspeaks to us in a written document. Without that document, without Scripture, we\ncannot meaningfully say that God is our Lord.\nAs the Confessionâs statement indicates, God has also spoken directly to\nhuman beings, and he has spoken through the mouths of prophets and apostles.\nBut written revelation has been since Moses the primary means of covenant\ngovernance. And today, our only access to Godâs direct speech and his words\nthrough the prophets is through Scripture. So without Scripture we have no Lord.\nSimilarly, without Scripture we have no salvation. For âsalvation belongs to\nthe Lordâ (Jonah 2:9). Salvation in all its dimensions is the sovereign work of the\nLord. Our access to it is by the gospel, and the gospel is part of Scripture. Paul\nsays, âSo faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christâ 146\n(Rom. 10:17). Without that word, then, we are without hope. Consider again\nPeterâs cry, âLord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal lifeâ\n(John 6:68).\nThe Lordâs promise of salvation to those who believe is a promise of\nScripture. If Scripture is not Godâs word, we have no reason to believe it. For a\npromise of salvation must necessarily come from God himself. If God doesnât\nwarrant it, there is no reason to believe it. The promise is warranted only if it is a\nword from God. If the Bible is not the word of God, then there is no word of God,\nand there is no promise or gospel.\nSince Scripture is necessary to the lordship relation itself (the covenant),\nand since it is necessary for salvation, it is necessary for the Christian life. In Part\n2 I argued that unless an absolute-personal God has spoken to us, there is no\nbasis for ethics. The Bible is the only transcript of Godâs words, and hence it is\nthe only so
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: urce of absolute ethical norms.\nAs the Confession says, it is the case that natural revelation is also a\nsource of Godâs norms, of ethical content. But, as Paul says in Rom. 1, apart\nfrom grace, sinners repress and distort that revelation, fleeing its implications. So\nagain we must heed Calvin who said that we need the spectacles of Scripture to\nsee natural revelation aright.\nThe remaining attribute of Scripture that I wish to discuss is its sufficiency.\nBut I have so much to say on that subject that I will have to give sufficiency a\nchapter to itself. 147\nChapter 11: The Sufficiency of Scripture\nThe last of the six attributes of Scripture is sufficiency, sometimes called\nsola Scriptura, âby Scripture alone.â The sufficiency of Scripture, particularly as\napplied to ethics, is a doctrine of immense importance and a doctrine frequently\nmisunderstood. So I will discuss it at greater length than the other attributes. My\nbasic definition: Scripture contains all the divine words needed for any aspect of\nhuman life.\nConfessional Formulation\nThe WCF formulates the doctrine thus:\nThe whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his\nown glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in\nScripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from\nScripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new\nrevelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless, we\nacknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary\nfor the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word:\nand that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God,\nand government of the church, common to human actions and societies,\nwhich are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence,\naccording to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be\nobserved. (1.6)\nBelow a commentary on this statement, phrase by phrase:\n1. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own\nglory,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: man's salvation, faith and life. The sufficiency of Scripture is\ncomprehensive, in the way that I presented the doctrine of comprehensiveness in\nChapter 10. Everything we need to know for Godâs glory is in the Bible. The\nsame is true for our own âsalvation, faith and life.â The Confession does not\nunderstand these terms in the narrow ways that I argued against in Chapter 10. It\nsees salvation as comprehensive, as we can tell from the rest of the document.\nSimilarly, âfaith and lifeâ is a comprehensive pair of concepts. The WSC 162 says,\nâThe Scriptures principally teach what man is to believe concerning God, and\nwhat duty God requires of man.â So it is reasonable to think that âfaith and lifeâ in\nWCF 1.6 refers to everything we are to believe and do, the whole content of\nScripture applied to the whole content of the Christian life.\n162\nQ and A 3. 148\nChristians sometimes say that Scripture is sufficient for religion, or\npreaching, or theology, but not for auto-repairs, plumbing, animal husbandry\ndentistry, etc. And of course many argue that it is not sufficient for science,\nphilosophy, or even ethics. That is to miss an important point. Certainly Scripture\ncontains more specific information relevant to theology than to dentistry. But\nsufficiency in the present context is not sufficiency of specific information but\nsufficiency of divine words. Scripture contains divine words sufficient for all of life.\nIt has all the divine words that the plumber needs, and all the divine words that\nthe theologian needs. So it is just as sufficient for plumbing as it is for theology.\nAnd in that sense it is sufficient for science and ethics as well.\n2. is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary\nconsequence may be deduced from Scripture. The sufficient content of Scripture\nincludes, not only its explicit teaching, but also what may be logically deduced\nfrom it. To be sure, logical deduction is a human activity, and it is fallible, as are\nall human activities. So
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: when someone tries to deduce something from Scripture,\nhe may err. 163 But the WCF speaks of not just any attempt to deduce conclusions\nfrom Scripture, but of âgood and necessary consequence.â That phrase refers to\nlogic done right, ideal logic. When deductive logic is done right, the conclusion of\na syllogism does not add to its premises. It rather brings out content already\nthere. In the classic syllogism, âAll men are mortal; Socrates is a man; therefore\nSocrates is mortal,â the conclusion doesnât tell you anything you couldnât find out\nfrom the premises themselves. What the syllogism does is to make the implicit\ncontent explicit. Logic is a hermeneutical tool, 164 a device for bringing out\nmeaning that is already there in the text. So (a) the âcontent of Scriptureâ\nincludes all the logical implications of Scripture, (b) The logical implications of\nScripture have the same authority as Scripture, and (c) logical deductions from\nScripture do not add anything to Scripture.\n3. unto which nothing at any time is to be added. Covenant documents in\nthe ancient near east often contained an âinscriptional curse,â a prohibition\nagainst adding to or subtracting from the document. Scripture, our covenant\ndocument, also contains such language, in Deut. 4:2, 12:32, Prov. 30:6, Rev.\n22:18-19; cf. Josh. 1:7. These passages do not forbid seeking information\noutside of Scripture. Rather, they insist that we will never need any divine words\nin addition to Godâs written words, words that are available to us only in the Bible.\n163\nThis liability to error should caution us to be careful in the work of logical deduction. Certainly it\nmust be done with hermeneutical wisdom. âAll men have sinned (Rom. 3:23), Jesus is a man (1\nTim. 2:5), therefore Jesus sinnedâ may seem like a valid syllogism, but of course it presupposes a\ndefective Christology. (Thanks to Richard Pratt for this example.) So the right use of logic\ndepends on many other kinds of skill and knowledge. On the other hand, t
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he possibility of error\nshould not lead us to abandon logical deduction. For error is not found only in logic, but also in\nevery other activity by which we seek to understand Scripture: textual criticism, translation,\ninterpretation, theology, preaching, and individual understanding. If our goal is to avoid making\nany error at all, we should not only avoid logic, but we should avoid all these other activities as\nwell. But that in itself would be an error of another kind.\n164\nSee DKG, 242-301. 149\nThat means as well that we should never place any human words on the same\nlevel of authority as those in Scripture. That would be, in effect, adding to Godâs\nwords.\n4. whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Adding to\nGodâs words can be done either by claiming falsely to have new words from God,\nor by regarding human tradition on the same level of authority as Godâs word.\nThe Confession ascribes these errors to its two main opponents respectively: the\nenthusiasts and the Roman Catholics. The enthusiasts were largely Anabaptists,\nwho held views similar to some modern charismatics. The Roman Catholics\ndefended their tradition as a source of revelation equal to the Bible. Roman\nCatholic theology has since changed its formulations somewhat, 165 but it still\nregards tradition as highly as it regards Scripture. Since the writing of the\nConfession, it has become important also for Protestants to guard their respect\nfor their own traditions, so that it doesnât compete with the unique respect due to\nScripture. 166\n5. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of\nGod to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed\nin the Word: To say that Scripture is sufficient is not to deny that other things may\nalso be necessary. We should always remember that the sufficiency of Scripture\nis a sufficiency of divine words. It is a sufficient source of such words. But we\nneed more than divine words if we are to be saved and to live hol
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: y lives. In\nparticular, we need the Spirit to illumine the word, if we are to understand it. So\nno one should object that the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture leaves no\nplace for the Holy Spirit.\n6. and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God,\nand government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which\nare to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the\ngeneral rules of the Word, which are always to be observed. I shall say more\nabout these âcircumstancesâ when I discuss the second commandment and the\nregulative principle of worship. For now, let us note that the sufficiency of\nScripture does not rule out the use of natural revelation (the âlight of natureâ) and\nhuman reasoning (âChristian prudenceâ) 167 in our decisions, even when those\ndecisions concern the worship and government of the church.\nThe reason, of course, is that Scripture doesnât speak specifically to every\ndetail of human life, even of life in the church. We have seen that in one sense\nScripture speaks of everything, for its principles are broad enough to cover all\n165\nToday, Roman Catholic theologians tend to speak, not of âtwo sourcesâ of revelation (Scripture\nand tradition), but of âone source,â the stream of tradition of which Scripture is a part. Neither of\nthese views, however, are compatible with the sufficiency of Scripture.\n166\nSee my articles, âSola Scriptura in Theological Method,â in my Contemporary Worship Music\n(Phillipsburg: P&R, 1997) and âTraditionalism,â available at http://reformedperspectives.org, under\nâpractical theology,â in two parts.\n167\nNote the triad: Scripture, the light of nature, Christian prudence. 150\nhuman actions. The principle of 1 Cor. 10:31, do all to the glory of God, speaks to\nevery human activity and grades every human act as right or wrong.\nBut it is often difficult to determine in specific terms what actions will and\nwill not bring glory to God. At that point, natural
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: revelation and Christian\nprudence give us important guidance. For example, Scripture doesnât mention\nabortion. But natural revelation tells us that abortion is a procedure that takes\ninnocent life. That shows us that the Bibleâs prohibition of murder is relevant to\nthe matter of abortion.\nNote that in this example, as the Confession says, there are âgeneral rules\nof the wordâ that are relevant to our decision. There are always general rules of\nthe word relevant to any human decision, as we have seen, at least the rule of 1\nCor. 10:31. So to use the data of natural revelation in this way, though it is extra-\nscriptural, is not to add to Scripture in the sense of Deut. 4:2. To do this is not to\nadd more divine words. It is, rather, a means of determining how the sufficient\nword of Scripture should be applied to a specific situation.\nThe fact that Scripture doesnât mention abortion, or nuclear war, or\nfinancial disclosure, or parking meters, therefore, never means that we may\nabandon Scripture in considering these issues. There is always a principle of\nScripture that is relevant. The only question is, specifically how does that\nprinciple apply? Recourse to natural revelation and human prudence is an\nattempt to answer that question.\nBiblical Basis\nBut is this confessional doctrine itself biblical? I believe it is. As weâve\nseen, the covenant document contains an inscriptional curse, forbidding adding\nand subtracting. This is to say that God alone is to rule his people, and he will not\nshare that rule with anyone else. If a human being presumes to add his own word\nto a book of divinely authoritative words, he thereby claims that his words have\nthe authority of God himself. He claims in effect that he shares Godâs throne.\nNevertheless, through the history of Israel some did have the audacity to\nset their words alongside Godâs. False prophets claimed to speak in Godâs name,\nwhen God had not spoken to them (1 Kings 13:18, 22:5-12), a crime that\ndeserved the death penalty (De
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ut. 18:20). And the people worshiped according\nto human commandments rather than Godâs:\nAnd the Lord said: \"Because this people draw near with their mouth\nand honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their\nfear of me is a commandment taught by men, 14 therefore, behold, I will\nagain do wonderful things with this people, with wonder upon wonder; and 151\nthe wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the discernment of their\ndiscerning men shall be hidden.\" (Isa. 29:13-14)\nJesus applies Isaiahâs words to the Pharisees, and adds, âYou leave the\ncommandment of God and hold to the tradition of menâ (Mark 7:8). And it is likely\nthat some people in Paulâs time wrote letters forged in Paulâs name, claiming his\nauthority for their own ideas (2 Thess. 2:2).\nGodâs own representatives, however, fearlessly set Godâs word against all\nmerely human viewpoints. Think of Moses before Pharaoh, Elijah before Ahab,\nIsaiah before Ahaz, Jonah before Nineveh, Paul before Agrippa, Felix, and\nFestus. Consider Jesus who spoke with the same boldness before the\nPharisees, Sadducees, Scribes, Herod, and Pilate. Those who are armed with\nGodâs word, the sword of the Spirit, are free from the tyranny of human opinion!\nSo Paul, in his famous statement about biblical inspiration, speaks of\nsufficiency as well:\nAll Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for\nreproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of\nGod may be competent, equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16-17)\nâEveryâ refers to sufficiency.\nGeneral and Particular Sufficiency\nWe should notice that 2 Tim. 3:16-17 ascribes sufficiency to the Old\nTestament. That is an interesting point, that the Old Testament is actually a\nsufficient moral guide for New Testament Christians. Why, then, does God give\nus the New Testament as well? That question leads to a distinction between two\nkinds of sufficiency:\n1. General Sufficiency\nAt any point of redemptive history, th
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e revelation given at that time is\nsufficient. After Adam and Eve sinned, God revealed to them how they would be\npunished, and he also, remarkably, revealed to them the coming of a deliverer, a\nseed of the woman, who would crush the serpentâs head (Gen. 3:15). This\nrevelation, extensive as it is, is not nearly as extensive as the revelation available\nto us in the completed biblical canon. Was this revelation sufficient for them?\nYes, it was. Had they failed to trust this revelation, they could not have used as\nan excuse that it wasnât full enough. In this revelation, they had all the divine\nwords they needed to have. So that revelation was sufficient. 152\nNevertheless, God added to that revelation, by speaking to Noah,\nAbraham, and others. Why did he add to a revelation that was already sufficient?\nBecause Noah needed to know more than Adam did. The history of redemption\nis progressive. In Noahâs time, God planned to judge the world by a flood, and\nNoah had to know that. The Adamic revelation was sufficient for Adam, but not\nfor Noah.\nRecall the principle I suggested in Chapter 10 regarding the clarity of\nScripture: âScripture is clear enough to make us responsible for carrying out our\npresent duties to God.â Sufficiency should be understood the same way. Godâs\nrevelation to Adam was sufficient for him to carry out his present duties, but Noah\nneeded more, for he had additional duties. He needed more in order to do Godâs\nwill in his time.\nSimilarly, the revelation of the Old Testament was sufficient for the first\ngeneration of Christians. But God graciously provided them with much more,\nincluding the letters of Paul. In Godâs judgment these were necessary for the\nongoing life of the young church, and when they were collected and distributed\nthe believers recognized them as Godâs word. Once the New Testament began\nto function as Godâs word in the church, the Old Testament was no longer\nsufficient in itself, but it continued to function as part of the canon which was,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: as\na whole, sufficient.\nThat consideration raises the question of whether God will add still more\nrevelation to the canon. Sufficiency in itself, what I am calling âgeneral\nsufficiency,â does not preclude divine additions to Scripture, though it does\npreclude mere human additions.\n2. Particular Sufficiency\nBut there is an additional principle that should lead us not to expect any\nmore divine words until the return of Christ. That is the finality of Christâs\nredemption. When redemption is final, revelation is also final.\nHeb. 1:1-4 draws this parallel:\nLong ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by\nthe prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,\nwhom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created\nthe world. 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of\nhis nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After\nmaking purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty\non high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has\ninherited is more excellent than theirs. 153\nVerse 3 speaks of Jesusâ purification for sins as final, for when finished he sits\ndown at Godâs right hand. Verse 2 speaks of Godâs speech through his Son as\nfinal, in comparison with the âmany times and many waysâ of the prophetic\nrevelation. Note the past tense âhas spoken.â The revelation of the Old\nTestament is continuous, that of the Son once-for-all. Nothing can be added to\nhis redemptive work, and nothing can be added to the revelation of that\nredemptive work.\nHeb. 2:1-4 also contrasts the revelation of the old covenant with that of the\nnew:\nTherefore we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, lest\nwe drift away from it. 2 For since the message declared by angels proved\nto be reliable and every transgression or disobedience received a just\nretribution, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It\nwas declared at first by the Lord, and
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: it was attested to us by those who\nheard, 4 while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various\nmiracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.\nThe âmessage declared by angelsâ is, of course, the Mosaic law. The âgreat\nsalvationâ in Christ is something far greater. The message of this salvation was\ndeclared first by Christ, then by the apostles (âthose who heardâ) and then by\nGod himself, through signs and wonders. From the writerâs standpoint, these\ndeclarations are all in the past tense. Even though part of that message (at least\nthe Letter to the Hebrews) is still being written, the bulk of it has already been\ncompleted.\nScripture is Godâs testimony to the redemption he has accomplished for\nus. Once that redemption is finished, and the apostolic testimony to it is finished,\nthe Scriptures are complete, and we should expect no more additions to them.\nThe same conclusion follows from 2 Pet. 1:3-11. There, Peter notes that\nJesusâ âdivine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness,\nthrough the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellenceâ\n(verse 3). All things that pertain to life and godliness, therefore, come from Jesusâ\nredemption. After that redemption, then, evidently, there is nothing more that\ncould contribute anything to our spiritual life and godliness. Peter then mentions\nvarious qualities that we receive through Jesus, concluding, âFor in this way there\nwill be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord\nand Savior Jesus Christâ (verse 11). This is the language of sufficiency. The\nvirtues that come from redemption are sufficient for us to enter the final kingdom.\nNothing more is needed.\nSo within the concept of sufficiency, I distinguish between âgeneralâ and\nâparticularâ sufficiency. As we saw earlier, the general sufficiency of Scripture\nexcludes human additions, but is compatible with later additions by God himself. 154\nThis is
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the sense in which the Old Testament is sufficient according to 2 Tim.\n3:16-17. The particular sufficiency of Scripture is the sufficiency of the present\ncanon to present Christ and all of his resources. God himself will not add to the\nwork of Christ, and so we should not expect him to add to the message of Christ.\nThe Use of Extra-Biblical Data\nIf we remember that the sufficiency of Scripture is a sufficiency of divine\nwords, that will help us to understand the role of extra-biblical data, both in ethics\nand theology. People sometimes misunderstand the doctrine of sufficiency by\nthinking that it excludes the use of any extra-biblical information in reaching\nethical conclusions. But if we exclude the use of extra-biblical information, then\nethical reflection is next to impossible.\nScripture itself recognizes this point. As I said earlier, the inscriptional\ncurses do not forbid seeking extra-biblical information. Rather, they forbid us to\nequate extra-biblical information with divine words. Scripture itself requires us to\ncorrelate what it says with general revelation. When God told Adam to abstain\nfrom the forbidden fruit, he assumed that Adam already had general knowledge,\nsufficient to apply that command to the trees that he could see and touch. God\ndidnât need to tell Adam what a tree was, how to distinguish fruits from leaves,\nwhat it meant to eat. These things were natural knowledge. So God expected\nAdam to correlate the specific divine prohibition concerning one tree to his\nnatural knowledge of the trees in the garden. This is theology as application:\napplying Godâs word to our circumstances.\nThe same is true for all divine commands in Scripture. When God tells\nIsrael to honor their fathers and mothers, he does not bother to define âfatherâ\nand âmotherâ and to set forth an exhaustive list of things that may honor or\ndishonor them. Rather, God assumes that Israel has some general knowledge of\nfamily life, and he expects them to apply his command to that knowledge.\nJesus
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rebukes the Pharisees, not because they had no knowledge of the\nbiblical text, but because they failed to apply that knowledge to the things that\nhappened in their own experience. In Matt. 16:2-3, he says,\nWhen it is evening, you say, 'It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.' 3\nAnd in the morning, 'It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and\nthreatening.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you\ncannot interpret the signs of the times.\nThe chief deficiency in their application of Scripture was their failure to see Jesus\nas the promised Messiah, the central theme of the Hebrew Bible. In John 5:39-\n40, Jesus says, 155\nYou search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have\neternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, 40 yet you refuse to\ncome to me that you may have life.\nAgainst the Sadducees, who deny the Resurrection, Jesus quotes an Old\nTestament text that at first glance doesnât seem to speak to the point:\n31\nAnd as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was\nsaid to you by God: 32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac,\nand the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.\" 33 And\nwhen the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching. (Matt.\n22:31-33).\nThat text (Ex. 3:6) was a famous one; every Jewish biblical scholar knew it well.\nThe Sadduceesâ problem was not that they didnât know the text, but that they\nwere unable or unwilling to apply it to the current discussion of resurrection.\nJesus teaches them that to the extent that one cannot apply Scripture he is\nactually ignorant of Scripture. Knowing Scripture cannot be separated from\nknowing its applications. 168 But that is to say that one cannot know Scripture\nwithout understanding how it applies to extra-biblical data. Here, one cannot\nrightly understand the normative without the situational.\nSo Scripture itself says that Scripture has an ethical purpose. The right\nway to study Scripture is to apply it to the issues that
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: face us in our own time. In\nRom. 15:4, Paul says,\nFor whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction,\nthat through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures\nwe might have hope.\nUnlike any other ancient book, Scripture is written with the purpose of instructing\nthose who would live many centuries into the future, to give them instruction,\nendurance, encouragement, and hope. Its own authors (divine and human)\nintended for it to guide us in our ethical and spiritual struggles. Similarly, the\nfamiliar passage in 2 Tim. 3:16-17,\nAll Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for\nreproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of\nGod may be competent, equipped for every good work.\nIndicates, not only that Scripture is Godâs word, but also that it has a practical\nand ethical purpose. Both this passage and the famous passage 2 Pet. 1:19-21\nare written by aged apostles, concerned about false teaching likely to enter the\nchurch after their deaths (2 Tim. 3:1-9, 2 Pet. 2:1-22). Paul and Peter agree that\n168\nSee DKG, 81-85, 95-98. 156\nScripture contains the resources necessary to distinguish true from false\nteachers, both in their doctrine and in their character. (The ethics of the false\nteachers is a main emphasis of these contexts.) But to use Scripture that way is,\nof course, to apply it to the situations the people encounter.\nThe Logic of Application\nMuch ethical reasoning can be expressed in the form of moral syllogisms.\nIn a moral syllogism, the first premise states a principle, the second a fact to\nwhich the principle applies. Then the conclusion states the application. 169 We\nmight describe the first premise as normative, the second as situational, and the\nconclusion as existential, since it brings the principle to bear on our own ethical\ndecision. For example,\n1. Stealing is wrong. (Normative premise)\n2. Embezzling is stealing. (Situational premise)\nTherefore, embezzling is wrong. (Existential concl
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: usion)\nIn Christian ethics, the normative premise ultimately comes from God, for only he\nhas the authority to define ethical norms for human beings. In principle, this\npremise may come from any kind of divine revelation. But we must remember the\nprimacy of Scripture, which governs our understanding and interpretation of\ngeneral and existential revelation. Our interpretations of general and existential\nrevelation must be tested by Scripture. If someone claims that God wants me,\nsay, to move to Paris, he needs to show me from Scripture that this is indeed\nGodâs will. But then the ultimate norm is Scripture, not general or existential\nrevelation by itself.\nSo we may formulate the sufficiency of Scripture for ethics as follows:\nScripture is sufficient to provide all the ultimate norms, all the normative\npremises, that we need to make any ethical decision. It contains all the divine\nwords we need to make our ethical decisions, and all ultimate ethical norms\ncome from the mouth of God.\nThen what use is general revelation? (1) It is important, especially, in\nfurnishing situational premises. Of course the Bible too furnishes situational\npremises, as in\n1. Adultery is wrong. (Ex. 20:14)\n2. Lust is adultery. (Matt. 5:27-28)\n169\nWithin this general structure, of course, there are usually further complications: subsidiary\narguments to establish the normative premise and the situational premise. So ethical arguments\nin practice have many premises and many twists and turns of logic. In the present discussion, I\nam presenting a general form that summarizes many arguments about ethics. 157\nTherefore, lust is wrong.\nBut most of the time we need extra-biblical data to formulate the situation\nwe are seeking to address, as in the following example:\n1. Stealing is wrong.\n2. Cheating on your income tax is stealing.\nTherefore, cheating on your income tax is wrong.\nThe Bible, of course, does not mention the US income tax, though it does\nmention taxes in general. What it says about taxes in general is re
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: levant, of\ncourse. It is among the âgeneral rules of the Wordâ mentioned in the Confessionâs\nstatement. But in order to evaluate premise 2, we need to know not only these\nbiblical principles, but also some facts not mentioned in Scripture that tell us what\nthe income tax is. Here is an even more obvious example:\n1. Sabbath-breaking is wrong.\n2. Operating a tanning salon on Sunday is Sabbath-breaking.\nTherefore, operating a tanning salon on Sunday is wrong.\nTo establish premise 2, of course, we need to know some general principles of\nScripture about the Sabbath. But Scripture doesnât mention tanning salons. So\nwe need some specific information from outside the Bible to warrant the second\npremise.\nOf course, to go âoutside the Bibleâ is not to go outside of Godâs\nrevelation. It is rather to move from the sphere of special revelation to the sphere\nof general revelation. So the whole syllogism utilizes general revelation, illumined\nand evaluated by special revelation.\n(2) But it should also be evident that even the normative premises of\nethical syllogisms use extra-biblical data at some point. For all our use of\nScripture depends on our knowledge of extra-biblical data. Scripture contains no\nlessons in Hebrew or Greek grammar. To learn that, we must study extra-biblical\ninformation. Similarly, the other means that enable us to use Scripture, such as\ntextual criticism, text editing, translation, publication, teaching, preaching,\nconcordances, commentaries, etc. all depend on extra-biblical data. So in one\nsense even the first premises of moral syllogisms, the normative premises,\ndepend on extra-biblical knowledge. So without extra-biblical premises, without\ngeneral revelation, we cannot use Scripture at all. But Scripture is emphatically a\nbook to be used.\nNone of those considerations detracts from the primacy of Scripture as we\nhave described it. Once we have a settled conviction of what Scripture teaches,\nthat conviction must prevail over all other sources of knowledge. So
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Scripture\nmust govern even the sciences that are used to analyze it: textual criticism, 158\nhermeneutics, etc. These sciences enable us to understand Scripture, but they\nmust themselves be carried on in accord with Scripture. There is a hermeneutical\ncircle here that cannot be avoided, and that circle shows how the normative and\nsituational perspectives are interdependent. But in the hierarchy of norms,\nScripture must remain primary.\nAdiaphora\nThe Greek word adiaphora means literally âthings indifferent,â that is,\nthings that make no difference. In theological ethics people have sometimes\nused it to designate a class of actions that are neither right nor wrong, a third\ncategory of actions in addition to right and wrong. Some people have referred to\neating meat and drinking wine (Rom. 14:21), for example, as adiaphora.\nThe question of adiaphora relates to the sufficiency of Scripture in this\nway: Scripture commands certain actions, and these are right. Scripture forbids\ncertain actions, and these are wrong. But it seems as though there are many\nactions that Scripture neither commands nor forbids, such as eating meat and\ndrinking wine. Scripture is sufficient to determine what is right and wrong. So\nwhen it is silent, neither category can apply. So, the argument goes, there must\nbe a third category, the adiaphora.\nHistorically, this concept has been used most frequently in the area of\nworship. Luther applied the term to certain Roman Catholic forms of worship,\nwhich he thought were neither commanded nor forbidden by Scripture, and which\nthe believer could therefore observe or not in good conscience. The Puritans and\nScots Presbyterians, however, denied the existence of adiaphora in worship. For\nthem, what God commands in worship is right; anything else is forbidden. There\nis no middle ground. 170\nI too reject the concept of adiaphora, not only in worship, but in ethics\ngenerally. My reasons, however, differ from those of the Puritans and Scots.\nFirst, let us be clear that there are
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: no things (in the sense of material\nobjects in the world) that are indifferent in any meaningful way, even though the\nliteral meaning of the Greek term adiaphora is âthings indifferent.â People\nsometimes say that, for example, heroin is bad, peaches are good, but wine is\nindifferent. Remember (a) that such statements refer to non-moral goodness, not\nmoral goodness as I defined it in Chapter 2. And (b) Scripture itself tells us that in\nthat non-moral sense everything God created is good, not bad or indifferent\n(Gen. 1:31, 1 Tim. 4:4). I would judge from these passages that even heroin has\na good use and is part of Godâs good creation. In any case, these passages\nleave no room, in the world of material things, for adiaphora.\n170\nI shall discuss this issue in more detail when we consider the Second Commandment. 159\nSo those who have used the concept have generally applied it to human\nactions, rather than material things. So applied, the concept deals with ethical,\nrather than nonethical, goodness and badness. But are there any human actions\nthat are ethically indifferent? When Paul says, âso, whether you eat or drink, or\nwhatever you do, do all to the glory of Godâ (1 Cor. 10:31), he implies that\neverything we do either brings glory to God or it does not. 171 The âwhateverâ is\nuniversal. It includes our eating and drinking, sleeping, waking, bathing, working,\nmarrying, entertaining ourselves, indeed every human activity. When we glorify\nGod we are doing right, and when we do not glorify God we are doing wrong.\nHere there is no room for any third category that we might call âadiaphora.â That\nis to say that no human action is indifferent to God.\nWhy, then, has the concept of adiaphora become so popular in some\ncircles? I think because it has been confused with other concepts that are\nlegitimate. These are:\n1. Choices between two or more goods, rather than between good and\nevil. Certainly there are many choices of this kind in human life. But when we\nmake a choice among goo
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ds, our choice is good, not adiaphora.\n2. Acts concerning which Scripture is silent. Now as we have seen there\nare no human actions concerning which Scripture is absolutely silent. For 1 Cor.\n10:31 and similar passages speak of everything. But there are human actions\nconcerning which Scripture does not speak specifically. For example, Scripture\ndoesnât mention specifically my typing on a computer. 1 Cor. 10:31 addresses\nthis action generally and implicitly, but not specifically. So we might be tempted\nto think that specific actions of this kind are adiaphora. But that is a very\nmisleading way to speak. My typing on the computer is not ethically indifferent. It\nis either ethically good or ethically bad, for it is either to Godâs glory or not.\n3. Acts neither commanded not forbidden in Scripture. This is close to the\nprevious category. But there are some acts that are mentioned in Scripture, and\nmentioned specifically, that are neither commanded nor forbidden. Again an\nexample would be eating meat and drinking wine in Rom. 14:21. We may be\ntempted to say that such actions are adiaphora. But recall from Chapter 2 that\nactions neither forbidden nor commanded are permitted (1 Cor. 7:6). What God\npermits us to do is good. So actions in this category are good, not bad or\nindifferent.\n4. Acts that are neither right nor wrong in themselves, but are right or\nwrong in specific circumstances. Eating ice cream, for example, can be right in\nsome circumstances, wrong in others. Drinking a glass of wine may be a good\nthing to do in many circumstances, but not if one has already had ten glasses.\nAre such actions adiaphora? I would say not. Eating ice cream is not right or\n171\nCompare other passages we cited earlier that also emphasize the universality of our\nresponsibility to God: Rom. 14:23, Col. 3:17 and 23. 160\nwrong âin itself;â but no human action is ever performed âin itself.â It is always\nperformed in one set of circumstances or another. Any specific act of eating ice\ncream will alwa
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ys be either right or wrong, never adiaphora. Same for any other\nact that is neither right nor wrong âin itself.â 172\nThe Strong and the Weak\nThose defending the concept of adiaphora often mention Paulâs\ndiscussions of the strong and the weak in Rom. 14:1-15:13 and 1 Cor. 8-10. The\nRoman and Corinthian churches were divided by controversies over\nvegetarianism (Rom. 14:2), the observing of special days (Rom. 14:5), 173 and the\neating of food offered to idols (1 Cor. 8:1). The argument goes that these matters\nare adiaphora: it is a matter of indifference whether someone abstains from\nmeat, or observes holidays, or eats food offered to idols.\nIn my view, it is very misleading to describe these issues as adiaphora.\nThe passages make clear that they are not matters of indifference. Rather, the\nchoices that we make in these areas are either right or wrong. There is no middle\nground.\nThe passages contrast two groups of Christians, whom Paul describes as\nâstrongâ and âweak.â In 1 Cor., he describes the weak as those who âlack\nknowledgeâ (1 Cor. 8:1, 7, 10-11) and have a âweak conscienceâ (verses 7, 9, 10-\n12). These groups were opponents, and on the specific issues of the\ncontroversy, Paul sides with the strong (Rom. 15:1), though he criticizes their\nbehavior. Some readers are inclined to assume that God always favors those\nwho have the most religious scruples. But in these passages, to the surprise of\nsuch readers, the strong are the ones without the scruples, the unscrupulous\nones. The strong are the ones who eat meat, who think that observing special\ndays is unnecessary, and who have no problem eating food offered to idols. The\nweak are the ones whose consciences are troubled by such practices.\nBoth groups are persuaded of the rightness of their positions. As Paul\nsays, each carries out his practice âin honor of the Lordâ (Rom. 14:6). And Paul\nhonors the Christian professions of each. Although he disagrees with the weak,\n172\nIf someone prefers to use the word âa
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: diaphoraâ to refer to actions that are neither right nor\nwrong in themselves, I will not protest too much. Definitions are never a matter of life or death. Of\ncourse, in this case the term will refer only to general categories of these actions, not to specific\nexamples of these categories. But I think that the use of this term always connotes the thought of\nmoral neutrality, which is, in a Christian understanding, divine indifference. But God is never\nindifferent to what we do, as is plain from 1 Cor. 10:31 and similar texts. So I think even the most\ndefensible uses of the term, such as this one, tend to mislead.\n173\nIn my later discussion of the Fourth Commandment, I shall consider the implications of this\npassage for the keeping of the weekly Sabbath. 161\nhe describes them as brothers (verse 15) and as those âfor whom Christ diedâ\n(verse 15; cf. 1 Cor. 8:11).\nThis division creates three problems in the churches, and it is important to\nkeep these distinct in our minds:\n1. The very fact that one group in the church is spiritually weak or lacks\nknowledge is a problem. âWeakâ and âignorantâ are terms of reproach. People\nwho are spiritually weak and ignorant need pastoral help to make them strong\nand knowledgeable. That help comes from the Lord, operating through the\nmeans of grace, the word, the church, and prayer. Paul doesnât go into detail\nabout what the strong should do to educate the weak, but he speaks elsewhere\nof teaching, nurturing, restoring.\n2. The two groups have wrong attitudes toward one another. In this\nregard, both the strong and the weak are at fault. The strong âdespiseâ the weak\n(Rom. 14:3, 10). The weak âpass judgment onâ the strong (verses 3-4, 10). 174\nPassing judgment here probably means accusing of sin, perhaps even casting\ndoubt on the other personâs allegiance to Christ.\nPaulâs response to this problem is simply to forbid such attitudes: donât\ndespise, donât judge. Both groups belong to Christ, and it is simply wrong for\nChristian
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s to treat one another this way. Note that Paul never suggests in these\npassages that the strong should subject the weak to formal discipline, as he does\nwith the incestuous man in 1 Cor. 5. Rather, the two parties are to love one\nanother as brothers within the church. 175 To say this is not to contradict the need\nfor education and nurture noted in #1 above. Certainly the strong must seek to\neducate, nurture, and strengthen the weak. And, doubtless, the weak will\ncontinue for a time to seek to change the strong as well. But there are right and\nwrong ways to carry out this ministry to one another. Despising and passing\njudgment are not among them. The strong may not despise the weak, because\nthe weak are fellow Christians. The weak may not judge the strong for the same\nreason, and, of course, because the strong are right.\n3. But there is a third issue that Paul here is mainly concerned with in\nthese passages, and here the strong are at fault. The strong, by their behavior,\nare in danger of placing âa stumbling block or hindranceâ (Rom. 14:13, cf. 1 Cor.\n8:9) in the way of their weak brothers. This is a very serious matter. Paul\n174\n1 Cor. 8-10 doesnât include these specific expressions, but it is clear from 8:1-3 that Paul sees\nin the whole controversy a lack of love. In this passage he mainly confronts those who âhave\nknowledge,â the âstrongerâ party. Although these have knowledge, they have not been using that\nknowledge in a loving way.\n175\nEvidently, then, not all differences within the church are subject to the formal procedures of\nchurch discipline. There are disagreements that may and ought to be tolerated. No church or\ndenomination may demand a hundred percent agreement on all matters. For more discussion of\nthis important subject, see my book Evangelical Reunion (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991), now\navailable at www.thirdmill.org. 162\ndescribes the stumbling block as something that not only brings grief to the weak\n(Rom. 14:15) but defiles the weak conscience (1 Cor. 8:7
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ), destroys (verse 15, cf.\n1 Cor. 8:11), even tends to âdestroy the work of Godâ (20), 176 brings\ncondemnation (23). In placing a stumbling block before a weak brother,\ntherefore, the strong himself sins against Christ (1 Cor. 8:12), even though, as\nwe have seen, his convictions about these ethical issues are correct.\nWhat kind of behavior by the strong could have such serious\nconsequences? Evidently the strong were leading the weak into sin, for sin is the\nonly thing with the spiritually destructive power Paul describes. What kind of sin?\nThe strong influenced the weak to sin against the dictates of his conscience (1\nCor. 8:7, 12). Conscience, as we shall see later, is our ability to tell right from\nwrong. Peopleâs consciences are not infallible. Sometimes a personâs conscience\ntells him something is wrong when it is right, and vice versa. Consciences have\nto be taught and nurtured, by the means of grace, as we saw above.\nNow a Christianâs conscience tells him what is pleasing or displeasing to\nGod. If that conscience is weak, it tells him that some actions displease God,\nwhen in fact they please God. If the weak Christian violates his conscience, then,\nhe violates what he considers to be the dictates of God. In other words, to violate\nthe conscience, even when the conscience is wrong, is to rebel against God. 177\nThe âstumbling block,â then, I believe, is an inducement to sin against a\nweak conscience. Letâs imagine that an elder of the church, a strong believer,\ninvites a weak believer, a Christian who believes God commands vegetarianism,\nto eat at his table. The strong believer serves meat, perhaps in part to pressure\nthe weaker believer to become strong. The weak believer then is faced with\ntemptation to eat meat, which would violate his conscience. The temptation is all\nthe greater because of his desire to please the elder and the general demands of\nancient hospitality. But if the weak believer eats the meat (without his conscience\nfirst being strengthened), he will
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: be guilty of sin. Because even though eating\nmeat is not contrary to Godâs law, the weak believer is motivated by rebellion\nagainst God. He is placing the demands of hospitality, the demands of his host,\nover the demands of God, and therefore he sins. The sin is not of the act itself,\nbut the motive, the heart attitude.\nAt Corinth, the strong believers were actually going to feasts at idolsâ\ntemples (1 Cor. 8:10). Paulâs view is that the food itself is not a danger, even if it\nhad at one point been offered to an idol (verse 8, 10:25). But the religious context\nof an idol feast could well be a danger to a weaker Christian. And if the weaker\n176\nWe should make allowance for hyperbole here. In the most important sense, the work of God\ncannot be overthrown. But the nature of sin, from Satanâs first rebellion down to the present is to\ndestroy, particularly to destroy a personâs spiritual life.\n177\nThis is a sort of catch-22, to be sure. When oneâs conscience misleads, it may be wrong to\nfollow it for to follow it may lead to sin. But it may also be wrong to disobey conscience, for to\ndisobey conscience is always to rebel against what one thinks is right. This dilemma shows the\nimportance of educating the conscience according to Godâs word. 163\nChristian hears that the food has been offered to an idol, but he sees the strong\neating it (especially in the idolâs temple) he may well be tempted to fall back into\nthe actual worship of idols.\nThe strong, therefore, should avoid doing anything that might tempt the\nweak to sin against his conscience. The strong should certainly seek to educate\nthe weak with the word of God, to make him strong. But while the weak brother is\nweak, the strong should not tempt him to do things that violate his weak\nconscience or that might lead him back into an idolatrous religious system. The\nstrong should teach, in other words, but should not exert pressure. We nurture\nthe conscience, not by force or pressure, but by godly persuasion.\nHow do these pas
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sages apply to us today? People sometimes derive from\nthese passages that a pastor, for example, should not drink alcoholic beverages\nin front of the teenagers in his church, for fear that they will use his example to\njustify drinking to excess. There is some wisdom in that advice, though it can be\npressed too far. It might be better for the pastor to instruct the youth so that they\nwill not be tempted in that way. But that advice does not in any case arise from\nthe passages we have discussed.\nA better parallel with the use of alcohol might be as follows: a pastor\ninvites to his home for dinner a man who is conscientiously opposed to any use\nof alcoholic beverages. The pastor drinks wine himself and puts pressure on his\nguest to do the same. The example is a bit artificial. Most conscientious\nabstainers in our culture today are not likely to be influenced to violate their\nconscience by such a pastoral example. More likely, they will be inclined to âpass\njudgment onâ the pastor in this case. That would be unfortunate, but that is not\nwhat Paul calls the âstumbling block.â Nevertheless, that spiritual danger exists in\nsome cases, and it is therefore wrong for the pastor to try to convert the\nabstainer to his position by using social pressure.\nI hope it is evident now that the concept âadiaphoraâ is entirely\ninappropriate to describe the issues presented in these passages. It is true, of\ncourse, that eating meat, observing days, and eating idol food are not right or\nwrong in themselves, but become right and wrong in various circumstances. But\nas I indicated earlier, all human acts are in one set of circumstances or another.\nNone simply occur in themselves. And in the circumstances described in these\npassages, the acts in view are right in some cases, wrong in others, never\nneutral. The strong is right to eat meat, for example, but he is wrong when he\neats in such a way as to pressure the weak to violate his conscience. The weak\nis right to abstain, though not for conscientious r
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: easons. Both are wrong in their\nattitudes toward one another.\nIn these passages, it is plain that Godâs attitude toward these actions is\nnot neutral at all. The passages include a pervasive emphasis on Godâs lordship, 164\nand it is because of Godâs lordship that Paul exhorts the people as he does. Hear\nthese passages, noting how many times the words God and Lord appear:\n3\nLet not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let\nnot the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has\nwelcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of\nanother? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be\nupheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. (Rom. 14:3-4)\n6\nThe one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord.\nThe one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to\nGod, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives\nthanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to\nhimself. 8 If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord.\nSo then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. 9 For to this\nend Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead\nand of the living. 10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you,\nwhy do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the\njudgment seat of God; 11 for it is written, \"As I live, says the Lord, every\nknee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.\" 12 So then\neach of us will give an account of himself to God. (Rom. 14:6-12)\nTherefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that\n\"an idol has no real existence,\" and that \"there is no God but one.\" 5 For\nalthough there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth- as indeed\nthere are many \"gods\" and many \"lords\"- 6 yet for us there is one God, the\nFather, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord,\nJesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (1\nCor. 8:4-6)\nAnd it is in the context of discussing these problems that Paul writes the verse I\nhave often cited recently:\nSo, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of\nGod. (1 Cor. 10:31)\nPaul commends mutual love in these situations because of the lordship of God.\nGod is not neutral here. He cares what we do, and he cares about how we treat\none another: not despising or judging, not setting a stumbling block in a brotherâs\nway. Partaking and abstaining are both good acts, when they are done in honor\nof the Lord. And they are good precisely because they honor God. There is no\nsuggestion here of moral neutrality, nothing for which the term adiaphora might\nbe appropriate.\nBut these passages are relevant to the sufficiency of Scripture, precisely\nbecause of the emphasis here on Godâs lordship. The prevailing issue here is 165\nGodâs honor, what pleases him. Human opinions must yield to Godâs words,\nwhich alone have ultimate authority. We find those words exclusively in Scripture. 166\nChapter 12: Law in Biblical Ethics\nWe have been studying the normative perspective of Christian ethics. In\ngeneral, the normative perspective asks what God wants us to do. We saw that\nthe ultimate norm is God himself. More specifically, we find his will for us in his\nword or revelation. We looked at a number of forms that revelation takes, but we\nfocused intensively on Godâs written word, the Scriptures, because of its primacy\nin the covenant God made with us. In the previous two chapters, we discussed\nsix attributes of Scripture that bear on ethics.\nWhen we think of Scripture as an ethical norm, we are thinking about it as\nlaw. So it is important for us to give some attention to the concept of law in the\nBible. From one perspective, law is a part of Scripture; from another perspective\nit is the whole.\nIn an obvious way, law is one part of Scripture that must be coordinated\nwith other parts. The traditional Jewish divisions of their Bible (the Christian Old\nTestament)
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: were the law, the prophets, and the writings. The law or torah is the\nfirst five books of Scripture, the Pentateuch. Christians have traditionally divided\nthe Bible (both testaments) into law, history, poetry, prophecy, gospels, epistles,\nand apocalyptic (the book of Revelation). As with the Jewish division, law is the\nfirst five books.\n0\nBut of course the first five books contain not only law, but also other types\nof literature. Much of the Pentateuch is historical narrative rather than divine\ncommands. So many have translated torah as instruction rather than law, and\nthat seems appropriate, though the instruction in these books certainly includes a\ngood amount of law in the literal sense. The centerpiece of the Pentateuch is the\ncovenant that God made with Israel under Moses, which includes law as well as\nother elements, as we saw in Chapter 3.\nAnd there are divine commands in many parts of Scripture other than the\nPentateuch. Kings and Chronicles, for example, contain many divine commands\nfor the temple worship. The Book of Proverbs contains advice from wisdom\nteachers that carries the force of divine commands. The prophets constantly\ncommand Israel to repent, at Godâs behest. Jesus shows the depth of the law in\nhis teachings such as the Sermon on the Mount, Matt. 5-7. The letters of the\napostles contain much ethical instruction. So in one sense, âlawâ is scattered\nthroughout the Bible in many places.\nThe element of law is important to Scripture, therefore, but Scripture\ncontains many other elements as well. It contains imperatives, which we easily\nassociate with law, but also indicatives, questions, promises, and\nexclamations. 178 It contains legal material, but also other genres such as\n178\nFor another discussion of genres and speech acts, see DKG, 202-205. 167\nnarrative, poetry, song, wisdom, parables, humor, apocalyptic. We should note\nthat all of these are Godâs authoritative word, and all of them are relevant to\nethics, for according to 2 Tim. 3:16 all Scripture is b
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: reathed out by God and\nprofitable for our instruction in righteousness, to equip us for good works.\nIt is interesting and important to consider how material in Scripture that is\nnon-legal in form can be relevant to ethics. Obviously narrative is important, for\ninstance, because it tells the story of how God rescued us from sin and enabled\nus to do good works, and because it provides many examples of human\nbehavior, some for our imitation, some not. Poetry and song drive Godâs word\n(law and narrative) into our hearts, making it vivid, memorable, and motivating.\nParables invite us to place ourselves into a provocative story that challenges our\nethical complacency. Humor puts our pretensions into perspective. Apocalyptic\nstretches the imagination with symbolism about Godâs coming judgments and\nblessings.\nAs we see the variety of ways in which Scripture teaches ethics, we\nshould be motivated to use similar variety in our own teaching. Ethical instruction\nis not just stating ethical norms. It is also singing, telling stories, 179 joking,\nexclaiming, and symbolizing. 180\nSo if we ask the normative question, âhow does God want me to live?â we\nmust look, not only at the specifically legal sections of Scripture, but through the\nwhole Bible. This is only to say that the normative perspective is indeed a\nperspective, a perspective on the whole Bible.\nIn that sense, the whole Bible is law. For the whole Bible is Godâs\nauthoritative word, given to us for our instruction in righteousness, to equip us for\ngood works. 181 Everything in Scripture has the force of law. What it teaches, we\nare to believe; what it commands, we are to do. 182 We should take its wisdom to\nheart, imitate its heroes, stand in awe at its symbolism, laugh at its jokes, trust its\npromises, sing its songs.\n179\nThink, for example, of how Nathan confronted David using a parable to convict him of sin (2\nSam. 12:1-15). More on this when we consider the existential perspective.\n180\nObviously I am not adept at these alterna
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tive ways of teaching ethics. But I would encourage\nothers, with other gifts, to employ them for the edification of Godâs people. These are just as\nimportant as the writing of theology books.\n181\nThe same thing can be said of narrative and the other forms of language as well. Some\nsections of Scripture are specifically narrative in form, but to know the whole narrative of the Bible\nyou must consult the whole book. For that story includes the stories of God sending prophets,\nwisdom teachers, and so on. Similarly with other forms of speech and literature. See DKG, 202-\n205.\n182\nThis is easier to understand if we recall a frequent theme of the Theology of Lordship:\nepistemology is part of ethics. That is to say that there is an ethics of belief as well as an ethics of\naction. So even those parts of Scripture that seem to be given for our contemplation rather than\nour action are ethical: they tell us normatively what and how to contemplate. 168\nLaw and Grace\nIn what follows, I shall discuss relationships between the concept of law\nand other concepts in Scripture. First of all, it is important for us to understand\nthe relationship between law and grace.\nThis relationship is, of course, an elementary aspect of the gospel. It is\nplain in Scripture that we cannot be saved from sin by obeying the law. Paul\nsays,\nNow we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are\nunder the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may\nbe held accountable to God. 20 For by works of the law no human being will\nbe justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. 21 But\nnow the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law,\nalthough the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it- 22 the righteousness of\nGod through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no\ndistinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are\njustified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,\n25\nwhom God
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by\nfaith. (Rom. 3:19-25; cf. 4:1-8, 13-16, 11:6, Gal. 2:15-21, Eph. 2:8-10, Phil.\n3:9, Tit. 3:5)\nSalvation, in other words, is not something we can earn by doing good works. It\nis, rather, Godâs free gift to us, given because of Christâs death for us. Our\nrighteousness before God is the righteousness of Christ and him alone.\nThis has been the standard Protestant teaching since the Reformation,\nand it is enshrined in all the Protestant confessions. Recently, however, some\nhave asked questions about Paulâs teaching in this area. Some answers to those\nquestions have been described as the ânew perspective on Paul.â That\nperspective is based on writings of Krister Stendahl, E. P. Sanders, James D. G.\nDunn, N. T. Wright, and others. In that perspective, the problem with Judaism,\naccording to Paul, was not works righteousness, but its failure to accept Godâs\nnew covenant in Christ, which embraced Gentiles as well as Jews. On this\nperspective, Paulâs gospel is not an answer to the troubled conscience of\nsomeone (like Luther) who canât meet Godâs demands. Rather, it is the fulfillment\nof Godâs promise to Abraham to bless all nations. The âworks of the lawâ against\nwhich Paul contends are not manâs attempts to satisfy Godâs moral law, but the\ndistinctions between Jews and Gentiles such as circumcision, food laws, and\ncleansings.\nDiscussions of this new perspective are very complex, entering into details\nabout the nature of Palestinian Judaism at the time of Paul, Paulâs own history,\nand the exegesis of crucial texts. I cannot enter this controversy here. I do agree 169\nwith those who believe that Sanders and others have been too selective in their\nreferences to Palestinian Judaism, and I believe that the new perspective fails to\ndeal adequately with a number of Pauline passages, such as Rom. 4:4-5, 11:6,\nEph. 2:8-10, Phil. 3:9, which make plain that Paul rejects, not only legal barriers\nbetween Jew and Genti
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: le, but also all attempts of people to save themselves by\ntheir works. Paulâs argument in Rom. 1-3, too, makes this clear: all people, Jew\nand Gentile alike, are guilty before God and cannot do anything to justify\nthemselves. Their salvation comes only by Godâs grace, according to the\npassage in Rom. 3 quoted above. So Lutherâs doctrines of sola gratia and sola\nfide are fully scriptural and fully Pauline. 183\nThe new perspective legitimately warns us against reducing Paulâs gospel to\nsoteric justification by faith. Paulâs confrontation with the Jews was on several\nfronts. Nevertheless, it is important to insist that we are saved only by the grace\nof God in Christ, not by any works of ours.\nIn his chapter âLaw and Grace,â John Murray summarizes well what law can\nand cannot do for us. Below are the main headings of his discussion: 184\nWhat Law Can Do\n1. Law commands and demands; it propounds what the will of God\nis.\n2. Law pronounces approval and blessing upon conformity to its\ndemands (Rom. 7:10, Gal. 3:12).\n3. Law pronounces the judgment of condemnation upon every\ninfraction of its precept (Gal. 3:10).\n4. Law exposes and convicts of sin (Rom. 7:7, 14, Heb. 4:12).\n5. Law excites and incites sin to more virulent and violent\ntransgression (Rom. 7:8-9, 11, 13).\nWhat Law Cannot Do\n1. Law can do nothing to justify the person who in any particular\nhas violated its sanctity and come under its curse.\n2. It can do nothing to relieve the bondage of sin; it accentuates\nand confirms that bondage (Rom. 6:14).\nGodâs Law as the Christianâs Norm\n183\nI recommend Kim Riddlebargerâs essay, âReformed Confessionalism and the âNew\nPerspectiveâ on Paul,â available at the web site of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals,\nwww.alliancenet.org, as an excellent introduction to this discussion. I fully endorse the\nconclusions of that article. I also commend a critical article, âN. T. Wright on Justification,â by\nCharles E. Hill, available at http://www.thirdmill.org/files/eng
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lish/html/nt/NT.h.Hill.Wright.html.\n184\nJohn Murray, Principles of Conduct (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 184-186. 170\nBut if law cannot justify us or relieve the bondage of sin, is it then obsolete\nto those who receive Godâs saving grace? Does the believer, then, have nothing\nto do with law? Quite otherwise. Scripture is clear that the law has a positive role\nin the believerâs life. The law is a gracious gift of God (Psm. 119:29). It is given\nfor our good (Deut. 10:13). The Psalmists express over and over again their\ndelight in the law of the Lord (Ps. 1:2, 119:16, 24, 35, 47, 70, 77, 174). Jesus\nsays,\nDo not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I\nhave not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you,\nuntil heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the\nLaw until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the\nleast of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be\ncalled least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and\nteaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.\nAnd he adds to that law many of his own commandments, which he also expects\nus to keep: âIf you love me, you will keep my commandmentsâ (John 14:15; cf.\nverses 21, 23, 15:10, 1 John 2:3, 5:3, 2 John 6).\nPaul says that the law is âholy and righteous and goodâ (Rom. 7:12; cf.\nverses 13-14, 16, 19, 21-22, and 25), and he speaks of himself as ânot being\noutside the law of God but under the law of Christâ (1 Cor. 9:21). He treats the\nbasic principles of the Mosaic law as normative for Christians in passages like\nRom. 13:8-10, 1 Cor. 7:19, Gal. 5:13-14. And, like Jesus, he also sets forth\nethical commands, as in Rom. 12-16, Gal. 5:13-6:10, Eph. 4-6 and elsewhere.\nHow is this positive emphasis on law compatible with grace? It is simply\nthat those who are saved by Godâs grace will want to obey him. Obedience does\nnot earn salvation for us, but it is the natural response of those who have\nbecome
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Godâs sons and daughters. As the Heidelberg Catechism puts it,\nQ86: Since, then, we are redeemed from our misery by grace through\nChrist, without any merit of ours, why must we do good works?\nA86: Because Christ, having redeemed us by His blood, also renews us\nby His Holy Spirit after His own image, that with our whole life we show\nourselves thankful to God for His blessing, and that He be glorified\nthrough us; then also, that we ourselves may be assured of our faith by\nthe fruits thereof; and by our godly walk may win others also to Christ.\nNow to obey someone, we must know what he wants of us. So to obey God, we\nmust meditate on his law. 171\nHow, then, is this positive regard for the law compatible with Paulâs\nstatement in Rom. 6:14, âFor sin will have no dominion over you, since you are\nnot under law but under grace?â In what sense are we ânot under law?â Again,\nMurrayâs analysis is helpful. He argues that âunder lawâ in the context of Paulâs\nargument here refers to the bondage of sin:\nThe person who is âunder lawâ, the person upon whom only law has been\nbrought to bear, the person whose life has been determined exclusively by\nthe resources and potencies of law, is the bondservant of sin. And the\nmore intelligently and resolutely a person commits himself to law the more\nabandoned becomes his slavery to sin. Hence deliverance from the\nbondage of sin must come from an entirely different source. 185\nThat âentirely different source,â is, of course, Godâs grace. So Paul says, âyou are\nnot under law, but under grace.â Grace in Rom. 6 particularly represents the fact\nthat when Jesus died for our sins, we died to sin, and we were also raised with\nChrist to newness of life.\nSo, âunder lawâ in Rom. 6:14 has a different meaning from the same\nexpression in 1 Cor. 9:21. In Rom. 6:14, Paul denies that believers are in\nbondage to sin, since they are not limited to what Murray calls âthe resources and\npotencies of law.â But in 1 Cor. 9:21, he recognizes, w
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ith the Psalmists, Jesus,\nand other biblical writers, that the law continues to have authority over him, to\nshow him how to obey the Lord who has saved him by grace. 186\nPaul also uses the phrase âunder lawâ to refer to the distinctives of the\nMosaic covenant, such as circumcision, temple sacrifices, the Aaronic\npriesthood, feast days, and so on, distinctives which Judaizers were trying to\nimpose upon Gentile Christians (Gal. 3:23). This is the theme that has become\nprominent in the writings of the ânew perspective.â The phrase in Gal. 3:23 has a\ndifferent meaning from the use of the phrase either in Rom. 6:14 or in 1 Cor.\n9:21. In this sense, to be âunder lawâ is to be under âthe pedagogical nonage and\ntutelage of the Mosaic economyâ in contrast with âthe mature sonship and liberty\nenjoyed by the New Testament believer.â 187 We should ascribe the same\nmeaning to the âabolishing the law of commandments and ordinancesâ in Eph.\n2:15.\nSo Murray concludes that we are not âunder lawâ (1) in the sense of being\nunder the bondage of sin (Rom. 6:14), or (2) âbeing under the ritual law of the\nMosaic economyâ (Gal. 3:23). But we are under law in the sense of being\nobligated to obey our Lord (1 Cor. 9:21). 188\n185\nIbid., 185-86.\nMurrayâs discussion of 1 Cor. 9:21 is valuable. See Ibid., 186-188.\n187\nIbid., 188.\n188\nIbid., 190.\n186 172\nLaw and Gospel\nI would now like to look at another distinction closely related to law/grace,\nbut by no means identical to it. That is the distinction between law and gospel. As\nwe have seen, we are saved by Godâs grace, not by our obedience to his law. So\nsome have tried to draw a sharp distinction in Scripture between two\nâmessages.â One message, âlaw,â conveys law without grace, the other, âgospel,â\nconveys grace without law. In my judgment, it is not possible to make this\ndistinction, even though Scripture does make a sharp distinction between works\nand grace.\nIt has become increasingly common in Reformed circ
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: les, as it has long\nbeen in Lutheran circles, to say that the distinction between law and gospel is the\nkey to sound theology, even to say that to differ with certain traditional\nformulations of this distinction is to deny the gospel itself.\nSometimes this argument employs Scripture passages like Rom. 3:21-31,\nemphasizing that we are saved by Godâs grace, through faith alone, apart from\nthe works of the law. In my judgment, however, none of the parties to the debate\nquestions that justification is by grace alone, through faith alone. But it is one\nthing to distinguish between faith and works, a different thing to distinguish law\nand gospel.\n1. The Traditional Distinction\nThe distinction between law and gospel is not a distinction between a false\nand a true way of salvation. Rather, it is a distinction between two messages,\none that supposedly consists exclusively of commands, threats, and therefore\nterrors, the other that consists exclusively of promises and comforts. Although I\nbelieve that we are saved entirely by Godâs grace and not by works, I do not\nbelieve that there are two entirely different messages of God in Scripture, one\nexclusively of command (âlawâ) and the other exclusively of promise (âgospelâ). In\nScripture itself, commands and promises are typically found together. With Godâs\npromises come commands to repent of sin and believe the promise. The\ncommands, typically, are not merely announcements of judgment, but Godâs\ngracious opportunities to repent of sin and believe in him. As the Psalmist says,\nâbe gracious to me through your law,â Psm. 119:29.\nThe view that I oppose, which sharply separates the two messages,\ncomes mainly out of Lutheran theology, though similar statements can be found\nin Calvin and in other Reformed writers. 189 The Epitome 190 of the Lutheran\n189\nLutheran theologians, however, frequently complain that Reformed theology âconfusesâ law\nand gospel, which is in the Lutheran view a grave error. The main difference is that for the
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nReformed law is not merely an accuser, but also a message of divine comfort, a delight of the 173\nFormula of Concord, at 5.5, recognizes that gospel is used in different senses in\nScripture, and it cites Mark 1:15 and Acts 20:21 as passages in which gospel\npreaching âcorrectlyâ includes a command to repent of sin. But in section 6, it\ndoes something really strange. It says,\nBut when the Law and the Gospel are compared together, as well as\nMoses himself, the teacher of the Law, and Christ the teacher of the\nGospel, we believe, teach, and confess that the Gospel is not a preaching\nof repentance, convicting of sins, but that it is properly nothing else than a\ncertain most joyful message and preaching full of consolation, not\nconvicting or terrifying, inasmuch as it comforts the conscience against the\nterrors of the Law, and bids it look at the merit of Christ alone...\nI say this is strange, because the Formula gives no biblical support at all for\nthis distinction, 191 and what it says here about the \"gospel\" flatly contradicts what\nit conceded earlier in section 5. What it describes as âcorrectâ in section five\ncontradicts what it calls âproperâ in section 6. What section 6 does is to suggest\nsomething âimproperâ about what it admits to be the biblical description of the\ncontent of gospel, as in Mark 1:15 and Acts 14:15. 192 Mark 1:15 is correct, but\nnot proper.\n2. Law and Gospel in Scripture\nredeemed heart (Psm. 1:2). Also, the Reformed generally do not give the law/gospel distinction\nas much prominence within their systematic theological formulations. And, historically, they have\nbeen more open to the broader biblical language which the Lutheran Formula of Concord calls\nâcorrectâ but not âproperâ (see below).\n190\nI am quoting the Epitome, a summary of the Formula, rather than the Solid Declaration, which\ndeals with these matters at greater length. I think the argument of the Epitome is easier to follow,\nand I donât think the Solid Declaration adds anything i
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: mportant to the present discussion, though\nsome Lutheran correspondents have told me otherwise.\n191\nThe Solid Declaration (section 6 of the chapter âLaw and Gospelâ) mentions Mark 1:15 in\nwhich âbelieving in the gospelâ is distinguished from repenting. But especially in view of the use of\nâgospelâ in verse 14, we may not take âgospelâ in verse 15 to exclude any command. Indeed,\nâbelieve in the gospelâ is itself a command. Section 26 of the Solid Declaration mentions also 2\nCor. 3:7-18 as a passage that âthoroughly and forcibly shows the distinction between the Law and\nthe Gospel.â That passage does not mention âlawâ or âgospel,â but it does distinguish the Mosaic\nCovenant as a âministry of deathâ (verse 7) and âministry of condemnationâ (verse 9) from the\nNew Covenant in Christ as a âministry of righteousnessâ (verse 9). But Paulâs emphasis here is on\na difference in degree, the relative glory of the two covenants. He does not teach that the Mosaic\ncovenant contains only condemnation. Indeed, not even Lutheran theologians believe that the\ngospel was absent from the Mosaic period or that it made its first appearance at the time of\nChrist. In all periods of redemptive history, God has renewed his promise of redemption.\n192\nThe passage cited by the formula, Acts 20:21, does not use the euaggello root, the usual term\nfor âgospelâ and âgospel preaching,â but the term diamarturomai. But Acts 20:21 is nevertheless\nsignificant, since it gives a general description of what Paul did in his preaching to âboth Jews and\nGreeks.â That preaching was certainly gospel preaching. Paul resolved in his preaching to âknow\nnothing but Christ and him crucified.â Luke 24:47 is also significant, for it includes both\nrepentance and forgiveness of sins as the content Jesus gives his disciples to preach (kerusso)\nto all nations. 174\nI have been told that proper at this point in the Formula means, not âincorrectâ\nor âwrong,â but simply âmore commo
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n or usual.â I have, however, looked through\nthe uses of the euaggel- terms in the NT, and I cannot find one instance in which\nthe context excludes a demand for repentance (that is, a command of God, a\nlaw) as part of the gospel content. That is to say, I cannot find one instance of\nwhat the Formula calls the âproperâ meaning of gospel, a message of pure\ncomfort, without any suggestion of obligation. And there are important theological\nreasons why that use does not occur.\nEssentially, the \"gospel\" in the New Testament is the good news that the\nkingdom of God has come in Jesus (Matt. 4:23, 9:35, Mark 1:14, Luke 4:43, Acts\n20:24f). 193 \"Kingdom\" is (1) God's sovereign power, (2) his sovereign authority,\nand (3) his coming into history to defeat Satan and bring about salvation with all\nits consequences. 194 God's kingdom power includes all his mighty acts in history,\nespecially including the Resurrection of Christ.\nGodâs kingdom authority is the reiteration of his commandments. When the\nkingdom appears in power, it is time for people to repent. They must obey\n(hupakouo) the gospel (2 Thess. 1:8, compare apeitheo in 1 Pet. 4:17). The\ngospel itself requires a certain kind of conduct (Acts 14:15, Gal. 2:14, Phil. 1:27;\ncf. Rom 2:16).\nWhen God comes into history, he brings his power and authority to bear on\nhis creatures. In kingdom power, he establishes peace. So New Testament\nwriters frequently refer to the âgospel of peaceâ (Eph. 6:15; cf. Acts 10:36, Rom.\n10:15), sometimes referring to the âmysteryâ of God bringing Gentiles and Jews\ntogether in one body (Rom. 16:25, Eph. 6:19).\nIt is this whole complex: God's power to save, the reiteration of God's\ncommands, and his coming into history to execute his plan, that is the gospel. It\nis good news to know that God is bringing his good plans to fruition.\nConsider Isa. 52:7, one of the most important background passages for the\nNew Testament concept of gospel:\n193\nN. T. Wright believes that this use of gospel has a double roo
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t: âOn the one hand, the\ngospel Paul preached was the fulfilment of the message of Isaiah 40 and 52, the message of\ncomfort for Israel and of hope for the whole world, because YHWH, the god of Israel, was\nreturning to Zion to judge and redeem. On the other hand, in the context into which Paul was\nspeaking, \"gospel\" would mean the celebration of the accession, or birth, of a king or\nemperor. Though no doubt petty kingdoms might use the word for themselves, in Paul's world\nthe main âgospelâ was the news of, or the celebration of, Caesar,â âPaulâs Gospel and\nCaesarâs Empire,â available at http://www.ctinquiry.org/publications/wright.htm. Of course\nboth of these uses focus on the rule of God as Lord, and both involve what is traditionally\ncalled law.\n194\nThis a triad of the sort discussed in this and other books in the Theology of Lordship series. 175\nHow beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good\nnews, who publishes peace, who brings good news of happiness, who\npublishes salvation, who says to Zion, âYour God reigns.â\nIt is the reign of God that is good news, news that ensures peace and salvation.\nEven the demand for repentance is good news, because in context it implies that\nGod, though coming in power to claim his rights, is willing to forgive for Christ's\nsake. As God comes, he reigns, establishing his law throughout the earth.\nIn Isa. 61:1-2, which Jesus quotes in his Capernaum sermon (Luke 4:18-\n19), Isaiah proclaims,\nThe Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed\nme to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the\nbrokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the\nprison to those who are bound; 2 to proclaim the year of the LORD's favor,\nand the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn.\nThis verse also provides important background to the New Testament use of\nâgospel:â note the âgood news to the poorâ in verse 1. This message too is the\nmessage of the coming of
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: a king, a new administration of justice, even\nvengeance. This gospel, like that of Isa. 52:7, is about the re-establishment of\nlaw.\nSo gospel includes law in an important sense: Godâs kingdom authority,\nhis demand to repent. And even on the view of those most committed to the\nlaw/gospel distinction, the gospel includes a command to believe. We tend to\nthink of that command as in a different class from the commands of the\nDecalogue. But that too is a command, after all. Generically it is law. And, like the\nDecalogue, that law can be terrifying to someone who wants to trust only on his\nown resources, rather than resting on the mercy of another. And the demand of\nfaith includes other requirements: the conduct becoming the gospel that I\nmentioned earlier. Faith itself works through love (Gal. 5:6) and is dead without\ngood works (James 2:17).\nHaving faith does not merit salvation for anyone, any more than any other\nhuman act merits salvation. Thus we speak of faith, not as the ground of\nsalvation, but as the instrument. 195 Faith saves, not because it merits salvation,\nbut because it reaches out to receive Godâs grace in Christ. Nevertheless, faith is\nan obligation, and in that respect the command to believe is like other divine\ncommands. So it is impossible to say that command, or law, is excluded from the\nmessage of the gospel.\nAs gospel includes law, it is also true that law includes gospel. God gives his\nlaw as part of a covenant, and that covenant is a gift of Godâs grace. The\n195\nSee, for example, WCF 11.2. 176\nDecalogue begins, âI am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of\nEgypt, out of the house of slavery.â Only after proclaiming his saving grace does\nGod then issue his commands to Israel. So the Decalogue as a whole has the\nfunction of offering Israel a new way of life, conferred by grace (cf. Deut. 7:7-8,\n9:4-6). Is the Decalogue âlawâ or âgospel?â Surely it is both. Israel was terrified\nupon hearing it, to be sure (Ex. 20:18-21). But in fact it
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: offers blessing (note\nverse 6) and promise (verse 12). Moses and the Prophets are sufficient to keep\nsinners from perishing in Hell (Luke 16:30-31).\nSo the definitions that sharply separate law and gospel break down on careful\nanalysis. In both law and gospel, then, God proclaims his saving work, and he\ndemands that his people respond by obeying his commands. The terms âlawâ\nand âgospelâ differ in emphasis, but they overlap and intersect. They present the\nwhole Word of God from different perspectives. Indeed, we can say that our Bible\nas a whole is both law (because as a whole it speaks with divine authority and\nrequires belief) and gospel (because as a whole it is good news to fallen\ncreatures). Each concept is meaningless apart from the other. Each implies the\nother.\nThe law often brings terror, to be sure. Israel was frightened by the Sinai\ndisplay of Godâs wrath against sin (Ex. 20:18-21). But it also brings delight to the\nredeemed heart (Psm. 1:2; compare 119:34-36, 47, 92, 93, 97, 130, 131, Rom.\n7:22). Similarly, the gospel brings comfort and joy; but (as less often noted in the\ntheological literature) it also brings condemnation. Paul says that his gospel\npreaching is, to those who perish, âa fragrance from death to deathâ and, to those\nwho believe, âa fragrance from life to lifeâ (2 Cor. 2:15-16; compare 1 Cor. 1:18,\n23, 27-29, 2 Cor. 4:3-4, Rom. 9:32). The gospel is good news to those who\nbelieve. But to those who are intent on saving themselves by their own\nrighteousness, it is bad news. It is Godâs condemnation upon them, a rock of\noffense.\n3. Which Comes First?\nIn discussions of law and gospel, one commonly hears that it is important,\nnot only to preach both law and gospel, but also to preach the law first and the\ngospel second. We are told that people must be frightened by the law before they\ncan be driven to seek salvation in Christ. Certainly there is a great need to\npreach Godâs standards, manâs disobedience, and Godâs wrath against sin,\nespec
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ially in an age such as ours where people think God will let them behave as\nthey like. And very often people have been driven to their knees in repentance\nwhen the Spirit has convicted them of their transgressions of law.\nBut as we have seen, it is really impossible truly to present law without\ngospel or gospel without law, though various relative emphases are possible.\nAnd among those relative emphases, the biblical pattern tends to put the gospel\nfirst. That is the pattern of the Decalogue, as we have seen: God proclaims that 177\nhe has redeemed his people (gospel), then asks them to behave as his covenant\npeople (law). Since both gospel and law are aspects of all Godâs covenants, that\npattern pervades Scripture.\nJesus reflects that pattern in his own evangelism. In John 4:1-42, Jesus\ntells the Samaritan woman that he can give her living water that will take away all\nthirst. Only after offering that gift does he proclaim the law to her, exposing her\nadultery. Some have cited Luke 18:18-30 as an example of the contrary order:\nJesus expounds the commandments, and only afterward tells the rich ruler to\nfollow him. But in this passage Jesus does not use the law alone to terrorize the\nman or to plunge him into despair. The man does go sadly away only after Jesus\nhas called him to discipleship, which, though itself a command, is the gospel of\nthis passage.\n4. Legitimate Use of the Traditional Distinction\nNow if people want to define gospel more narrowly for a specific theological\npurpose, I won't object too strongly. Scripture does not give us a glossary of\nEnglish usage. A number of technical theological terms donât mean exactly what\nsimilar terms sometimes mean in the Bible. Regeneration and election are\nexamples, as is covenant. 196 We can define our English terms pretty much as we\nlike, as long as those definitions donât create confusion in our readers.\nOver the years, we have come to think of gospel as correlative with faith and\nlaw as correlative with works. In this usage, law i
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s what condemns and gospel is\nwhat saves. Although this distinction differs from the biblical uses of the terms, it\ndoes become useful in some contexts. For example, we all know a type of\npreaching that merely expounds moral obligations (as we usually think of them:\ndonât kill, donât steal) and does not give its hearers the knowledge of Christ they\nneed to have in order to be saved. That kind of preaching (especially when it is\nnot balanced by other preaching emphases) we often describe as a preaching of\nmere law, legalism, or moralism. There is no good news in it. So, we are inclined\nto say, it is not preaching of the gospel. So in this general way we come to\ndistinguish the preaching of law from the preaching of gospel. That is, I think, the\nmain concern of the Formula: to remind us that we need to do both things.\nWe should be reminded of course that there is also an opposite extreme:\npreaching âgospelâ in such a way as to suggest that Christ makes no\ndemands on oneâs life. We call that âcheap graceâ or âeasy believism.â We\nmight also call it preaching âgospel without law.â Taken to an extreme, it is\n196\nThe phrases âcovenant of worksâ and âcovenant of graceâ found in the Westminster\nConfession of Faith, 7.2-4 are not found anywhere in Scripture. Covenant in Scripture refers to\nparticular historical relationships between God and his people, mediated by Noah, Abraham,\nMoses, David, and Jesus. âCovenant of graceâ generalizes the common features of these\nhistorical covenants, seeing them as successive manifestations of Godâs redemptive Lordship.\nâCovenant of worksâ finds in Godâs relation to our first parents features identical to his later\ncovenants with, of course, significant differences. 178\nantinomianism, the rejection of Godâs law. The traditional law/gospel\ndistinction is not itself antinomian, but those who hold it tend to be more\nsensitive to the dangers of legalism than to the dangers of antinomianism.\nSuch considerations may lead us t
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: o distinguish in a rough-and-ready way\nbetween preaching law and preaching gospel. Of course, even in making that\ndistinction, our intention ought to be to bring these together. None of these\nconsiderations requires us to posit a sharp distinction. And certainly, this rough-\nand-ready distinction should never be used to cast doubt on the integration of\ncommand and promise that pervades the Scriptures themselves.\nIt should be evident that âlegalistâ preaching as described above is not true\npreaching of law, any more than it is true preaching of the gospel. For as I\nindicated earlier, law itself in Scripture comes to us wrapped in grace.\n5. Law/Gospel and the Christian Life\nThe Formulaâs distinction between law and gospel has unfortunate\nconsequences for the Christian life. The document does warrant preaching of the\nlaw to the regenerate, 197 but only as threat and terror, to drive them to Christ\nEpitome, VI, 4. There is nothing here about the law as the delight of the\nredeemed heart (Psm. 1:2; compare 119:34-36, 47, 92, 93, 97, 130, 131, Rom.\n7:22).\nThe Formula then goes on to say that believers do conform to the law under\nthe influence of the Spirit, but only as follows:\nFruits of the Spirit, however, are the works which the Spirit of God who dwells\nin believers works through the regenerate, and which are done by believers\nso far as they are regenerate [spontaneously and freely], as though they\nknew of no command, threat, or reward; for in this manner the children of God\nlive in the Law and walk according to the Law of God, which [mode of living]\nSt. Paul in his epistles calls the Law of Christ and the Law of the mind, Rom.\n7, 25; 8, 7; Rom. 8, 2; Gal. 6, 2. (Epitome, 6.5).\n197\nTheological literature speaks of three âuses of the lawâ : (1) to restrain sin in society, (2) to\nterrorize people in order to drive them to Christ, and (3) as a guide to believers. In Lutheranism\n(not in Reformed circles) there has been controversy over the third use, though the Formula\naffirms it. B
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ut in Lutheranism, it is often said that âthe law always accuses.â So the third use is\nessentially the second use directed at believers, driving us to Christ again and again and away\nfrom our residual unbelief. Reformed writers do not deny our continual need for Christ and the\nimportance of hearing again and again that we are saved only by his grace. But in Reformed\ntheology, the law also plays a more direct role, giving us specific guidance in Godâs delightful\npaths. 179\nSo the law may threaten us to drive us to Christ. But truly good works are never\nmotivated by any command, threat or reward. 198\nIn my view, this teaching is simply unbiblical. It suggests that when you do\nsomething in obedience to a divine command, threat, or promise of reward, it is\nto that extent tainted, unrighteous, something less than a truly good work. I agree\nthat our best works are tainted by sin, but certainly not for this reason. When\nScripture presents us with a command, obedience to that command is a\nrighteous action. Indeed, our righteousness is measured by our obedience to\nGodâs commands. When God threatens punishment, and we turn from\nwickedness to do what he asks, that is not a sin, but a righteous response. When\nGod promises reward, it is a good thing for us to embrace that reward. 199\nThe notion that we should conduct our lives completely apart from the\nadmonitions of Godâs word is a terrible notion. To ignore Godâs revelation of his\nrighteousness is, indeed, essentially sinful. To read Scripture, but refuse to allow\nits commands to influence oneâs conduct, is the essence of sin.\nAnd what, then, does motivate good works, if not the commands, threats,\nand promises of reward in Scripture? The Formula doesnât say. What it suggests\nis that the Spirit simply brings about obedience from within us. I believe the Spirit\ndoes exactly that. But the Formula seems to assume that the Spirit works that\nway without any decision on our part to act according to the commands of God.\nThat I think is wron
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: g. âQuietismâ is the view that Christians should be entirely\npassive, waiting for the Spirit of God to act in them. This view of the Christian life\nis unbiblical. The Christian life is a battle, a race. It requires decision and effort. I\nam not saying that the Formula is quietist (Lutheranism rejected quietism after\nsome controversy in its ranks), but as we read the position of the Formula, it\ndoes seem that quietism lies around the corner from it.\n6. The Objective and the Subjective\nPart of the motivation for this view of the Christian life, I believe, is the\nthought that oneâs life should be based on something objective, rather than\nsomething subjective. On this view, our life is built on what Christ has done for\nus, objectively in history, not on anything arising from our own subjectivity or\n198\nWe may question the consistency of this position. If the threats of the law drive Margaret to\nChrist, so that she believes in Jesus, is that belief a good thing? One would be inclined to say\nyes, but it cannot be if actions motivated by threat are ipso facto sinful.\n199\nAt this point there is an odd convergence between traditional Lutheranism and secular\ndeontologism. Secular deontologists, like Kant, whom we considered in Chapter 8, also reject\nethical actions motivated by reward or punishment and say that one does good only by doing his\nâduty for dutyâs sake.â As I indicated in my discussion of Kant, that position is unscriptural.\nScripture often motivates our conduct by rewards and punishments, and it is not ethically right to\nshun these divine provisions. Kant also rejected ethical actions done in obedience to commands\nfrom someone outside the self, again violating Scripture, but strangely echoing the Formula of\nConcord. 180\ninwardness. So in this view, gospel is a recitation of what God has done for us,\nnot a command to provoke our subjective response.\nThis understanding focuses on justification: God regards us as objectively\nrighteous for Christâs sake, apart from anything
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: in us. But it tends to neglect\nregeneration and sanctification: that God does work real subjective changes in\nthe elect.\nI have no quarrel with this understanding of justification. But in Scripture,\nthough justification is based on the work of Christ external to us, it is embraced\nby faith, which is subjective. And faith, in turn, is the result of the Spiritâs\nsubjective work of regeneration (John 3:3). 200 So nobody is objectively justified\nwho has not been subjectively changed by Godâs grace.\nSo the Westminster Confession of Faith 18.2, even in speaking\nof assurance of salvation, refers not only to the truth of Godâs\npromises (objective), but also to the âinward evidence of those\ngracesâ and âthe testimony of the Spirit of adoption,â which are in\nsome measure subjective.\nIn fact, we cannot separate the objective and the subjective or, in\nterms of my earlier distinctions, the situational from the\nexistential. Objective truths are subjectively apprehended. We\ncannot have objective knowledge, confidence, or assurance,\nunless we are subjectively enabled to perceive what God has\nobjectively given us.\nConcluding Observation\nSince the law/gospel distinction, as expressed in the Formula, is\nunscriptural, I do not commend it to Reformed believers. It is especially\nwrong to claim that this view is or should be a test of orthodoxy in\nReformed churches.\nLaw and Love\nMany discussions of ethics, especially by theologians, deal with the\nrelationship between law and love. The question is important, because\nlove is in some sense the central principle of Christian ethics. Some\nwriters say that love somehow replaces law in the Christian life. But we\nshould not accept that view without some reflection.\n200\nSo, again, saving faith works through love (Gal. 5:6) and is dead without works (James 2:14-\n26). 181\nWe saw in Chapter 3 the centrality of the covenant relation in which\nGod is lord and we are vassals, servants, sons, daughters, bride. In the\nancient near east, love often refers
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: to the allegiance of a vassal to his lord.\nRecall the elements of the suzerainty treaty that I listed in that chapter. In\nthe treaty, the first stipulation, or law, is that of exclusive covenant\nallegiance, sometimes called âlove.â In the Decalogue, that stipulation is\nthe First Commandment, âYou shall have no other gods before meâ (Ex.\n20:3). Deut. 6:4-5 expresses this stipulation with the term âloveâ in the\nshema, the famous confession of the Jewish people:\nHear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 You shall love the\nLORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your\nmight.\nJesus calls this âthe great commandment in the lawâ (Matt. 22:36), âthe\ngreat and first commandmentâ (verse 38). In verse 39, he adds, âAnd a\nsecond is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself,â another\ncommandment of love, this one from a more obscure Old Testament\npassage, Lev. 19:18.\nJesusâ own teachings also emphasize the centrality of love in the\nbelieverâs life. Not only does he stress love of neighbors, but even love of\nenemies (Matt. 5:43-48), teaching that as God loves his enemies, we\nshould also love ours. And love is his ânew commandment:â\nA new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have\nloved you, you also are to love one another. 35 By this all people will know that\nyou are my disciples, if you have love for one another. (John 13:34-35, cf.\n15:12, 17, 1 John 2:7-11, 3:11-24, 4:7-21).\nThis commandment is ânewâ because it is based on the example of Jesusâ\nown love for his people, a love, as the narrative later indicates, unto death.\nThis love is to be the mark of the church, by which believers are to be\ndistinguished from the world. 201\nSimilarly the apostles emphasize love in their ethical teaching (as\nRom. 12:9-10, 15:30, 2 Cor. 8:7, Gal. 5:6, 22, Eph. 1:15, 3:17, 6:23, 1\nThess. 4:9, Heb. 13:1, 1 Pet. 1:22). Love is the highest Christian virtue,\naccording to 1 Cor. 13 and 1 Pet. 4:8. And as J
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: esus had taught in Matt.\n201\nIn the tradition of Reformed theology, the marks of the church are the preaching of the word of\nGod, the right administration of the sacraments, and church discipline. I believe it is biblical to\nspeak of these as marks, but to do so requires a number of inferences. Scripture never directly\nrefers to these as marks. But it does refer in that way to the love of Christ. It is unfortunate that\nthis mark has been suppressed in favor of the others. And it is tragic that the world has often not\nbeen able to see this mark in us. Too often the church has not been a notable example of love,\nbut has been more famous for its battles. See my paper, âMachenâs Warrior Children,â in Sung\nWook Chung, ed., Alister E. McGrath and Evangelical Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003). 182\n22:37-40 (cf. also 7:12), Paul also teaches that love fulfills the law (Rom.\n13:8-10, Gal. 5:14, cf. 6:2).\nWhat is love? I will discuss the nature of love more fully under the\nexistential perspective. For the present, we may think of it tri-\nperspectivally: love is allegiance, action, and affection. As we have seen,\nwithin the covenant, love describes the exclusive allegiance of the vassal\nto the suzerain. Scripture also defines love by action, as by Jesusâ atoning\nwork in 1 John 4:10 and our actions toward others in Rom. 13:10, Eph.\n5:2. And biblical love is also affection, as in references to sexual and\nromantic love (Gen. 29:20, 32, 2 Sam. 1:26, Prov. 5:19), the analogy\ntherein to Godâs love (Hos. 3:1, 11:4, 14:4, Zeph. 3:17), the believerâs\naffection for God (Ps. 119:97) and for other believers (Rom. 12:10, 1 Pet.\n1:22, 1 John 3:17).\nThe following considerations are important in considering the\nrelationship between love and law:\n1. Love is a command, part of the law.\nLove is the great commandment, the greatest commandment, the\nhighest virtue, the mark of the believer, center of biblical ethics. But it is\nalso, nevertheless a command among others. Many thinkers, such as\nFriedrich
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Schleiermacher, 202 Emil Brunner, 203 and Joseph Fletcher, 204\nhave tried to show that love is something other than a command. Fletcher\nsays,\nOnly one âgeneralâ proposition is prescribed, namely, the\ncommandment to love God through the neighborâ¦ And this\ncommandment is, be it noted, a normative ideal; it is not an operational\ndirective. All else, all other generalities (e.g. âOne should tell the truthâ and\nâOne should respect lifeâ) are at most only maxims, never rules. For the\nsituationist there are no rulesânone at all. 205\nHere Fletcher denies that love is a ârule.â He admits that it is a general\nproposition, but he puts general in quotation marks. (And what is the\n202\nFriedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith (N. Y.: Harper and Row, 1963). He thinks that\nlove cannot be a law, since law is concerned only with outward acts. That may be true of human\nlaw, but it certainly is not true of the law of God.\n203\nBrunner, The Divine Imperative (Phila.: Westminster Press, 1947). Brunner says that Godâs\nwill for me, love, is absolutely concrete, though law deals only with general principles. But it\ncertainly is not obvious that general principles can never dictate concrete decisions. Scripture\nitself assumes that Godâs commands do and ought to have this effect.\n204\nFletcher, Situation Ethics (Phila.: Westminster Press, 1966).\n205\nIbid., 55. Emphasis his. 183\ndifference between a rule and a proposition?) Then he says that love is a\nânormative ideal,â not an âoperational directive.â If he has defined that\ndistinction anywhere, I have not located the definition. Evidently he thinks\nthat even love cannot direct us in all concrete ethical decisions, but serves\nonly as an ideal.\nFletcher, of course, wants to deny that love is a rule or law,\nbecause he doesnât want us to be subject to rules at all, but he does want\nus to be subject to love, at least in an ideal way. But if âlove only is always\ngood,â 206 then it is hard to understand why it is not a law o
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r rule. So\nFletcher denies the existence of rules and, like Plato, embraces, in effect,\na rule that cannot be defined. The first is irrationalistic, in terms of our\nearlier analysis, and the second is rationalistic. But, as with Plato, since\nthe rationalistic principle lacks content, it is essentially irrationalistic. And\nsince Fletcherâs denial of rules is a rational hypothesis, 207 his irrationalism\nis rationalistic.\nIn place of all this, Scripture clearly makes love a command of God.\nThat fact immediately rules out any opposition or antithesis between love\nand commandments in general. Any arguments directed against the\nkeeping of commandments in general bear with equal weight against\nobedience to the love commandment. But in an ethic governed by\nScripture, such arguments carry no weight at all.\n2. The Love Commandment Requires Obedience to the Whole Law of\nGod.\nIn the suzerainty treaty structure of the covenant, the\ncommandment to love the Lord (exclusive covenant loyalty) precedes the\ndetailed prescriptions of the law. We demonstrate our love by obeying the\ncommandments. Such is the relation in the Decalogue between the first\ncommandment and the rest. Note also what follows the love\ncommandment in Deuteronomy 6:4-9:\nHear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 You shall love the\nLORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your\nmight. 6 And these words that I command you today shall be on your\nheart. 7 You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of\nthem when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and\nwhen you lie down, and when you rise. 8 You shall bind them as a sign on\nyour hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. 9 You shall\nwrite them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.\n206\n207\nIbid., 57, title of Chapter 3.\nHowever unlikely it is that one can prove by reason such a universal negative. 184\nTo love God completely is to take heed to his words, to saturate oneâs\nmind and tho
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: se of his family with the commands of God. This is certainly\nat least part of what is meant by love fulfilling the law: love carries out the\ncommandments of the lord.\nSo Jesus says that those who love him will keep his commands, a\nmajor theme in the Johannine writings (John 14:15, 21, 23, 15:10, 1 John\n2:3-5, 5:3, 2 John 5-6. 208 Unlike Fletcher, Scripture never suggests that\none must disobey a divine command in order to fulfill the law of love.\n3. Love is a Provocative Characterization of the Law\nWe have seen that the law commands us to love, and that love\ncommands us to keep Godâs commandments. Law requires love, and love\nrequires law. But that relationship suggests synonymy, that law is love and\nlove is law. Can that be right? And the question naturally arises: If love\nand law impose on us the same obligations, how do they differ? Why do\nwe need two categories, if each contains all the content of the other?\nReaders of the Theology of Lordship will not find it strange that I\ndescribe this relationship as perspectival. Love and law are the same\ncontent, considered from two different angles. But then the question\nbecomes, how do they differ as perspectives?\nAs perspectives, the difference between them is in focus or\nemphasis. âLawâ focuses on the acts we are to perform, while âloveâ\nfocuses on the heart-motives of these acts. Of course, godly heart-motives\nare themselves commanded by the law, and acts are part of the threefold\ndefinition of love that I presented earlier. But there is a difference of focus\nhere.\nTo say that love is the central obligation of the Christian is to\nemphasize that slavish obedience (Kantâs âduty for dutyâs sakeâ) is not the\ngoal of the law. Rather, that goal is a genuine passion for God and others\nthat comes from the heart. 209 Biblical ethics is first of all personal, for God\nis absolute person. It is behavior appropriate to a relationship with the one\nwho created and redeemed us, our covenant lord, a relationship that\nincludes others mad
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e in his image.\n208\nCompare also the interplay between love and obedience in 1 John 3:19-24, where these are\nwrapped together in a unique Johannine way with the concepts of assurance, Godâs knowledge,\nanswered prayer, believing in Christ, abiding in him, and the Spiritâs witness.\n209\nRecall our discussion of Godâs word written on the heart in Chapter 9. 185\nBut unlike Platoâs good, Kantâs categorical imperative, and\nFletcherâs love, biblical love is not an abstract conceptual blank. It has\ndefinite content, and God specifies that content in his law. That is the\nprinciple we express best by describing our obligation from the\nperspective of law.\nMoral Heroism\nIn this section, I will reflect further on the relation between love and law,\nparticularly in relation to the sufficiency of Scripture.\nI have said that Scripture is sufficient for ethics in the sense that it includes\nall the divine words we will ever need to determine our obligations. And since\nGodâs word is the source of our obligations, we have none except those\npresented in the word.\nThat emphasis might lead us to think that determining our obligation is\nfairly simple. If we are obligated to do something, there will be a biblical\ncommand to that effect. If there is no biblical command, there is no obligation. So\nit might seem possible to codify our obligations fairly concisely, as the Jews\nfound 613 commands in the Torah. Once we have obeyed that number of\nspecific commands, we might imagine, we will be right with God.\nBut a number of Bible incidents discourage such a project. In 2 Sam.\n23:13-17, David longingly expresses a wish for some water from the well of\nBethlehem, his home town, now under the rule of the Philistines. In response,\nDavidâs three mighty men\nbroke through the camp of the Philistines and drew water out of the well of\nBethlehem that was by the gate and carried and brought it to David. But\nhe would not drink of it. He poured it out to the LORD 17 and said, \"Far be\nit from me, O LORD, that I
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: should do this. Shall I drink the blood of the\nmen who went at the risk of their lives?\" Therefore he would not drink it.\nWere these men ethically obligated to perform this action? One looks in vain for\nany text of the Torah or elsewhere in Scripture that commands such a thing. Nor\ndid David actually command his men to do this, so they were not carrying out the\nwill of a civil authority.\nSo it may seem that they were not obligated to do what they did.\nNevertheless, the text agrees with David that what they did was something noble,\nwonderful. This was an action of surpassing valor. Scripture never suggests that\nthey sinned by adding to the word of God. And it is hard for me to imagine that 186\nthey would have done such a thing except under moral compulsion, a great\nloyalty to their leader.\nThe same question can be asked about the story of the widow in Mark\n12:44 who gave two mites, all that she had, to the temple treasury. The law\nmandated only a tithe. Was she, then, performing a work of supererogation,\ndoing more than the law requires, adding to Godâs word? Or was she doing\nsomething she was not actually obligated to do? What about Barnabas who sold\nhis property and gave it to the church (Acts 4:37)? Peter told the liar Ananias that\nin such cases believers are not required to give land to the church (Acts 5:4).\nSo some might be inclined to say that Davidâs mighty men, the widow, and\nBarnabas were governed, not by obligation, but by some other motive. If they\nwere not obligated, then, although they performed works of heroism, they would\nnot have sinned if they had chosen to omit these actions.\nBut to say that these actions are not obligatory poses problems. Are these\nactions optional, then? Something you can do or not do, at your own pleasure?\nIn 1 Cor. 9, Paul describes all his exertions for the Gospel, with all the ârightsâ\nhe has relinquished so that the Gospel might be made available without charge.\nIf he had a right to be paid by the church, we are inclined to say, certain
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ly he\ncanât have been obligated to preach without pay. But there is a sense of\nobligation in the passage:\nFor if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity\nis laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17 For if I do this of\nmy own will, I have a reward, but not of my own will, I am still entrusted with a\nstewardship. (verses 16-17)\nIf Paul has a certain ârightâ not to preach without payment, he has a\ncompulsion of some sort to forego that payment. Further, his decision\ndischarges a âstewardship entrustedâ to him. What if he had refused to\ndischarge that trust? Would he have sinned?\nBefore you answer, note that Paul says later, âI do all this for the\nsake of the Gospel, that I may share in its blessingsâ (verse 23) and then\ndescribes his compulsion as that of a runner with his eye on the goal,\nconcluding, âI beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have\npreached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.â In some\nsense, winning the prize depends on Paul's moral heroism.\nThis almost sounds like salvation by works. Of course, we know\nfrom other Scripture that it isnât that. What is it, then? Well, ultimately the\nprize is Jesus. It is his Kingdom; it is the full blessing of knowing him. 187\nCompare what Paul says here with another passage reflecting his moral\nheroism, Phil. 3:7-11, 14:\nBut whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. 8 Indeed, I\ncount everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ\nJesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count\nthem as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not\nhaving a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which\ncomes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on\nfaith- 10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share\nhis sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 that by any means possible I\nmay attain th
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e resurrection from the deadâ¦ I press on toward the goal for the\nprize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.\nPaul is so passionate about Jesus that he wants to experience all\nthe blessings that come to those who go all out for him. Itâs not that\notherwise he will go to Hell, or that there is some precise proportion\nbetween the merit of earthly works and heavenly reward. It is just that Paul\nwants to know Jesus as best he can. Cf. 2 Cor. 12, where he endures his\nsufferings âfor Christâs sakeâ (verse 10), for in that weakness is his\nstrength. Compare also 2 Cor. 1:5-6, and the perplexing verse Col. 1:24.\nBut arenât we obligated, in one sense, to know Jesus as best we\ncan? Eternal life itself is knowing Jesus, John 17:3. God told Israel\nthrough Moses that they should come to know him (Deut. 7:9). He did his\nmighty deeds âso that they might know that I am the Lord.â Not only are\nwe obligated to know him, but to love him, with all our heart, soul,\nstrength, and mind (Matt. 22:37).\nPaulâs particular moral heroism is not obligatory for all of us.\nPreaching without charge was Paulâs way of carrying out his passion for\nknowing and loving Jesus. Other apostles accepted payment for their\nministry, as was their right. But they showed their passion for Christ in\nother ways. It is that passion that is obligatory, not a particular way of\ncarrying it out. It is the principle, not Paulâs particular application of it. 210\nBut God expects some level of heroism from each of us. The Great\nCommandment, to love God with all we have, is an extreme demand. God\nmay never call you to an act of military heroism like Davidâs mighty men,\nor to give away all your belongings, like the poor widow, or to sell your\n210\nEvery commandment makes obligatory some specific applications. For example, Matt. 22:37\nimplies that we should not bow down to Baal or Zeus. But every commandment also allows a\ncertain amount of leeway for individual application. For example, the fifth commandment requires\nRu
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: th Billingsley to honor her own parents, Joe and Katherine Billingsley. But it doesnât specify\nprecisely how she is to honor them, in financial support, living arrangements, personal visits, etc.\nWe shall discuss this flexibility of application again in the next chapter, under âPriorities.â 188\nproperty, like Barnabas. But he will ask you to make some kind of really\nhard sacrifice, as he asked the Rich Young Ruler to sell all his goods to\nfeed the poor.\nMoral heroism is an obligation, because our overall obligation is to be like\nJesus: to love as he did (John 13:34, 35, 1 John 4:9-12) in his most extreme\nsacrifice, and to serve others as he served us (Mark 10:45).\nMoral heroism is another illustration of the fact discussed in Chapter 11,\nthat the whole counsel of God for ethics includes, not only the explicit content of\nScripture, but also what may be deduced or drawn from it by way of application.\nMoral heroism applies the law of love to situations of life that excite our\nadmiration, even though the specific action may not be described explicitly in\nScripture.\nSo moral heroism is part of our obligation. Of course, when we understand\nthis obligation, we can see much more clearly why our good works can never\nmeasure up to Godâs standards. By comparison with the heroism of Christ, and\neven by comparison with some of his best followers, we fall far short. So we rely\nwholly on Godâs grace in Jesus for our salvation. But as we renounce our own\nrighteousness for that of Christ (Phil. 3 again), we come to see Jesusâ glory in\ncomparison with our rubbish, and God plants in us that passion to run the race\nwith Paul: to know the fullness of Christâs blessings and, above all, to know Christ\nhimself. 189\nChapter 13: Applying the Law\nUnder the normative perspective, we have considered the norms of\nChristian ethics from the most general to the most specific: God himself, his\nword-revelation, his written word, his law. As we saw in the previous chapter, law\nis both a part of Scripture an
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d a way of looking at Scripture as a whole. Either\nway, Godâs law is norm for our lives. It tells us what to believe and what to do.\nBut we need to get still more specific. How shall we determine in specific\nterms what Godâs law has to say to us? In discussing moral heroism in the\nprevious chapter, we saw that determining Godâs will is not a simple matter of\nlooking things up in a list of commandments. For Godâs commandments,\nparticularly the law of love, are very broad. Their applications may take many\nforms that would never appear on a list of commands, indeed which do not\nappear explicitly in any biblical text. For, as I indicated in Chapter 11, most\napplications of Scripture require extra-biblical data, and they lead to conclusions\nthat may not be stated explicitly in Scripture.\nAnd this question is further complicated by the fact that Christians, rightly\nor wrongly, ignore many biblical laws. How many of us bring burnt offerings to\nchurch with us? But God commanded Israel to do that. The law of animal\nsacrifices is part of the law of God.\nIf we deny the necessity of animal sacrifices today, then we must\ndistinguish some divine laws that are, and others that are not, currently and\nliterally normative. Everything in Scripture is normative in some way, because it\ncomes from the mouth of God. Even those laws which we no longer observe\nliterally, like the animal sacrifices, have much to tell us about Godâs redemptive\npurpose, and what they teach us is divinely authoritative. But we believe that God\nno longer commands such sacrifices, and we believe that too on the authority of\nthe word of God. So there is a difference in Scripture between what is generally\nnormative and what is currently and literally normative.\nHow do we tell the difference? This is a hermeneutical question, a\nquestion of how we are to interpret the laws of the Bible. We may also describe it\nas a question of application: we are asking how the legal material in Scripture\napplies to us today.\nWhen you think ab
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: out it, it is fairly obvious that not every divine command\nin Scripture is normative for us today. As a rather absurd example, consider\nJesusâ command to his disciples in Luke 19:30,\nGo into the village in front of you, where on entering you will find a\ncolt tied, on which no one has ever yet sat. Untie it and bring it here. 190\nJesus here asks his disciples to bring him a colt to ride into Jerusalem in the\nevent we celebrate on Palm Sunday. One can imagine a contemporary religious\nsect (perhaps called the Church of the Divine Horseman) that takes this verse as\na literal demand on every Christian: every year, before Palm Sunday, every\nchurch member goes into town to fetch a colt for Jesus to ride. 211\nSuch a practice is ludicrous, of course, because it is obvious from the\ncontext of Luke 19:30 that Jesus was not issuing this command as a perpetual\nordinance for all time. Rather, this command was limited to a single instance, in a\nsingle, narrowly defined setting. How do we know? Well, the passage doesnât say\nso explicitly. But to make the commandment broader than that defies good\nhermeneutics and even common sense. 212\nSo it will not do for us to simply take every imperative in Scripture as a law\nto obey today. God has not given every biblical command to us so that we will\ncarry it out immediately. Indeed, every command is directed to a particular\nsituation that has both similarities and differences to our situations today. 213 That\nfact introduces complications into the project of formulating an ethic based on\nbiblical law.\nWhen such complications appear in theology, it is often time to make\ndistinctions. In this case, some distinctions within Godâs law will give us some\nguidance in determining what is currently normative. I shall distinguish, first,\nbetween creation ordinances and later laws, second between the Decalogue and\nother legislation, third between old and new covenants, fourth between moral,\ncivil, and ceremonial law within the Old Testament, then, fifth, certain kinds
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of\npriorities that exist in all biblical law. As in the previous chapters, we are moving\nfrom broad distinctions to more precise ones. Along the way, we shall look at the\nquestion of Theonomy. And at the end we shall look at the concept of âtragic\nmoral choice,â which claims that Godâs requirements for us are sometimes\ninconsistent.\nCreation Ordinances\nCreation ordinances are laws that God gave to Adam and Eve before the\nFall. John Murray lists among them the following: âthe procreation of offspring,\nthe replenishing of the earth, subduing of the same, dominion over the creatures,\nlabour, the weekly Sabbath, and marriage.â 214 These are taken from Gen. 1:28,\n211\nBut we wonder, why only once a year? If Jesus commanded this act as a perpetual obligation,\nshouldnât we be doing it all the time? Even at the cost of martyrdom (for some governments have\nbeen unkind to horse thieves)?\n212\nCommon sense is not the chief rule of theology, but it is not to be routinely ignored.\n213\nNote again the overlap between normative and situational perspectives. Without taking\naccount of the situation in which the norm is given, we simply donât know what the norm is.\n214\nMurray, Principles of Conduct (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 27. 191\n2:2-3, 215 15, and 24. Of course, God also gave them the specific command not to\neat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:17), but that is not\nusually considered a creation ordinance, because God gave it only for one\noccasion, not as a perpetual ordinance for mankind.\nI would add worship to this list. It is implicit in the Sabbath ordinance, but it\nis best to make it explicit. Though the term worship is not found in Gen. 1-3, it is\ninconceivable that Adam and Eve should not have responded in worship to Godâs\nintimate and immediate presence in the Garden. The Garden is a sanctuary, a\ndwelling of God, and therefore holy ground. Like Godâs dwellings on Mt. Sinai\nand Mt. Zion, Eden is evidently a mountain-dwelling of God. Note the referen
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ce\nto rivers flowing downhill in 2:10.\nI also believe that the teaching of Gen. 1:27-28 that man is the image of\nGod has ethical implications, as in Gen. 9:6 and James 3:9. Godâs procedure in\ncreating Adam (Gen. 1:26-28) and Eve (2:21-23) was uniquely different from his\ncreation of other beings. And to humans, not to any other creature, God assigned\nthe Godlike task and privilege of taking dominion over the whole earth (Gen.\n1:26, 28). Given these honors, Adam surely knew that human life was something\nexceedingly precious to God, to be deeply respected. In Gen. 9:1-7, God renews\nthe cultural mandate to Noah, with a reminder that man is made in Godâs image\n(verse 6). He thereby justifies the law against shedding manâs blood. Certainly\nthat law was known to Adam and Eve as well, heightening the tragedy of Cainâs\nmurder in Gen. 4.\nSo the creation ordinances, like other biblical laws, have a threefold,\nindeed triperspectival, focus: on God (worship, Sabbath), the natural world\n(replenishing, subduing, and dominating the earth), and man himself (marriage,\nprocreation, labor).\nCreation ordinances are important, because they form the basic law of\nhuman existence. They do not presuppose any particular historical\ncircumstances, as do, for example, the laws of Moses. Creation ordinances are\ngiven to man as man, presupposing only our createdness in Godâs image and the\nearth as our created environment. So it is unlikely that God would abrogate or\nsignificantly modify any of these ordinances in the course of history.\nAfter the consummation of history, of course, at least one of these\nordinances will change. Jesus teaches that in the resurrection, human beings will\nneither marry nor give in marriage (Matt. 22:30). Evidently then procreation also\nceases. Some have taught, too, that since Jesus has filled all things (Eph. 4:10)\nand has subdued all things to himself (Matt. 28:18) that the cultural mandate is\nno longer in effect for New Testament believers. I disagree with this view, as I\nsha
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ll indicate under the situational perspective. But although the creation\n215\nThis justification for the Sabbath ordinance is controversial. I shall argue its validity under the\nFourth Commandment. 192\nordinances are, among biblical laws, the least problematic, there is room for\ndiscussion as to their present and future application.\nThe Decalogue and the Case Laws\nThe Decalogue may be seen as a republication of the creation ordinances,\napplying them to Israelâs life within the Mosaic Covenant. The first four\ncommandments 216 deal with worship, including Sabbath. If I am right to include\nworship as a creation ordinance, and Murray is right to include the Sabbath, then\nthese four commandments are direct applications of these ordinances. The Fifth\nand Seventh Commandments are based on the ordinances of marriage and\nfamily. The Sixth and Ninth Commandments are based on the preciousness of\nhuman life in the image of God. The Eighth and Tenth Commandments are\nbased on Godâs command to labor, to subdue the earth, and to take dominion\nover it. God gives to us possessions, inheritances, and he calls us to increase\nthese by the sweat of our brow, not by taking what belongs to others.\nCertainly the commands of the Decalogue still bind new covenant\nbelievers, in general terms. Jesusâ Sermon on the Mount contains extended\nexposition of some of the commands in the Decalogue. He condemns the\noversimplifications and distortions of the Scribes and Pharisees, but he affirms\nthe commandments in their deepest significance. To the rich young man who\nasks Jesus what he must do to attain eternal life Jesus presents first\ncommandments of the Decalogue (Matt. 19:16-19), before asking him to sell his\ngoods and âfollow meâ (verse 21). 217 Paul cites commandments from the\nDecalogue when he seeks to show that love fulfills the law (Rom. 13:9-10).\nJames also affirms commandments of the Decalogue as he demands that his\nreaders fulfill the whole law, not just part of it (James 2:8-12).\nSo the whole church h
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: as recognized that the Decalogue remains\nnormative for us, with the exception, in some circles, of the Fourth\nCommandment. I shall address the controversy over the Fourth Commandment\nat a later point. But there are no changes in redemptive history sufficient to make\nadultery lawful or to render immoral the honoring of parents.\n216\nIn referring to the numbers of the commandments in the Decalogue, I am using the numbering\nsystem common in Reformed (and most evangelical) circles, rather than the different systems\nused by Lutherans, Roman Catholics, and Jews. The First, then, is the prohibition of other gods,\nthe Second the prohibition of idol-worship. The prohibition of coveting is all one commandment,\nthe Tenth.\n217\nIt may be significant that the commandments Jesus cites in verses 18-19 are from the âsecond\ntableâ of the law, dealing with our responsibilities to fellow human beings. The requirement to\nâfollow me,â then, in effect summarizes the first table, our responsibility toward God. So Jesusâ\nuse of the Decalogue may contain a startling testimony to his own deity. 193\nNevertheless, there are some features in the Decalogue that refer\nspecifically to Israelâs situation as they wait in the wilderness to enter the\npromised land. In the Deuteronomic version of the Fourth Commandment, the\npeople are to keep the Sabbath because âyou shall remember that you were a\nslave in the land of Egypt and the Lord your God brought you out from there with\na mighty hand and an outstretched armâ (Deut. 5:15). The Fifth Commandment\npromises to those who honor parents âthat your days may be long in the land that\nthe Lord your God is giving youâ (Ex. 20:12). When we apply these\ncommandments to our own situations, we need to apply these details in ways\ndifferent from, though analogous to, Israelâs situation. We keep the Sabbath, not\nbecause we were literally delivered from Egypt, but because Jesus delivered us\nfrom the greater bondage of which Egypt is a type: bondage to sin. And we hono
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r\nparents, not literally to have long life in the land of Canaan, but to enjoy Godâs\nfullest blessings wherever we are on the earth (epi tes ges) 218 (Eph. 6:3), and,\nbeyond that, in the new heavens and new earth to come.\nSo it is not unthinkable that some elements of the Decalogue may change\nin their application, even though the basic obligations set forth bind all human\nbeings until the last judgment.\nNow within the Pentateuch, it is also important for us also to distinguish\nbetween fundamental law (creation ordinances, the Decalogue) and case law.\nSome scholars use the terms apodictic and casuistic to identify these two\ncategories. Apodictic laws are, as Kant would say, categorical imperatives. They\nsimply tell us what to do, as in the Decalogue, âYou shall not steal,â etc.\nCasuistic laws are hypothetical imperatives. Typically, they begin with an\nâif,â indicating the circumstances and conditions in which the law is applicable.\nFor example, Ex. 22:1 reads, âIf a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it or\nsells it, he shall repay five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.â The\napodictic laws serve as the fundamental constitution of Israel. The case laws are\njudicial precedents, examples of how judges have applied the apodictic laws to\nvarious circumstances. The law of Moses includes many casuistic laws, as a\nguide for judges who must make similar applications.\nOf course, every situation is different. Ex. 21:33-34 says,\nWhen a man opens a pit, or when a man digs a pit and does not\ncover it, and an ox or a donkey falls into it, 34 the owner of the pit shall\nmake restoration. He shall give money to its owner, and the dead beast\nshall be his.\n218\nThis may be a bit of an exegetical stretch. Paul may simply be quoting the commandment, and\nthe ge may simply refer to the promised land, as the corresponding Hebrew term does in Ex.\n5:12. But as we shall see in the next section, the equivalent of the promised land in the new\ncovenant is nothing less than the whole earth.
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 194\nBut what if the owner of the field has taken steps to cover his pit, but a storm\nweakens the cover? Then, presumably, the judge must assess (as judges must\ndo today) how much of the responsibility belongs to the owner and how much he\nshould pay, taking the circumstances into account. The case laws are not\nintended to refer specifically to every situation that may arise. Rather, they\naddress representative situations, so as to guide judges in assessing\nresponsibility.\nThe Decalogue leaves judges no discretion. They have no authority to\nmake theft legal, or to penalize people for worshiping the true God. But the case\nlaws encourage judges to be flexible in considering how the principles of the\nDecalogue apply to each case. They may not contradict the case laws, any more\nthan they may contradict the Decalogue. But since cases vary, God gives to\njudges discretion to relate the Decalogue to new cases in wise and creative\nways. As in modern courts, the judges certainly had power to determine\nmitigating and aggravating circumstances, to assess motives, to determine\nprobabilities in the evidence.\nThe penalties attached to crimes in the case laws are also exemplary,\nrather than to be woodenly applied. For example, it is evident that in many capital\ncrimes, there is provision to ransom the life of the criminal. Num. 35:31 prohibits\nransom for the life of a murderer. But that suggests that ransom was possible in\nother crimes for which the case laws specify the death penalty, even when the\ntext does not specifically mention the possibility of ransom. Examples may be\nadultery, homosexuality, and blasphemy. Ex. 21:30 specifically mentions the\npossibility of ransom in an otherwise capital case. It may well be that judges in\nIsrael had considerable liberty to determine penalties for crimes, following\ngeneral principles of law found through the Pentateuch.\nOld and New Covenants\nWhen the New Testament refers to the âold covenantâ (2 Cor. 3:14, Heb.\n8:13) it speaks of the covenant God made with
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Israel with Moses as mediator\n(Ex. 19-24). The ânew covenantâ is, in Heb. 8 and 10, the covenant of which\nJesus is mediator, identified with the new covenant of Jer. 31:31-34.\nGod is the author of both covenants, and the covenant documents of each\ncontinue to be normative for Godâs people. Jesus proclaims the authority of the\nold covenant Scriptures in Matt. 5:17-20, as weâve seen, and Paul says the same\nin 2 Tim. 3:16-17. And the New Covenant words of Jesus and the Apostles come\nto us authoritatively through the New Testament Scriptures.\nBoth covenants continue the promise that God will bless all nations\nthrough Abrahamâs children (Gen. 12:3), a promise of Godâs grace. Both 195\ncovenants also include divine commands. Murray argues that the demand for\nobedience and the promise of salvation by grace through faith are substantially\nthe same in both covenants. 219 The demand for obedience in both covenants is\nnot a demand that people earn their salvation through meritorious works (though\nthe Jews sometimes misconstrued the Mosaic Covenant as works\nrighteousness). Rather, it calls upon the believer to obey God (by Godâs grace)\nas the appropriate response to redemption. Murray quotes Geerhardus Vos in\nthis connection:\nIt is plain, then, that law-keeping did not figure at that juncture [the\nMosaic Covenant-- JF] as the meritorious ground of life-inheritance. The\nlatter is based on grace alone, no less emphatically than Paul himself\nplaces salvation on that ground. But, while this is so, it might still be\nobjected that law-observance, if not the ground for receiving, is yet made\nthe ground for retention of the privileges inherited. Here it can not, of\ncourse, be denied that a real connection exists. But the Judaizers went\nwrong in inferring that the connection must be meritorious, that, if Israel\nkeeps the cherished gifts of Jehovah through obedience of His law, this\nmust be so, because in strict justice they had earned them. The\nconnection is of a totally different kind. It bel
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ongs not to the legal sphere of\nmerit, but to the symbolico-typical sphere of appropriateness of\nexpression. 220\nNevertheless, Heb. 7-10 does indicate substantial changes that come with\nthe New Covenant, changes so great that the author refers to the Old Covenant\nas âobsoleteâ (8:13). He adds, âand what is becoming obsolete and growing old is\nready to vanish away.â Those changes are\n1. A New Priesthood (7:1-28). Jesus, the priest after the order of\nMelchizedek replaces the Aaronic priesthood. This fact involves a âchange in the\nlawâ (7:12), for the Mosaic law itself makes no provision for such a change. For\nthis reason alone, many of the laws of the Pentateuch are no longer literally\napplicable: those that deal with the ordination of priests, their daily work of\nsacrifice, the cleansing rituals they must follow, their daily maintenance of the\ntabernacle and temple, their yearly entrance into the holiest place.\n2. A New Sacrifice (8:1-10:18), by which Jesus deals with our sins âonce\nfor allâ (9:26-28, 10:12-18). It was impossible for the blood of bulls and goats,\nunder the old covenant, to take away sins (10:4), but Jesus sacrifice of himself\ndealt with the sins of his people completely and for all time, so that we need no\nadditional sacrifice. So in the new covenant sacrifices of animals, grain, oil, and\nwine play no further role. Laws requiring these are no longer literally normative,\nthough we can learn much from them about the nature of Jesusâ sacrifice.\n219\nJohn Murray, Principles of Conduct (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957). 194-201. His whole\ndiscussion is very valuable.\n220\nVos, Biblical Theology, Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954), 143. 196\nOther passages mention three more changes that are also vitally\nimportant, namely,\n3. A New Nation. The new covenant is not specifically between God and\nnational Israel, as was the old. It is with a new family, a new nation, consisting of\nboth Jews and Gentiles. Of course, even the old covenant was open to
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Gentiles\nwho worshiped the God of Israel and accepted circumcision. And the new\ncovenant is in a sense an extension of the old: the olive tree of Israel with some\nbranches broken off and other (Gentile) branches grafted in (Rom. 11:17-24).\nBut the new covenant is nevertheless radically new. In the new covenant,\nâneither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith\nworking through loveâ (Gal. 5:6, cf. 6:15, 1 Cor. 7:19). Because of this new\nfamily, the council of Jerusalem described in Acts 15 stated that Gentiles could\nbe members of the church in good standing without being circumcised and\nwithout keeping all the laws of Moses. The council did ask that Gentiles abstain\nfrom âthings polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has\nbeen strangled, and from bloodâ (Acts 15:20, 29). 221 The reason given was not\nthe intrinsic immorality of these actions, but because âfrom ancient generations\nMoses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every\nSabbath in the synagoguesâ (verse 21). Of course, sexual immorality is to be\navoided as something wrong in itself (as 1 Cor. 5:1-13). But the council was\nimmediately concerned, evidently, not with morality as such, but with the offense\nthat Gentile Christians might give to Jewish Christians.\nSo God has broken down the âdividing wallâ (Eph. 2:14) between Jews\nand Gentiles, as Paul writes to Gentile Christians:\nTherefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called \"the\nuncircumcision\" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the\nflesh by hands- 12 remember that you were at that time separated from\nChrist, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the\ncovenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But\nnow in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by\nthe blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both\none and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 15 by\nabolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create\nin himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might\nreconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the\nhostility. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and\npeace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access in\none Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens,\n221\nThese are among the âNoachian commandmentsâ recognized by Jewish tradition as pertaining\nto Gentiles as well as Jews. A good, brief introduction to this tradition can be found in J.\nBudziszewski, Written on the Heart (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1997), 202-207. 197\nbut you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household\nof God, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ\nJesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure,\nbeing joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. 22 In him you\nalso are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.\n(Eph. 2:11-22)\nNote that breaking the dividing wall leads to the abolishment of commandments\nand ordinances (verse 15). Note also that there is a new temple (verses 21-22).\nSo in the new covenant, the temple in Jerusalem has lost its status as the\nunique dwelling place of God. Its veil was torn in two, from top to bottom, when\nJesus was crucified (Mark 15:38). In 70 AD, the building itself was destroyed, as\nJesus had predicted (Matt. 24:1-2). Godâs dwelling now is in the heavenly\ntabernacle (Heb. 9:11), in Jesus (John 1:14), and in Jesusâ people (1 Cor. 3:16).\nAnd if God no longer dwells uniquely in the temple, the unique significance\nof the land of Palestine must change as well. For the land was holy, because the\nholy God dwelled in that land, with his holy people. But if there is a change in the\nholy people and the place of Godâs dwelling, then the land loses its special\nsignificance.\nIt is hard to say
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: precisely what modifications these principles introduce\ninto the law, but let me suggest the following:\n(a) Certainly this development does away with the requirement of\ncircumcision, effectively replacing it with the new covenant sacrament of baptism.\nIt vindicates the judgment of Acts 15.\n(b) I would assume that it also changes those provisions of the old\ncovenant law that are primarily designed to defend the unique holiness of the\ntemple, the land, and the nation of Israel. The new covenant church as such\npossesses no land in Palestine. The annual feasts, which brought the Jews near\nto Godâs dwelling three times a year, are no longer appropriate to a truly\ninternational people of God. The laws such as the Jubilee that guarded the\noriginal divisions of the land of Palestine are not binding on Gentiles who never\nhad such land rights.\n(c) Advocates of the ânew perspective on Paulâ claim that certain laws had\na particular importance in the conflict between Judaism and Hellenism, and\ntherefore in the New Testament controversy over the âworks of the law.â Don\nGarlington describes the views of James D. G. Dunn:\nDunn does maintain that âthe works of the lawâ encompass the\nwhole Torah, but within the period of the Second Temple certain aspects\nof the law became especially prominent as the boundary and identity 198\nmarkers of the Jewish people: prominently circumcision, food laws, purity\nlaws, and sabbath. 222\nIt may well be that these are the laws Paul especially considers to have been set\naside 223 by the work of Christ, though as Dunn implies these are not the only\nlaws, for Paul, that lack the power to save.\n(d) Vern S. Poythress argues that many other laws in the old covenant\nare, in part or in whole, means by which God guarded his unique relationship\nwith the Jewish people in the holy land of Palestine. Israel, for example, was to\npurge the land of false religion. Deut. 13:1-18 calls Israel to destroy unbelieving\ncities within the holy land, as part of its holy war agains
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t the Canaanite tribes. But\nin the New Testament, God does not call the church to exterminate unbelievers\nfor their unbelief, but rather to fight against the âultimate opponentsâ of the Lord,\nSatan and his hosts (Eph. 6:12). And,\nâ¦now during the New Testament era there is an advance. Holy war is\nwaged through baptism and union with Christ. The flesh is crucified (Gal.\n5:24). Human beings are not simply destroyed as were the Canaanites,\nbut raised to life because of Christâs resurrection. This situation is the\nfoundation for widespread evangelism. Now the whole inhabited earth has\nbecome the new land that is to be conquered in Godâs name (Matthew\n28:18-20). We are to wage holy war. But the nature of that holy war is\nredefined because of Christ. 224\nSo we should also take into account\n4. A New Mission: As Poythress indicates, the new covenant requires a\nnew conquest, not the military conquest of a piece of territory, but the conquest\nof the whole world through the preaching of the Gospel. As with the Old\nTestament holy war, this conquest brings Godâs judgment. But for those whom\nGod has chosen, the judgment has fallen on Christ, and what remains is\nresurrection unto new life. This Great Commission is the fundamental task of the\nchurch:\n222\nGarlington, âLaw and Gospel: the Contribution of the New Perspective on Paul,â forthcoming.\nThe reference to sabbath will trouble some who follow the tradition of the Westminster Standards.\nBut of course that term is found in Col. 2:16, so there must be some sense in which the term\nsabbath can designate a law transcended by Christ. I shall discuss this issue under the Fourth\nCommandment.\n223\nIn one sense, no law of God is ever set aside or abrogated (Matt. 5:17-20). But there are some\nthat, because of events in redemptive history, we come to observe, in our new covenant age, in\nvery different ways from what God asked of the old covenant Israelites. The commands to\nworship God by sacrifice, for example, continue to be normative, but we
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: now worship by the\nsacrifice of Christ. Please insert this qualification whenever I use terms like âabrogatedâ or âset\naside.â What I mean is that such laws are no longer to be literally obeyed. But I cannot make that\nqualification every time the issue comes up.\n224\nVern S. Poythress, The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses (Brentwood, TN: Wohlgemuth\nand Hyatt, 1991), 147-48. 199\nAnd Jesus came and said to them, \"All authority in heaven and on\nearth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all\nnations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of\nthe Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded\nyou. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.\" (Matt.\n28:18-20)\nThis missionary conquest takes Godâs presence to dwell in people all over the\nworld, âfrom every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languagesâ (Rev. 7:9).\nIn the Old Testament, there was also a concern for the nations of the world. God\nhad promised Abraham that in him all the families of the earth would be blessed\n(Gen. 12:3). But in the Old Testament itself, the missionary direction was, as it\nhas been called, predominantly âcentripetal:â the nations were to come to worship\nGod in Jerusalem (as Zech. 14:16-19). Isaiah anticipates a greater reality: altars\nto the Lord in foreign lands, equality between Egypt, Assyria, and Israel, as\nGodâs people (Isa. 19:23-25). But only in the New Testament, in Jesusâ Great\nCommission of Matt. 28, does the movement of God become fully âcentrifugal,â\nmoving outward to all the nations of the world.\nThis expansive mission reinforces the importance of the changes in law\nnoted in #3. As the church moves to many nations, there is no place for laws\nmandating distinctive clothing or diet. Rather, Paulâs rule is âI have become all\nthings to all people, that by all means I might save someâ (1 Cor. 9:22). God no\nlonger asks us to preserve the distinctiveness of our own national culture, but to\n
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sacrifice that distinctiveness to reach others for Christ. So God admonishes\nPeter, who resists outreach to the Gentile Cornelius, that âwhat God has made\nclean, do not call commonâ (Acts 10:15). God drives home the point in a vision\nwhere he tells Peter to kill and eat all sorts of animals that the law describes as\nunclean.\nSo the cleansing laws and dietary laws no longer bind the Christian\nliterally, though we may still learn much from them about Godâs desire for purity\nin his people.\nTherefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink,\nor with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17 These are a\nshadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. (Col.\n2:16-17) 225\nAccording to this arrangement [that of the Old Testament priesthood and\ntemple-JF], gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the\nconscience of the worshiper, 10 but deal only with food and drink and\n225\nWe shall have to discuss under the Fourth Commandment the specific teaching of this\npassage concerning Sabbath observance. 200\nvarious washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of\nreformation. (Heb. 9:9-10)\nAs for dietary laws, see Mark 7:14-23 (especially 19), Peterâs vision in Acts 10:9-\n16 and 11:2-10, and the passages we considered earlier in Rom. 14 and 1 Cor.\n8-10, which emphasize that âthe kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and\ndrinking but of righteousnesss and peace and joy in the Holy Spiritâ (Rom.\n14:17).\n5. A New Maturity. In Gal. 3:23-4:11, Paul compares our freedom from the\nlaw to the freedom of slaves liberated from their bondage. The law was our\nâguardian until Christ cameâ (3:24). The âguardianâ (paidagogos, translated\nâschoolmasterâ in the KJV) was the servant who took the children to school, often\ngiving them some harsh discipline along the way. But ânow that faith has come,\nwe are no longer under a guardianâ (verse 25). This means that we are no longer\nslaves, but sons, crying âAbba! Father!
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: â (4:6-7). This new relationship to God sets\nus free from âelementary principles of the worldâ (4:9), such as the observance of\nâdays and months and seasons and yearsâ (verse 10).\nIt is difficult to determine precisely what laws Paul refers to here. I shall\nrefer to this passage again under the Fourth Commandment. But here I want to\nobserve that Paul regards the New Testament believer as more mature than\nthose under the old order. Children need constant restraint to keep them moving\nin the right direction. Adults, ideally at least, are expected to discipline\nthemselves from within. So it is right for them to have more freedom and\nresponsibility. In the religious parallel, Christians are sons, rather than mere\nslaves. Our relation to God is more spontaneous.\nThis maturity comes from the work of Christ and the outpouring of the\nSpirit in a far greater fullness than was known under the old covenant. So, as we\nsaw in Chapter 3, the New Testament writers motivate us to good behavior, not\nonly by citing the law, but by appeal to the work of Christ (Col. 3:1-3) and the\npresence of the Spirit (Gal. 5:16).\nMoral, Ceremonial, and Judicial Law\nChapter 19 of WCF presents a distinction between various kinds of law:\nII. This law, after [manâs] fall, continued to be a perfect rule of\nrighteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai, in\nten commandments, and written in two tables: the first four\ncommandments containing our duty towards God; and the other six, our\nduty to man. 201\nIII. Beside this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to\nthe people of Israel, as a church under age, ceremonial laws, containing\nseveral typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, his graces,\nactions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly, holding forth divers\ninstructions of moral duties. All which ceremonial laws are now abrogated,\nunder the new testament.\nIV. To them also, as a body politic, he gave sundry judicial laws, which\nexpired together with the State of
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: that people; not obliging any other now,\nfurther than the general equity thereof may require.\nThe moral law, then, is our fundamental responsibility toward God as set forth in\nthe creation ordinances and, as we have seen, in the Decalogue. Ceremonial law\nhas to do with the Aaronic priesthood, animal sacrifices, annual feasts,\ncircumcision, the Day of Atonement, laws of uncleanness, and others. Judicial\nlaw (often called civil) includes crimes punishable by the state and the penalties\nrequired for them.\nThe distinction is a good one, in a rough-and-ready way. As we have\nseen, there are such things as moral laws, that are based on our nature as\nhuman creatures of God, and are therefore literally normative for all history. It will\nnever be right to steal or murder. It will always be right to worship the one true\nGod exclusively and to honor oneâs parents. And, as we saw in the last section,\nthere are many laws which should not be kept literally in the present period of\nredemptive history, and those are what the Confession calls ceremonial. Finally,\nthere are laws given to guide the actions of civil magistrates in Israel, and those\nmay be called civil.\nBut when we get into details, these designations are not as sharp or as\nhelpful as we might like. For one thing, the laws of the Pentateuch are not clearly\nlabeled as moral, civil, or ceremonial. In passages like Lev. 19, laws that we\ngroup under these categories are all mixed together. And the New Testament\ndoesnât mention such distinctions either, typically referring simply to âthe law.â As\nweâve seen, âthe lawâ has various meanings in the New Testament, which must\nbe determined by context. The threefold distinction, then, is a theological one, not\nfound explicitly in Scripture. Theologians use it as a tool to analyze and classify\nthe various laws in the Bible.\nFurther, there are problems with each of these designations:\n1. The Moral Law: The creation ordinances and the Decalogue are surely\nthe most obvious candidates for th
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e status of âmoral laws.â But as we saw earlier,\nthere are open questions as to the present applicability of these. Of course, if one\nbelieves, for example, that the cultural mandate is no longer normative, then he\ncan claim to relegate that commandment to the ceremonial, rather than the moral\ncategory. But then, the categories moral and ceremonial are not as helpful as we 202\nmight have thought. In these cases, we donât determine that a law is ceremonial\nand therefore not currently normative; rather the reverse. Rather than\ndetermining that a law is abrogated because it is ceremonial, we determine that it\nis ceremonial because we believe it to be abrogated. So moral is just a label for\nthose laws we believe to be currently normative, rather than a quality of the laws\nthat leads us to that conclusion. Similarly, ceremonial. There is nothing\nparticularly wrong with this procedure, as long as we understand what we are\ndoing.\n2. The Ceremonial Law: One might think that ceremonial laws are about\nceremonies, particularly liturgies used in worship. Many of them are, including\ncircumcision, the sacrifices, priestly ordination, priestly garments, feasts, perhaps\ncleansing laws, and so on. However (a) Some laws about ceremonies are\ngenerally considered part of the moral law, rather than the ceremonial law. For\nexample, the first four commandments of the Decalogue govern the worship of\nGodâs people. (b) Some laws often called ceremonial have little to do with\nceremonies, such as dietary laws, clothing laws (as Num. 15:38), laws\nconcerning leprosy and other diseases. Again, it seems as though theologians\ncall certain laws âceremonial,â not because they share a certain subject-matter,\nbut rather because they are judged not appropriate to the new covenant. The\nname ceremonial, therefore, is somewhat misleading. But I suppose we need\nsome word to refer to laws that are not currently normative, and ceremonial is the\nword adopted by the Reformed tradition for that purpose.\n3. The Civil Law:
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: These are defined as the laws of the state of Israel as it\nexisted in the Old Testament period. There are a number of problems, however,\nwith this concept:\n(a) The laws of the Pentateuch rarely indicate precisely who is to enforce\nthem. Some fall under the authority of judges (as Ex. 21:22), others of priests (as\nLev. 1-9). Sometimes the elders play a role (as Deut. 19:12). But many others\nare not assigned to any government except that of God (as, we presume, in Lev.\n19:18), the self-government of individuals (as the dietary laws), and the informal\nsanctions of the community.\n(b) In Reformed theology, as in WCF, the distinction of âcivilâ from âmoralâ\nindicates that all the laws deemed civil are no longer normative. But that begs\nquestions that deserve to be investigated. The Mosaic law contains a death\npenalty for the crime of murder, for example (Ex. 21:14, Deut. 19:11-13). But that\nlaw is not given merely to Israel. God gave it long before to Noah, and through\nhim, to the whole human race (Gen. 9:6). This law does not serve any purpose\nunique to the Israelite theocracy. Rather, it is an administration of simple justice.\nSo among the civil laws are at least some that apply to nations other than\nIsraelâi.e., some that are not merely civil, but moral. 203\n(c) The WCF 19.4, quoted earlier, makes a significant exception to the\nâexpirationâ of the civil laws: ânot obliging any other now [that is, any state other\nthan Old Testament IsraelâJF], further than the general equity thereof may\nrequire.â What is this âgeneral equity?â The meaning of this phrase has been the\nsubject of considerable debate. But the basic idea is not difficult to ascertain.\nGod gives some laws to Israel that presuppose its unique status as Godâs\nchosen people. Among these are the laws concerning sacrifice, tabernacle, and\npriesthood. But he gives other laws that do not presuppose Israelâs unique\nstatus, but which merely command basic justice. We saw this in (b) above in\nrelation to the dea
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: th penalty for murder. As another example, the basic penalty\nfor theft is double restitution (Ex. 22:7). This penalty, again, is not based on\nIsraelâs unique status as Godâs holy people. Rather, it is a matter of simple\njustice: the thief must return what he stole, plus an equal amount, so that he\nloses what he hoped to gain. So this law is not only normative for Israel, but for\nany nation that seeks justice. That is to say, this particular civil law is a moral law.\nAll the laws God gives to Israel are just, and in that sense they are a\nmodel for other nations. Moses says to Israel,\nSee, I have taught you statutes and rules, as the LORD my God\ncommanded me, that you should do them in the land that you are entering\nto take possession of it. 6 Keep them and do them, for that will be your\nwisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples, who, when\nthey hear all these statutes, will say, 'Surely this great nation is a wise and\nunderstanding people.' (Deut. 4:5-6)\nThat is to say, all the laws of God are perfectly just and right, given Israelâs\nsituation. Israel is Godâs holy people, and these laws are perfect laws for a holy\npeople in the environment of the promised land. When Israel keeps these laws,\nthe nations will see them as good and wise.\nThis does not mean that all the laws of Israel should have been\ntransferred verbatim into the law-books of Egypt and Babylon. Egypt and\nBabylon are not holy peoples. Their culture and economies are different. But\ncertainly some laws, like double restitution for theft, should be adopted by those\nand other nations as well. Further, Lev. 18:24-30, speaking of laws concerning\nsexual relations, indicates that nations other than Israel are responsible to the\nsame standards as Israel:\nDo not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all\nthese the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean, 25\nand the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land\nvomited out its inhabitants. 26 But you shall kee
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: p my statutes and my rules\nand do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who\nsojourns among you 27 (for the people of the land, who were before you, 204\ndid all of these abominations, so that the land became unclean), 28 lest the\nland vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation\nthat was before you. 29 For everyone who does any of these abominations,\nthe persons who do them shall be cut off from among their people. 30 So\nkeep my charge never to practice any of these abominable customs that\nwere practiced before you, and never to make yourselves unclean by\nthem: I am the LORD your God.\" 226\nSo we should understand âgeneral equityâ to refer to the overlap between the civil\nlaw and the moral law. In the law of Israel, God enforces justice upon his people.\nThe law has other purposes as well, including ritual holiness, typology, and\nsymbolism, that are not appropriate for other nations. But justice is appropriate\nfor all nations, and the justice of the law of Moses is a model for justice in all\nnations.\nThe problem, then, in dealing with Israelite civil law, is distinguishing\nbetween the demands of justice as such and the special demands made of Israel\nas a holy people of God. The Feast of Tabernacles is clearly one of the latter,\nand the death penalty for murder is one of the former. But the two arenât always\nas easily distinguished. What about the provision of cities of refuge for those\naccused of murder (Num. 35)? Is that a wise provision to protect the lives of\nthose falsely accused, or is it a special provision for Godâs holy people (note that\nthe slayer is released only at the death of the high priest, verse 28). The student\nof the Mosaic law must think through each statute to determine what it means,\nasking why God gave that statute to Israel. Did God give it simply as justice? As\na type of Christ? As a way to remind Israel of their special covenant? Or some\ncombination of these? Students of the law must think through many possib
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ilities.\nTheonomy\nTheonomy, sometimes called Christian reconstruction, is a movement of\nReformed thinkers dedicated to encourage observance of the Mosaic law among\nChristians. The patriarch of the movement was the late Rousas J. Rushdoony,\nfounder of the Chalcedon ministry, who set forth his position in many writings,\nespecially The Institutes of Biblical Law. 227 This position is also espoused in\nmany writings by economic historian Gary North, Rushdoonyâs son-in-law. The\nmost cogent exponent of theonomy was the late Greg L. Bahnsen, author of\nTheonomy in Christian Ethics. 228\n226\nFor other evidence of the continuity between what God demands of Israel and what he\ndemands of other nations, see Greg Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics (Phillipsburg:\nPresbyterian and Reformed, 1977), 339-64.\n227\nNutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1973. See my review in an Appendix to this volume.\n228\nNutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1977. 205\nBahnsen uses a phrase that expresses well the overall program of\ntheonomy, as theonomists understand it. That is, âThe Abiding Validity of the Law\nin Exhaustive Detail.â 229 It appears to be a simple and radical proposal, telling us\nto simply hear Godâs law and do it, all of it. According to Bahnsen, this proposal\nis an implication of Matt. 5:17-20. So he and other theonomists see their\nopponents as antinomianâas people who are not willing to obey Godâs\ncommands. 230\nBut as we have seen, the question of obeying biblical laws is not simply\nwhether we will obey them. It is also a question of how to interpret them, how to\napply them. And theonomists are not oblivious to the hermeneutical questions.\nIndeed they, like the majority of Christians, regard much of the law as no longer\ncurrently normative. When Bahnsen speaks of the âabiding validity of the law in\nexhaustive detail,â he does not mean that we should literally keep the dietary\nlaws or bring animal sacrifices to church with us. Rather, like most of us, he sees\nthese laws as fulfilled in Christ, in such a way
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: that they donât need to be kept\nliterally today. The âabiding validityâ of these laws means, rather, that we keep\nthem by worshipping on the basis of Jesusâ final sacrifice. When we bring the\nsacrifice of Christ before the Father, we are obeying the Old Testament\ncommand to bring sacrifices to God. So the âabiding validity of the lawâ is flexible\nenough to allow considerable change in the specific nature of our obligation. But\nunderstood in that flexible way, most all orthodox Reformed thinkers would agree\nwith the principle. Given that flexible understanding, the principle is not nearly as\nradical as it sounds.\nSo what is different about theonomy? I would say that theonomy is not\nabsolutely different from other Reformed positions, but relatively so. The relative\ndifference is as follows: Theonomy is a school of thought within Reformed\ntheology which prefers literal, specific, and detailed applications of Mosaic civil\nlaws to modern civil government. The word \"prefers\" gives us some leeway. At\npoints, the theonomists, like the rest of us, apply the law in general and non-\nliteral ways. But they tend more than the rest of us to prefer the specific and the\nliteral.\nIn terms of our earlier discussion, theonomists tend to see a larger overlap\nbetween civil laws and moral laws than do other Reformed thinkers. Greg\nBahnsen even rejects the distinction between civil and moral. For him, there is a\nmajor, systematic distinction in Scripture between moral laws and ceremonial\nlaws (or ârestorative,â as he prefers). And the civil laws, particularly the penalties\nfor civil crimes, are not a third category. Rather, they are themselves either moral\nor ceremonial. In Bahnsenâs view, they are largely moral. 231 In particular,\nBahnsen and other theonomists insist that the penalties for civil crimes in the\n229\nIbid., 39, from the title to Chapter 2.\nBahnsen calls his opponents âlatent antinomiansâ in ibid., 306-314.\n231\nIbid., 207-216.\n230 206\nPentateuch are normative for moder
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n civil governments, including death\npenalties for adultery, homosexuality, and blasphemy.\nTheonomy appeals to many who are unhappy with the vagueness of much\nChristian ethics. Theonomy seems to promise them clear-cut answers to their\nethical questions. But theonomists differ much among themselves as to how\nthe civil laws are to be applied. In their movement, there is controversy, for\nexample, over the status of dietary laws, the levirate, and long-term loans.\nSo the differences between theonomists and other Reformed thinkers are\nnot sharp, but somewhat fuzzy. Rather, theonomy as defined above is an\nemphasis, a tendency.\nThe opposite tendency is found in a number of authors, notably Meredith\nG. Kline. Like Bahnsen, Kline makes a bold, programmatic statement, namely,\nâthe Old Testament is not the canon of the Christian church.â 232 By this\nstatement, he does not intend to deny the authority of the Old Testament.\nIndeed, he recognizes the Old Testament to be Godâs word, inspired and\ninfallible. But it is not canon, which in his view is\nâ¦not a matter of faith-norms but of life-norms. More specifically, inasmuch\nas the nuclear function of each canonical Testament is to structure the\npolity of the covenant people, canonicity precisely and properly defined is\na matter of community life-norms. 233\nFor Kline, the Old Testament is not part of the Christian canon, because it is the\ncovenant document of the Mosaic covenant, not of the new covenant in Christ.\nThe New Testament alone is the document of the new covenant. Although the\nOld Testament is normative for the faith of New Testament believers (i.e. for their\nâfaith-normsâ), it is not normative for its community life-norms (though\npresumably it is authoritative in some way for individual life-norms).\nI find these distinctions unpersuasive. I grant that we should define canon\nas those documents God has given to govern the lives of the covenant people of\nGod. But I donât see any biblical basis for the distinctions between life and
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: faith,\nor individual and community, that Kline sets forth here. Faith is part of life, and\nboth individual and community life are under Godâs covenant.\nBut my main point is that Kline, like Bahnsen, is not as brash as his initial\nhypothesis might suggest. When Kline says that the Old Testament is not our\ncanon, he does not mean what most of us think of when we hear the word canon.\nRather, he has a technical concept of canon that doesnât exclude at all the\nauthority of the Old Testament as the word of God. Further, Kline, like Bahnsen,\nis willing to apply Old Testament statutes to contemporary civil law, as in his\n232\n233\nKline, The Structure of Biblical Authority (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 99.\nIbid., 101-102. 207\ndiscussion of Ex. 21:22-25. 234 In that article, he argues that the Israelite regard\nfor the unborn rules out the practice of abortion. So Kline, like the theonomists,\nrepresents a tendency, not an extreme.\nOne gets the impression from reading Bahnsen and Kline that their\nprinciples are intended to determine our application of specific texts in the Mosaic\nlaw. Bahnsenâs approach suggests that we should always, or most often, apply\nthem literally; Klineâs approach suggests the reverse. But since both principles\nhave exceptions, we still need to give close attention to the application of each\nindividual text. For example, as we examine the statute forbidding the eating of\nblood (Lev. 17:10-12) we must ask questions such as âWhat did this mean to its\noriginal audience?â âWhy did God give them this rule?â âDoes that reason make it\nappropriate to our situation, as it was in the situation in which it was written?â\nWe must ask such questions of every statute, regardless of whether\nBahnsen is right, or Kline, or some third alternative. That fact suggests to me that\nthe exegesis of specific texts is more fundamental than the truth of any broad\ntheological principle. That is, the exegesis determines the principle, rather than\nthe other way around. That is alwa
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ys true in theology, and it is importantly true in\nthis case.\nSo whether the theonomist tendency, the Klinean tendency, or more\nconventional Reformed approaches are correct will depend, in my opinion, not\nupon general theological principles, but on the exegesis of specific passages. If,\non investigation, the best exegesis finds that most of the contested texts warrant\nhighly specific, literal and detailed applications, then we will have to say that the\ntheonomists were most right. If that exegesis more commonly points the other\nway, we will have to say that the theonomists were relatively wrong. 235\nI cannot here present exegeses of all the relevant passages; but perhaps\nthe following comments will be found helpful.\n1. Historically, Reformed thought has shown elements of both relatively\ntheonomic and relatively non-theonomic emphases. I do not believe that either\napproach may claim unequivocally to be \"the Reformed position.\" Of course,\nReformed people are not antinomian. They believe that Christians are governed\nby God's law, and that includes the Old Testament. But Reformed\nexegetes including Calvin have varied greatly as to how literally and specifically\nthey apply the details of the Mosaic legislation to their own situations.\n234\nKline, âLex Talionis and the Human Fetus,â Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society\n20.3 (Sept., 1977), 193-201.\n235\nThe Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses, by Vern S. Poythress, referenced in an earlier note\nis, in my judgment, the best attempt so far to analyze the meaning of the statutes of the law. After\na comprehensive discussion of the laws themselves, Poythress presents, as an Appendix, a\ncritical analysis of theonomy. 208\n2. Kline's rejection of theonomy presupposes some ideas which are\nthemselves controversial and in my opinion dubious: (a) the sharp distinction\nbetween life-norms and faith-norms, (b) the derivation from the Noachic\nCovenant of a religiously neutral state, (c) his view of the New Testament as the\nsole canon of the
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Christian church. We should not, therefore, assume that\nKline any more than theonomy represents unambiguously the\nReformed tradition.\n3. Other critics of theonomy tend to be very vague in their arguments or\neven reveal a certain antipathy toward the Mosaic laws themselves (e.g. the\nhorror displayed at the very idea of making homosexuality a capital crime).\n4. Since both Bahnsen and Kline make broad, bold\nprogrammatic statements which they modify considerably in their\ndetailed discussions, it seems to me that their bold programmatic statements do\nnot really or fairly represent the views they are presenting. In actual fact, they\nare much closer together than their rhetoric would suggest. 236\n5. In the application of Scripture, there is never unity without diversity or\ndiversity without unity. Every law of Scripture must be applied to situations. Since\nevery situation is different, every application is somewhat different. On the\nother hand, since all Scripture is God's word, all applications have one thing in\ncommon: they are applications of the word of God, applications of a fundamental\nunity. Rhetoric, therefore, which denies unity or diversity is misleading. Contrary\nto theonomic rhetoric, there is always \"change\" from one application to the next\nof the same law. Contrary to anti-theonomic rhetoric, all of God's word must be\nbrought to bear upon all of human life (Matt. 4:4).\n6. \"Change\" in this discussion applies both to redemptive-historical\nchange (e.g., old covenant to new covenant) and to cultural change (e.g., we no\nlonger fence our roofs as in Deut. 22:8, because we no longer use the roof as\nspace for living or entertaining guests). Assessing the relevance of all these\nforms of change is not always easy. Should believers wear tassels on their\ngarments (Num. 15:38-39)? Is that ruled out by redemptive-historical change? Is\nit ruled out because the tassel has no symbolic value in the present-day world?\nHow about head-covering for women in worship (1 Cor. 11:2-16)? We should not\
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nassume that for each of these questions there is one obvious and easy\nanswer, such that those who come to opposite conclusions from ours are\ninsincere or heretical. God has ordained, and therefore takes account of, our\nepistemological limitations.\n7. Given the various changes from situation to situation in the application\nof the law, it is certainly not self-evident that God intended the civil laws given to\nIsrael to bind all civil societies. If some of the statutes given to Israel are or are\n236\nSee my âThe One, the Many, and Theonomy,â in William S. Barker and W. Robert Godfrey,\neds., Theonomy: a Reformed Critique (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), 89-99. 209\nnot also binding on other nations, that point must be demonstrated in piecemeal\nfashion, from one statute to the next.\n8. Recall my earlier discussion of the relationship between the Decalogue\nand the case laws. Given the flexibility allowed to judges in Israel, it is not evident\nthat the penalties of the case laws form a code to be mechanically imposed on\neach case. Every case is different. The penalties of the case-laws are exemplary.\nAnd even if the case laws given to Israel are normative for modern civil\ngovernments, they do not constitute an exhaustive catalogue of penalties for\nevery situation. There will always be a need for judicial flexibility. That flexibility\nwill be all the more important in a modern society, in which judges must deal with\nmany things unknown to ancient Israelites. What penalty should be given to\ninternet pornographers, for example? So even if the case laws are normative\ntoday, they would not preclude judicial flexibility; rather, they would necessitate it.\n9. There is some confusion in theonomy between present and future\napplication of the law. The rhetoric of theonomy is often calculated to arouse\nimmediate action, and at least some of the appeal of the movement is that\npeople see in it a practical political program for todayâs society. But others are\nhorrified by the idea that theonomists, tak
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ing over government in these confused\ntimes, would immediately proceed to execute homosexuals, adulterers, and so\non. Confronted with this objection, Bahnsen argued that the Mosaic laws should\nnot be enforced today. They presuppose, he said, a people who understand and\nbelieve the law and who are committed to be God's people. 237\nBut this idea turns theonomy from a practical program for the present to a\nfuture ideal. I suspect that few of us would disagree with theonomy, or would\ndisagree as strongly, if it were simply presented as a future ideal. Sure: if the\npostmillennial hope 238 is realized and the world-society with its institutions\nbecomes largely Christian, then most of us would find very attractive the prospect\nof living under something like the Mosaic civil law.\nWe can well agree that there are elements of the Mosaic law which would\nbe enforceable and helpful in contemporary society: e.g. double restitution for\ntheft without prison sentences. But the question of what is or is not to\nbe implemented now is a difficult question, and it is made all the more difficult by\nBahnsenâs present/future distinction. We need not only to determine how literally\nthe law is to be applied in the ideal situation; we must also determine how it is to\nbe applied in the non-ideal situation of today.\n237\nAnother theonomic reply has been that theonomists believe in limited government, so that a\ntheonomic government would not have the power to conduct a reign of terror. That point is\nreassuring to some extent. But it is odd to hear that a theonomist government would deny to itself\nsufficient power to enforce what it considers to be biblical norms.\n238\nMost theonomists are postmillennialists. They believe that there may be a very long time\nbefore Jesus returns in glory. In that time, perhaps tens of thousands of years, it is not difficult for\ntheonomists to envision the world becoming substantially Christian. 210\nTo the extent that theonomy is a future ideal, rather than a present-day\npolitical progr
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: am, it becomes less radical and more theoretical. To some readers,\nthat makes theonomy more attractive; to others, less.\n10. Much of the rhetoric of theonomy is based on the assumed need for\ncertainty on specifics. I have often heard Bahnsen ask candidates for\nlicensure/ordination in Presbytery how they would argue against, say, bestiality,\nwithout referring to OT case law. We need the case laws, his argument goes,\nbecause the other parts of Scripture are not sufficiently specific. Another\nexample: theonomists typically deny the appeal to \"natural light\" (an appeal\ncommonly made by Calvin and his successors) because the natural light is not\nsufficiently specific in its directives. The argument suggests that we need divine\ndirection that is perfectly specific, that leaves no room for human reflection; else\nwe will be obeying ourselves rather than God.\nBut in my view, this is not the nature of Christian ethics. No command of\nScripture is perfectly specific; all Scripture commands are general to some\nextent. Scripture does not tell me what key to press on my computer as I write\nthis chapter. But it does tell me in general what I ought to say. Scripture does not\nanywhere specifically forbid abortion; we determine that abortion is wrong by\napplying the eighth commandment and the language of Scripture concerning the\nunborn. Scripture does not speak of nuclear war, of the use of artificial life-\nsupport, and so on. So in Christian ethics there is always a situational\nperspective. To apply Scripture to specifics, we need to have knowledge of\nthings outside the Bible.\nThus we should not be frustrated that we do not have, say, a Scripturally-\ndictated maximum figure limiting government taxation. We will never escape the\nneed to apply general principles to specific situations.\n11. After some reflection, I have come to the conclusion that theonomy is\na good case study of how theological ideas should not be introduced. The sharp\npolemics of the theonomic movement (and, to be sure, of its critics i
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n return)\nhave been in my view quite unnecessary and indeed counter-productive to its\nown purposes. People have a hard time seeing the important truths that\ntheonomy communicates; it is hard to learn from someone who is\nalways accusing you of something. Reformed people have always had a\nhigh regard for God's law. They are not, on the whole, antinomians and should\nnot be stigmatized as such. Theonomy's approach should not be to attack them\nfor \"latent antinomianism,\" but to ask probing questions, to gently guide those\nreaders into more thoughtful and accurate applications of God's Word.\nAm I condemning here the accusatory language used by the Reformers\nand Scripture itself? Doubtless there is a place for harsh language. Jesus was\nharsh with the Pharisees, but not with the woman of Samaria, although he\ncertainly did convict her of sin. In general I think the Reformers were justified in 211\ntheir polemics, but I confess I have often wondered how much more persuasive\nthey might have been if they had more regularly observed the adage that \"you\ncatch more flies with honey than with vinegar.\"\n12. For all of this, I would say that theonomy has in many ways been a\nhelpful movement. When I went to seminary, we had excellent courses in Old\nTestament history, poetry, and prophecy, but almost nothing on the law. My initial\nexposure to the details of the Mosaic law was through the theonomic literature.\nFurther, the theonomists point the way to show how we can incorporate into\nChristian faith and life the love of Godâs law evident in Psm. 1, 19, 119, and\nelsewhere.\nAt the very least, the theonomic writings show us why the nations around\nIsrael would marvel at the wisdom of the law (Deut. 4:6). Certainly, God gave\nthese statutes for the good of his people (Deut. 10:13). Had Israel kept the law,\nshe would have been far better off. And as we come better to appreciate the\ngoodness of the law in its original context, we may come more to understand\nhow it may be relevant to our own society, how it co
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: uld be good for us as well.\nPriorities\nWe have been looking at various factors that determine whether particular\nbiblical laws are currently normative. But even among laws that are normative at\na particular time and place, there are priorities to be observed, and those\npriorities also should influence our decisions.\nAs we saw in Chapter 9, our ultimate ethical authority is God himself. He\nis law in the highest sense. The law he reveals to us is a system, a\ncomprehensive way of life in which the supreme goal (summum bonum) is to\nbring glory to him (1 Cor. 10:31). Within that system, some elements are more\nimportant, more pressing than others.\nThat is true in any system of law. In the United States, for example, there\nare many different kinds of law: the Constitution, federal statutes, orders from the\nexecutive branch, state constitutions and statutes, local laws, decisions of courts.\nEven the orders given by a policeman on his beat are law in a sense. But within\nthis system, some kinds of law take precedence over others. When someone\nbelieves that a statute is unconstitutional, for example, he may appeal to the\ncourt system. The courtâs decision, for better or worse, takes precedence over\nthe statute in question. When Paul, in Rom. 13:1, tells us to be subject to the\nâgoverning authoritiesâ (cf. 1 Pet. 2:13), he means, therefore, to be subject to the\nentire system of law. 212\nIn US law, we may assume that there are contradictions within the system\nthat have to be resolved by court appeals and such. We may not assume that in\nthe case of Godâs law. Nevertheless, it too is a system, and there are parts of it\nthat, at any given time, will take precedence over other parts. In what follows, I\nshall describe several kinds of priorities.\n1. Normative Priorities\nThere are some principles of Godâs law that Scripture explicitly states to\nbe more important than others. In Matt. 23:23, Jesus says that justice, mercy,\nand faithfulness are âweightier matters of the law,â compared with t
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he Phariseesâ\nconcern with the tithing of mint and dill and cumin. Significantly, Jesus affirms the\ntithing of herbs, when he tells the Pharisees, âThese you ought to have done,\nwithout neglecting the others.â Both the more weighty and the less weighty\nmatters are part of the law, divine norms. But there is a difference between them.\nSimilar is Godâs statement in Hos. 6:6, âFor I desire steadfast love and not\nsacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offeringsâ (cf. Micah 6:6-8,\nMatt. 9:13, 12:7). In fact, God did desire burnt offerings, for he commanded them\noften in the Old Testament. The statement in Hosea is comparison, and to some\nextent hyperbole. It means that Godâs desire for steadfast love is so much\ngreater than his desire for sacrifice that in the context of such a comparison it\nseems that he does not desire sacrifice at all. Clearly these passages indicate\nnot only normative principles, but normative emphases. The principles God\nconsiders most weighty are the ones that should preoccupy us above all.\nSimilarly, the WLC, 151-52, tells us that some sins are worse than others.\nThat principle is implicit in the above references, and in passages like Ezek. 8:6,\n13, 15, Matt. 12:31-32, Luke 12:47-48, John 19:11, Heb. 10:29 (cf. 2:2-3), 1 John\n5:16. Any sin is sufficient to condemn us to Hell. But even in Hell there are\ndegrees of punishment, as seems to be implicit in Luke 12:47-48.\nThese passages describe objective differences of importance among\nGodâs laws. The law itself declares these differences, and so I call these\nnormative priorities.\n2. Situational Priorities\nIn various situations of life, it becomes more important to follow one\nprinciple of the law than another. Modern secular legal systems, for example,\nmake special provision for emergencies. Normally, for example, we are expected\nto drive on the right side of the road and not to cross solid lines. But when Jim is\ndriving on a crowded highway, and a sinkhole unexpectedly appears ahead,\nleaving hi
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: m no room to drive on that side, it is legitimate for Jim to wait until a\nsafe moment, then to drive on the left, across the solid line, around the sinkhole.\nThe highest principle of the law is safety, and that takes precedence over the 213\nnormal traffic rules. If Jim is arrested for breaking a traffic law, concern for safety\ncan serve as a legal defense. In fact, in such a case, Jim has not violated the\nlaw. He has maintained its highest intention, which is to keep people safe.\nScripture also recognizes that emergencies can affect our relation to\nGodâs law. Jesus notes how David and his men âentered the house of God, in the\ntime of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not\nlawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with\nhim?\" (Mark 2:26) The reason, simply, was that they were hungry (verse 25).\nThus Jesus defends his own disciples, who plucked grains to eat on the Sabbath:\nâThe Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man\nis lord even of the Sabbath\" (verses 27-28). God did not make the Sabbath to\nstarve human beings, says the lord of the Sabbath himself. If Sabbath restrictions\nprevent nourishment, they must yield. This is not Sabbath-breaking, he says. It\nis, rather, a keeping of the Sabbath, as God intended it to be kept.\nSimilarly, the Bibleâs instruction to submit to human authorities (Rom. 13:1,\n1 Pet. 2:13, Heb. 13:17, cf. Ex. 20:12). This is an important rule, but it is, of\ncourse, subordinate to our higher duty to obey God. So when the highest Jewish\nauthority, the high priest, together with the Sanhedrin, commanded the apostles\nnot to teach in the name of Jesus, they answered, âWe must obey God rather\nthan menâ (Acts 5:29), and they violated the order âevery day, in the temple and\nfrom house to houseâ (verse 42).\nPhilosophers have sometimes distinguished âprima facie dutiesâ from\nâactual, present duties.â Obedience to legitimate human authority is a prima faci
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e\nduty in biblical ethics. We should practice such obedience except in the rare\ninstance of an overriding consideration. One who argues that there is such an\nexception must bear the burden of proof. But there are indeed cases of such\noverriding considerations, where our actual, present duty is an exception to a\nprima facie duty.\nTo practice a legitimate exception, as the apostles did in Acts 5:29, is not\nto break the law of God. Taken as a whole system, the law requires such an\nexception.\nWe are on somewhat dangerous ground here. Ethicists are sometimes\ntempted to say, for example, that since love is the highest principle of Christian\nethics, it warrants exceptions to laws of chastity. The argument is that one may\nhave sexual relations outside marriage, as long as that is a true expression of\nlove. Why should we accept Acts 5:29 as an exception to the general principle of\nRom. 13:1, and not accept loving fornication as an exception to, say, 1 Cor.\n6:18?\nThe answer is that the exception of Acts 5:29 comes from Scripture itself.\nIt comes, not only from Acts 5:29 itself, but from the overall biblical teaching that 214\nGod alone is the supreme authority. But Scripture never suggests that the law of\nlove warrants fornication. To say that it does is to misunderstand biblical love.\nLove is first of all a love to God, a relation of allegiance, action, and affection, as\nwe saw in Chapter 12. Those who love God will obey his standards for sexuality.\nSecond, love is a relation of allegiance, action, and affection between human\nbeings, a relation in which one seeks what is best for the other. Scripture teaches\nthat fornication is never best for anybody.\nSo we should be able to see that âsituational prioritiesâ are never\nopportunities for us to deviate from Scripture. Rather, they inform us as to the\ncomplexity and depth of Scriptureâs own ethical standards. Indeed, as in other\ncontexts, here the situational is the application of the normative, and therefore\npart of the normative. Normative
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and situational are never opposed; they always\nimply one another.\n3. Existential Priorities\nBut there is yet a third kind of priority in our attempts to keep the law. That\nis the set of priorities related to our own callings.\nPerhaps we can get at this issue by noticing that obeying God usually\ntakes time and planning. We tend to think of obedience as instant response to\ndivine commands, as when Jesus called his disciples and âimmediatelyâ they\nfollowed him (Matt. 4:18-22). And certainly, when God gives us a negative\ncommand, telling us to stop doing something, he gives us no opportunity to\npostpone our obedience. 239\nSo sermons sometimes suggest that to obey God means to drop\neverything we are doing and to do something else. If the sermon text calls for\npersistent prayer, we ought to stop everything else and pray. The preacher\nreminds us that Luther spent hours in prayer, and we feel guilty that we have not\ndone that.\nBut then the next sermon says the same thing about another duty, say,\nevangelizing your neighborhood. And then feeding the poor, visiting the sick,\npursuing social justice, studying Scripture, parenting your children, working on\nyour marriage, attending worship services, and on, and on. The guilt becomes\ngreater than we can bear.\nThe fact is that although all these are legitimate biblical duties, we cannot\ndo them all at once. We are finite. Our schedules are limited. We must frequently\n239\nSomeone once told me that a man in a church charged who had committed adultery claimed\nthat he was âin the process ofâ repenting. I gathered that meant that he committed adultery less\nfrequently than before. But of course repentance for a particular sin is not a process, but a\ndecisive break. 215\nstop obeying one command (say, praying) in order to carry out another (say,\npresenting the gospel to the neighbor down the street).\nIn fact, God understands our finitude. He does not assume that every\ncommand of his must be carried out immediately. It is comforting and reassuring\n
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: for us to realize that as well.\nGod also understands that Christians will vary from one another in the\nemphasis they place on each command. That emphasis will vary with gifts and\ncalling. Those who are called to be full-time preachers will spend more time\npreaching than those who are called to be full-time homemakers. Even prayer\nvaries among us. All of us are called to pray, but some of us, like the widows\nmentioned in 1 Tim. 5, may be called to continue âin supplications and prayers\nnight and dayâ (verse 5).\nSo we are responsible to set priorities among divine commands. How\narrogant that sounds! Who are we to determine how much time we are to spend\ncarrying out each divine command? How can anyone presume to determine\npriorities among ultimates!? But we do and must.\nWe can understand this principle better when we see that many of Godâs\ncommands are given, not primarily to individuals, but first to a corporate body:\nthe human race as a whole, or the church as the body of Christ. God gave, for\nexample, the cultural mandate of Gen. 1:28 not to Adam and Eve as individuals,\nbut to them as a corporate family, including their descendants. Adam could not\nhave filled or subdued the earth as an individual. Only the human race as a\nwhole could have any hope of accomplishing that mandate. The same is true of\nthe Great Commission of Matt. 28:18-20. Neither Peter nor Andrew could\nsinglehandedly make disciples of all nations. But the church, acting as a body\nunder the impetus of Godâs Spirit, can and will.\nSo my individual responsibility is not to subdue the earth or to disciple all\nthe nations. It is, rather, to find a specific role, for which God has gifted me, that\nwill contribute something to those results. In my case, though some might\ndisagree, I think God has called me to be a theologian. That calling requires me\nto study the Bible more than most, and to spend less time than others bringing\nthe gospel door to door. It is that calling that determines, or should determine, my\npersonal s
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: et of priorities. I must make a decision, but God offers his guidance for\nsuch decisions.\nTo speak of such a decision is merely to talk about applying Godâs word to\noneâs individual situation. We have seen over and over again that Scripture can\ndo its work in our lives only as we apply it to our situations. Scripture itself\nrequires it, and so existential prioritizing is a norm. Existential priorities, therefore,\nare not exceptions to divine norms, any more than situational priorities are.\nIndeed at this point the existential and the normative coincide. 216\nIt is important that we recognize a legitimate diversity here within the body\nof Christ. The person who spends ten hours a week feeding the poor is not\nnecessarily more faithful than the widow who spends those ten hours in prayer.\nOr vice versa. We should be thankful to God for this diversity, for it is through this\ndiversity of contributions that God will accomplish his great work.\nOne application of this principle: People sometimes think that if God has\ncommanded something it must be given unlimited emphasis and time. 240 So in\nsome denominations, one commonly hears that since God requires sound\ndoctrine, the church assemblies must give unlimited attention to doctrinal issues,\neven at the expense of missions, evangelism, and prayer. The problem is, of\ncourse, that God has also commanded missions, evangelism, and prayer. And if\na denomination is to have a balanced view of things, it must at some point stop\nits doctrinal debates long enough to concentrate on other matters.\nImbalance sometimes occurs in the opposite direction, as well.\nUnfortunately, because of the denominational divisions of the church, people\npreoccupied with doctrinal issues tend to gravitate to some denominations, and\npeople preoccupied with missions to others. It would be better to have people\nwith both preoccupations in the same church organization.\nBut we should be clear that people preoccupied with doctrinal matters are\nnot necessarily more holy, more fait
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hful, or more Reformed (!) than those who\nare preoccupied with missions. People with one group of priorities need not\ncriticize those with a different emphasis. The difference is often a difference in\ndivine calling.\nThe Orthodox Presbyterian Church is relatively preoccupied with issues of\ndoctrinal purity, while the Presbyterian Church in America, holding to the same\nconfessional standards, is relatively more preoccupied with church planting and\nmissions. Some in each body are convinced that the other body is unfaithful to\nthe Lord, because of its different emphasis. Attempts to merge the two\ndenominations have proven futile. In my judgment, part of the problem is that\nsome in each group have confused the groupâs priorities with biblical principle.\nA better way to look at it is this: the PCA is like a breadwinner, leaving the\nhome each day to reach the world outside. The OPC is like a homemaker,\nkeeping the house clean, determining who should be invited to dinner.\nHomemakers and breadwinners often get into arguments, but both are necessary\n240\nI belonged to a presbytery once that consumed enormous amounts of time on the reading and\ncorrecting of minutes, normally the first thing on the docket. When I asked why, I was told that of\ncourse God wants us to do all things decently and in order, and that entails a concern for\naccurate minutes. So God has ordained, the argument went, that the perfecting of minutes be\ngiven as much time as it takes. Even if (with other things on the schedule) it squeezes out\ndiscussions of church planting and evangelism. I didnât find the argument persuasive. 217\nto a good marriage. A church without breadwinners, or without homemakers, is a\nchurch that lacks some important gifts of God. So in my judgment the two\ndenominations should not let their priority differences interfere with their\nfellowship. They should rather be attracted to one another. Indeed, they should\nbecome one. 241\nTragic Moral Choice\nWe have been looking at various ways in which divine la
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ws can lose their\nimmediate, present, normativity. But an important question remains, namely\nwhether two divine laws can ever make incompatible demands on us. This is the\nquestion of âconflict of duties,â sometimes called âtragic moral choice.â It is one of\nthe most discussed questions in the ethical literature. You have probably thought\nabout the famous illustration from World War II: You are hiding Jews in your\nbasement. The Nazis come and ask you directly whether there are any Jews in\nyour house. If you answer truly, you give innocent lives over to death. If you\nanswer falsely, you tell a lie and violate Godâs standards of truthfulness. So in\nthis case, the sixth commandment, do not murder, seems to impose on you a\nresponsibility incompatible with the ninth commandment, which mandates truth.\nIn this situation, it seems as though we must disobey one divine command\nin order to obey another, which is to say that at this point the demands of Godâs\nlaw are inconsistent. Or we can look at the problem from the situational\nperspective and say that in this situation there is no righteous alternative. In this\nsituation it is impossible not to sin.\nMany ethicists, perhaps most, assume that such conflicts exist. Liberal\ntheologians have no problem affirming this, for they do not believe that the Bible\nteaches a single, consistent system of ethics. But even evangelicals sometimes\naffirm the existence of tragic moral choice. John Warwick Montgomery, who\nbelieves strongly in biblical inerrancy, writes,\nThe Christian morality fully realizes the difficulty of moral decision, and\nfrequently a Christian finds himself in a position where it is necessary to\nmake a decision where moral principles must be violated in favor of other\nmoral principles, but he never vindicates himself in this situation. He\ndecides in terms of the lesser of evils or the greater of goods, and this\ndrives him to the Cross to ask forgiveness for the human situation in which\nthis kind of complication and ambiguity exist
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s. 242\n241\nFor more on the biblical mandate for church union see my Evangelical Reunion (Grand\nRapids: Baker, 1991), now available at www.thirdmill.org.\n242\nMontgomery, The Suicide of Christian Theology (Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, 1970), 69. 218\nMontgomery says here that sometimes we find ourselves in situations so difficult\nthat we cannot avoid sinning. Doubtless he would say that this is one of the\neffects of the curse on the ground following Adamâs sin. But though there is no\nalternative available to us in such situations, we must nevertheless ask Godâs\nforgiveness through Christ. 243\nI must, however, take exception to this reasoning. I donât believe that the\ntheory of tragic moral choice is compatible with Scripture, for the following\nreasons:\n1. In Scripture, we have a moral duty to do right, never to do wrong. But\nMontgomery seems to think that in situations of conflicting norms we have a\nmoral duty to do something wrong, something for which we must afterward ask\nforgiveness. That notion is, in my judgment, morally confused.\n2. In Scripture, ethical knowledge presupposes knowledge of what is right.\nGod judges even pagans because they knew what was right, but rejected that\nknowledge (Rom. 1:18-23, 32). But on Montgomeryâs view, in conflict situations\nthere is no right alternative and therefore no possibility of knowing the right. By\nwhat standard, then, does God judge such conduct?\n3. On this view, the law of God itself is contradictory, for it requires\ncontradictory behavior. 244\n4. Indeed, on this view, Scripture counsels us to sin, contrary to Psm.\n19:7-9, which says,\nThe law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of\nthe LORD is sure, making wise the simple; 8 the precepts of the LORD are\nright, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure,\nenlightening the eyes; 9 the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever;\nthe rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether.\n5. And then, on this view, since Scripture is Godâs word, G
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: od himself\ncounsels us to sin. That is a blasphemous supposition, rejected in the strongest\nterms by James 1:13-14.\n6. It is also important to consider the Christological implications of this\nview. If Jesus faced conflicts of duties, then he was guilty of sin, for a conflict of\nduty is by definition one in which any choice is sinful. That conflicts with the\n243\nMontgomery is Lutheran, and we can hear in his words echoes of Lutherâs âsin boldlyâ and\nâsimul justus et peccator.â\n244\nSomeone may want to argue that the law is consistent, but its applications are not. But I have\nargued that the applications of words are their very meanings, in DKG, 81-85 and 93-98. And in\nthis book, I have argued in Chapter 11 that the extra-biblical data by which we apply Godâs\ncommands never subtract from the authority of those commands. Surely the consistency of\nScripture is an empty concept if Scripture can command us to do contradictory things. 219\nbiblical affirmation of Jesusâ sinlessness (Heb. 4:15, 1 Pet. 2:22, 1 John 3:5). On\nthe other hand, if Jesus did not face tragic moral choices, and we do, then we\ncannot affirm that he âin every respect has been tempted as we areâ (Heb. 4:15).\nIf tragic moral choices exist, they are the toughest choices we have to make, the\nheight of our moral and spiritual warfare. If Jesus did not have to make them, he\ndid not endure our spiritual battle at its hardest point, and so the assurance of\nHeb. 4:15 rings hollow. The only way to avoid this problem is to say that there\nare no tragic moral choices, that Jesus did not face them, and neither do we.\n7. Godâs word gives us a specific promise concerning temptation, in 1 Cor.\n10:13:\nNo temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God\nis faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with\nthe temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be\nable to endure it.\nThis text says that no temptation is so great that the Christian cannot escape it.\nThat is,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: even in the worst temptations, God gives us the resources to be faithful\nto him, to make right choices, to find ways of escaping from wickedness. Tragic\nmoral choice, however, is a situation where by definition there is no way to\nescape. So this passage implies directly that there is no tragic moral choice.\nThis verse is, of course, a promise to Christian believers, not to others.\nBut it would be odd to imagine a world in which every situation offers a right\nalternative to the Christian, but not to the non-Christian. It is true that non-\nChristians, lacking Godâs grace, commit sin in all they do. But that is not because\nthere is no right alternative available for them. To the contrary, it is because they\nknow what is right (Rom. 1) and refuse to do it.\nSo I must conclude that there are no tragic moral choices, no conflicts of\nduties. We should try to understand, however, why the theory of tragic moral\nchoice is so plausible to many. The main reason, I think, is that many moral\ndecisions are very difficult. Sometimes it is hard to find the way of escape, and\npeople are tempted to think that such a way does not exist. Please donât think\nthat in rejecting the theory of tragic moral choice I mean to imply that ethical\ndecisions are easy. Rather, I encourage you to sympathize with those who\nwrestle with these issues, pray for them, help them to find a godly solution.\nSome alleged examples of tragic moral choice are really questions of\npriority within the divine law, such as we discussed earlier in the chapter. Others\nhave to do with questions of interpretation. For example, as I shall argue later, I\nthink a sound interpretation of the ninth commandment will allow us to withhold\nthe truth from those who seek innocent life. So, rightly understood, the ninth\ncommandment does not conflict with the sixth, and the example of the Nazis 220\ndemanding information about Jews is not an example of tragic moral choice,\ndifficult as the situation certainly was for many in that time.\nAnother reason why
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: people find this theory attractive is that they have\nfound themselves in situations where they must choose âbetween two evils.â As\nwe recall, Montgomery used this as an example of tragic moral choice, but more\nanalysis is needed. It is important to distinguish between âevilsâ and âwrongs.â An\nevil is an event that brings suffering. A wrong is a moral evil, a sin against God, a\nviolation of his law.\nNow it is usually wrong to inflict evils on people, but not always. The\npunishment of criminals and just war bring suffering on those deemed to deserve\nit. But Scripture does not regard these as wrong. A surgeon may choose to inflict\npain on a patient in order to heal him. The pain is an evil; it exists only as part of\nthe curse brought on the earth by sin. But it is not wrong for the surgeon to inflict\npain for a good purpose. In doing this, he brings about evil, but he does not do\nwrong.\nSo it is sometimes necessary and right to choose the lesser of two or\nmore evils. But it is never necessary or right to choose between two wrongs. The\nsurgeon does no wrong when he inflicts evil on a patient for a good reason.\nChoosing between two evils, so understood, is not tragic moral choice. It may,\nindeed, be virtuous.\nCasuistry\nThe application of Scripture to situations is sometimes called casuistry.\nCasuistry deals with cases, relating general ethical principles to the specifics of\nhuman life. Casuistry has gotten a bad name, because many have abused the\nprocess. For that reason, I prefer the term application to the term casuistry. But in\nfact, we should recognize that, by whatever name, casuistry is unavoidable.\nEthical norms, including those in Scripture, are always somewhat general.\nScripture does not describe every situation in which we find ourselves day by\nday, nor does it prescribe norms specifically for each of those situations. The\nwork of applying its general norms to those specifics belong to us, making use of\nboth special and general revelation. And that work is called casui
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: stry.\nIn casuistry, we see clearly the complexity of ethical decision making. The\ncasuist must rightly interpret both the moral law and the situation to which the law\nwill be applied. He must understand also peopleâs motives (existential\nperspective), which can often affect or even determine the rightness or\nwrongness of their actions. He must understand mitigating circumstances and\naggravating circumstances, which can also affect whether an action is right or\nwrong, and the degree of rightness or wrongness. 221\nThe chief danger is that the casuist will replace or even contradict the\nmoral law with his own (or a tradition of) interpretations. Jesus charged the\nPharisees with breaking the commandment of God for the sake of their tradition\n(Matt. 15:3). Tradition is not in itself a bad thing. Used well, it makes the godly\nthinking of past generations useful to us today. But used wrongly it imposes\nbarriers between the believer and Godâs word.\nThis danger has taken two distinct forms through the history of ethics.\nSome casuists have been lax, using their interpretative powers to rationalize sin.\nOthers have tried to be more rigorous, using casuistry to impose a burdensome\nyoke of regulations on Godâs people. So in ancient Judaism there was conflict\nbetween the schools of Hillel (lax) and Shammai (rigorous). And in post-\nreformation Roman Catholic circles there was debate between the Jesuits (lax)\nand the Jansenists (rigorous).\nThe relatively lax parties have been famous for their justifications of\napparently sinful conduct, such as, (1) justifying a wrong action because it is\nmore right than its opposite, (2) determining exceptions to general commands,\n(3) determining implicit qualifications for commands, (4) excusing normally sinful\nactions if done from a good motive. These justifications are not entirely wrong. As\nwe saw earlier, not every biblical command is to be fulfilled literally and\nimmediately. There are exceptions and qualifications to some commands that\nScripture presents
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: implicitly or explicitly, as (2) and (3) indicate. We shall see\nunder the existential perspective that motive does play a role in the moral quality\nof actions (4). I have no sympathy for (1), however, which either assumes tragic\nmoral choice or assumes that in some other way a wrong action can be right. But\neven in areas (2)-(4), casuists of the lax sort have often gone too far, not\nobserving the limits set by Scripture.\nThe rigorist schools of casuistry have added vast catalogues of moral\nrestrictions to the relatively simple requirements of Godâs word, leaving little\nfreedom to the believer. Sometimes their motive in this has been to âfenceâ the\nlaw, adding extra-biblical restrictions to keep us from violating genuine biblical\nlaws. Hence, to keep people from the possibility of boiling a kid in its motherâs\nmilk (Ex. 23:19), the Jews insisted that people not eat meat and dairy products at\nthe same meal.\nThis encourages a nit-picking mentality, interest in minutiae, over against\nthe âweightier matters of the law.â There is nothing wrong with an interest in the\nminutiae of Scripture, unless, as with the Pharisees, that interest crowds out the\nthings that most matter. Rigorism also obscures the clarity of Scripture, making it\nseem as though ethical questions can only be decided by experts.\nTo guard against the abuse of casuistry, we need to have (1) a firm,\npractical confidence in the Scriptures as the clear and sufficient word of God, (2) 222\nan awareness of what is more or less important within Scripture itself, (3) a\nmature conscience, resisting rationalization and self-justification.\nIt is also important to know the limits of casuistry. Sometimes we dream of\nconstructing a very large book that would contain, not only all the biblical ethical\nprinciples (totaling 613, according to Jewish tradition), but also all the possible\napplications of those principles. But that dream is a delusion. The possible\napplications of the law of God can never be listed or written down. The n
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: umber of\nthem is far too large to be written in a book. For with every breath we take we are\napplying Godâs law. Every thought, word, or deed, is done either to Godâs glory or\nto the glory of an idol (1 Cor. 10:31 again). And even if there were such a book,\nthe moment the book were published new situations would arise. And then there\nwould be questions about the application of that book itselfâhow it governs our\nconduct in those new situations.\nEthics books have their value, I hope, but that value is not to exhaustively\ndescribe the number of our moral responsibilities. There will always be a need for\nindividual application. Experts can help us in this task, but they cannot anticipate\nevery fork in the road. God can, and his Spirit alone can equip us adequately for\nthe moral journey. 223\nSection 2: The Situational Perspective\nChapter 14: Situation and Norm\nWe will now begin to look at Christian ethical methodology from the\nsituational perspective. Since it is a perspective, like the normative and\nexistential, it covers the same subject-matter as the other two, namely the whole\nof ethics. Therefore, you can expect some overlap between the content of this\nsection and that of the last. This section will not be a mere repetition, however,\nbecause it will look at the data from a different angle. Further, there are some\nsubjects that I might have discussed under the normative or existential\nperspectives, that I have chosen to discuss here instead, such as natural law 245\nand redemptive history. The question of what one discusses under which\nperspective is largely pedagogical. Since the three perspectives cover the same\nground, the question is not which choice is objectively true, but which choice is\nmost helpful in presenting the material to people. 246 Theology is application!\nRecall that under the normative perspective, the ethical question can be\nformulated, âWhat does God tell us to do?â or âWhat is our duty?â Under the\nsituational perspective, the question is âhow can we
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: change the world in order to\nbring glory to God?â As with the normative perspective, the situational\nperspective includes everything, but the focus is on the world, on the course of\nnature and history as the environment in which we make ethical decisions. It is\nfocused less on the Bible than on extra-biblical data of importance to ethics. But\nit looks at those data in the light of the Bible. It is important to remember that the\nBible (like everything else ) is not only part of the normative perspective but is an\nelement of the other two perspectives as well. It is a norm of particular\nimportance, but it is also an important fact of our situation (situational) and of our\npersonal experience (existential).\nAs the normative perspective focused on Godâs lordship attribute of\nauthority, the situational perspective focuses on his lordship attribute of control.\nFor when we observe the course of nature and history, we are observing the\noutworking of Godâs eternal decree and his power to carry out that plan in\ncreation and providence. It is God who has fashioned the world by his power, so\nthat certain means lead to certain ends. This fact provides a basis for science in\nits examination of causes and effects. It also provides a basis for ethics as we\nattempt to accommodate means to ends.\n245\nNatural law could have been discussed under the normative perspective, because it deals with\na means by which God reveals ethical truth. Or it could have been discussed under the existential\nperspective, since natural law theory places much weight on human nature and conscience.\n246\nIn general, I donât take much interest in questions about which perspective is appropriate for a\ncertain topic. 224\nAs the normative perspective presents what may be called a Christian\ndeontological ethic, so the situational perspective may be called a Christian\nteleological ethic. Teleological ethics sees ethical decision as formulating goals\nfor life and then determining means to reach those goals. Scripture also does\
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nthis. As we shall see, it presents goals for human life and means of reaching\nthem. And although Scripture is indispensable in revealing to us these goals,\nachieving them requires close attention to the situations in which we live. It is\nthose situations that disclose to us many of the resources and opportunities we\nhave for reaching godly goals.\nUnlike secular forms of deontologism and teleologism, the normative and\nsituational perspectives, as Christian ethics should understand them, are not\ninconsistent. A right understanding of Godâs norms and a right understanding of\nthe situation in which we live are ultimately identical. Along the way, as the focus\nof our attention varies back and forth between the two perspectives, Godâs word\ntells us much of what we need to know about the situation, and our observations\nof the situation tell us much about how we should be applying Godâs word.\nIn Chapter 11, I indicated that even though Scripture is sufficient to give us\nall the words of God we need for any task, every moral decision requires a\nknowledge of extra-biblical data as well, so that the word may be applied rightly\nto our circumstances. The situational perspective focuses on the use of that\nextra-biblical data, without forgetting that Scripture provides necessary directions\nfor interpreting and using that data.\nWe can summarize the value of extra-biblical data in ethics in the following\nways:\n1. It provides many of the minor premises of moral syllogisms (Chapter\n11). Recall that the moral syllogism includes at least one normative premise, one\nsituational premise, and a conclusion that is an applied norm. Example:\nA. Lying is morally wrong.\nB. Billâs statement was a lie.\nConclusion: Billâs statement was morally wrong.\n2. It poses moral questions. When God told Adam to fill and subdue the\nearth, that command gave moral significance to Adamâs every experience. When\nunfallen Adam saw a snail crawling along the ground, his first concern would\nhave been to ask, how should I us
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e this creature to subdue and fill the earth to\nGodâs glory? In that way, every fact of Adamâs experience raised a moral issue,\nas it does for us as well.\n3. It helps us to answer moral questions. Everything we learn about the\nfacts helps us to answer the questions posed as in 2, above. As Adam and other\npeople studied snails, they would have discovered various nutritional uses of 225\nthem, as well as the sheer aesthetic value of one of Godâs odder creations. This\nis simply to say that everything we experience in the world enables us in some\nway to apply Godâs norms to our lives.\nIn this chapter we will consider the interface between normative and\nsituational perspectives. That is, we will consider further the ways in which the\nsituation, particularly the data of our experience outside the Bible, helps us to\nlearn Godâs norms for our lives.\nIn general, all the facts of our situation are normative. This is because God\nexpects us to live lives in accord with reality, with the facts, with the world as he\nhas made it. So in Rom. 1 and elsewhere, we learn that God reveals himself in\nthe created world and therein communicates ethical content. This, as we saw in\nChapter 9, is natural or general revelation.\nSo the hierarchy of norms is also a hierarchy of facts. Under the normative\nperspective, in Chapter 9, I discussed various kinds and levels of divine norms,\nranging from God himself as a norm, through the word of God, nature and\nhistory, persons, and language, spoken and written. Our situation also can be\ndescribed in various levels. As God is the supreme norm, he is also our supreme\nsituation, the supreme fact of our experience with which we must deal. More\nspecifically, our situation is Godâs eternal plan, which directs the whole course of\nnature and history. 247 Still more specifically, our situation is nature itself, the\ngeneral workings of the world perceived by our senses and reason and described\nby the physical sciences.\nOne subdivision of nature is what we call history,
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the events of human\nexistence. 248 And one important subdivision of history is redemptive history, the\nstory of creation, fall, and redemption. 249 Still more narrowly, we can focus on\n247\nFor an account of Godâs eternal plan, or decrees, see DG, 313-339. If DG didnât exist, I would\nalso examine in the present volume the question of whether Godâs sovereign control of everything\nis compatible with human freedom and responsibility. That is an important ethical question,\nbecause some have argued that our ethical responsibility depends on a certain kind of free will, a\nfree will that is able to act apart from Godâs decree, a personâs own character, even a personâs\nown desires. That is the view called âlibertarian free will.â I believe that theory is wrong, unbiblical,\nincoherent, and actually destructive of moral responsibility. I have argued so at great length in\nDG, 119-159. The related question of how a good God could foreordain sin (given that libertarian\nfreedom does not exist and therefore does not account for evil) is treated in 160-182.\n248\nHistory refers either to the events themselves or to accounts of those events in language. In a\nbroad sense, history includes everything that has ever happened to any human being. In a\nnarrower sense, it includes only the most significant events, those most important to Godâs plan,\nthe course of later events, and our present thoughts and feelings (note the triad). Naturally,\nhistorical literature deals with history in the narrower sense rather than the broad sense, because\nhistorians must deal with their finitude. But this fact opens areas of disagreement, for what is\nimportant to one historian may not be to another. There are, therefore, differences of opinion\nabout both about what history is, and about what happened in history.\n249\nSome prefer a term like âcovenant historyâ rather than âredemptive history,â for the latter term\nliterally embraces only events later than the Fall. The former term would embrace creation and 2
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 26\nvarious phases of redemptive history. And one important part of that history is\nour own experience, what God is doing with us today. In our present experience,\nwe deal with God, angels, other people (our social environment), and ourselves.\nThat last item deserves more comment: Strange as it may seem to say it, we\nourselves are part of our environment, our situation; for in our decisions we must\ntake into account our own heredity, past history, gifts, strengths, weaknesses,\nand so on. Here the situational and existential perspectives coincide.\nNatural Law\nIn the remainder of this chapter, I would like to examine a method of\nrelating norms to situation that has enjoyed great prestige in this history of\ntheological ethics. Traditional Roman Catholic theology, together with\nmany contemporary Protestant and Jewish thinkers, hold what they call a\n\"natural law\" theory of ethics. This idea can be traced from Aristotle and\nthe Stoics to Aquinas, to Hugo Grotius, and to many modern thinkers\nboth religious and secular. Modern political conservatives, even some\nnonreligious ones, often appeal to natural law in their ethical judgments, because\nthey believe that such an appeal gives them an objective basis for moral\njudgments, contrary to the relativisms of most contemporary thought.\nOne reason religious conservatives often appeal to natural law is because\nit enables them to argue their cherished positions without directly appealing to\nthe Bible and church tradition. Secularists regularly attack Christians for âtrying to\nimpose religion on society.â By appealing to natural law, rather than religion itself,\nthe Christian can counter this criticism. For example, many Roman Catholics\nhave argued that the case against abortion is not religious at all, but based only\non scientific judgments about the nature of the unborn. So they oppose abortion\nby appealing to natural law.\nâNatural law\" is understood to be a moral order, found in nature and in\nman himself. It is accessible through reason and
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: conscience. Knowledge of it\ndoes not require Scripture or Godâs saving grace. Following Aquinas, J.\nBudziszewski defines natural law as âmoral principles that are both right for\neverybody and knowable to everybody by the ordinary exercise of human\nreason.â 250\nBudziszewski says that reason comes to know natural law through Godâs\ngeneral revelation. 251 He mentions five forms of general revelation, which I\nfall as well. But in common theological language, âredemptive historyâ covers the whole history\nnarrated in Scripture, and I will maintain that common usage.\n250\nBudziszewski, Written on the Heart: the Case for Natural Law (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity\nPress, 1997).\n251\nRecall my discussion of general revelation in Chapter 9. 227\nparaphrase and abbreviate: (1) creationâs testimony to the existence of the true\nGod, (2) âthe fact that we are made in the image of God,â (3) âthe facts of our\nphysical and emotional design,â (4) âthe law of conscience,â (5) âthe order of\ncausality, which teaches us by linking every sin with consequences (Proverbs\n1:31).â 252\nSeveral questions should occur to those who have so far accepted my\nown account of general revelation (Chapter 9):\n1. Scripture says that those who lack saving grace repress the truths of\ngeneral revelation, exchanging them for a lie (Rom. 1:18, 25). Does that not\nmake it impossible to base an ethic on general revelation alone? Budziszewski\nagrees that sinners hold down the truth, and that âpersistence in such pretense\ndarkens or perverts such natural knowledge as God has given us.â 253 He says,\nâthe human race has been in the condition psychologists call âdenialâ ever since\nthe Fall.â 254 Nevertheless, Budziszewski notes that when the apostles in the New\nTestament confront Gentiles with the gospel, they appeal to the âtestimony of\ncreation.â 255\nIt is difficult theologically to understand how best to coordinate depravity\nwith common grace. But it is right to say that depravity is never
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: so extreme that it\nentirely blots out Godâs law from the unbelieverâs consciousness. Rom. 1 teaches\nthat the unbeliever knows it well enough that when he rebels against it, it leaves\nhim without excuse (Rom. 1:20, 32). So I would say that the non-Christian both\nknows and suppresses the truth, and his knowledge of the truth may sometimes\nbe conscious. 256 It is not wrong, therefore, to say that he is aware of Godâs moral\nstandards through general revelation. Here I agree with Budziszewski.\nBut the rather precarious status of general revelation in the nonbelieverâs\nconsciousness calls in question the likelihood of that revelation producing a\nstable moral consensus in modern secular culture sufficient to govern nations.\n2. What is the role of Scripture in natural law ethics? Obviously, for\nAristotle, the Stoics, and other pagan predecessors of modern natural law theory\nthere is no role for Scripture at all. Aquinas, Grotius, and others, however, have\n252\nBudziszewski, op. cit., 180-81. He says on 181 that âThe doctrine of natural law is grounded\nby the second, third, fourth and fifth of Godâs ways of general revelation.â He does not explain his\nomission of the first. Elsewhere, as on 210, section 6, he argues that natural law loses its force if\nit is not seen as the law of a personal creator, so the first would seem to be at least as relevant as\nthe others.\n253\nIbid., 182.\n254\nIbid., 183. See also his account of denial in The Revenge of Conscience (Dallas: Spence\nPublishing Co., 1999), 84-86.\n255\nIbid.\n256\nThe Pharisees who opposed Jesus in the gospels would be an example of a very conscious\nunderstanding of moral truth, accompanied by an unregenerate nature. For a fuller analysis of\nthis question, see my Cornelius Van Til (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1995), 187-230. 228\nhad to deal with the relation of natural law to Scripture. It has sometimes been\ntempting for natural law ethicists to leave Scripture out of the picture, regarding it\nas a theological, rather than an ethical aut
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hority. But that wonât do, if I have been\nright about the âcomprehensivenessâ of Scripture (Chapter 10).\nBudziszewski, however, has a high view of biblical authority and often\nargues the existence of natural law by appealing to Scripture. At one point, he\nrelates natural law to Scripture as follows:\nThere is a natural law, and it can be known and philosophically analyzed.\nBut that which is beside the Scripture can be vindicated only with the help\nof Scripture; that which is revealed before the gospel can be secured\nagainst evasion only in the light of the gospel. The doctrine of natural law\nis best grounded not in the study of nature independent of Godâs Word but\nin the Word of God itself. I do not mean that natural law is the same as\nDivine law; I do mean that Scripture is our foremost authority about\nboth. 257\nBudziszewski admits, however, that natural law theories often fail to be fully\nscriptural:\nEven among Christian philosophers the doctrine of natural law often fails\nto measure up. Either it focuses on matters peripheral to the text and the\ndevices of our heart, or it wanders from its scriptural foundation. To one\ndegree or another these have been flaws of almost all previous natural-\nlaw theorizing, including my ownâand nearly all books about it, perhaps\nincluding the present one. 258\nThis statement is a remarkable expression of candor. And I do appreciate\nBudziszewskiâs attempt to bring Scripture into his argument in a way that has not\nbeen common in the natural law tradition. But still more needs to be said.\nIf âthat which is beside the Scripture can be vindicated only with the help\nof Scripture,â then appeals to natural law depend on Scripture. If one presents a\nnatural law argument to someone who doesnât believe in natural law, who keeps\nchallenging the authority on which the law is based, ultimately the argument must\nhave recourse to Scripture. So natural law arguments ultimately depend on\narguments from Scripture. The argument is not merely âPlay fair
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: , because that is\nthe natural law,â or even âPlay fair, because you cannot help believing in fair\nplay,â but âPlay fair, because you cannot help believing in fair play, and we know\nthat because the Bible says so.â\nOf course, to say that is to remove much of the appeal of the natural law\ntradition, which is the claim that we may argue objective principles of ethics\n257\n258\nBudziszewski, op. cit., 183-84; cf. 186.\nIbid., 186. 229\nwithout recourse to Scripture. If Budziszewski and I are right, there is no such\nthing as a natural law argument apart from Scripture. Natural law arguments are,\nin fact, natural-law-arguments-warranted-by-the-Bible. That doesnât mean that\nevery natural law argument must be accompanied by Bible texts, but rather that\nas when an argument attempts to trace natural law back to its ultimate\nfoundation, that foundation must be located in Scripture.\nThis is, in fact, what the Bible itself would lead us to expect. When God\nspoke with Adam in the Garden, he presupposed that Adam had some natural\nknowledge of trees and animals and such. But he did not want Adam to interpret\nthese objects autonomously, apart from Godâs own spoken word. Similarly,\nthroughout the Bible, God expects human beings to interpret the world by Godâs\nword, so that all human knowledge is a knowledge of world and word at the same\ntime. This principle is especially important since the Fall, though it would have\nbeen important even if Adam had not fallen. For since the Fall, human beings do\ndistort natural revelation (Rom. 1). That distortion can be removed only by saving\ngrace, and saving grace comes through the gospel, the message of Scripture.\nSo, although nonbelievers have a certain knowledge of God apart from\nScripture, which challenges them even though they repress it (as we saw under\n1, above), that is not a desirable situation. Far better that they come to know God\nthrough the gospel and then learn to look at every fact in the world through the\nâspectaclesâ of Scripture.\n
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 3. But, given that Budziszewski recognizes a significant role for Scripture\nin warranting natural law, why do we need natural law, after all? What use is\nnatural law, when we have the Bible? Budziszewski answers,\nThe main use of general revelation, including the natural law, is\napologetics: giving a reason for the hope that lies within us. I do not mean\nthat in apologetics we always refer to the natural law but that we depend\non its existence. 259\nHe mentions three forms of apologetics, evangelical, moral, and political. In\nevangelical apologetics, we seek to persuade people of the truth of the gospel. In\nmoral apologetics, we âengage in ethical persuasion or counsel.â 260 In political\napologetics, we seek\nâ¦to leaven the civil law we share with our nonbelieving neighborsâfor\ninstance, when we seek agreement that life in the womb should not be\ndestroyed, that sodomy should not be granted legal equivalence with\nmarriage, or that sick people should be cared for and comforted instead of\nstarved or pressured into suicide. In this area we can hardly get far by\nproclaiming to nonbelievers âThe Bible says!â But we can get somewhere\n259\n260\nIbid, 184.\nIbid. 230\nby proclaiming extrabiblical truths which we know, on biblical authority,\nthat the nonbeliever really knows too. 261\nBudziszewski is himself a skillful and cogent apologist in moral and\npolitical matters. His What We Canât Not Know 262 is, on the whole, a brilliant\ndefense of basic ethical norms. He is at his best with âthe basics of right and\nwrong,â 263 such as âPlay fair,â âDonât murder,â and âTake care of your family.â\nEveryone, he says, acknowledges these standards. Even when people are\nunfair, they maintain that they are fair, rather than repudiating fairness. When\nthey make excuses for their misdeeds, they appeal to these and other basic\nethical standards. In the few instances when they repudiate these ethical\nstandards, they nevertheless use these standards to rebuke others.\nIn his The Revenge
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of Conscience, Budziszewski takes another\napologetic approach, showing how repressing the conscience leads to worse and\nworse moral conduct and to natural consequences, as when sexual immorality\nleads to sexually transmitted diseases. 264\nBut when natural law thinkers get beyond these basics I find them less\npersuasive. Roman Catholic writers often argue that since there is a natural\nconnection between sexual relations and procreation, contraception is wrong.\nThat argument seems to me to be a naturalistic fallacy: sex leads to procreation,\nso sex ought to lead to procreation, an argument from is to ought. Budziszewski\ndefends natural law theory against the charge of naturalistic fallacy by saying,\nAn âisâ which merely âhappens to beâ has no moral significance because it\nis arbitrary; thatâs why it cannot imply an âought.â But an âisâ which\nexpresses the purposes of the Creator is fraught with an âoughtâ already.\nSuch are the inbuilt features of our design, including the design of deep\nconscience. 265\nThis is essentially the same as my own defense of Christian-theistic ethics\nagainst the charge of naturalistic fallacy (see Chapter 5). And Budziszewski does\nshow in various ways that natural law is a law of God, not a merely human\nconjecture about the natural purposes of things. But in the argument against\ncontraception, and others, it is difficult to show that the proposed restriction is in\nfact a law of God. I shall try to show under the seventh commandment that\nScripture doesnât teach it. And in the absence of biblical support, I donât know\nhow one could show that God forbids contraception. Opposition to contraception\nis not like opposition to murder, stealing, unfairness, or betraying friends. One\n261\nIbid.\nDallas: Spence Publishing Co., 2003. The dialogue on 107-135 is an admirable example of\nthat philosophical genre.\n263\nWhat We Canât Not Know, 112.\n264\nRevenge, 20-38.\n265\nWhat We Canât Not Know, 108.\n262 231\ncan use means of birth control withou
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t evident inconsistency with universally\nacknowledged moral principles. 266\nThe same is true in the argument over abortion. Later I shall try to present\na argument against abortion from Scripture. But if we set Scripture aside, the\nnatural law argument runs like this:\n1. It is wrong to take the life of an innocent human person.\n2. Abortion takes the life of an innocent human person.\nTherefore, abortion is wrong.\nBut how do we establish from natural law alone the personhood of the unborn\nchild presupposed in premise 2? Usually the argument is that the unborn child is\ngenetically different from his parents and therefore not a âpart of his motherâs\nbody.â But there is a logical jump between genetic uniqueness and personhood.\nGenetic uniqueness is a physical property, personhood a moral one, implying\nmoral rights. How can it be shown that genetic uniqueness conveys a right to\nlife? I believe Scripture teaches that the unborn child is a person, but it is by no\nmeans evident how that conclusion can be proved by natural law. So natural law\narguments often cry out for scriptural supplementation.\nAnd if we canât argue an ethical point from Scripture, it would be best not\nto argue it at all. In Chapter 11 on the sufficiency of Scripture, I tried to show that\nScripture contains a complete transcript of Godâs will for ethics. So principles that\ncannot be established from Scripture cannot be established by natural law\narguments either. When people try to add to Godâs word by natural law\narguments, they violate the sufficiency of Scripture. This is not to say that it is\nwrong to use natural law arguments. As Budziszewski shows, they can be very\nuseful. But if I am right, these arguments have significant limitations.\nI conclude, then, that natural law is an important apologetic tool, but it\ndoes not provide ethical norms in addition to those in Scripture. And those who\nuse natural law arguments need to beware of naturalistic fallacies.\n4. A final question about natural law is whether it i
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s adequate to govern\ncivil society.\nAquinas distinguishes several kinds of law: (1) Eternal Law (Godâs own\nmind), (2) Natural Law (âThe reflection of eternal law in the very structure of the\ncreated rational mind, directing us to our natural goodâ 267 ), (3) Divine Law\n(Scripture), and (4) Human Law (laws of civil society). Aquinas says that human\nlaw should be derived from natural law, not divine law. Why? Budziszewski\nparaphrases Aquinasâs answer:\n266\nI shall discuss this issue in more detail, including the possibility of a natural law argument,\nunder the Seventh Commandment.\n267\nBudziszewski, Written on the Heart, 61. 232\nBecause government is charged with directing the community to its natural\nrather than its supernatural good, so God does not intend the enforcement\nof Divine law upon nonbelievers. 268\nHe adds, however, as Aquinas surely would, that âeven if human law should not\nenforce Divine law, it should not violate it eitherânot any more than it may\nviolate natural law.â 269\nAs an example, Budziszewski argues that the biblical principle, âI am\nprohibited from divorcing a faithful spouseâ should not be imposed as law on civil\nsociety without âa good deal of watering down.â 270 The reason is that âbefore the\ncoming of Christ not even believers were expected to understand the true nature\nof marriageâ 271 (he refers to Matt. 19:8).\nI agree that we should exercise care about turning biblical principles into\ncivil law. Not every command in Scripture is appropriate for civil law (for example,\ncommands about our heart-attitudes, as Deut. 6:4-5). And not every command\nthat is appropriate for civil law should be enacted in every nation, or immediately.\nAs I indicated in the discussion of theonomy, Chapter 13, some laws like the\ndeath penalty for adultery presuppose a national commitment to Godâs Lordship\nand a population instructed in Godâs law.\nBut I cannot agree with Aquinas and Budziszewski that natural law alone,\nwithout the supplementation of Scrip
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ture, should determine the civil law. For one\nthing, I question Aquinasâ distinction between natural and supernatural goods,\nand his limitation of the stateâs competence to the former, as I shall indicate in\nvarious later discussions. And if that distinction cannot be maintained, then I see\nno reason to argue that Scripture should be excluded from influence on civil law.\nThis is not to say that I would necessarily quote Scripture texts in the\ncontext of political debate. As Budziszewski says,\nIn this area we can hardly get far by proclaiming to unbelievers âThe Bible\nsays!â But we can get somewhere by proclaiming extrabiblical truths which\nwe know, on biblical authority, that the nonbeliever really knows too. 272\nBut surely our goal is to get beyond these extrabiblical truths. As Budziszewski\nhimself argued, natural laws are not fully warranted without an appeal to\nScripture (as we saw under 2, above). And I argued further that we should never\ninvestigate nature except with the spectacles of Scripture.\n268\nIbid., 63.\nIbid.\n270\nBudziszewski, Revenge, 112.\n271\nIbid.\n272\nBudziszewski, Written, 184.\n269 233\nAnd that same conclusion follows from the very nature of politics\naccording to Scripture. The ultimate goal of political apologetics is nothing less\nthan to present Christ as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. The political goal of\nbiblical Christianity is a civil state that acknowledges him for who he is. For every\ninstitution of human culture, as well as every individual human being, is called to\ndo homage to King Jesus. 273 We may not reach that goal in the course of modern\npolitical debate; but that is where the debate should point, and we may well find\noccasion to tell nonbelievers, in all honesty, that this is the direction in which we\nwould urge society to move.\nAnd if the Lord tarries, it should not be unthinkable that one day our\nsociety could become predominantly Christian, so that the people will be, not\nonly tolerant of biblical arguments, but eager to hear them
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: . When and if that\nhappens, we should certainly not refuse to bring the Bible into the public square.\nSome readers, including some Christians, might disagree with this\nunderstanding of Jesusâ lordship and its relevance to the state. But at the very\nleast, this is a view that many Christians have held. It would be wrong to limit\npolitical discourse so as to exclude such a view a priori. Secularists are eager to\nkeep âreligiousâ views out of the public square, an utterly undemocratic\nrestriction. Christians should oppose all such limitations, even the exclusion of\nviews they reject.\nSo although I would not insist on bringing up Bible passages in every\npolitical debate, I think we should not exclude them either. Budziszewski says\nthat âScripture is our foremost authority about [natural law as well as Divine\nlaw].â 274 There is no reason to deprive unbelieving society of this authoritative\nsource, when they need it so very badly, and when they need to know so much\nthat natural law cannot supply.\nSo in my judgment the natural law tradition contains both bad and good. It\nis important for us to be discerning, here as always âto take every thought captive\nto obey Christâ (2 Cor. 10:5). 275\n273\nMore on this in our discussion of the fifth commandment.\nBudziszewski, Written, 184.\n275\nFor a more elaborate critique of natural law theory, as exemplified in writers such as John\nCourtney Murray, Jacques Maritain, and Ken Myers, see Peter J. Leithart, Natural Law: A\nReformed Critique (Niceville, FL: Biblical Horizons, 1996). I think Leithartâs treatment of human\ndepravity needs more nuance, but he makes a powerful case for the use of Scripture in political\ndiscourse. At least some of the weaknesses Leithart attributes to natural law thinkers have been\novercome somewhat by Budziszewski, who has evidently been in correspondence with Leithart\n(see Budziszewski, Revenge, xviii). That is why I have focused so closely on Budziszewski in this\nchapter. But Budziszewski has not come to see clea
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rly the political claims of Christ in Scripture.\nFor more on this subject, see my discussion of the Fifth Commandment.\n274 234\nChapter 15: Our Ethical Situation\nIn this chapter I will attempt to describe our ethical situation as Scripture\npresents it. That is, what are the chief facts we must take account of in making\nethical decisions? How does the Bible characterize our ethical environment? 276\nAs I indicated in the last chapter, just as there are various levels within the\nnormative perspective (God, revelation, verbal revelation, etc.), so there are\nvarious levels of facts that we deal with in the world. These include God, angels,\nhuman society, individual existence, and nature. Let us look at each of these:\nGod\nI have already said much about the role of God in our ethical decisionsâ\nboth in this volume and, in effect, in DG, and I will say much more. So the\npresent discussion will be much shorter than the subject warrants. But I will offer\nsome summary thoughts.\nAs God himself is our chief norm, he is also the chief fact of our\nexperience, the chief person âwith whom we have to doâ (Heb. 4:13, KJV). He is\nour ultimate situation, for everything else in our environment, including ourselves,\ncomes from his eternal decree (Eph. 1:11), his creation (Neh. 9:6), and his\nprovidence (Acts 17:26, Heb. 1:3).\nHe is not just a fact among other facts. He is the all-conditioner, 277 the fact\nfrom which every other fact receives its existence and nature. So he is the fact\nthat is revealed in every fact, the fact we encounter in every fact. As Calvin said,\ntherefore, all that we do is coram deo, in the presence of God. Wherever we go,\nhe is there (Psm. 139).\nThe biblical view of God is radically different from the views of God found\nin other religions, philosophies, and worldviews. That difference can be\nsummarized in three headings:\n1. The Creator: No other worldview presents us with a God who created\nall things out of nothing. Some worldviews are pantheistic, believing that the\nsupreme b
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: eing is the whole universe. Others offer no account of the origins of all\nthings. For pantheistic and nonpantheistic alternatives to the biblical worldview,\nall reality is equal in dignity and authority. But in Scripture, there are two levels of\n276\nOf course, it is also important to discuss the extrascriptural facts that form our ethical\nenvironment. I shall try to do that a bit in my later chapters on Christ and Culture. But there are so\nmany extrabiblical facts that it would be impossible to do justice to them in a single book.\n277\nCornelius Van Til, Why I Believe in God (Phila.: Committee on Christian Education, Orthodox\nPresbyterian Church, n.d.). This pamphlet is available on various web sites and in Greg Bahnsen,\nVan Tilâs Apologetic (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1998), 121-143. 235\nreality, the divine and the nondivine, the creator and the creatures. The creator\nhas ultimate power and authority; the creature does not. The ethical importance\nof this fact is staggering. In every ethical decision, the first consideration must be\nhow that decision will affect our relation to God.\n2. Absolute Personality: It is also the case, as we saw in Chapter 5, that\nonly in Scripture is the supreme being an absolute person. There are personal\ngods in polytheistic religions, but they are not absolute. There are absolutes of a\nsort in worldviews like Hinduism and Hegelianism, but those absolutes are not\npersonal. Only in biblical Christianity (and to some extent in those âChristian\nheresiesâ influenced by the Bible) is there a being who is truly supreme, absolute,\nand who is also a person. Our God is not only our creator; he also knows, loves,\nfeels, and speaks to his creatures. Life coram deo is a fully personal relationship.\nSo in our ethical decisions we are interested above all in what God thinks and\nhow he feels about what we do.\n3. Lordship: Again, I mention the importance of covenant lordship, the\nspecific relationship God has formed with his creatures. That relationship\ninvolves control, autho
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rity, and presence, and we have explored, in Chapter 3\nand elsewhere, the ethical implications of these lordship attributes. (a) God\ncontrols all there is. And, most significantly in this context, he controls our\nenvironment. Whether we find ourselves in happy or difficult situations, God has\nplaced us there. So we should regard our situation, not as a predicament brought\non us by impersonal fate, but as an opportunity and/or challenge, brought to us\nby our covenant Lord.\n(b) God speaks to us with supreme authority. We have explored the\nimplications of this fact under the normative perspective.\n(c) God is the ultimate presence, the one who is closest to us, the one with\nwhom, of all persons, we have the most to do. He is not far away from us, always\ninescapable. We live coram deo. So God sees all we do, and he evaluates all we\ndo, in blessing and judgment. Yet he not only evaluates our conduct. He draws\nnear also to give grace, undeserved favor, beyond anything we can ask or think.\nSo he sent his Son to dwell among us (John 1:14) and to die the death we\ndeserve. So he sends his Spirit to comfort, sanctify, and lead us into all truth. Our\nethical life is a deepening of that relationship, a walking together with God.\nThe Angels\nThe Bible also presents angelic beings as beings âwith whom we have to\ndo,â as one of the environments of the Christian life. It is hard for the modern\nChristian to know what to make of this. Believers in Bible times were deeply\nconscious of the presence of angels in their midst, as when Paul mentions that 236\nwomen should wear a head covering âbecause of the angelsâ (1 Cor. 11:10).\nPaul feels no need to explain this phrase. He assumes the Corinthians will\nunderstand what he means. But I recall my revered professor of theology, John\nMurray, shaking his head sadly after reading this passage and confessing he had\nno idea what it meant. Nor can I offer insight. Modern Christians including myself\nhave lost the vivid consciousness of angelic beings that New Test
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ament\nbelievers took for granted. Some popular writers and television shows have\nrecently explored claims to angelic activity in our time, but these seem like\ncultural curiosities without much intellectual or spiritual weight.\nPart of the problem is that modern people have lost touch with the\nsupernatural and preternatural. 278 They have become skeptical of any world or\nany beings beyond those of our senses. Christians at least believe in God, but\nthey have absorbed enough of the anti-supernaturalism of their culture that belief\nin angels seems foreign to them. It seems that belief in God is hard enough. Why\nadd further difficulty by bringing angels into it? And if God is sovereign, what\nneed do we have for preternatural beings? God is the one who judges and\nblesses us, sometimes in extraordinary ways. Why are angels important?\nBut Scripture itself mentions angels over 300 times. This fact suggests\nthat we need to take angels into account in our ethical decisions. Being a modern\nperson myself, I donât pretend to have gotten very deeply into the doctrine of\nangels, but I would cautiously venture the following thoughts.\n1. The doctrine of angels rebukes the smallness and impersonalism of our\ncosmology. Modern worldviews typically claim to have discovered a much larger\nuniverse than was known to the ancients and medievals. But they have a much\nsmaller view of the universe of persons, having abandoned belief in God and in\nangels. According to Scripture, however, there are vast numbers of angels that\ninhabit the world. So we need to develop a larger perspective. In 2 Kings 6,\nElishaâs servant was terrified by the armies of Syria surrounding their city. Elisha\ncomforted him with a vision of angels:\nHe said, \"Do not be afraid, for those who are with us are more than\nthose who are with them.\" 17 Then Elisha prayed and said, \"O LORD,\nplease open his eyes that he may see.\" So the LORD opened the eyes of\nthe young man, and he saw, and behold, the mountain was full of horses\nand chariots o
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f fire all around Elisha. (Verses 16-17)\nMysterious warriors, even mysterious horses!âpoised to bring victory to the\nprophet (in a most mysterious way, as the later verses indicate). Elishaâs servant\nneeded a larger cosmology, one allowing for more persons. He needed, further,\nto see that the physical conflict is only part of a larger spiritual conflict, a larger\nwarfare, as we will discuss further below.\n278\nIn traditional theology, God and his works are supernatural, above nature; angels and theirs\nare preternatural, beyond nature. 237\nSo the doctrine of angels makes our worldview even more personalistic. It\nreminds us that not only is God a divine person, but that many of the means he\nuses to bring about events in the world are also personal, rather than impersonal.\nScripture has little if anything to say about natural laws and forces, much to say\nabout Godâs personal agents, both angels and men. Typically, God does not\npress buttons; he sends messengers. This is important, because impersonalism\nalways detracts from ethical responsibility.\n2. The doctrine of angels shows us something of the dimensions of our\nethical-spiritual warfare. We see this in at least three ways:\n(a) Angels participate in the kingdom warfare. Above and around us are\ngood and evil angels, engaged in spiritual warfare. Satan and his hosts engage\nhuman beings in the battle by tempting them to sin. The good angels, however,\nare âministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit\nsalvationâ (Heb. 1:14). The two armies fight one another, as well as fighting\nagainst and for us (Dan. 10:13, 21, Jude 9, Rev. 12:7).\nSo Scripture urges us not to underestimate the difficulty of the struggle, as\nif we could succeed with human resources alone (Eph. 6:10-20). If we were\nfighting human beings, physical weapons would prevail, though even in human\nwarfare Godâs will is decisive. But we are fighting beings who are far more\nintelligent, strong, and numerous than we are, and who, to us, are
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: exceedingly\nmysterious.\nOn the other hand, we should not overestimate the difficulty either, for\nthere are angels fighting on our side (2 Kings 6:15-17) and the spiritual weapons\nof Eph. 6 are sufficient.\nIt may seem uninteresting to conclude with the advice âdonât\nunderestimate,â and âdonât overestimate.â But the main point here is that we\nshould not base either our hopes or our fears on the empirical situation alone.\nNews media and opinion makers in our culture seem to think that the most\nimportant issues are political, followed closely by entertainment. But Scripture\nsays otherwise. The really decisive issues of human life are ethical and spiritual.\nAnd it is the religious and ethical equipment God gives us that will prevail over\nthe hosts of evil.\n(b) Second, angels are witnesses to human salvation (Luke 12:8-9, 15:10,\n1 Cor. 4:9, Eph. 3:10, 1 Tim. 3:16, 1 Pet. 1:12, Rev. 4:10). Although (as above)\nangels participate in the redemptive drama, there is another sense in which they\nare spectators rather than participants. Redemption doesnât extend to them, for\nunfallen angels need no redemption, and fallen angels receive none (cf. Heb.\n2:16). So, although the angels contend for Godâs redemptive purposes, they do\nnot have the experience of being redeemed themselves. Thus Scripture 238\nsometimes pictures them as standing in amazement, looking in from the outside,\nas it were. Remarkably, they even learn the wisdom of God from observing the\nchurch (Eph. 3:10). It is our privilege to teach the angels by our words and life!\n(c) Third, the doctrine of angels is a measure of the greatness of our\nsalvation in Christ, for salvation lifts us above the angels. According to Heb. 2:9,\nJesus was made, for a little while, lower than the angels for the suffering of\ndeath. But in his resurrection he is again exalted above them. The passage\nimplies that Jesus brothers, the church, share that exaltation with him, fulfilling\nmanâs dominion over the earth (Gen. 1:28, Ps. 8). Although we d
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: o not yet see\neverything subject to man, we see this dominion in Jesus (Heb. 2:8). So the\nangels minister to us, not vice versa (Heb. 1:14). The world to come is not theirs,\nbut ours (2:5-8; Cf. Paulâs odd statement that we shall judge angels, 1 Cor. 6:3).\nIt belongs to man, Godâs image, not the angels.\nScripture applies these facts by indicating that angel worship is not only a\nsin, but also a delusion, from which Christ has set us free (Col. 2:18-19, Rev.\n19:10, 22:8-9). Further, because of redemption, the prince of the evil angels,\nSatan himself, is a defeated foe. We may resist him, and he will flee (1 Pet. 5:8-\n9, James 4:7).\nHuman Society\nA much more visible dimension of our ethical environment is the social\ndimension. We live with other people. God expects us to take our fellow human\nbeings into account when we make moral decisions. I shall say much more about\nsocial ethics in connection the fifth through tenth commandments of the\nDecalogue. But here I wish to make some general observations.\n1. The Cultural Mandate: a Corporate Task\nFrom the beginning of our existence, ethical life has presupposed a\ncommunity. The first creation ordinance, the cultural mandate of Gen. 1:28,\ncomes to Adam and Eve together (âAnd God blessed them, and God said to\nthemâ). The mandates themselves, to fill and subdue the earth, are not tasks\nthat Adam could even conceivably have done alone. 279 Since God made man\nmale and female, and since reproduction is itself part of the cultural task, God\nevidently intended from the beginning that this work be carried out as a corporate\ntask, a task for the whole human race. The individual is not responsible to fill and\nsubdue the earth. His responsibility, rather, is to make the best contribution to\nthis task of which he is capable.\n279\nCf the discussion in Chapter 13, under âExistential Priorities.â 239\nThus, from the very beginning, God intended for us to make our individual\ndecisions by taking other people into account, and specifically by seekin
>Sep 28 18:39:20 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: g how\nwe can best help our fellow human beings in their divinely ordained task.\n2. The Fall: a Corporate Failure\nGod made Eve to be a helper to Adam (Gen. 2:18) in every respect and\ntherefore also in the ethico-religious sphere. Both were to encourage one another\nin keeping the commands of God. But in the Fall, Eve took on the role of Satan,\nbecoming temptress rather than helper to her husband. And Adam forsook his\nheadship in the family, capitulating to the sinful request of his wife.\nSo the Fall involved, not only individual sins on the part of Adam and Eve,\nbut simultaneously a breakdown of their relationship. God had intended human\nbeings to have dominion over the animals, the man to have authority over his\nwife, 280 and all human beings to be subordinate to him. In the Fall narrative,\nSatan inhabits an animal, who takes dominion of the woman, who usurps the\nauthority of the man, who blames it all on God (Gen. 3:12). So Satan seeks an\nexact reversal of the authority structure.\nWe see the destruction of the relationship also in the sexual shame\nbetween the man and the woman, (Gen. 3:7, 10-11, 21, cf. 2:25), Adamâs\nblaming his wife for his sin (3:12), and the further breakdown in family harmony\nimplied in 3:16. By Godâs curse, both elements of the family task, childbearing\nand labor, are to be painful (3:16-19). So we see at the very beginning of the\nhistory of redemption that disobedience to God brought consequences upon\ncorporate human society as well as individuals.\n3. Fallen Society\nPeople sometimes ask whether sin is a merely individual thing, or whether\nit has corporate dimensions. A related question is, whether there are âsinful\nstructures of society.â I believe that sin is basically individual, because it is\nirreducibly personal. But sinful individuals contaminate the institutions they\ninhabit, and those institutions make the effects of sin even worse. When sinners\ngather together, they can accomplish more wickedness than they can\nindividually.\n280\nIâll try to ju
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: stify this non-feminist reading at a later point. For now, consider 1 Cor. 11:3, Eph.\n5:22-24, 1 Tim. 2:8-15. 240\nIn Gen. 4:17-24, the descendants of Cain develop the earliest forms of\nculture. These developments are not evil in themselves. But Moses chooses, as\na paradigm of the moral quality of that culture, Lamechâs song of vengeance\n(verses 23-24).\nIt is hard to know what sin it was that so provoked the Lord in Gen. 6:1-\n7, 281 but evidently at that point human wickedness reached a zenith, so that\nâevery intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continuallyâ (verse 5).\nGod sent the great flood as a judgment. But the flood did not wash away sin. In\nGen. 8:21, God in effect repeats the condemnation of 6:5: âthe intention of manâs\nheart is evil from his youth.â\nSo in Gen. 11, there is another compounding of sin through corporate\nunity. People build a city and a tower âlest we be dispersed over the face of the\nwhole earth,â defying God, who had ordained for the human race precisely to be\ndispersed. In preparing his judgment, the Lord comments on the effect of this\ncorporate enterprise on the moral character of the human race:\nBehold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and\nthis is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they\npropose to do will now be impossible for them. (Gen. 11:6)\nThe compounding of evil through corporate units then becomes a common\nbiblical theme. There are not only wicked people, but wicked cities: Sodom,\nGomorrah, Tyre, Sidon, Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum (Matt. 11:20-24). And,\nnot only wicked cities, but wicked nations (the Canaanite tribes, Moab, Edom,\nAmmon, Amalex, Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, etc.). Here the sinful practices of\nindividuals are reinforced by social agreements, covenants, and traditions. Sinful\npatterns of life become accepted by society, and therefore they are more easily\naccepted by individuals. So sinful individuals corrupt society and vice versa.\nSo biblical apocalyptic (Daniel, Ma
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tt. 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, Revelation)\npresents the ultimate spiritual battle as a battle between kingdoms: that of God,\nand that of human national-ecclesiastical units under the ultimate rule of Satan.\n4. The Corporate Character of Redemption\nBut redemption, too, has a corporate dimension. As Satan works through\ninstitutions and groups, so does God. Even after the Fall, the cultural mandate\ncontinues as our corporate task. Childbearing and labor bring toil and pain, but\n281\nScholars have made various suggestions: (1) marriages between Sethites and Cainites, (2)\nsexual relationships between women and angelic beings, and (3) royal polygamy. Iâm somewhat\ninclined toward the third suggestion. 241\nultimately they succeed in keeping the human race alive until God sends his\nredeemer.\nAnd God redeems, not only individuals, but peoples. The Book of Genesis\ndescribes the process of election, 282 in which God chooses one family and\nrejects another for his purposes of redemption. He chooses the family of Seth\nrather than the family of Cain. He chooses Noahâs family from all the others. He\nchooses the descendants of Shem over those of Ham and Japheth, Peleg over\nJoktan (Gen. 10:25?), Abraham over Nahor and Haran, Isaac over Ishmael,\nJacob over Esau. In his covenant with Abraham, God ordains circumcision as a\nsign and seal of covenant membership, identifying the family of God and\ndistinguishing them from all the other families of the world.\nThe equivalent to circumcision in the new covenant is baptism. Infant\nbaptism is a controversial doctrine in the church today, but certainly the Jews of\nthe first century who first heard the gospel would have assumed that their\nchildren were included in the new covenant as in the Abrahamic. That\nassumption would have been strengthened by Peterâs statement that âthe\npromise is for you and for your childrenâ (Acts 2:39) and by the regular baptism of\nhouseholds (Acts 11:14, 16:15, 31, 1 Cor. 1:16). Nothing in the New Testament\nsuggests a change from the O
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ld Testament principle of family membership in the\ncovenant. So we should recognize that in the New Testament too, God claims for\nhimself, not only individuals, but families.\nAfter God claimed the family of Israel, it grew into a great nation. So there\nwas need for additional institutions to order different aspects of family life. So\nGod gave to Israel prophetic, priestly, and kingly institutions. In the new covenant\ntoo there are apostles, prophets, pastor-teachers, elders, and deacons. As sinful\ninstitutions magnify the power of sin in the world, so godly institutions, working as\nGod intends, magnify the influence of righteousness and grace.\nSo in the consummation of history there will be, not only new heavens and\nnew earth, but also a city, the new Jerusalem. The goal of history is for Godâs\nrighteousness to take institutional form, as well as to take root in the hearts of\nindividuals.\n5. Corporate Life and Moral Decisions (Summary)\nSo God intends for us to help one another in our common task, not to try\nto do everything alone. He authorizes us to seek help and guidance from those\nequipped to give it. Because of sin, however, other people are not only helpers,\nbut tempters as well. So there is need of vigilance, testing, and proving as well as\n282\nIn terms of the distinction made in DG, Chapter 16, I am speaking here primarily of historical\nelection, not eternal election, though the former is an image of the latter. 242\ntrust. As in the Russian proverb quoted often by President Reagan, âtrust, but\nverify.â This temptation and sinful influence is compounded by the development\nof social institutions in unregenerate society.\nBut redemption builds a new society, in which we can again expect to\nwork together with other people in a constructive way, carrying out Godâs\ncommands. In that society, we can expect help, not only of a natural kind, but\nalso help that comes from the gifts of the Holy Spirit. So we meet Christ in our\nbrothers and sisters. The highest gift is the highest ta
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sk, to love one another.\nThe blessing of the Spirit is magnified in the development of godly\ninstitutions. Indeed, regenerate people cannot help but bring Godâs standards\ninto their places of service: businesses, schools, the arts, technology, agriculture,\nlabor, even government (1 Cor. 10:31 again). So Christians have an obligation to\naddress all areas of human life, including all social institutions, with the\ncommands of God. In some cases, as history has shown, this will lead to\ndistinctively Christian institutions within the larger society. In other cases, it will\nbring about change in the secular institutions themselves.\nLiving With Ourselves\nBut Christian ethics is individual as well as social. Even in deciding how to\ncontribute to a corporate project, we must make individual decisions. And in\ndoing so each person should take account of his own strengths and weaknesses,\nopportunities and limitations.\nIn some ways, all human beings are alike, made in the image of God,\nunder his lordship, responsible to him in every area of life, but fallen into sin. All\nChristians are alike in that in addition to their human nature and history, they are\nredeemed by Christ. So they are new creatures in Christ, free from sinâs\ndominion, filled with gifts of the Spirit. In all Christians, also, sin itself lingers until\nthe consummation.\nBut in other respects, each of us differs from every other person, and\nevery Christian differs from every other Christian. We have different\npersonalities, different abilities and disabilities, different histories and experience.\nIn the body of Christ, each of us plays a unique role, with distinctive calling, gifts,\nand opportunities.\nAnd each of us fights, in some ways, a unique spiritual battle. Generically,\nthe temptations we face are âcommon to manâ (1 Cor. 10:13). They can be\nsummarized as temptations to violate any of the Ten Commandments. Hence,\nHeb. 4:15 tells us that Jesus was tempted âin every respectâ¦ as we are.â But\nthese temptations take di
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: fferent forms in each personâs life. All of us are tempted 243\nto steal, for example, but in different ways. Some are tempted to steal from\nindividuals, others âonlyâ from corporations or government, via such things as\nfraudulent use of warranties or tax evasion. Others of us are tempted mainly to\nsteal honor that belongs to God.\nAll of us are tempted sexually. But some are tempted to homosexual sins,\nothers heterosexual. All of us are tempted to dishonor our parents, but some are\ntempted to despise their counsel, others to leave them without support in their old\nage.\nAnd each of us has unique moral responsibilities, which are applications of\nour general moral responsibilities. Scripture teaches us to keep our contracts and\nwork hard. For some, that will mean showing up regularly each day at a\ncorporate office. For others, that will mean delivering a sermon each Sunday in a\nPresbyterian church. For others it will mean doing the wash, cooking meals, and\nraising young children.\nSo moral decisions require us to take into account both the likenesses and\ndifferences between ourselves and others. That is to say that each of us must\napply the word of God to his own unique situation. Though we can and should\nseek help from others, no one else can do this for us.\nStrange, then, as it may sound, the self is a crucial element of its own\nenvironment. As we must learn to live with God, angels, and other people, we\nmust also learn to live with ourselves. Here the situational and existential\nperspectives coincide.\nI would like to look more closely at two areas where living with ourselves is\na crucial consideration.\n1. Living With Our Genes\nOne particular problem often discussed today in this area is the bearing of\ngenetic inheritance upon moral responsibility.\nThe rapid progress of genetic science has brought certain interesting facts\nto our attention. Some years ago, it was learned that an abnormally high\nproportion of boys with a double \"y\" chromosome (xyy) engage in anti-social or\ncrimi
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nal behavior. There was discussion of whether that discovery might help us\nin maintaining social stability. Should we abort children who have this genetic\ncombination? Should we test children early for this condition and take special\npains to steer xyy boys into constructive paths? Should we seek ways to change\nthe genetic makeup of such children?\nLater came the discovery that a certain gene is associated with a relatively\nhigh percentage of alcoholics. And then Simon LeVay, a gay activist 244\nand neuroscientist, published a paper in Science 283 arguing that there are some\nminute but statistically significant differences between heterosexual and\nhomosexual men in the size of the \"INAH-3\" region of the anterior hypothalmus,\npart of the brain. Some have argued that this discovery tends to establish what\ngay activists have long been saying, namely that homosexuality is an innate\ncondition rather than a \"choice,\" that it cannot be helped, and therefore it should\nbe accepted as normal.\nI am not competent to evaluate LeVay's research. For a brief scientific\ncritique by a Christian who appears at least to know what he's talking about, see\nP. D. Brown, \"Science and Sodomy.\" 284 I do think that we are wise to suspend\njudgment until LeVay's work is corroborated by others who are more objective on\nthe question. However, we should note as others have that there is an\nunanswered \"chicken and egg\" problem here: how do we know that this condition\n(or perhaps the larger unexplored physical basis for it) is the cause, and not the\nresult, of homosexual thought and behavior?\nAnd of course we must also remember that these discoveries were made\nthrough studies of the brains of people who were exclusively homosexual,\ncompared with brains of people who were (I gather) exclusively heterosexual. But\nthere is a wide spectrum between these two extremes. The exclusively\nhomosexual population seems to be between 1% and 3% of the population\n(the widely used Kinsey figure of 10% is now largely discredited). B
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ut many more\npeople have bisexual inclinations, and still others are largely heterosexual but\nwilling to enter homosexual relationships under certain circumstances\n(experimentation, prison, etc.) Is there a genetic basis for these\nrather complicated patterns of behavior? Neither LeVay nor anyone else has\noffered data suggesting that.\nBut let's assume that there is an innate physical basis for homosexuality,\nand for alcoholism, and indeed for general criminality. I suspect that as genetic\nscience develops over the years there will be more and more correlations made\nbetween genetics and behavior, and that will be scientific progress. What ethical\nconclusions should we draw?\nFor one thing, we certainly should not draw the conclusion that gay\nactivists want to draw, namely that any \"innate\" condition must therefore be\naccepted as natural, normal, and ethically right. As Charles Krauthammer points\nout, 285 innateness has nothing to do with normality. Many diseases, for example,\n283\n253:1034-37.\nCredenda Agenda 5:3, p. 18. More recently, âAccording to a March, 2004 report provided by\nthe National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH): âThere is no\nevidence that shows that homosexuality is simply âgeneticââ¦.And none of the research claims\nthere is. Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bytes to the public.â\n[See www.narth.com/doct/istheregene.html, emphasis in the original.]â The citation is from an\nunsigned article, âIs There a âGay Geneâ?â in Chalcedon Report 466 (Sept., 2004), 14.\n285\nColumn in Escondido Times-Advocate, July 25, 1993.\n284 245\nare genetically determined. But we don't consider Tay-Sachs or Sickle-Cell\nAnemia to be \"normal\" or desirable conditions, let alone to possess some ethical\nvirtue. Nor do we consider alcoholism or \"xyy\" anti-social behavior to be normal\nand natural. Rather, we do all we can to fight them. Genetic discoveries, indeed,\nopen up more possible weapons for this fight. Some have
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: suggested, indeed,\nthat the discovery of a \"gay gene\" would give us the opportunity, through abortion\nor genetic manipulation, of eliminating homosexuality (or at least one impulse\ntoward homosexuality) from society altogether. 286\nAnd, of course, to say that innateness entails moral desirability is to\ncommit a textbook example of the naturalistic fallacy.\nFurther, we must keep these discoveries in perspective. Not everyone\nwho has the xyy gene becomes a criminal, and not everyone with a genetic risk\nfactor for alcoholism actually becomes an alcoholic. Similarly, it is quite unlikely\nthat a \"gay gene,\" should it exist, would actually determine people to be\nhomosexual. Although studies of twins do show a correlation between genetics\nand homosexuality, half of all twin brothers of homosexuals are heterosexual. So\nthe data suggest something less than genetic determinism. Indeed, they suggest\nthat it is possible for someone to resist patterns of behavior to which he is\ngenetically predisposed. Genes do determine eye color, sex, blood type and so\non; but patterns of behavior, although influenced by genetic make-up, do not\nseem to be controlled by it. The typical behavioral differences between males\nand females, for example, have a genetic basis; but (as feminists are quick to\npoint out) that genetic basis does not exhaustively determine how we will behave\nin every situation. Women sometimes behave in ways more typical of men, and\nvice versa. Astrologers like to say \"the stars impel, but they do not compel.\" The\nsame would have to be said for the influence of genes over behavior.\nIndeed, other sorts of influences are often more compelling than genetic\ninheritance. An unsigned editorial in National Review 287 points out that \"the\neffects of childhood brutalization can restrict one's freedom far more than does a\nphysiological preference for sweets; and many purely biological impulses pale in\nstrength before the smoker's need of a cigarette.\" So if we excuse homosexuality\non the basis o
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f genetic predisposition, we should also excuse all acts resulting\nfrom environmental influence and from bad choices in the past. Clearly, however,\nwe should deny the validity of any such excuses. We may not excuse otherwise\nwrong acts on the ground that they are influenced by \"compulsions,\" hereditary\nor not.\nNor do we in other cases excuse acts committed on the basis of genetic\npredispositions. One who has a genetic propensity to alcoholism cannot excuse\nhis alcoholism on that basis; nor can an xyy man excuse his criminality.\nThese conditions do not force people to do anything contrary to their desires;\n286\n287\nThat is precisely what gay activists don't want to hear.\nAug. 9, 1993, p. 17. 246\nthus they do not compromise moral freedom. 288 They do create moral\nchallenges, venues for moral temptation. But that too should be seen\nin perspective: all of us have moral \"weak spots,\" areas where we are especially\nvulnerable to the Devil's enticements. These areas of temptation have many\nsources; heredity among them. Others would be environment, experiences, and\nour own past decisions. Thus some have a particular problem with temptation to\nalcohol abuse; others, because of their early training, personal taste, or social\nattachments, are not often tempted to commit that particular sin. But these will\ncertainly have other areas of temptation. This is true even for those\nwho are most mature in the Christian faith: such maturity opens one to the\ntemptation of spiritual pride. Thus the person whose special moral\nchallenges have a genetic component is not in a totally unique situation. We all\nface such challenges; they are never entirely under our control. For all of us, this\nworld is a spiritually dangerous place. Truly, \"your enemy the devil prowls around\nlike a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour\" (I Pet. 5:8). But thanks\nto God's grace, we may \"resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know\nthat your brothers throughout the world are undergoing the same kind of\nsuffer
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ings\" (verse 9).\nWould a genetic basis for homosexuality eliminate the element of\n\"choice?\" Certainly not. A person with a genetic propensity for alcoholism still\nmakes a choice when he decides to take a drink, and then another, and then\nanother. Same with an xyy male who decides to punch somebody in the nose. If\nwe assume the existence of a genetic propensity for homosexuality, it is true as\nwe said that those with that makeup face greater temptation in this area than\nothers. But those who succumb to the temptation do choose to do so, as do all of\nus when we succumb to our own besetting temptations. Homosexuals certainly\nchoose not to remain celibate, and they choose to have sexual relations. They\nare not forced to do this by their genes or by anything contrary to their own\ndesires.\nIs it possible for a homosexual to repent of his sin and, by God's grace, to\nbecome heterosexual? Christian ministries to homosexuals claim that this is\npossible and that it has happened, though they admit that this is a particularly\ndifficult sin to deal with. Sexual orientation is something that goes very\ndeeply into human personality, and we have an instinct to keep it relatively\nprivate. That instinct is a good one, but it does make counseling in this area\nespecially difficult. Gay activists claim that transformation of sexual orientation is\nimpossible, and they dispute alleged \"ex-gay\" testimonies. Indeed, some people\nwho have professed deliverance from homosexuality have later returned to\nhomosexual relationships. And many \"ex-gays\" have candidly admitted that they\ncontinue to experience homosexual attraction, attraction which they now perceive\nas a moral and spiritual challenge. Pro-gay advocates argue that this lingering\nhomosexual temptation proves that homosexuality is ineradicable.\n288\nI am assuming here the view of free will developed in DG, 119-159. 247\nI believe on faith that God can deliver homosexuals (1 Cor. 6:9-\n11), because Scripture teaches that His grace can deliver his people f
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rom all\nsin. 289 I haven't done first-hand research on the results of various ministries to\nhomosexuals. It would certainly not surprise me to learn that many people who\nstruggle by God's grace to overcome their homosexuality still experience\nhomosexual temptations. People who have been addicted to alcohol often\nface continuing temptations in this area long after they have stopped drinking to\nexcess. Similarly those who have overcome the impulses of hot tempers, drugs,\nor heterosexual promiscuity. If that were true in regard to repentant\nhomosexuals, it would not cast the slightest doubt on the power of God's grace to\nheal such people. Recurrent temptation is a problem for all of us, and will be until\nglory. One may not judge the fruits of Christian ministries on a perfectionist\ncriterion, namely the assumption that deliverance from sin must remove all\ntemptation toward that sin in this life.\nThe bottom line, however, is that the genetic element in sin does not\nexcuse it. To see that, it is important to put the issue into an even wider\nperspective. Christianity forces us again and again to widen our viewpoint, for it\nforces us to see everything from the perspective of a transcendent God and\nfrom the standpoint of eternity. Such perspective helps us to see our trials as\n\"light and momentary\" (II Cor. 4:17) and our sins as greater than we normally\nadmit. From a biblical perspective, the difficult fact is that in one sense all sin is\ninherited. From Adam comes both our sin and our misery. We are guilty\nof Adam's transgression, and through Adam we ourselves inherit sinful natures. If\na genetic predisposition excuses sodomy, then our inheritance from Adam\nexcuses all sin! But that is clearly not the case. 290\nIs that fair? Well, here we resort to the usual apologetic defenses of the\ndoctrine of original sin: Adam contained all the (genetic!) potentialities of all of us,\nand lived in a perfect environment save one source of temptation. None of us\ncould or would have done any better. And, Am
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: erican individualism to the contrary\nnotwithstanding, the human race is one in important senses, and God is right to\njudge it as a single entity. The final analysis, of course, is that we are\nHis creations. He defines what is \"fair,\" and he has the right to do as he pleases\nwith the work of his hands.\nIn this broad context, however, the argument that one sin should be\ndeclared normal on the basis of a genetic component appears entirely self-\nserving, and must be dismissed as invalid.\n289\nJohn Jefferson Davis asks, âIf Masters and Johnson can achieve a 66 percent success rate in\ndealing with homosexuals with purely secular techniques, can we doubt that with the power of\nGodâs Holy Spirit even more dramatic rates of transformation are possible?â Evangelical Ethics\n(Phillipsburg: P&R, 2004), 132.\n290\nOf course, Reformed theology construes our relationship to Adam as representative, rather\nthan merely genetic, and that is important. But Adam represents all who are descended from him\n\"by natural generation;\" so there is also an inevitable genetic element in human sin. 248\n2. Living With Our Limitations\nAnother area of current discussion related to \"living with ourselves\" is the\nquestion of accepting our limitations. The Bible teaches that we have two\noutstanding sources of weakness: finitude and sin. In the previous section we\nexplored one aspect of human sinfulness. In this, we will explore a dimension of\nour finitude.\nMore and more, various groups within society are calling\nupon governments to remedy the disadvantages that they have relative to other\ngroups. Thus there are today various \"rights\" movements, demanding remedies\nagainst real and alleged oppression based upon race, culture, sex, handicap,\nsexual orientation and many other things, such as unusual height or weight. I\nshall deal with racism, sexism and other such issues elsewhere. Homosexuality\nwas discussed above and will be treated again in other connections.\nFor the present, let me use as an example the movemen
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t to\naccommodate persons with disabilities. 291 People with disabilities certainly have\na special claim on Christian compassion. God tells Israel, âYou shall not curse\nthe deaf or put a stumbling block before the blind, but you shall fear your God: I\nam the LORDâ (Lev. 19:14, cf. Deut. 27:18). Jesus showed his qualifications to\nbe the Messiah by fulfilling Isa. 35:4-6,\nSay to those who have an anxious heart, \"Be strong; fear not! Behold,\nyour God will come with vengeance, with the recompense of God. He will\ncome and save you.\" 5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the\nears of the deaf unstopped; 6 then shall the lame man leap like a deer,\nand the tongue of the mute sing for joy. For waters break forth in the\nwilderness, and streams in the desertâ¦\nHe cited this verse to show John the Baptist that he was indeed the one who was\nto come (Matt. 11:4-6). Jesus restores the disabled as a particularly vivid image\nof redemption from sin. For indeed in our moral and spiritual lives we are all\ndisabled, and we need Jesus as our healer (Mark 2:17). 292\nThis fact creates a major responsibility for the church, to be a society that\nwelcomes, values, and assists the disabled. Far too often, Christians have been\nunwilling to take the trouble to understand the needs of the disabled and then to\ntreat them as valued and gifted members of Jesusâ body.\n291\nI know; you're supposed to say \"challenges\" or \"different abilities\" instead of \"disabilities.\" I\nprefer the politically incorrect, but more honest and descriptive language. And I am quite ready to\nuse it of my own present and future disabilities! Should I lose my sight, I would not want to be\npatronized by being called \"perceptually challenged.\"\n292\nThanks to my friend Michael S. Beates, who makes this point powerfully in his Doctor of\nMinistry dissertation, Wholeness from Brokenness: Disability as a Model of the Transforming\nPower of the Gospel (Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando campus, 2003). 249\nPerhaps in part beca
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: use of the churchâs failure, government has stepped\nin to remedy the needs of disabled people. The Americans with Disabilities Act of\n1992 is a bold government plan to remove many types of impediments to the\nhandicapped, mandating accommodations of various sorts to disabled\nemployees, students, customers. Since that time, most new buildings have\nbecome wheelchair accessible and many new employment opportunities have\nopened up.\nLike most legislation, this has produced problems for some. Conservatives\nhave objected to a number of provisions and judicial applications of the act.\nLlewellyn H. Rockwell 293 argued that the act had a crippling (!) effect upon\nAmerican business and, indeed, upon the national economy. He lists a number\nof individual absurdities like wheelchairs at third base forced upon the Little\nLeague, the use of Braille at automated drive-in (!) bank tellers, the forced\nrehiring of a blind fireman, accommodation for a man who failed his electrician\ncertification test (because he was \"no good at taking tests\"), the forced rehiring of\na postal worker fired for alcoholism. But the broader picture is that âThe number\nof complaints, however, will never measure the degree to which the act\nis radically changing American business. The threat of a complaint is as effective\nas the complaint itself. The hundreds of pages in the Federal Register spelling\nwhat the ADA is supposed to mean don't come close to exhausting the\npossibilities.\" 294\nMy own impression, a decade after the act and after the Rockwell article,\nis that the ADA has done much more good than harm. Knowing what I know now,\nif I had had the opportunity to vote on the ADA in 1992, (up or down, with no\nopportunity for amendment) I would have voted for it.\nBut we do need to look at this matter in broader perspective. We all have\ndifferent levels of abilities in different areas of life, which means that each of us\nis relatively disabled in some way in comparison with others. Some kinds of\ndisablement are very visible:
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: people who must use wheelchairs, people who are\ntreated badly because of their skin color or gender. But less visible kinds of\n\"oppression\" can be even more significant in individual cases. Consider the boy\nwho is poor at athletics and therefore finds it harder than most people to achieve\nhis romantic and vocational goals. Consider the biologist whose Christian\nconvictions keep him from achieving deserved prominence in his field. Consider\nthe worker who loses his job because his employer must downsize in order to\nafford compliance with the ADA. Consider the people who are forced into\npoverty because of a recession prolonged by excessive government regulations\non business. It would be utopian in the extreme to think that all of these\ncomplaints can be remedied by government edict.\n293\n294\n\"Wheelchairs at Third Base,\" National Review (July 7, 1993), pp. 47-50.\nIbid., 50. 250\nFranklin Roosevelt was confined to a wheelchair by polio, long before\nanyone thought of the concept of \"disability rights.\" There were many things he\ncould not do that others could. Yet he was elected president of the United States\nfor four terms, something that no one else has ever accomplished. People\nwith disabilities also have abilities; indeed, their advocates keep reminding us of\nthat, and rightfully so. A person with a visible handicap is not necessarily\ndisabled in the more profound sense, i.e. less able than others to achieve his\ngoals. The Franklin Roosevelts of this world do not need government-\nmandated advantages in order to succeed. And many of the \"abled\" do find it\nhard to succeed without special help.\nTherefore, laws like the ADA cannot succeed in creating ultimate equality.\nThey give special help to many who don't need it and penalize people\nwho, considered on an objective basis, do need help. This is, of course, the\nnature of government. It cannot make fine distinctions among individuals to\ndetermine absolutely who needs help and who doesn't. It can only mandate help\nto certain broad, vis
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ible groups. And when it does so, it inevitably\ncreates injustice against those who are forced to sacrifice in order to help those\nwhom the law defines as victims. And the more it tries to make finer and finer\ndistinctions of this sort, the more injustice it brings about. The rationalist impulse,\ntrying to produce perfect justice by fiat, almost necessarily increases injustice.\nThe church can do better, for the local church can look at each individual\nsituation to see what a person's needs are and the resources he has for meeting\nthose needs; and it can do this with the insight that God's word provides.\nUltimately, however, only God can see the heart, and so only God can\nsay definitively who is disabled and how, and who needs what.\nAs I shall indicate later, I do not absolutely oppose all government\ninvolvement in welfare. Governments are the ruling bodies of our extended family\nin Adam. 295 But I do believe that government should give families and churches\nthe first opportunity to meet diaconal needs. And, when government steps in, it\nshould do so with a full understanding of its own disabilities, particularly its own\ninability to micro-manage moral inequities. Government should enter the\nscene only when the families, churches, and other private agencies have\nshown themselves clearly unwilling or incompetent to do so. And in this\nenterprise, local government should have priority, then regional/state,\nthen federal; for the more local a government is, the better position it is in to\nassess true need.\nBut the larger perspective is this: Scripture calls us to be content, not to\ncovet the advantages of others. See Ex. 20:17, Luke 3:14, Phil. 4:11, I Tim. 6:6-\n8, Heb. 13:15, III John 10. The early Christians, especially the apostles, were the\nmost disadvantaged of human beings, save Jesus. Yet, following the path of\n295\nSee my essay, âToward a Theology of the State,â Westminster Theological Journal 51.2 (Fall,\n1989), 199-226. 251\nthe cross, they did not try to force others to \"equalize
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \" those disadvantages. They\naccepted their disadvantages as part of their ethical situation and sought to live\nin that situation so as to please Christ. New Testament advice to citizens, slaves,\nwives and children is entirely contrary to the rights-rhetoric of modern politics;\nsee Rom. 13, 1 Cor. 9, Eph. 5:22-6:9, Col. 3:18-4:1, I Pet. 2:13-3:22. Of course,\nthe Old Testament prophets do teach us to fight against oppression. But our\nmain weapon in this battle is the word of God. We are not to imagine that all\nproblems can be solved by an omniscient, all-benevolent state. Here the first\ncommandment, as well as the tenth, becomes relevant.\nOur Natural Environment\nThe natural environment will claim our attention under the Sixth\nCommandment, but it is appropriate here to make some basic observations.\n1. Human beings are part of nature. Our very creatureliness is something\nwe have in common with nature, rather than with God. Further, God made us\nfrom the dust of the ground (Gen. 2:7) and dependent on the ground for our\ncontinued life (Gen. 1:29, 2:8-9, 15-17, 3:1-19). Therefore, there are many\nobvious similarities and analogies between human and animal life. And we must\nprotect plant and animal life, and their habitats, if we are to protect our own\nsurvival and that of our descendants.\n2. Human beings are lords of nature. We are, nevertheless, radically\ndifferent from other forms of life in important ways. Our creation comes from a\nspecial consultation of the divine council (Gen. 1:26). We are special creations,\nnot the products of evolution (Gen. 2:7, 21-23). We are the very image of God\n(Gen. 1:26-28). Therefore God has given us vassal lordship over the earth, to fill,\nsubdue, and have dominion over it (Gen. 1:26-28, 2:19-20).\n3. Our fall brought a curse on the natural world. In Gen. 3:17-19, God\ndeclares that the earth now will resist our attempts at dominion. Now the earth is\na source of toil and weariness. Godâs declaration that all created things are good\n(Gen. 1:31) remains true ev
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: en after the fall (1 Cor. 10:26, 1 Tim. 4:4). But human\nlust finds in things a source of temptation, as Eve found temptation in the\nforbidden fruit. And events in the natural world serve as means of divine\njudgment and chastening, as well as deliverance.\n4. God uses nature in the history of redemption. God uses things in\ncreation as signs of his redemptive activity, such as the rainbow (Gen. 9:13) and\nthe star of Bethlehem (Matt. 2:2). Signs will also anticipate Jesusâ return and the\nfinal judgment (Matt. 24:29-30). Though salvation itself is not a natural event,\nnature collaborates with Godâs redemptive purposes. Creation itself waits\nanxiously for the consummation (Rom. 8:19-23). So events in nature are not only 252\noccasions of temptation, but also of the believerâs growth and victory. They work\nultimately toward the accomplishment of Godâs purposes (Rom. 8:28). The\nconsummation itself is, not only a new heavens, but a new earth, 2 Pet. 3:13,\nRev. 21:1. And in that new world dwells righteousness.\n5. God calls us to take account of nature in our moral decisions. From the\nbeginning, God expected Adam to apply Godâs word to his natural environment.\nThe cultural mandate challenged him to determine how every object could be\nused to subdue and fill the earth to Godâs glory. Similarly with the command to\nwork and keep the garden (Gen. 2:15), to name the animals (2:19-20), and to\nabstain from the forbidden fruit (2:17). God still calls us to replenish and subdue\nthe earth, and to deal with each part of creation in a way that honors God.\nSuch is the biblical mandate for ecological responsibility. God calls his\npeople to have dominion over the earth, but that does not mean to exploit or\ndestroy. As God asked Adam to âworkâ and âkeepâ the Garden, so we are to work\nand keep the earth. 296 As God commanded Israel to give rest to the land (Lev.\n25:4), so he calls us to maintain its vitality. And we are to be kind to animals as\nwell (Deut. 5:14, 25:4).\n296\nâWorkâ and âkee
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: pâ are used elsewhere for priestly functions. These priestly connotations are\nappropriate in Gen. 2:15, given that Eden is, as I said earlier, a sanctuary of God. âKeepâ\n(shamar) can mean to guard the sanctuary against intruders. But, of course, given in the context\nof gardening (and the command about the fruit in verses 16-17), these terms serve to make\nmanâs care of the earth part of his priestly responsibility to God. 253\nChapter 16: Redemptive History\nThe situational perspective deals with our ethical environment, which\nincludes everything. By âeverythingâ in this context, I mean God himself, and the\nwhole course of nature and history which he directs by his divine plan, his\ncreation, and providence. In the previous chapter, I listed the elements of nature\nand history: God, the angels, human society, our individual make-up, and the\nnatural world. That discussion was ontological in the sense that it focused on the\nrealities (divine and human, persons and things) that participate in nature and\nhistory, rather than on the events of nature and history. But of course our ethical\nsituation is constituted by events, not only by persons and things.\nEvents occur in the course of nature, which I defined in Chapter 14 as âthe\ngeneral workings of the world perceived by our senses and reason and described\nby the physical sciences.â A subdivision of nature is history, âthe events of human\nexistence.â And an important subdivision of history is redemptive history, âthe\nstory of creation, fall, and redemption.â In this book I shall not try to describe the\nethical significance of natural events in general. Although I will make allusion to\nnatural history at appropriate times, the general subject exceeds my competence\nand the plan of this volume. But we must look more carefully at human history as\nthe Bible describes it. And according to Scripture the most important events of\nhuman history are those I have described as redemptive history. We must make\nour ethical decisions recogn
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: izing that the world is created, fallen, and redeemed\nby Christ, and understanding the ethical implications of those facts.\nNarrative\nI have mentioned that the normative perspective presents us with a\nChristian âcommand ethic,â the situational a ânarrative ethic,â and the existential a\nâvirtue ethic.â Our concern now is narrative, the story of our life with God. The\nBible contains many kinds of literature as we have seen, but one of its most\nimportant genres is narrative. The narrative tells us what God has done to secure\nthe salvation of his fallen creatures. Centrally, that narrative presents Christ and\ntells us what he has done for us. So it defines the content of faith and gives\nassurance. It also defines our ethic. Our ethic is to respond appropriately to that\nstory, to the one who has redeemed us.\nThe narrative genre has many advantages for preachers, teachers, or\nanyone interested in communicating ethical content. People seem to enjoy\nlistening to stories, rather than listening to commands or even descriptions of\nvirtues. So we can understand why so much of the Bible is in narrative form.\nJesusâ own teaching is especially full of stories, many of them parables. We\nrecall how God used Nathanâs parable of the ewe lamb (2 Sam. 12:1-7) to 254\nconvict David of sin. Narrative has a way of overtaking the listener by surprise, of\ninvolving him in the story.\nNarrative is especially important in communicating gospel. Gospel is good\nnews, and therefore a narrative of what God has done for us in Christ. In 1 Cor.\n15:1-11, Paul enumerated the elements of the gospel as a series of events, as a\nnarrative. We might imagine, therefore, that narrative corresponds to gospel, and\ncommand to law. As I indicated in Chapter 12, however, Scripture does not\ndistinguish gospel and law with any rigid sharpness. Law, among other things,\ntells us to believe in Jesus; and gospel narrates how the king came into the world\nto re-impose his law upon rebellious creatures.\nIn one sense, the narrati
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ve of creation, fall, and redemption includes the\nwhole Bible. No part of Scripture is outside the story. Psalms and Proverbs are\nnot narrative in form, but they add to the narrative, telling us how God instructed\nhis people Israel in piety and wisdom. To learn the whole story, we need the\nwhole Bible. Without Psalms and Proverbs, we would not have the complete\nnarrative. So the narrative is the whole Bible, and in that sense the whole Bible is\nnarrative.\nBut it is also true to say that the whole Bible is divine command, for every\npassage is an authoritative word from God telling us what we must believe and/or\ndo. So narrative and command (gospel and law, if you will) are complementary\nperspectives on the whole Bible. And the same may be said about the existential\nperspective, that the whole Bible is virtue description, showing us the virtues of\nGod himself, Father, Son, and Spirit, and of those who belong to him by grace.\nSo narrative is important, but not all-important. It is an important\nperspective on the whole Bible, but it is not the only perspective. The narrative is\nthe whole Bible, and the whole Bible is narrative, but not to the exclusion of\ncommands and virtues.\nIt is therefore important to note that though Psalms and Proverbs, for\nexample, are aspects of narrative in a larger sense, they do not belong to the\nnarrative genre. They have their own purposes, which are not merely to narrate\nevents (although the poetry of the Psalms often does narrate redemptive history),\nbut to inform the praises and the wisdom of Godâs people.\nThe Redemptive Story 255\nThe story of the Bible is of God coming to be with his people as their Lord,\nin his control, authority, and presence. After creation and fall, the story is about\nredemption, and thus about Jesus. 297\nBefore the Fall, Adam lived in Godâs garden-sanctuary, tending and\nguarding it as Godâs priest. God was Adamâs friend as well as his Lord. God\nspoke to Adam and Eve, defining their nature and task as human beings (Gen.\n1:28)
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and granting them the blessings of the garden (1:29-31). He also gave to\nAdam the terms of a crucial test of covenant fellowship (2:15-17) and, through\nEveâs creation and the institution of marriage, constituted the human community\n(Gen. 2:18-25).\nAfter the Fall, God again came to be with Adam and Eve, this time in\njudgment, but also, surprisingly, with blessing. He curses the Satan-serpent, Eve,\nand Adam, in the areas most appropriate to each. The serpent, who would exalt\nhimself above God, will go on his belly and eat dust, awaiting his final destruction\nby the seed of the woman (Gen. 3:14-15). The woman will have pain in\nchildbearing, and the rule of her husband will be frustrating to her (verse 16). 298\nThe man also will labor in pain, as the ground produces thorns and thistles. He\nwill raise crops by the sweat of his face, looking toward his return to the ground\nfrom which he came (verses 17-19). Now human death enters the picture. But,\nwe wonder, in terms of Gen. 2:17, why doesnât God execute the sentence of\ndeath immediately?\nThe very postponement of death is Godâs redemptive grace. And there is\nyet more grace in the fallâs aftermath. The curse on Satan is blessing to\nhumanity: the promised seed will destroy him and will thus rid the world of evil.\nAnd the curse on the woman also hides a blessing. She is not to die immediately,\nbut will continue to live and have children, one of whom will redeem the race.\nSimilarly, the curse on the manâs labor is also mixed with Godâs grace. His toil,\nthough painful, will keep the human race alive until the coming of the deliverer.\nImmediately, then, the narrative focuses on Godâs grace through the\ncoming Messiah. Christ, even at the beginning, is the focus of the story. Human\nethical life, then, is a response to Godâs grace that looks forward to final\ndeliverance. Judgment occurs as well, in Godâs limitation of human life (Gen.\n6:3), in the great flood (Chapters 6-9), and in the confusion of languages at Babel\n(11:1-9). These
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: judgments indicate to believers that God will not be mocked, that\nhis standards will prevail. Thus law and grace combine to guide the human race\nin the paths of God.\n297\nI know of no better summary of the story than Edmund Clowney, The Unfolding Mystery\n(Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1988). Clowneyâs book shows, often in very striking ways, how\nChrist is the central subject of the Old Testament narrative.\n298\nI agree with Susan T. Foh that the âdesireâ Eve had for her husband was a desire to dominate\nhim, a desire destined to be frustrated. See her Women and the Word of God (NP: P&R, 1980). 256\nIn the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants, God comes to dwell with his\nchosen people (Gen. 26:3, 24, 28:15, 31:3, Ex. 3:12, 4:12, Deut. 31:8, 23, Josh.\n1:5), anticipating the coming of Jesus, Immanuel, God with us (Isa. 7:14). In\nthese covenants, the presence of the Lord governs all human life. God is the\nHoly one, who has called the family of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from among\nall the nations of the earth, to be his holy people. They are to be holy, because\nhe is holy (Ex. 19:6, Lev. 11:44-45, 19:2, 20:7, 26, 21:8, 1 Pet. 1:16). So they are\nto live their lives as those who live on holy ground, who dwell in the closest\nproximity to God.\nIn one sense, to live in such fellowship with God is a wonderful thing. But\nthat presence of God is also threatening. When God meets with Israel at Mt.\nSinai, death awaits any human being or beast that touched the mountain (Ex.\n19:12-13). When God comes to dwell in the holiest part of the tabernacle and\ntemple, many barriers stand between the believer and that place. Death looms\nfor those who violate the rules of approach.\nBut this fearsome God is also the savior, the deliverer. Israel is to keep the\nlaw because of redemption, for the Decalogue begins, âI am the LORD your God,\nwho brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slaveryâ (Ex. 20:2).\nAnd in the republication of the Decalogue in Deut. 5, the Lord commands Israel\nto give rest to her
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: households, because âYou shall remember that you were a\nslave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there\nwith a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the LORD your God\ncommanded you to keep the Sabbath dayâ (verse 15).\nThrough the Old Testament, God asks Israel to obey him, motivating them\nby his past deliverances and blessings. The prophecy of Isaiah begins with God\nlamenting that the children he has âreared and brought upâ have rebelled against\nhim (Isa. 1:2). He also mentions past judgments: For her sin, God has struck\nIsrael down (verse 5), so Israel should know better than to defy the Lord. The\njudgments will cease if and when Israel repents (verses 18-20), for God is ready\nto forgive those who are willing to obey him.\nHe also motivates their obedience by promises of future blessing (2:1-5)\nand judgment (2:12-22). He is the Lord of history, and he controls the fortunes of\nIsrael. At the end, the Lord will be glorious, and his people holy (4:2-6). That\nmovement of history is certain, and those who wish to share in that glory must\nturn back to God. So the situation, past, present, and future, motivates\nobedience.\nBetween the Old Testament and the final judgment, however, comes\nJesus. The Old Testament foreshadows his work, in the sacrificial system, in the\nlives of prophets, priests, and kings, and in specific prophecies of his coming.\nThe Scriptures bear witness of him (John 5:39; cf. Luke 24:27, 44). Those who\nrepent of sin and look to God in faith are at the same time looking forward to the 257\nMessiah. It is the prospect of his coming that encourages them to trust and obey\nthe Lord, despite apparent defeats to his purposes.\nWhen Jesus comes to accomplish our redemption from sin through his\ndeath and resurrection, these events give his people a fresh motivation for godly\nbehavior (John 13:34, Rom. 6:1-23, 13:11-12, 1 Cor. 6:20, 10:11, 15:58, Eph.\n4:1-5, 25, 32, 5:25-33, Phil. 2:1-11, Col. 3:1-3, Heb. 12:1-28, 1 Pet. 2:1-3, 4:1-6,\n1 Jo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hn 3:16). 299 Jesus has loved us beyond measure by dying for our sins, and\nthe only appropriate response is for us to love him and one another. Since he\nhas died for our sins, and since we died with him to sin (Rom. 6), we should live\nas those who are alive to righteousness. Since we have been raised with him to\nnewness of life, we should seek the things that are above (Col. 3:1-3).\nSo, as biblical theology emphasizes, in the New Testament imperatives\nflow from indicatives. Obligations follow from the narrative, from the story. This is\nnot a naturalistic fallacy, because as I said in Chapters 5 and 9, everything that\nGod is and does is ethically normative. And, of course, it is obvious that when a\nsituation changes, behavior must change. On a warm day, it may be appropriate\nto wear short pants; not so when the temperature is ten below zero. When Jesus\nhas died for our sins and has risen again, our only appropriate response is to\nlove him. And if we love him, we will keep his commandments. Those who are\nconvinced that Jesus has saved them will be powerfully moved to love and serve\nhim. This fact underlies the structure of the Heidelberg Catechism, which moves\nfrom guilt, to grace, to gratitude. In the view of the Catechism, we keep the law\nout of gratitude, in response to grace.\nTo say this is not to contradict what I said earlier under the normative\nperspective. The simple fact that God commands X is sufficient ground for me to\ndo X. So far as sheer obligation is concerned, people should obey God whether\nthey are redeemed or not. Even Satan and the fallen angels are under that\nobligation. Redemption adds a substantial motivation for obedience, but it does\nnot create the obligation. Further, even when we are serving Christ in response\nto his redemptive work, we need to know what he wants us to do. And so we\ncontinue to need the law to tell us what kind of behavior is appropriate to\nredeemed people. If we love him in response to his love, we will keep his\ncommandments; but to do that we ne
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ed to know what his commandments are.\nThe Two Ages\nBiblical theology, which focuses on the history of redemption, has\nemphasized the âtwo-ageâ structure of the New Testament. In Matt. 12:32, Jesus\nspeaks of a sin that will not be forgiven âeither in this age or in the age to come.â\n299\nSee the discussion in Chapter 3 on the History of Redemption as one of the Bibleâs âreasons\nto do good works.â 258\nPaul also refers to these two ages in Eph. 1:21. The first of the two ages is âthis\nageâ (ho aion houtos), the period of time in which we live, a period that is to end\nat the second coming of Christ and the final judgment (Matt. 13:39-40, 49, 24:3,\n28:20). This is the age in which sin and the curse continue in the earth, before\nGodâs final victory. So Scripture describes this age in ethical terms. It is âthe\npresent evil ageâ (Gal. 1:4) from which Christâs redemption delivers us.\nNonbelievers are caught up in the affairs of âthis age,â unwilling to be\nbothered by the demands and promises of God. Jesus speaks of âthe sons of this\nageâ (Luke 20:34), Paul of âthe debater of this ageâ (1 Cor. 1:20), the ârulers of\nthis ageâ (1 Cor. 2:8), and the âwise in this ageâ (1 Cor. 3:18).\nSome Christians, to be sure, are ârich in this present ageâ (1 Tim. 6:17),\nthat is, that they have acquired things that are valued by this age. That is not\nnecessarily sinful, but Timothy must give them a special charge ânot to be\nhaughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who\nrichly provides us with everything to enjoy.â So all believers must take heed âto\nlive self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present ageâ (Tit. 2:12). The\npresent age, even to believers, is a source of temptation.\nThe âage to come,â however, is the age of fulfillment. Jesus contrasts the\nâsons of this ageâ (Luke 20:34) with âthose who are considered worthy to attain to\nthat age and to the resurrection from the deadâ (following verse). In t
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he\nunderstanding of those Jews who believed in resurrection, âthat ageâ follows our\ndeath and Godâs final judgment. In âthe age to come,â Godâs people have âeternal\nlifeâ (Mark 10:30).\nBut the remarkable thing about New Testament teaching, in contrast with\nthe Jewish conception, is that in one sense the âage to comeâ has already\nappeared in Christ. Believers in Christ are those âon whom the end of the ages\nhas comeâ (1 Cor. 10:11). The closing of the holy places in the temple to\nworshipers is symbolic of the present age, so that when the veil is torn and we\nenter boldly into Godâs presence through Christ, another age has begun (Heb.\n9:8-9). Christ âhas appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by\nthe sacrifice of himselfâ (Heb. 9:26). For believers, then, the âcoming ageâ has\nbegun in Christ. He has dealt with sin once for all.\nThe Resurrection of Jesus is the crucial sign that the âlast daysâ are here.\nThe Pharisees associated the last days with the resurrection of the righteous and\nthe wicked. So Jesus associates that time with resurrection in John 6:39-40, 44,\n54. But when the grieving Martha says that her brother Lazarus âshall rise again\nin the resurrection at the last dayâ (John 11:24), Jesus replies, âI am the\nresurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,\nand everyone who lives and believes in me shall never dieâ (verses 25-26). Then\nhe proceeds to raise Lazarus from the dead, indicating that the life-giving power\nof the age to come is present in himself. So in Luke 17:21 Jesus tells the 259\nPharisees that the kingdom is already in their midst, certainly referring to himself.\nWherever Jesus is, there is the age to come.\nAfter Jesus himself has risen, and signs of the Spiritâs presence abound\n(sent from the throne of Christ) Peter proclaims that the Joelâs prophecy of the\nâlast daysâ has been fulfilled (Acts 2:17). The writer to the Hebrews proclaims in\nthe past tense th
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: at âin these last days [God] has spoken to us by his Sonâ (1:2).\nThe same conclusion follows from New Testament teaching on the\nkingdom of God. Geerhardus Vos defines the kingdom as follows:\nTo him (Jesus), the kingdom exists there, where not merely God is\nsupreme, for that is true at all times and under all circumstances, but\nwhere God supernaturally carries through his supremacy against all\nopposing powers and brings man to the willing recognition of the same. 300\nThe kingdom of God, long awaited, has come in Christ (Matt. 3:2, 4:17, 12:28).\nThe gospel is the gospel of the kingdom (Matt. 4:23, 9:35, 10:7), the Sermon on\nthe Mount is the ethic of the kingdom (Matt. 5:3, 10, 19, 20, 6:33), the Lordâs\nPrayer the prayer of the kingdom (6:10), the parables the mysteries of the\nkingdom (Matt. 13:11). The church has the keys of the kingdom (Matt. 16:19. The\nkingdom of God has come. Christ the king has been raised to Godâs right hand,\nwhere he has authority over all things (Matt. 28:18).\nYet there are also some biblical expectations for the last days and the\nkingdom that are still unfulfilled. The bodily resurrection of the just and unjust has\nnot taken place. The return of Christ and the final judgment remain future. The\nsaints pray âthy kingdom comeâ (Matt. 6:10) regarding the kingdom as future. Sin\nand the curse continue on the earth. Indeed, these âlast daysâ are âtimes of\ndifficultyâ (2 Tim. 3:1; cf. 2 Pet. 3:3). It is a time in which false teaching abounds,\nin which unscrupulous people try to undermine the doctrine and holiness of\nGodâs people.\nSo the biblical data is somewhat paradoxical. On the one hand, the last\ndays are here in Christ. On the other hand, much remains future. The age to\ncome is present, the present age lingers. From Jesusâ ministry until his return,\nthe two ages exist simultaneously. Our present existence is, as Vos put it, âsemi-\neschatological.â\nBelow is Vosâs diagram of the two ages. 301 âThis ageâ runs from the fall of\nAdam to t
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he return of Christ (parousia). âThe age to comeâ runs from the\n300\nVos, The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Church (Nutley, NJ:\nPresbyterian and Reformed, 1972), 50.\n301\nVos, The Pauline Eschatology (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1986), 38. [P&R Editors: Can you scan this\nimage in here from the book, or do this up more artistically? Iâd like a better version. At least draw 260\nResurrection of Christ through all eternity. During the period between the\nResurrection and the Parousia, the two ages exist side-by-side.\nResurrection\nOf Christ\nThis age\nParousia\nThe age to come\nSemi-\nEschatology\nIt is important for us to understand the dynamic and the tension of the\nsemi-eschatological age in which we live. Our salvation is complete in Christ, but\nsin will not be destroyed until his return. Or, as biblical theologians often put it,\nsalvation is âalready,â but also ânot yet.â Christ has all authority, but Satan still\nhas some power. We can draw confidently on the power and love of God, yet\nthere are perils in the way. We have died to sin and have been raised to\nrighteousness in Christ (Rom. 6), and yet we must âPut to deathâ¦ what is earthly\nin youâ (Col. 3:5). The battle is won, but there is much mopping-up to be done. 302\nThis historical paradox is a current form of the larger paradox of the\nrelation of divine sovereignty and human responsibility. God has saved us\nthrough Christ, by his own sovereign power. We must rely on him for all our\nprovision. But this fact does not allow us to be passive. There is a battle to be\nfought (Eph. 6:10-20), a race to be run (1 Cor. 9:24-27). We are not to âlet go\nand let God.â Rather, as Paul says, âwork out your own salvation with fear and\ntrembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good\npleasureâ (Phil. 2:12-13). Godâs sovereign action does not discourage, but rather\nmotivates us to fight the spiritual battle.\narrows or something from âResurrectionâ and âParousiaâ to the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: appropriate points in the\ndiagram.âJF]\n302\nI believe that it was Oscar Cullmann who used World War II language to illustrate this\nparadox: Christâs atonement and resurrection are like D-Day, his return and the final judgment V-\nDay. But of course the resurrection of Jesus guarantees its final outcome in a way that D-Day\ncould not. 261\nEthics and the Millennium\nHaving discussed the implications of semi-eschatology for the Christian\nlife, let us now look at eschatology proper, that consummation of history that is\nstill future, consisting of the return of Christ, the final judgment, and the eternal\nstate.\nI will not get into detailed discussions here about millennial positions and\nthe order of events in the last days, but I will look briefly to see what ethical\nimplications there may be to the three main millennial theories. These are,\npremillennialism, the view that the return of Christ precedes the thousand years\nof peace mentioned in Rev. 20, postmillennialism, traditionally the view that the\nreturn of Christ follows that period, and amillennialism, the view that this period is\na symbol for the present age. In more recent discussion, postmillenialists\n(henceforth, âpostmils,â and similarly for the others) and amils have come to\nagree that the thousand years are a symbol of the present age. The two\nviewpoints differ, however, as to the degree to which Christianity becomes\nculturally and politically dominant during that period, postmils expecting much\ncultural success and amils expecting little. Amils typically think that the gospel\nwill be fruitful spiritually, but not culturally or politically.\nThe conventional wisdom, then, is that premils and amils tend to be\npessimistic about influencing society in biblical directions, while postmils tend to\nbe optimistic. Of course I have known some optimistic premils and amils, and\nsome pessimistic postmils. Optimist and pessimism seem to me to have more to\ndo with one's personality and spiritual maturity than with his theology of the en
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d\ntimes. And there are some types of postmillennialism which are actually\nconducive to pessimism. One postmillennialist thinks that Western civilization is\ndoomed, at least in the near future; his optimism is for the long term only. But\nhow long are these âterms?â\nThe movement in the 1970s and '80s toward greater Christian involvement\nin social issues was spearheaded, not by Reformed amils and postmils, but by\nArminian premils like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. This is an embarrassment\nfor us Reformed people, who like to think that we have a corner on Christian\npolitical thought and action, and tend to look down our noses at \"fundamentalists\"\nfor their lack of a \"full-orbed Christian world-and-life view.\" Of course, it may\nbe argued that fundamentalists like Falwell and Robertson were influenced,\nmaybe at third or fourth hand, by Reformed people like Rousas J. Rushdoony,\nGary North, and Francis Schaeffer. But it was the Evangelical premils who took\nthe lead in the actual movements for social change, and we should give them\ncredit. Herein is another reason why the church should re-examine its divisions. 262\nFull implementation of Christianity in our time requires the gifts given to\nall Christian traditions. 303\nTherefore, a premil commitment does not destroy all motivation to\nChristian social action, though perhaps one might still argue that from a strictly\nlogical (as opposed to emotional or empirical) standpoint postmillennialism ought\nto be a greater encourgement to such action. Thus would I resolve the\nargument between North, who thinks one must be postmillennial to be\na theonomist, and Bahnsen, who thinks postmillennialism is an advantage to a\ntheonomist but not an absolute necessity.\nMy own eschatology? Through my career I have avoided the millennial\nquestion like the plague, thinking that Scripture does not clearly address it.\nNeedless to say, I have never been asked to teach a course in eschatology. But\nlet me try a \"perspectival\" approach, suggesting that all three
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: views have some of\nthe truth. I agree with the amils and premils that this age is an age of suffering\nand persecution for God's people (2 Tim. 3:12). I also agree with the postmils\nthat in the long run this age can be seen as an age of Christian triumph, not only\nin narrowly \"spiritual\" matters, but in the church's social influence as well. That is\nin fact what we see in history: believers are always persecuted in some measure;\nbut eventually Christianity triumphs and comes to profoundly influence the\ninstitutions of the societies it touches. To limit the church's triumph to a narrowly\n\"spiritual\" realm is, as postmils emphasize, Platonic rather than Scriptural. When\nGod saves a person, that person brings his regenerate values into every area of\nlife (1 Cor. 10:31). 304\nEthically, this approach saves us from premature triumphalism and from\nundue pessimism and frustration. Suffering comes first, then glory; but the blood\nof the martyrs is the seed of a great church. And as we look back over two\nthousand years of Christian history, it is wonderful to see how divine\nprovidence, slowly, but surely, brings triumph out of dark circumstances.\nThe church follows the path of the cross, and it shares in the glory of the cross.\nHere is another form of the paradox of the already and the not-yet.\nThe troubles of Christianity in our own time are not, in my opinion, the\nworst troubles the church has experienced. The Roman persecutions, the\nbarbarian invasions of Europe, the spiritual darkness preceding the Reformation\nand the religious wars following it, the secularist \"Enlightenment\" of\nthe eighteenth century, the totalitarian persecutions of Christians in the early\ntwentieth century were all more difficult challenges, in some respects, than we\nface today in modern Western civilization. But the church's persecutors are now\nobscured in historical dust, while the Christian church continues by God's grace\nas a powerful witness to Christ's Lordship and salvation. The troubles we face\ntoday, includ
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ing the attacks of militant Islam, will be similarly dispatched. In God\n303\n304\nSee my Evangelical Reunion (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991), available at www.thirdmill.org.\nRecall our discussion of the comprehensiveness of Scripture in Chapter 10. 263\nwe trust, and in Him we are confident for the future. So I lean toward a short-term\namillennialism and a long-term postmillennialism.\nNow: can I say anything in favor of premillennialism specifically? Sure,\nwhy not? I believe that Jesus is coming visibly to earth to judge the living and the\ndead, and that that judgment just might take a thousand years! 305 But I do not\nbase that assertion on Revelation 20.\nEthics and Eschatology in Scripture\nScripture, as I pointed out, has little to say about the millennium and its\nsupposed ethical implications. But it does say much about the ethical implications\nof the return of Christ and the final judgment. Indeed, Scriptureâs main use of\nthese doctrines is ethical. It does not teach us about Jesusâ return primarily to\nstimulate us to draw up charts, to determine the precise order of events in the\nlast day, but to show us how to live. It is remarkable that almost 306 every text\nabout the return of Jesus has an ethical thrust.\nThese ethical applications are of several different kinds:\n1. Since this age is to end and the things of this world are to be dissolved,\nthe Christian ought to have a set of priorities radically different from those who\nbelong to âthis age.â So Peter says,\nBut the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens\nwill pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and\ndissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.\n11\nSince all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people\nought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, 12 waiting for and\nhastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens\nwill be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they\nburn! 13 But accord
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ing to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and\na new earth in which righteousness dwells. (2 Pet. 3:10-13)\nIt is not appropriate to set our hearts on things that are doomed to be burnt up.\nHoliness and righteousness, however, last forever, and are therefore worth\npursuing.\n305\nS. Lewis Johnson, a premillennialist, taught, Iâm told, that the millennium is essentially a\nthousand year judgment.\n306\nI insert this term as a scholarly caution. I donât actually know of any exceptions. Of course, if I\nam right in my larger thesis, that all Scripture is given for ethical purposes (2 Tim. 3:16-17), then\nthis narrower thesis follows as an implication. 264\n2. As Christians, we claim to eagerly await the return of Christ, praying\nâCome, Lord Jesusâ (Rev. 22:20). As we saw above, Peter calls us to âwait forâ\nand âhastenâ 307 the coming of Christ. But so often we belie our eagerness by our\npreoccupation with this age. To authenticate our eagerness, we need to live\nâlives of holiness and godlinessâ (2 Pet. 3:12). John tells us that when Jesus\nappears, âwe shall be like him, because we shall see him as he isâ (1 John 3:2).\nThe parousia will enable us much better to image the holiness of Jesus. If we are\nreally eager to see Jesus, then, we should want to anticipate that new holiness\nas much as possible in this sinful age. So anyone with this hope âpurifies himself\nas he is pureâ (1 John 3:3).\n3. Since the Resurrection of Christ has established the new age 308 of the\nkingdom of God, we are confident that our labors for Jesus will not be in vain, but\nwill inevitably prevail. Paul says, âTherefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast,\nimmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord\nyour labor is not in vainâ (1 Cor. 15:58).\n4. We also look to the parousia as our deliverance from tribulation, and\ntherefore as a source of hope for Christians undergoing persecution (Luke\n21:28).\n5. Since we know that Christ is coming, but we do not know the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: day or the\nhour, we must always be ready to meet him. That means being up and about his\nbusiness (Matt. 24:44-51, 1 Thess. 5:1-10, 1 Pet. 1:7, 2 Pet. 3:14).\n6. We also look forward to receiving our rewards on the last day. God\npromises rewards to his people, and they receive those rewards when Jesus\nreturns. That promise serves as an additional motivation (Ps. 19:11, Matt. 5:12,\n46, 6:1-6, 10:41-42, Rom. 14:10, 1 Cor. 3:8-15, 9:17-25, 2 Cor. 5:10, Eph. 6:7-8,\nCol. 3:23-25, 2 Tim. 4:8, 1 Pet. 5:4, James 1:12, 2 John 8, Rev. 11:18).\nI confess I was surprised by the number of times Scripture uses rewards\nto motivate obedience. Like many of us, I tend toward the Kantian notion that we\nshould simply do our duty for dutyâs sake and never think about reward. But that\nnotion is quite unbiblical. If God takes the trouble (this many times!) to urge our\nobedience by a promise of reward, we should embrace that promise with thanks,\nnot despise it. That is, we should not only do good works, but we should do them\nfor this reason.\n307\nWe âhastenâ it, I presume, by praying for it and by evangelism, by which the full number of the\nelect are brought into the church. And, appropriate to the present discussion, evangelism is by\nboth word and deed.\n308\nObviously in this context, ânew ageâ refers to the biblical âage to come,â discussed earlier,\nrather than to the occult new age of contemporary neo-paganism. See Peter Jones, Spirit Wars:\nPagan Revival in Christian America (Escondido, CA: Main Entry Editions, 1997). 265\nThis teaching is, of course, not salvation by works or merit. Although the\nword ârewardâ is used in these passages, there is no suggestion that we have\nearned the reward in the sense that we have paid God what the reward is worth.\nJesus says that even when we have done everything we have been commanded\n(and none of us have done that) we have done no more than our duty (Luke\n17:7-10). Indeed, in that case we are âunworthyâ servants. Elsewhere, Scripture\nrepresents the rew
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ard as something out of all proportion to the service rendered\n(Matt. 19:29, 20:1-16, 24:45-47, 25:21-30, Luke 7:36-50, 12:37).\nNevertheless, there is some sort of gradation in the rewards given to\nindividuals. Jesus says that the apostles will judge the âtwelve tribes of Israelâ\n(Matt. 19:28), suggesting that in the consummate kingdom there will be varying\ndegrees of authority. But if the apostles have a special status, it is doubtful that\nthey have it because they are more holy than all the saints in the succeeding\ncenturies. Rather, they are the foundation (Eph. 2:20) on which the church is\nbuilt, and they continue in that role, for no other reason than that Christ has\ncalled them to fill it. Some passages suggest degrees of blessing, as when Paul\ndistinguishes those who build on the foundation of Christ gold, silver, and\nprecious stones from those who build wood, hay, and stubble (1 Cor. 3:8-15),\nsome being saved âonly as through fire.â But this passage deals with broad\nclasses of Christians, not with some micro-analysis of merits.\nThe parable of the talents (Matt. 25:14-30, cf. Luke 19:12-27) provides the\nbest argument for proportionate rewards. One cannot argue, however, that the\ndegree of investment success ascribed to the first two servants entitles them, as\nstrict payment, to the masterâs rewards. Rather, the master acts generously, out\nof the goodness of his heart. This is to say that here, as with every transaction\nwe have with God, we deal with him as a person, not with an impersonal principle\nof cause and effect.\nEssentially, the reward is the kingdom itself (Matt. 5:3, 10, 25:34), which in\nother passages is said to come by electing grace (Matt. 25:34, Luke 12:31-32).\nGood works follow, rather than precede, this gift (Luke 12:33-49). To put it\ndifferently, the Lord himself is the inheritance of his people (Ps. 16:5, 73:24-26,\nLam. 3:24). He is the inheritance of every believer. If there are differences of\ndegree, they are differences of intimacy with the Lord himse
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lf. If some glorified\nsaints lie closer than others to Godâs heart, no one else will be jealous or angry,\nfor the eternal kingdom excludes such emotions. Rather, the lesser members of\nthat kingdom will rejoice at the greater blessings given to others, and those who\nare greatest will serve the lesserâbeginning with the Lord himself, as Jesus says\nin Luke 12:37,\nBlessed are those servants whom the master finds awake when he\ncomes. Truly, I say to you, he will dress himself for service and have them\nrecline at table, and he will come and serve them. 309\n309\nThanks to Bill Crawford for bringing to my attention this amazing promise of our Lord. 266\nBut who would not want as much intimacy as possible with such a wonderful\nLord? Here is a reward that profoundly motivates holiness of heart and life.\nBetween the Resurrection and the Parousia: Bearing the Burdens of\nChange and of Knowledge\nAs we have seen above, we live between the resurrection of Jesus and\nhis return in glory. The apostles also lived in this period, toward its beginning. So\nour time is a continuation of theirs, and it is like the apostolic age in many ways:\nthe already and the not-yet, the empowerment of the Spirit, the\nGreat Commission mandate, looking forward to Jesus' return. It is also different\nin some ways: the charismatic gifts of prophecy and tongues (I believe) have\nceased, being replaced in effect by the written canon of apostolic teaching. The\napostles as leaders of the church have been replaced by elders and deacons,\nofficers whose teaching does not have the foundational infallibility of the\napostles, but which must be subject to that apostolic authority in the Word. There\nare also, of course, changes of cultural and social kinds, changes in science,\ntechnology and the like. Through all the changes, however, God is present with\nhis people: in the word, in the sacraments, in the body of believers, in the Spirit's\ninward witness.\nHistorical change is an important part of the ethical situation. As we apply\nthe la
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: w of God, we must understand how it applies to each situation that comes\nbefore us. That work never ends. We may not assume that the Reformers or the\nPuritans, for example, finished the task, no matter how great our respect\nfor these great ministers of the word. The Puritans did not have to evaluate\nnuclear warfare, genetic engineering, modern science, or neo-paganism from\nScripture; but we cannot avoid those tasks in our own time.\nI must warn you against taking certain popular shortcuts. (1) For example,\nit is not scriptural to approach ethics with a mere traditionalism, a desire merely\nto emulate the Christianity of a past age. Whether or not we believe that past\nages were \"better\" than this one, our mandate is not to repristinate or recreate a\npast situation; it is to apply the scriptures to the situation of today. I fear that\nsome Reformed churches seek to be mere museum pieces: historical artifacts\nwhere people can go to hear old-fashioned talk and experience older forms of\nchurch life; spiritual versions of Colonial Williamsburg. On the contrary, Christian\nworship is to be contemporary (because it must be intelligible, I Cor. 14), and the\nchurch's preaching must adapt (insofar as Scripture permits) to the language\nand habits of the target population (I Cor. 9). 267\n(2) The task is also avoided illegitimately by people who pit divine\nsovereignty against human responsibility and therefore refuse to make use of\nmodern technology, science, medicine, communications, demographic\nstudies, etc. All modern tools must be evaluated by the Scripture as to what we\nshould use and how we should use it. But the fact that God is sovereign in\nsalvation does not invalidate human study, strategy, plans, techniques, efforts.\nOtherwise there would be no point in seeking even to communicate effectively;\nwe could walk into a crowd, say any dumb thing we please, and wait for God\nto act. We all know that is not right. We all see the importance of studying the\nlanguages and culture of our target audiences,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and in preaching classes people\npreparing for ministry learn to speak effectively. In doing so we have no thought\nthat such human preparation violates divine sovereignty. Why should we not\nextend this logic to demographic studies and modern communicative\ntechniques?\nIf we avoid these shortcuts, we will have to face the fact that ethics in our\ntime, theology as well, to say nothing of church life and evangelistic strategy,\nshould be different today, in important ways, from all past ages of church history\nincluding the New Testament period. We face situations (both difficulties and\nopportunities) that were not faced by Machen, Kuyper, Hodge, Edwards, Owen,\nCalvin, Augustine, Paul. The word must be applied to those new situations. Of\ncourse, I grant that we are in the same warfare as the older saints, and that we\nmust use the same spiritual weapons. But in its specifics that war is different\nnow. Those who take the lazy way, the way of shortcuts, will be left behind. They\nmay be instructive historical artifacts, but they will not be powerful instruments to\nbring people to Christ. God can, of course, use the feeblest instruments; but he\ntypically honors the work of believers who count the costs and seize the\nopportunities.\nBesides laziness, there is a certain selfishness about the shortcut\nmentality. 310 Shortcutters are those who feel comfortable with certain \"tried and\ntrue\" forms of life and witness, forms that God has used in the past. Then they\nseek to produce a theological rationale for keeping those forms even when times\nhave changed. They talk as if they are fighting for biblical principle, though in fact\nthey are merely arguing for a certain application of scripture that was appropriate\nto a past situation.\nThe debate is confused, of course, by words like \"conservative,\" which are\napplied both to defenders of scriptural principle and to those who merely defend\npast ways of doing things without scriptural justification. But defending\nauthentic biblical principle is one thing;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: defending the continuance of past\napplications into our own time is something very different. Both shortcutters and\ncritics of shortcutters need to be more aware of this distinction.\n310\nLaziness is a form of selfishness, but the wider category also needs to be addressed in\nthis context. 268\nBut what masquerades as a battle for biblical principle is often at bottom a\nmere rationalization of selfish impulses, a desire to stay comfortable, to avoid\nhaving to change familiar patterns. Often, however, Scripture itself is on the side\nof change! I Cor. 9 is an important text in this respect. Paul was willing to be a\nJew among the Jews, a Gentile among the Gentiles, that some might be saved.\nHe did not seek his own comfort, even his own rights. Indeed, he allowed his\nbody to be buffeted, lest while preaching to others he himself should be a\ncastaway. He tried \"to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my\nown good, but the good of many, that they might be saved\" (1 Cor. 10:33). And\nnote: Immediately after this verse, he urges \"Follow my example, as I follow the\nexample of Christ\" (11:1).\nThis means that in our evangelistic methodology, indeed in our worship\n(for that too has an evangelistic element, 14:24-25), our goal must not be to\nplease ourselves, but to bend and stretch, to accept discomfort and the trauma of\nchange, in order to speak the Christian faith into the contemporary world.\nLet me also discuss here another, rather different, problem connected with\nour historical distance from the New Testament. That problem is that our present\nhistorical situation is something of an epistemological burden. We are around\n1,920 years removed from the later books of the New Testament canon. Now in\nsome ways this is an advantage. We have had much more time to study\nScripture than did the early church fathers like Clement and Justin Martyr. And in\nsome ways, I think, contemporary orthodox Reformed theology has a far deeper\nand more precise understanding of the gospel than did the chur
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ch fathers. 311 I\nsay this contrary to those evangelicals who are joining Eastern Orthodox\nchurches in order to return to the supposedly more profound teachings of the\nearly church Fathers. Although the Fathers did wonderful work in their day,\nstanding heroically for the faith amid terrible oppressions, their writings were\nconfused on many important points, such as the Trinity and justification by faith.\nAnd although it is valuable to read them today (often they look at things\nfrom angles that today are unusual and edifying), we would be wise in perusing\ntheir writings not to confuse vagueness with profundity.\nSo in some ways our historical distance from the New Testament is an\nadvantage. In other ways, however, it is a disadvantage. If I were a Christian\nchurch elder in, say, A. D. 62, and my church faced a controversy over, say,\ninfant baptism, I could simply fax the nearest apostle, in effect (I realize that this\nwas not always a perfectly simple process), and ask what the apostolic practice\nwas. That would settle the question. In the early generations following the\napostles, doubtless there were some reliable traditions dealing with questions not\nexplicitly answered in the New Testament. In my view, for instance, the early\n311\nOne remarkable evidence of biblical inspiration is the incredible difference in spiritual\nunderstanding between the last books of the New Testament and the first writings of the post-\ncanonical period. Clement, for example, is confused about all sorts of important things. Scripture,\nhowever, is so rich that it has taken 1,920 years for the church to learn many of its lessons. 269\nchurch did not need to have an explicit New Testament command to baptize\ninfants. They just did it, for that was the apostolic practice, and the church had\nalways done it that way. 312 But we do not have today such access to the\napostles. And there are a lot of questions which the early church could easily\nhave answered, which nevertheless perplex us today. Hence all the debates\nabout
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: baptism. We cannot \"fax the nearest apostle;\" we must engage in\na somewhat complicated process of theological reasoning. Same with regard to\nthe nature of church government, the church's attitude toward war, the new\ncovenant application of the Sabbath commandment, the style of worship, the\ngrounds of divorce, the demands of Christ upon civil government, the proper\ncriteria for determining physical death, many other things. Some\nthings mentioned in the New Testament, and evidently well understood by the\noriginal readers, are quite obscure to us, such as baptism for the dead (I Cor.\n15:29) and the covering of women \"because of the angels\" (I Cor. 11:10).\nToday, however, we are removed by many centuries from the time of the\napostles. And controversy in the church, particularly during the time of the\nReformation, has made it impossible to identify any single strain of church\ntradition as unambiguously apostolic. Thus, although we understand the central\naspects of biblical teaching better than the church fathers did, there are other\naspects which we, perhaps, understand less well than they did.\nIt is also the case, as we mentioned before, that many issues of the\nmodern day are not specifically discussed in scripture. If we cannot fax the\napostles to learn their view of baptism, much less can we determine directly what\nthey would say about nuclear weaponry, the government role in welfare,\nthe medical use of life-support equipment. Here too, there are biblical principles\nwhich apply; but the argument can be complicated. It is not as if the apostles\nwere readily available for interviews.\nIn facing our epistemological disadvantages, the first thing to be said is\nthat God understands. He is the Lord of history. His providence has\nplanned and controlled it. It is no accident that we are in the present\nepistemological situation. That situation, uncomfortable as it may be at\ntimes, suits God's purposes perfectly, and we must be thankful for it. We\nshould not murmur or complain, as Israel in the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: wilderness. When\nsomeone calls and asks me a hard question, say, about whether they\nshould remove life support systems from a dying relative, I usually begin\nby saying that these are, after all, hard questions, and that God\nunderstands how hard they are for us. We cannot fax the apostles, but He\ndoesn't expect us to. He has left us with Scripture and the Spirit's\nillumination, and He has determined that that is enough. We may fumble\naround in searching for answers. We may make decisions which we regret\n312\nI am not, of course, advocating a Roman Catholic view of tradition. Scripture is judge over all\nsuch traditions, and of course it is very difficult today to tell what truth, if any, there may be in\nextra-biblical traditions . 270\nlater on, because we hadn't at first considered all the relevant principles\nand facts. But God understands.\nIn such situations, it is helpful to remember that we are justified by faith,\nnot by works, nor, therefore, by ethical accuracy. That comfort does not, of\ncourse, excuse us from hard thinking. If God has justified us, we will want to\nplease him, and we will make intellectual and other efforts to do what he wants.\nBut the sincerity of such efforts is not measured by the perfection of the results.\nWe may try very hard to apply biblical principles and come up with an answer\nthat later proves inadequate. Yet God will still honor the attempt. He knows\nthe heart, and he takes into consideration the obstacles\n(including epistemological) that we must overcome.\nThus when after prayerful, honest searching of scripture you determine to\nlet your mother die, and afterward wish that you had kept her alive longer by life\nsupport, do not be overcome with guilt. God still loves you, for Jesus' sake, more\nthan you could ever love yourself.\nBeyond that, I think that our \"epistemological disadvantages\" should give\nus more understanding and forbearance for one another. If God still loves the\nbeliever who honestly makes a decision which proves wrong, we should also\nlov
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e and encourage that brother or sister. Sabbatarians should have a greater\nlove and understanding for non-Sabbatarians and vice versa; same with\nanabaptists and paedobaptists, premillenialists and amillenialists, pacifists and\njust-war theorists. We should not pretend that everything is cut and dried, even\nthough perhaps these issues were cut and dried in the New Testament\nperiod itself. We should agonize a bit with those who are wrestling with these\nissues. I am a paedobaptist; but what if I had been raised in a Baptist church?\nWould I have seen things the same way? Would the same arguments carry with\nme the weight they carry presently? I don't know. I believe I am right, and that\nScripture teaches infant baptism. I will present that truth as God's truth. But\nI won't pretend that it is so plain that those on the other side must be insincere.\nGod in his good providence has given us advantages and disadvantages,\nchallenges and opportunities, which are not precisely the same as those of any\npast generation. He calls us to meet those challenges and seize the opportunities\nfor Christ. The church of past ages can help us, to keep us from merely repeating\nthe mistakes of history and to give us a platform on which to build the next story\nof God's temple. But we must not shirk our responsibility. We must be modern (or\npost-modern!) Christians, focused on the world of our own time, and upon\nthe Christ who is the same, yesterday, today and forever.\nEthics, Preaching, and Biblical Theology 271\nAt theological seminaries within the Reformed tradition, one of the most\nexciting discoveries students make is the history of redemption. Biblical theology\nis that discipline that studies the Bible as a history of redemption. So many\nstudents become greatly excited about biblical theology. Many have done basic\nexegetical theology before coming to seminary, and many have experienced\nsystematic theology in the form of confessions and catechisms. But biblical\ntheology appears to them as something new.\nAnd the c
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ontent of biblical theology is exciting to the believer. When we\ncome to see Scripture as the history of redemption, we see far more clearly how\nall of Scripture bears witness to Christ. And biblical theology opens up to us the\nwonderful vision of the eschatology of redemption: that in Christ the last days are\nhere, and we are dwelling with him in the heavenly places. Redemption has been\naccomplished already, and its blessings are ours. There is, of course, a ânot yetâ\nas well as an âalready.â The consummation has come, but it is still yet to come.\nWe live as those who are sanctified, but not perfected.\nAs we have seen, the tension between the already and the not-yet is the\nsetting of New Testament ethical reflection. God has justified us in Christ and has\ngiven us his Spirit; yet sin remains and will not be completely destroyed until the\nfinal day. Nevertheless, the âalready,â the definitive accomplishment of\nredemption in Christ is our motivation for obedience. In our preaching and\nteaching, we should clearly set forth this framework as the context of ethical\ndecision making.\nI believe, however, that it is possible to go too far in our emphasis on the\nhistory of redemption. Some have claimed that the history of redemption is the\nprimary context for theological reflection in Scripture, and that it must always be\nthe primary subject-matter of preaching. With this assertion I must respectfully\ndisagree. In DKG 313 I took issue with these claims as applied to the concept and\npractice of theology and of preaching. Here I will comment a bit on the\nimplications of this view for ethics.\nAlthough the two-age structure of Pauline ethics is important, it does not\nby any means exhaust the biblical teaching relevant to our ethical decisions.\nThere are pages and pages of Scripture devoted to the details of Godâs law, to\n313\n207-212. In footnotes I mention there some of the authors who maintain the view I am\ncontesting. Other sources would include Sidney Greidanus, Sola Scriptura (Toro
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nto: Wedge\nPublishing Foundation, 1979), James T. Dennison, âWhat is Biblical Theology?â in Howard Griffith\nand John Muether, eds., Creator, Redeemer, Consummator (Jackson, MS: Reformed Academic\nPress, 2000), 187-191, Richard B. Gaffin, âSystematic Theology and Biblical Theology,â in John\nH. Skilton, ed., The New Testament Student and Theology (NP: Presbyterian and Reformed,\n1976), 32-50, and many articles at www.kerux.org and www.two-age.org. On the other side, I am\npleased to see that Dr. Jay Adams has also registered protests against the extreme emphasis on\nbiblical theology in some circles. See his âReflections on Westminster Theology and Homileticsâ\nin David Van Drunen, ed., The Pattern of Sound Doctrine (Phillipsburg: P&R, 2004), 261-68. 272\nproverbs about the practical life of the believer, to the heart motivations of love\nand faith that should impel our passion for holiness.\nNow some will point out that all these other elements of biblical ethics are\nto be understood âin the context ofâ the two-age schema. True enough; but\ncontextual arguments work both ways. If the law and the proverbs are to be\nunderstood in the context of the already and not-yet, the opposite is also true: the\nsemi-eschatological tension must be understood in terms of the law of God. It is\nthe law that defines the sinfulness from which Christ redeemed us. And God\nsaves us so that we may keep the law (Rom. 8:4). The law defines how we\nshould express our gratitude for Jesusâ redemption.\nShould preaching be redemptive-historical? Certainly; but it should also\nexpound Godâs laws and the new inner motivations to which we are called. In my\nterminology, redemptive history is the situational perspective, the situation in\nwhich we make ethical decisions. The law is the normative, and the motive is the\nexistential. All three perspectives should be preached and taught, if Christians\nare to gain a balanced perspective on Christian ethics.\nShould every sermon have redemptive history as its principal subj
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ect? I\nwould say no. There is nothing in the Bible itself that requires us to restrict\npreaching in this way. It is common to develop a theology of preaching from the\nBook of Acts, in which most of the preaching is evangelistic, given in\nmarketplaces or synagogues. The preaching in Acts to Jews is quite overtly\nredemptive-historical, as the apostles and their colleagues (such as Stephen and\nPhilip) present Christ as the fulfillment of Old Testament scripture. It is less so in\nthe two instances where the apostles speak to crowds of unconverted Gentiles\n(Acts 14:8-18 and 17:16-34). In those passages, Paul bases his addresses on\ncreation, indeed on general revelation, to rebuke the idolatry of his audience.\nThere are allusions to Scripture, and in Acts 17:31 Paul does refer to Christ,\nwithout naming him. But neither of these addresses can be fairly described as\nredemptive-historical.\nBut in developing an understanding of the nature of preaching in Christian\nworship, we must go beyond the Book of Acts. For it is by no means clear that\nthe preaching and teaching that went on in Christian worship services were\nsignificantly like the evangelistic preaching in Acts, either to Jews or to Gentiles.\nFor one thing, references to teaching in such services are sparse in the New\nTestament. The only clear reference is 1 Cor. 14:26, which refers to a âlessonâ\n(didache). 314 I am not inclined to draw a sharp distinction between kerygma\n(preaching) and didache (teaching). Certainly, the two words can describe the\nsame content. But I imagine that teaching in Christian worship was less\n314\nOf course, there was also teaching in the worship services through tongues, interpretation of\ntongues, and prophecy (1 Cor. 14:26-33). I am assuming that these do not continue past the\napostolic age. See Richard B. Gaffin, Perspectives on Pentecost (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian\nand Reformed Pub. Co., 1979). 273\nevangelistic and more pedagogical in its main thrust, like the New Testament\nletters of the apostles, whi
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ch were most likely read in worship (Col. 4:16, 1\nThess. 5:27). Although these letters take account of redemptive history, they also\ncontain long sections of ethical exhortation, responses to specific questions, and\nso on.\nThere are some passages that are very confusing to modern\ncongregations unless we say something about their redemptive-historical setting.\nGod told Israel under Joshua to kill the Canaanites. Does he tell us to do the\nsame? Certainly not, because the command presupposes a redemptive-historical\nsetting very different from ours. The iniquity of the Canaanite is full; it is time for\nGodâs judgment against those nations and the fulfillment of His promise to\nAbraham. Those conditions donât exist in our relationships with non-Christian\nneighbors. So every preacher must be aware of the redemptive-historical setting\nof his text. But that doesnât imply that the sermon must always be about that\nsetting. There is no biblical rule that such settings are the only proper subject-\nmatter of sermons.\nIndeed, there are many ethical passages in Scripture itself which do not\nexplicitly focus on the redemptive-historical context. Proverbs, for example, says\nnothing about the semi-eschatological ethical tension, not to mention the Mosaic\nLaw. We should not demand that a preacher emphasize something that is not\nemphasized in his text. If one argues that these texts must be seen in the light of\nthe broader biblical principles of redemptive history, again I would reply that the\nreverse is also true. Surely we cannot maintain that every relevant theological\ncontext be brought into the exposition of every text.\nI would like also to say a bit about the terms âmoralistâ and âexemplarist,â\nused as deprecating terms for preachers and sermons deemed insufficiently\nredemptive-historical in focus. âMoralismâ is, as I indicated in Chapter 2, a very\nvague expression, mainly used as a term of abuse. It was used to describe the\nliberalism of Ritschl and his disciples. They had no gospel
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: at all. To use that term\nof principled evangelicals of our own time, I believe, is an injustice. Moralism also\nconnotes legalism and salvation by works. I believe that if a preacher\nemphasizes grace in his overall ministry, including the proper relationship\nbetween grace and works, it is not wrong for him occasionally to preach on a\nProverb, a law, or a norm, without devoting his central attention to the structure\nof redemptive history or to the semi-eschatological ethical tension.\nThe use of the term âexemplaristâ among advocates of redemptive history\nis, in my judgment, even more confused. It seems to mean that it is somehow\nwrong to refer to a Bible character as a moral example. On this view, preachers\nshould refer to Bible characters only as plot devices, as means of advancing the\nnarrative, not as positive or negative examples for our moral guidance. 274\nIt is true, of course, that Bible characters other than Jesus are sinful and\ntherefore not always exemplary. It is also true to point out that when biblical\ncharacters are exemplary we must take into account their situation (i.e. their\nplace in the history of redemption). The story of David and Goliath, for example,\nis not an exhortation to little boys to go out and kill bullies with slingshots, but it\ntells of Davidâs courage in carrying out his responsibility as Godâs anointed, and\nthus points to Christ. But Davidâs courage is exemplary nonetheless, and we may\napply his example to our circumstances, making appropriate allowance for the\ndifference between our calling and Davidâs.\nBut it is clearly wrong to say that they are in Scripture no moral\nexamples. 315 We saw in chapter 9 that the imitation of God, of Christ, and of\ngodly human beings is a major biblical mode of moral instruction.\nSome redemptive-historical preachers seem to have an antipathy to the\nvery idea of practical âapplication,â preferring metaphors like âidentificationâ and\nâparticipation.â Here is an example:\nWe are saying to the pew, \"Co
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: me up to the heavenlies in Christ\nJesus; come and find your life hidden with Christ in God in this text.\" Here\nis your life. We do not ask you to derive lessons from the life of Adam. We\nproclaim that your life is in Adamâmiserable, sinful, rebellious, selfish,\nautonomous, hellish but we plead with men, women and children\neverywhere to find their life in that second Adam, to find themselves in\nChrist Jesus a new creation clothed upon with the righteousness of the\nLamb of God, ushered into the paradise of God by the one who has tasted\nthe flame and felt the edge of the sword of divine justice. We preach to\nyou life in Christ Jesusâyour life hidden with Christ in Godâfrom first Adam\nto second Adamâfrom Adam protological to Adam eschatologicalâthat is\nour method, that is our message. 316\nThe rhetoric here is impressive. But what, concretely, is the difference between\nderiving âlessonsâ or âapplicationsâ from the life of Adam, and proclaiming âthat\nyour life is in Adam?â Most readers would think that our identification with Adam\nis one lesson we could derive from the story. Is the real point of this statement\nthat this is the only application one can make? That we should never, for\nexample, use the unfallen relationship of Adam and Eve as a model for Christian\nmarriage?\n315\nOne student actually told me that there are no moral examples in Heb. 11 for us to imitate. His\nargument was that in Heb. 12:2 we are told to look to Jesus, and therefore, presumably, not to\nany of the saints mentioned in Heb. 11. In my judgment, commitment to an unbalanced kind of\nredemptive-historical emphasis had blinded that student to the obvious.\n316\nJames T. Dennison, âBuilding the Biblical-theological Sermon, Part One: Perspective,â\nhttp://www.kerux.com/documents/KeruxV4N3A3.asp. 275\nI have heard some enthusiasts for redemptive-history complain that the\nterm âapplicationâ has bad connotations deriving from its use in theologies like\nSchleiermacherâs and Bultmannâs. But critici
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: zing language on such grounds is an\ninstance of genetic fallacy. And the proposed alternatives, such as âparticipationâ\nand âidentificationâ have also been used in non-Christian philosophies,\nparticularly those of Plato and the mystics. The alternative âliving in the textâ is\nreally too vague to denote a purposeful ethical preaching thrust.\nIf the argument about application were merely a terminological dispute, it\nwould be of little importance. But I get the impression that some who stress\nredemptive history really want to avoid âpracticalâ application. They want the\nwhole sermon to focus on Christ, not on what works the believer should do. They\nwant it to focus on gospel, not on law. So they want the sermon to evoke praise\nof Christ, not to demand concrete change in peopleâs behavior. In their mind,\nChristocentricity excludes any sustained focus on specific practical matters.\nI too think sermons should magnify Christ and evoke praise. But it is\nsimply wrongheaded to deny the importance of concrete, practical, ethical\napplication. Such application is the purpose of Scripture itself, according to 2\nTim. 3:16-17. And since Scripture itself contains many practical âhow tos,â our\npreaching should include those too. To say that this emphasis detracts from\nChristocentricity is unscriptural.\nChrist is central in Scripture as the Redeemer. But he is also the Word,\nWisdom, the Lawgiver, the Lord of the Covenant, the Lion of Judah, the\nShepherd who leads his people into the right paths. It is wrong to assume that an\nemphasis on Christ as Redeemer (redemptive history) excludes an emphasis on\nChrist as norm and motivator.\nWhen a preacher avoids concrete ethical applications in his sermons, he\nis not preaching the whole counsel of God, and he is not adequately edifying his\npeople. The best redemptive-historical preachers understand this. Some of the\nmost powerful ethical preaching I have heard has come from Edmund Clowney\nand James Dennison. But in my judgment the concept of et
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hical preaching does\nnot fit very well into their overall theory of preaching.\nLet me also mention some dangers in the practice of preaching\nexclusively on redemptive-historical themes:\n1. Much biblical truth can be left out or illegitimately de-emphasized. The\npreacher does not feel free to dwell on the specifics, say, of Romans 12,\nbecause he feels he must spend most of his time of the redemptive-historical\nsetting of the passage (i.e. Romans 1-11).\n2. Some redemptive-historical preachers develop a jargon-laden\nvocabulary. One recent seminary graduate preached a sermon in which he used 276\nthe word âeschatologicalâ about fifty times (at least it felt like that), and a lot of\nother technical biblical-theological jargon. Maybe he thought that was all right, or\neven an advantage, with an audience of seminarians. My guess is that\nseminarians tend to tune out to such discoursesâthey have heard all of that\nmany times. But so facile was the young preacher with this language, I feared\nthat he preached this way in his own congregation. If he did, I fear that anyone\nwho visited the service would have been entirely bewildered.\nIn my view it is best to avoid jargon in preaching generally. And one can\nmake the relevant points about redemptive history without all the technical terms.\nMost evangelical preachers emphasize (a) that God forgives all the sins of\neveryone who believes in Christ, (b) that we nevertheless need to continue\nfighting the spiritual warfare (in our hearts and our society) until the return of\nJesus (c) that the redemptive work of Christ is what motivates us to pursue\nholiness. I believe that those truths constitute the essence of the âalready/not-\nyet,â and this language communicates the truth far more effectively than does the\njargon.\n3. Excess enthusiasm for redemptive history has sometimes produced\ndivision in churches and presbyteries. Some pastors not only preach redemptive\nhistory, but they condemn as moralistic anybody who fails to emphasize it as\nmuch as they
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: do. So âredemptive historyâ becomes a party label, and factions\nbattle over the concept. In my opinion, this partisanship is wrong.\nWhy is it, I wonder, that in our circles whenever anybody gets an\ninteresting idea, it produces a party that makes it a test of orthodoxy, leading to\nanother party that opposes it, and then to battles between these parties in the\nchurches? Why canât those who think they have new insights quietly teach their\ninsights to others while embracing them as brothers and sisters in Christ? If\nsome donât âget it,â why should that amount to heresy? Why not simply permit\nboth views to be taught until the Spirit convinces Godâs people generally that one\nview is Scriptural and the other is not?\nIn recent Reformed history, we have had these partisan battles over Van\nTilâs apologetics (and now, different schools of Van Tillian apologetics), common\ngrace, the incomprehensibility of God, supra/infralapsarianism, theonomy, the\nrelation between grace and law in the covenants, Shepherdâs view of justification,\nnouthetic counseling, exclusive Psalmody, contemporary worship, means of\nchurch growth, redemptive-historical preaching. None of these is resolved in our\nReformed confessions, but partisans act as if they were. They think their view\nalone is orthodox, and their opponents are dangerous heretics. Canât we just\nlighten up a bit? Can we never admit our fallibility? Is there not a place, on some\nissues, for teachability, even tolerance? Canât we ever agree to disagree in\npeace and love, working together on those matters where we agree? 317\n317\nFor more on this subject, see my article, âMachenâs Warrior Childrenâ in Sung Wook Chung,\ned., Alister E. McGrath and Evangelical Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 113-1476. 277\n4. For some reason, it seems to me that enthusiasts for redemptive history\nare often poor logicians. In some sermons, presbytery speeches, student papers,\neven some published treatises, I have often heard elaborate citations of\nSc
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ripture, alreadys and not-yets, Messianic this and Eschatological that, and\nthen at the end some conclusion (a doctrinal, ethical, or procedural point) that\ndoesnât have much at all to do with the redemptive-historical argumentation.\n5. Young preachers who try to preach redemptive-historical sermons often\nspend so much time preparing the theology of their messages that they\ncompletely neglect rhetorical considerations, i.e. communication. So their\nsermons come across as a lot of gobbledeygook. The redemptive-historical\nmethod of preaching typically takes much more preparation time than others.\nAnd at its best it requires substantial intellectual and rhetorical gifts which few\nseminarians and young pastors possess. When average preachers with busy\nschedules try to prepare redemptive-historical sermons, the result is often\nincomprehensible. Now, you can say what you like about the dangers of\nneglecting redemptive history; but a sermon that does not communicate with the\npeople is not preaching at all.\nSo all I ask of a young preacher is that he preach clearly the gospel of\ngrace, a proper relation between grace and works, and no major errors stemming\nfrom redemptive-historical ignorance. These are simple goals, well within the\nabilities of seminary trained young men whom God has called to the ministry.\nWhen a preacher accomplishes these goals, he may not fairly be accused of\nmoralism. His preaching will be biblical and effective.\n6. Young preachers often think that their sermons must be, not only clear,\nbut also profound and original. The redemptive-historical method often attracts\nthem, because it encourages such creativity. The best of the redemptive-\nhistorical preachers, like Vos and Clowney, often lead the listener into unique\nbiblical depth. But young preachers need to be more humble about what they can\nexpect from their first sermons. Better to realize oneâs own limitations and to seek\nwhatâs most important: clear communication of the biblical gospel.\nI will conclude by observ
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ing that I personally receive more benefit from\nredemptive-historically focused sermons than from any other kind. At best,\nredemptive-historical preaching exalts Christ and shows how all Scripture points\nto him. It also shows how Christ is relevant to all aspects of human life. So I hope\nthat seminaries will continue to teach students how to preach on the history of\nredemption. What disturbs me is the recent movement to develop a redemptive-\nhistorical party in the Reformed churches, set over against other partisan groups,\ndividing the body of Christ. 278\nChapter 17: Our Chief End\nIn Chapter 14, I indicated that the situational perspective is a sort of\nChristian teleological ethic. For in the situational perspective we ask how we\nshould seek to change the world in order to bring glory to God. That question\nassumes that we are working toward a goal (the glory of God) and seeking\nmeans to reach that goal. So under the situational perspective, our ethics has a\nformal structure similar to secular teleological ethics, which seeks means to\nreach an end. In secular teleological systems, the end is usually human\nhappiness or pleasure. Christian ethics does not ignore those goals, but makes\nthem subordinate to the glory of God.\nIn this chapter I will discuss several definitions of the goal of the Christian\nlife, from the literature of Christian theology.\nThe Doctrine of the Twofold End\nOn the very first page of his Summa Theologica, Thomas Aquinas\npresents his justification for a science of God (Scripture, theology) in addition to\nphilosophy:\nIt was necessary for man's salvation that there should be a knowledge\nrevealed by God besides philosophical science built up by human reason.\nFirstly, indeed, because man is directed to God, as to an end that\nsurpasses the grasp of his reason: \"The eye hath not seen, O God,\nbesides Thee, what things Thou hast prepared for them that wait for Thee\"\n(Is. 66:4). But the end must first be known by men who are to direct their\nthoughts and actions to the end.
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Hence it was necessary for the salvation\nof man that certain truths which exceed human reason should be made\nknown to him by divine revelation. 318\nGod has ordained for human beings, therefore, to pursue two ends, an earthly\nend and a heavenly one. Philosophy, without the aid of Scripture, enables us to\nunderstand our earthly end. Scripture and theology provide understanding of our\nheavenly one. Edmund Gardner finds the same duality in Danteâs De Monarchia:\nMan is ordained for two ends: blessedness of this life, which consists in\nthe exercise of his natural powers and is figured in the terrestrial paradise;\nblessedness of life eternal, which consists in the fruition of the Divine\naspect in the celestial paradise to which man's natural powers cannot\nascend without the aid of the Divine light. To these two ends man must\ncome by diverse means: \"For to the first we attain by the teachings of\n318\nAquinas, Summa Theologica, 1.1.1. 279\nphilosophy, following them by acting in accordance with the moral and\nintellectual virtues. To the second by spiritual teachings, which transcend\nhuman reason, as we follow them by acting according to the theological\nvirtues.\" But, although these ends and means are made plain to us by\nhuman reason and by revelation, men in their cupidity would reject them,\nwere not they restrained by bit and rein. \"Wherefore man had need of a\ntwofold directive power according to his twofold end, to wit, the Supreme\nPontiff, to lead the human race in accordance with things revealed, to\neternal life; and the Emperor, to direct the human race to temporal felicity\nin accordance with the teachings of philosophy.\" 319\nThis quotation adds to the first that (1) to each end correspond virtues: moral and\nintellectual virtues corresponding to our earthly end, and theological virtues (faith,\nhope, and love) to our spiritual end, and (2) this duality implies a duality of\ninstitutions, the state to guide us to earthly happiness and the church to lead us\nto heaven.\nThese quotations r
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: epresent the main thrust of Roman Catholic teaching\nconcerning the ends or goals of human life. The view of Augustine and earlier\nchurch fathers was somewhat more otherworldly. Aquinas, under the influence of\nAristotle, seeks balance between heavenly ends and earthly ones. Scripture also\nacknowledges the legitimacy of our earthly concerns. The things God created are\ngood, even after the fall (1 Tim. 4:4), according to Paul. Jesus teaches that God\nis concerned to provide us all our physical needs (Matt. 6:33), but he places this\nteaching, as we shall see, in the context of a rather different view of the goal of\nhuman life.\nFor Aquinas, unaided human reason is sufficient to guide us toward\nearthly happiness, but not toward eternal life. We can see that this view of things\nfits in well with the traditional natural law approach to ethics, especially without\nthe Budziszewski emendations. (Recall our discussion of this in Chapter 14.) For\nAquinas, natural reason (operating in accord with Aristotelian epistemology) is\nsufficient to direct the state, which in turn administers the affairs of earthly\nsociety. The church governs the spiritual sphere of life. Those who are most\nserious about seeking heaven take vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience and\nleave the sphere of earthly life for a âreligiousâ vocation. These follow the consilia\nevangelica, the evangelical counsels.\nWe should also connect this view of things with our earlier discussion of\nthe Lutheran law/gospel distinction (Chapter 12). Although Lutherans and Roman\nCatholics have very different views of what constitutes the gospel, they share the\nnotion that one sphere of human life, civil society, should be governed apart from\ngospel influence, apart, that is, from those teachings of Scripture that transcend\nnatural revelation.\n319\nEdmund G. Gardner, âDante Alighieri,â in The Catholic Encyclopedia, online edition, 2003,\navailable at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04628a.htm. 280\nAquinasâ view should be understood as part o
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f the larger distinction\nbetween nature and grace that underlies his thought. That distinction became the\nfoundation of traditional Roman Catholic theology. Herman Dooyeweerd\ndescribes the ânature-grace motiveâ as follows:\nWithin the natural sphere a relative autonomy was ascribed to\nhuman reason, which was supposed to be capable of discovering the\nnatural truths by its own light. Within the supra-natural sphere of grace, on\nthe contrary, human thought was considered to be dependent on the\ndivine self-revelation. Philosophy was considered to belong to the natural\nsphere, dogmatical theology, on the other hand, to the supra-natural\nsphere. In consequence, there was no longer a question of Christian\nphilosophy. Philosophical thought was, in fact, abandoned to the influence\nof the Greek and Humanist basic motives in their external accommodation\nto the doctrine of the Church. These motives were masked by the\ndogmatic acceptance of the autonomy of natural reasonâ¦. The Thomistic\nattempt at a synthesis of the opposite motives of nature and grace, and\nthe ascription of the primacy of the latter found a clear expression in the\nadage: Gratia naturam non tollit, sed perfecit (Grace does not cancel\nnature, but it perfects it.) 320\nThe nature-grace motive also appears in Roman Catholic anthropology, in\nwhich God supplements the natural gifts given to Adam at creation with a donum\nsuperadditum, a gift of divine grace, by which manâs senses are brought under\nthe control of reason and thus Adam enters a deep fellowship with God. In the\nfall, Adam and Eve lost the superadded gifts, which must be restored through the\noperations of grace. Their natural gifts remain intact.\nThe picture is always one of supplementation. The fall has not radically\ndisrupted the functions of nature. For the most part those functions still operate\npretty well. But human beings need something more, and grace provides what is\nlacking. Similarly, Aristotelian philosophy, to Aquinas, is sufficient for earthly\nhappiness,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: though it must be supplemented by Scripture if we are to attain\nheaven. Occasionally, to be sure, Scripture must correct the conclusions of\nnatural reason. Aristotle thought, for example, that the world was eternal. The\nBible teaches otherwise. So Aquinas, who is first of all a Christian and only\nsecondly an Aristotelian, gives Scripture veto-power over philosophy. But\nAquinas did not believe that philosophy, our study of the cosmos, had to be built\nupon Scripture from the outset. The foundations of philosophy, for Aquinas as for\nAristotle, lie in would-be autonomous human reason.\n320\nDooyeweerd, In the Twilight of Western Thought (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed,\n1960), 44-45. Roman Catholic thinkers do in fact speak of âChristian philosophyâ and of the\nthought of Aquinas as a notable example of that. They believe that Scripture and tradition actually\nencourage the kind of synthesis that Aquinas made between Christianity and Aristotle.\nDooyeweerd, of course, denies that such a synthesis is legitimate. 281\nBut in Reformed thought there is a much deeper integration between\nnature and grace. As we saw in Chapter 14, Calvin held that we cannot use\nnatural revelation rightly apart from the spectacles of Scripture. Scripture does\nnot merely 321 supplement Aristotle and correct him here and there; it rather\nchallenges the non-Christian philosopher to place all of his thinking on a different\nbasis, to bring every thought captive to Christ (2 Cor. 10:5).\nIn Reformed theology, there is no distinction in Adamâs original\nconstitution between natural and gracious gifts; rather, God constituted Adam as\na good and righteous man. In the fall, Adam did not merely lose certain gifts, but\nhis whole life became corrupt. So saving grace does not merely add a\nsupplement to fallen human life; rather, it restores it from the heart outward.\nSo it should not surprise us that Reformed understandings of âmanâs chief\nendâ tend to be unitary rather than dualistic. Our goal is to glorify God in al
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: l of life.\nIt is not that earthly happiness is unimportant. As Matt. 6:32-33 indicate, our\nFather knows what we need to preserve and enjoy our earthly lives. But our goal\nis not to attain these things, but rather the kingdom of God (verse 33). The\nâreligiousâ life is not a monastic existence, but human life as a whole, directed to\nGodâs glory.\nTo Glorify God\nThe WSCâs answer to the question, âWhat is the chief end of man?â is,\nâManâs chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.â 322 This formula\nmight seem to belie my last point, that Reformed concepts of the goal of ethics\nare unitary, rather than dualistic. The Catechism seems to call us to two things:\nglorifying God, and enjoying him forever. We shall see, however, that these do\nform a close unity. Certainly it should be immediately evident that these two\ngoals, if they be two, do not pertain, respectively, to spiritual and earthly life, as\non the Roman Catholic construction. Rather, both pertain to human life as a\nwhole. There is no area of life where we are not called both to glorify God and to\nenjoy him forever.\nLet us ask first what it means to glorify God. 323 The glory of God is literally\nthe great light that shines forth when God makes his presence visible to human\nbeings. As such, the glory is something physical, part of the creation. But glory is\n321\nOf course, this merely is important. Scripture does supplement the knowledge of God\navailable in natural revelation. So to speak of supplementation is not necessarily wrong. But there\nis much more to be said. Talk of supplementation must be supplemented. See my Cornelius Van\nTil (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1995), 248-51, 260-61.\n322\nQ. and A. 1.\n323\nThis discussion summarizes, and occasionally quotes, a longer one in DG, 592-95. 282\nalso a divine attribute, coordinate with greatness, power, majesty and splendor in\n1 Chron. 29:11. As God, Jesus shares in the Fatherâs glory (John 17:5). In\nScripture, glory in this sense is more or less equivalent to the l
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ordship attribute of\ndivine presence. Wherever God is, even when he is invisible, there is glory. So\nthe term glory can refer to God himself, his revelation of himself in the world, his\nreputation among human beings, or even the praise that human beings bring to\nhim. 324\nHis presence, in one sense, is throughout creation. So creation declares\nGodâs glory (Ps. 19:1). Human beings, his special image within creation, are also\nhis special glory (Ps. 8:5, 1 Cor. 11:7). The image of God, as we saw in Chapter\n9, is both a fact and a norm. So is the glory in which God has made us. As Godâs\nimage, we are made to reflect Godâs glory back to him. In one sense we do that\nby virtue of our creation. In another sense, to reflect that glory is a deliberate\nchoice that we make or refuse to make. 325\nSo Scripture calls us to glorify God in everything we do (1 Cor. 10:31). In\none sense, we cannot increase Godâs glory. But when our lives image God,\nothers see the presence of God in us. So we ourselves become part of that light\nfrom God that goes forth over the earth. When we speak truly of him and obey\nhis Word, we enhance his reputation on the earth, his praise, so that we, like\nJesus, become âthe light of the worldâ (Matt. 5:14).\nTo glorify God is to recognize him as the chief fact of human life. He\ndetermines our purpose, governs our lives. The first four of the Ten\nCommandments focus on our duty toward him. Everything we do must take him\ninto account, and whenever we properly take him into account, our actions are\nright (Rom. 14:23, Col. 3:17, 23).\nTo Enjoy Him Forever\nBut the Catechism adds a second phrase to its formulation of our chief\nend, âto enjoy him forever.â At first it is difficult to see how these two phrases fit\ntogether. The first is theocentric, but the second appears anthropocentric. The\nfirst is distinctly biblical, but the second sounds a bit like the goal of pleasure in\nsecular teleological ethics.\n324\nDoxa, glory, can also often be translated praise.\nThese two sen
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ses correspond to the larger biblical distinction between Godâs decretive and\nperceptive wills (DG, 531-38). God has decreed that all creatures will glorify him, whether they\nare in themselves good or evil. But his precepts demand that creatures choose consciously to\nglorify him. Sometimes creatures obey those precepts, sometimes not. So in one sense\neverything glorifies God; in another sense God receives glory only from what is holy and\nrighteous.\n325 283\nIt helps to notice, however, that even the second phrase is centered on\nGod. We are to enjoy him. So the second phrase calls us to find our chief\nenjoyment in God, not in the world. To embrace the enjoyment of God as the\ngoal of life is to sing with Asaph,\n25\nWhom have I in heaven but you? And there is nothing on earth\nthat I desire besides you. 26 My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the\nstrength of my heart and my portion forever. 27 For behold, those who are\nfar from you shall perish; you put an end to everyone who is unfaithful to\nyou. 28 But for me it is good to be near God; I have made the Lord GOD\nmy refuge, that I may tell of all your works. (Ps. 73:25-28)\nAlthough Asaph uses forms of the first person pronoun ten times in this passage,\nand thirty-three times through the whole Psalm, these verses are profoundly\ntheocentric. 326 So when the Catechism moves from the first phrase to the\nsecond, it is not moving from God-centeredness to man-centeredness. Rather, it\nis looking at God-centeredness from two perspectives.\nThe second perspective is entirely Scriptural. To redeemed human beings,\nglorifying God is a delight. In Chapter 16, I showed how pervasively Scripture\nemphasizes the rewards God has promised to those who love him. Those\nrewards are delightful beyond our imagining, and they are a powerful motivation\nto obedience. In that chapter I emphasized that the Christian ethic is far removed\nfrom Kantian deontologism, in which we do our duty for dutyâs sake, with no\nthought of reward. Rather, in the Christian life, w
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e seek to do Godâs will for Godâs\nrewards.\nEven Godâs law, which we often regard as a stern taskmaster, is a delight\nto the redeemed heart (Ps. 1:2, 119:97, Rom. 7:22), a gift of Godâs grace (Ps.\n119:29). It is our way of life, not in the sense that it brings us eternal life apart\nfrom grace, but in the sense that it brings fullness of blessing to those who are\nsaved by grace, when they walk in Godâs ways (Lev. 18:56, Deut. 5:33, 8:3,\n11:13-15, 28:1-4, 30:11-20). God has given the law for our good (Deut. 10:12-13,\n4:40, 12:28). 327\nScripture does condemn selfishness and preoccupation with our own\ncomfort and pleasure (Matt. 6:24-34, 1 Cor. 6:13, Phil. 3:19, 1 Tim. 5:6, James\n5:5). It demands self-sacrifice, even enduring hardship (Matt. 24:13, Mark 10:29-\n30, 2 Tim. 2:3, 4:5, Heb. 12:7, James 1:12, 1 Pet. 2:19), and persecution (Matt.\n326\nIt is still common for some to criticize contemporary worship songs for their overuse of first\nperson pronouns. Critics often take this as a symptom of narcissism, evidence that these songs\naim to glorify ourselves rather than God. Let us be done with this kind of argument. The Psalms\nabound in first-person references, but they are nonetheless profoundly God-centered. Compare\nmy discussion of Ps. 18, in critique of Marva Dawn, in Contemporary Worship Music (Phillipsburg:\nP&R, 169-70.\n327\nThis emphasis is, of course, contrary to the law/gospel view discussed in Chapter 12, in which\nthe law includes no blessings and the gospel includes no obligations. 284\n5:10-12, 44, 10:23, 13:21, John 15:20, Rom. 8:35, 12:14, 1 Cor. 4:12, 2 Cor.\n12:10, 2 Thess. 1:4, 2 Tim. 3:12). But some of the passages that describe most\ngraphically the rigors and difficulties of the Christian life also emphasize its\nrewards. Matt. 5:10-12 reads,\nBlessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for\ntheirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 \"Blessed are you when others revile\nyou and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my\naccount. 12 R
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so\nthey persecuted the prophets who were before you.\nAnd James 1:12, also a beatitude,\nBlessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has\nstood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to\nthose who love him.\nMark 10:29-30 promises blessings, not only in the next world, but in this one as\nwell:\nJesus said, \"Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or\nbrothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake\nand for the gospel, 30 who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time,\nhouses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with\npersecutions, and in the age to come eternal life.\nAnd Paul, in 2 Cor. 12:10, says,\nFor the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults,\nhardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am\nstrong.\nEvidently, then, the biblical principle is that the pleasures of serving God are not\nprimarily short-term, but long-term, though of course God gives us many short-\nterm blessings as well. Note the âlittle whileâ by which Peter describes the length\nof our hardship:\nBlessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his\ngreat mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through\nthe resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an inheritance that is\nimperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, 5 who by\nGod's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be\nrevealed in the last time. 6 In this you rejoice, though now for a little while,\nif necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, 7 so that the tested\ngenuineness of your faith- more precious than gold that perishes though it\nis tested by fire- may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at 285\nthe revelation of Jesus Christ. 8 Though you have not seen him, you love\nhim. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \njoy that is inexpressible and filled with glory, 9 obtaining the outcome of\nyour faith, the salvation of your souls. (1 Pet. 1:3-9)\nCompare with this Paulâs reference to his âslight momentary afflictionâ that is\nâpreparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparisonâ (2 Cor. 4:17,\ncf. Rom. 8:18-25, 35-39). Although our suffering in the present may seem\nsometimes to outweigh the blessing of God, in eternity those troubles will seem\ntiny. And through Godâs word we are able to view the present time in the light of\neternity, recognizing the true proportions of things. In that light, those like Paul\nare able to say even in the midst of terrible suffering 328 that it is light and\nmomentary.\nIn contrast, the pleasures of sin are fleeting (Heb. 11:25). Even pursuing\nthe good things of Godâs creation is vain outside the context of Godâs overall\npurpose for us (Eccl. 2:1-11, 12:13-14).\nSo our life with God is in the deepest sense an enjoyment of him. To say\nthis may require us to look at life from perspectives different from our customary\nones. But Scripture teaches us how to attain these perspectives, showing us how\nnot to be anxious in anything,\nbut in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your\nrequests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which\nsurpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in\nChrist Jesus. (Phil. 4:6-7) 329\nIn the end, one cannot glorify God without enjoying him. The goal of WSC\n1.1 is, in the most profound sense, not twofold, but one. God desires to share his\nglory with his people, his image, his sons and daughters, his bride. He is not like\nMolech (Lev. 18:21), the false god who demanded human sacrifice. Rather, our\nGod delights in the fulfillment of human potential.\nSo grudging obedience is not what he desires of us. It is, I think, better\nthan no obedience at all. But it is seriously defective. We should seek, not only to\nobey him, but also to delight in obedience. That delight comes from pr
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ayer and\nsupplication with thanksgiving, through immersion in the words of Scripture and\nthe hearts of the great saints of redemptive history, and through the fellowship of\nthe church in word and sacrament.\n328\nPaul actually describes his slight momentary affliction in 2 Cor. 11:24-33. Most people would\ndescribe these sufferings as unendurable.\n329\nJohn Piper has rendered a valuable service to the church in his advocacy of âChristian\nhedonism.â He shows powerfully and biblically that delight in God motivates the Christian life. See\nhis Desiring God (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Publishers, 2003). 286\nThe Kingdom of God\nAnother biblical formulation of the goal of human life is Matt. 6:33, âBut\nseek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be\nadded to you.â âThese thingsâ are the necessities of earthly life, food, drink, and\nclothing (verse 31). So in this text, as in the ones considered above, God is\nconcerned with human life and enjoyment. But here the Lord presents the goal\nfrom still another perspective. 330\nWe discussed the kingdom of God in Chapter 16. It is the movement of\nhistory by which God overcomes all his opponents and establishes his\nrighteousness on the earth. We saw in Chapter 12 that the gospel, the good\nnews, is the declaration that God is bringing his kingdom to earth. In Matt. 6:33,\nwe learn that the kingdom is what we should seek âfirst,â that it should be the\nchief purpose governing our lives.\nHow does this goal cohere with that of WSC 1? It shows further how\nGodâs glory and our pleasure are related. For the kingdom is an institution that\nincorporates both God and his people. He is the king, we are the subjects. In the\nkingdom, God and his people work together to bring transformation to people and\nto the world. Insofar as the kingdom prospers, God will be glorified, and we will\nfind our highest pleasure.\nOr we can think of the relationship of these goal-formulations as follows:\nGlorifying God is normative, enjoying him
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: is existential, and seeking his kingdom\nis historical and therefore situational.\nSo to speak of the kingdom as ethical goal is to focus on the important\nfactor of historical development. Our goal is not obedience in the abstract, but\nparticipation in a specific historical program. So everything we do should in some\nway contribute to the progress of that kingdom program. Not only should our own\nlives be righteous, but we should be seeking to establish Godâs righteousness on\nthe earth.\nThe Cultural Mandate and the Great Commission\nThe dynamism of the kingdom becomes even more evident when we\nconsider two more specific forms of the biblical goal of human life. These are the\nCultural Mandate of Gen. 1:28, and the Great Commission of Matt. 28:18-20.\n330\nCornelius Van Tilâs favorite description of the goal of human life was âthe kingdom of God as\nmanâs summum bonum,â Christian-Theistic Ethics (NP: Den Dulk Christian Foundation, 1971),\n44, cf. 41-151. 287\nGod gave the cultural mandate to Adam and Eve at their creation. Their first\nrecorded experience was the word of God giving this mandate to them, defining\ntheir task on the earth:\nAnd God blessed them. And God said to them, \"Be fruitful and\nmultiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of\nthe sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that\nmoves on the earth.\"\nThis mandate can be understood in three parts: (1) Manâs whole life is to be\ngoverned by Godâs commands. In this passage, Godâs word claims the right to\ngovern the whole direction of human life. In terms of our three perspectives, this\nis the normative side of the mandate. (2) Man is to subdue the earth and have\ndominion over all other creatures. Here, Adam and Eve are to image the power\nof Godâs lordship, taking control over the world to Godâs glory. This is the\nsituational perspective of the mandate, showing how man is to use his power to\nbring his environment under his vassal lordship, ultimately to the glor
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: y of God. 331\n(3) Man is to be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth with human beings, again\nimaging God, who fills the earth with his divine presence. This part of the\nmandate corresponds to the existential perspective.\nJesus gives the Great Commission to his disciples following his\nresurrection, preceding his ascension to Godâs right hand. This commission\nestablishes the church as a missionary body:\nAnd Jesus came and said to them, \"All authority in heaven and on earth\nhas been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations,\nbaptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy\nSpirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And\nbehold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.\" (Matt. 28:18-20).\nIn the Old Testament too, God intended to bless all nations through his covenant\nwith Abraham (Gen. 12:3). But the predominant imagery of that blessing (as Isa.\n2:1-4) was centripetal: the nations coming to Jerusalem to worship Yahweh. The\nGreat Commission begins a centrifugal movement: Godâs people going out from\nJerusalem, to Judea, Samaria, and âto the end of the earthâ (Acts 1:8), to bring\nthe kingdom to all nations. The Cultural Mandate, as we have seen, is also\ncentrifugal. So in the Great Commission, Jesus renews Godâs original purpose,\nto fill the earth with worshipers of the true God.\nOf course, great events have intervened between the Cultural Mandate\nand the Great Commission: the fall of man, and the redemptive work of Christ. If\nthe earth is to be filled with worshipers of the true God, they must first be saved\n331\nAs I indicated in Chapter 15, this does not mean that Adam should exploit the natural world. Of\ncourse, to exercise godly dominion, he must not only make use of the other creatures, but also\npreserve and nurture them, imaging the structure of Godâs own dominion. 288\nfrom sin, by the word and Spirit of God. So, unlike the Cultural Mandate, the\nGreat Commission is focused on the communication of the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: gospel message, by\nwhich we are to make disciples, baptize them, and teach them a new way of\nliving.\nOtherwise, the two mandates cohere. The Great Commission, like the\nCultural Mandate, can be described triperspectivally: It is based on Jesusâ\nsovereign control of all things, verse 18 (situational) 332 . It requires discipling,\nbaptism, and teaching (normative). And it guarantees the presence of Jesus with\nhis people for all time (existential).\nWe can also see a congruence between the two mandates in terms of\nanother triad: seed, land, and divine promise. The divine promise is the norm that\ncreates the obligation and insures the blessing. Land is the territory (situational)\nGod has given for man to occupy. Seed is the presence of man on the earth,\nanalogous to Godâs presence in the creation (existential). The Cultural Mandate\nbegins with Godâs word of blessing, which calls Adam and Eve to fill the earth\nwith their seed and to take dominion over the land.\nScripture continues to stress this triad through redemptive history. In\nGenesis 3, God responds to the fall by promises encased in threats (see Chapter\n16), reiterating his normative will. Then he pronounces curses and blessings\nprecisely in the areas of seed (childbearing) and land (manâs toil). In these areas,\nman is to experience pain. But these are also to be Godâs means of preserving\nthe human race until the child of the promise comes into the world.\nAll of the post-Adamic covenants are promises (normative) of land\n(situational) and seed (existential). God saves Noah by his word and he renews\nthe Cultural Mandate in Gen. 9:7. Abraham, too, trusts in Godâs word to give him\nland (Canaan) and seed (descendants through Isaac, as the sand and the stars,\nGen. 22:17). In the Mosaic covenant, God renews the promise of land and\nchooses a people to fill that land. For David, God promises that a royal seed will\nalways occupy the throne (2 Sam. 7:4-16, and that that seed will rule all the earth\n(Ps. 72).\nThe Great Commission carr
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ies this theme into the New Covenant. Christ\nis himself the seed of the promise, the fulfillment of Gen. 3:15. He fills all things\nwith his presence (Eph. 1:23, 4:10). And he takes title to all lands in Godâs\ncreation (Matt. 28:18). It might seem, then, that there is nothing left for believers\nto do, since Jesus has fulfilled the terms of the cultural mandate. But we must not\n332\nVerse 18 uses the term âauthorityâ (exousia), which I have usually associated with the\nnormative perspective. In this context, however, I think that Jesus refers to his authority over all\nthings to embolden his disciples, to recognize that no disaster can prevent the success of their\nmission. That encouragement brings his control (situational) to the fore. But of course the\nsituational and normative perspectives are inseparable. The situational is always normative in the\nsense that Godâs authority (normative) extends to all events of nature and history (situational). 289\nforget that we live in a semi-eschatological age, the age of the already and the\nnot-yet. This is the age in which Christ has fulfilled history, but in which\nnevertheless he calls his disciples to apply his finished work.\nThat call is the Great Commission. Believers too are to fill the earth with\nworshipers of God and thus to take dominion of all lands, by the resources that\nChrist gives them from heaven. Now the land is the whole earth, not just\nPalestine, and the seed are all those who have been begotten by Godâs Spirit.\nThus will be fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah that âthe earth shall be full of the\nknowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the seaâ (Isa. 11:9).\nThe Great Commission, therefore, can be understood as a republication of\nthe Cultural Mandate for the semi-eschatological age. Unlike the original Cultural\nMandate, it presupposes the existence of sin and the accomplishment of\nredemption. It recognizes that if the world is to be filled with worshipers of God,\nsubduing the earth as his vassal kings, they must first be co
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nverted to Christ\nthrough the preaching of the gospel. But when the evangelization of the world is\ncomplete, the result will be that envisaged in the Cultural Mandate.\nIn Reformed circles there have been different views concerning the\nrelation of these two mandates. Some have thought that the Cultural Mandate is\nobsolete, because of the fall and redemption, and because Christ has already\nfilled and subdued all things. On that view, Christians should be concerned only\nwith the work of the gospel, not with bringing potentialities out of the earth for\nhuman dominion. Secular work is legitimate, but only as a means of supporting\nthe work of the Great Commission.\nOthers believe that since the Cultural Mandate is the original mandate\ngiven to Adam, a creation ordinance (see Chapter 13), it should be the main\nfocus of human life. Some, indeed, on this view, are called to preach the gospel,\nbut that is only one way of fulfilling the Cultural Mandate.\nIf, however, I am right about the conceptual congruence of these two\nmandates and the semi-eschatological nature of Christâs fulfillment of Gen. 1:28,\nthen, first, the Cultural Mandate continues in force. It is right and good for us to\nexplore and inhabit the earth and to use its resources for the glory of God and\nthe betterment of human life. The works of science, art, technology, study,\ngovernment, and so on are good, when done for God. These are good in\nthemselves, not only as means to bring people to faith.\nIn the broadest sense, however, the Cultural Mandate cannot be fulfilled\nuntil the fulfillment of the Great Commission. There cannot be a world full of\nworshipers of God until people repent of their sins and turn to Christ. So all of\nhuman life in this semi-eschatological age should have a redemptive focus.\nEverything we do should contribute in some way to the fulfillment of the Great\nCommission. Construction of an office building, for example, can be good in 290\nitself. But Christians involved in such a project should also ask how that pr
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: oject\ncan be used to turn hearts to Christ, as by contributing some profits to the work\nof the church.\nSo the goal of human life in this age always has a redemptive aspect.\nScripture emphasizes this fact in a number of ways:\n1. As we saw in Chapter 16, the kingdom of God is not only the sovereign\nreign of God over creation, but specifically, as Vos said, âwhere God\nsupernaturally carries through his supremacy against all opposing powers and\nbrings man to the willing recognition of the same.â 333 So the kingdom is\nredemptive in character, and that redemptive kingdom is the goal of human life in\nMatt. 6:33. Jesus here contrasts that kingdom with lesser priorities (which are\nnonetheless necessities!), food, drink, and clothing. So it is the highest priority.\n2. The love commandment in John 13:34-35 calls us to love as Christ\nloved us, and it says that this is the mark of those who are Jesusâ disciples. But\nthat love of Christ is distinctly redemptive.\n3. In 1 Cor. 9, Paul speaks of the goal of his life as saving human beings\nthrough the gospel (verses 19-22, cf. 10:33), and indeed gaining his own share of\nthe benefit of the gospel (verses 23-27). We might think that these goals are\nunique to Paulâs calling as an apostle. But in 9:24 and 10:31-11:1 he urges the\nCorinthians to have the same goals as he. We saw earlier how 10:31 (âdo all to\nthe glory of Godâ) serves as a goal for all human life. Now we see the redemptive\ncontext of that goal.\n4. In Phil. 3, Paul again sets forth the overall motivation of his life and\nministry. He has counted âall thingsâ as loss for Christ (verses 7-8); so everything\nin his life is now directed toward Christ. Pressing on toward the âprize of the\nupward call of God in Christ Jesusâ (14) is the âone thingâ he does (13), the âgoalâ\nhe runs toward (14). Again, Paul does not adopt this goal for himself alone, but\nhe presents this as a model for our imitation (15-17).\nSo everything we do should be done to advance, not only Godâs purpo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ses\nin general, but specifically his program of redemption as presented in the Great\nCommission.\nVocation\nSo far, I have discussed goals primarily of a corporate kind: goals for the\nhuman race as a whole and for the church as Godâs people. Glorifying God,\nenjoying him, and seeking his kingdom are universal goals as well as individual.\n333\nVos, The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Church (Nutley, NJ:\nPresbyterian and Reformed, 1972), 50. 291\nBut the Cultural Mandate and the Great Commission are not really individual\ngoals. As I indicated in Chapter 15, neither of these presents a goal for each\nindividual to attain. Adam could not have replenished and subdued the earth all\nby himself. This task presupposes a society in which each member plays a\ndifferent role in achieving the result. The same is true of the Great Commission.\nNo individual believer can âteach all nations,â but the church as a body can do\nthis with Godâs help. God has gifted individuals differently (Rom. 12:3-8, 1 Cor.\n12:1-31, Eph. 4:1-16), so each believer must determine what specific role God\nhas enabled him to play in the fulfillment of the Commission.\nSpecific roles entail specific goals. The teacher in the church must seek to\nachieve clarity and effectiveness in his teaching. Someone laboring in mercy\nministry must seek the goal of meeting the needs of all God brings his way,\nexpressing to them the love of Christ.\nProtestantism has described these individual roles and goals as vocations,\ndivine callings. In the medieval period, Christians applied the term to positions in\nthe church: priests, monks, and nuns. The Reformation broadened the term to\ninclude all believers, so that even those doing secular work have divine\ncallings. 334 Paul uses the term in this broad sense in 1 Cor. 7:17.\nAlthough the term vocation suggests a divine revelation to each individual\nof Godâs assignment to him, the Reformers did not consider vocation to be a\nspecial revelation. Special revelation is limited
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: to Scripture. But God gives to\neach believer wisdom to discover how God has gifted him and how he can best\nuse that gift in Godâs kingdom. That wisdom should of course be compared with\nthe wisdom of other believers who can help us to evaluate our gifts. It would not\nbe wrong to describe this process as âexistential revelationâ (see Chapter 9). In\nvocation, God enables us to apply the principles of Scripture to our own lives and\nto our circumstances. In this process we come to see Godâs will for our lives 335\nand to gain assurance that we are in the place where God wants us to be.\nVocation comes to us, then, by way of (1) God giving gifts to us, (2) the\nSpirit enabling us to discern those gifts through self-examination and through the\nconfirmation of others in the church, (3) God providing opportunities for us to\ndevelop and exercise those gifts, (4) God providing wisdom so that we can use\nthose gifts in ways that glorify him, extend his kingdom, fulfill his mandates, and\nin the end enjoy him forever.\n334\nCalling in this sense differs from (1) âeffectual calling,â Godâs sovereign work of summoning\nelect people into union with Christ (as in Rom. 1:6-7) and from (2) the âgospel callâ or âoutward\ncallâ in which preachers of the gospel call their hearers to trust in Christ.\n335\nIn DG, 539-542, I suggest that there is a third sense in which Scripture uses the phrase âwill of\nGod,â alongside the decretive and perceptive senses. I think this is the case in Rom. 12:1-2, and\nsimilar expressions can be found in Eph. 5:8-10, Phil. 1:9-10, and Heb. 5:12-14. Vocation as\ndiscussed here is one kind of revelation of this will of God. 292\nShort-Range Goals\nWe continue to move from the general to the specific. As there are specific\ngoals for each believer, so there are specific goals for each moment.\nIf Laura is asked to submit a report to her employer, she should do it\nâheartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will\nreceive the inheritance as y
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: our reward. You are serving the Lord Christâ (Col.\n3:23-24). Paul directs this admonition specifically to slaves. How much more\ndoes it apply to those voluntarily employed.\nThere is no Scripture passage that specifically requires her to submit that\nreport, on time, in the form requested. But this is the application of many more\ngeneral teachings of Scripture, such as those we have already considered.\nGlorifying God, enjoying him, seeking his kingdom, obeying his mandatesâall of\nthese take place in thousands of individual decisions. The path toward the major\ngoals of the Christian life requires many little steps.\nSo I have an obligation to teach a class in systematic theology in\nClassroom 3 of Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, at 2 PM today. So far\nas I know, nobody else has that specific ethical obligation. But I have it, because\nof my individual calling and because of the specific jobs that calling entails. And\nmy goal is to cover certain subjects in that class in such a way as to help the\nstudents learn them. The big goals entail many little goals. We need to ask more\noften how our little tasks advance the big ones. And we need to consider whether\nthe sublimity of the larger tasks gives shape to the details of life, motivating us to\nseek Godâs glory again and again through the day. 293\nSection 3: The Existential Perspective\nChapter 18: Goodness and Being\nWe have seen that the normative perspective of Christian ethics asks,\nâWhat is my duty before God?â The situational perspective asks, âHow should I\nchange the world in order to bring about those goals pleasing to God?â Now we\nshall investigate the existential perspective, in which the ethical question is âHow\nmust I be changed, if I am to please God?â The question may also be asked from\na corporate standpoint, âHow must we be changed, if we are to please God?â\nThe three questions are ultimately equivalent, but they present different\nperspectives on ethical choice, and each can sometimes help us to correct o
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ur\nmisapprehensions of the others.\nThe normative perspective can be seen as a Christian deontological ethic,\nthe situational as a Christian teleological ethic, and the existential as a Christian\nexistential ethic. These reflect the emphases of their non-Christian counterparts\n(as we investigated them in Chapters 6-8), but they bring these emphases\ntogether into a more coherent and fruitful unity, in the context of our covenant\nrelationship to God.\nI begin with some ontological observations, similar to those I made about\nthe other two perspectives. Under the normative perspective (Chapter 9), I\nshowed how Godâs word is God himself, revealing himself through created\nmedia. Under the situational perspective (Chapter 15), I indicated that our basic\nsituation is God himself, and all the persons and things he has made. Now again,\nunder the existential perspective, we must consider the supremacy of God, and\nhis relation to his creatures.\nGod is, not only the chief norm and the chief fact, but also the chief\nperson, the chief subjectivity. As such, he is for us, not only law and situation, but\nalso our example of holiness, righteousness, and love. 336 He is himself good, as\nonly a person can be. 337 But to say that is not to say that he conforms to a\nstandard of goodness imposed on him from above. Nor is it to say that he\ncreates goodness as he creates the world, so that he could change it tomorrow.\nGoodness is not something above God, or something below God. Rather,\ngoodness is God. God is his own goodness. Good is Godâs own character, his\neternal attribute. Without his goodness, he would not be God. So he will never be\nother than good. âGod is light, and in him is no darkness at allâ (1 John 1:5). And,\n336\nI understand holiness, righteousness, and love, as forms of divine goodness. See DG, 394-\n401.\n337\nThis is true in both ethical and nonethical senses of goodness, but in this context I am thinking\nprimarily of ethical goodness. 294\nâAnyone who does not love does not know God,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: because God is loveâ (1 John\n4:8, cf. 16). 338\nThis is to say that, like the highest being, the highest goodness is a\nperson. He is not an impersonal, abstract form, like Platoâs good. 339 So our\nsupreme standard of goodness, holiness, righteousness, and love is an absolute\nperson. Since he is a person, he is not only a standard, but also an example to\nus of ethical perfection. He calls us to imitate what he is (Lev. 19:2) and what he\ndoes (Matt. 5:43-48, John 13:34-35).\nSo God does not need to have anyone tell him what to do. He does good\nbecause it is his character to do so. In the most important sense, he cannot do\nanything else. He does good, because it is his deepest desire, because in the\nmost profound way he wants to do it. Godâs goodness and his being are one.\nGodâs Image and Human Goodness\nNow God has made human beings to be his image, and his intention is for\nhis own union of goodness and being to be reflected in us. Of course the image\nis never quite the same as the original reality. We know that human goodness is\nnot inseparable from human nature as Godâs goodness is from his, because we\nhave indeed fallen from our original goodness. Nevertheless, God made Adam to\nbe a good person (Gen. 1:31); he gave him a good ethical character. 340 It is a\ngreat mystery how Adam, good as he was, came to sin against God. 341\nBesides being good, Adam was free and responsible before God. I\ndiscussed the nature of human freedom and responsibility in DG. 342 The ethical\nimplication is this: that Adam had to make his own decisions. He was responsible\nto obey Godâs norms, but to do that he had to adopt Godâs norms as his own.\nAdam had to decide whether Godâs standards would become his own standards,\nthe standards by which he would make his own decisions.\n338\nThis is the doctrine of divine simplicity, that all of Godâs defining attributes are necessary to his\nbeing. For a general discussion of simplicity, see DG 225-236 and passim through the chapters\ndealing with the attribut
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: es.\n339\nCf. my discussion of Plato in Chapter 8, especially on the dialogue Euthyphro. Also recall my\ndiscussion in Chapter 3 of the importance of the fact that the Lord is a person, and the argument\nin Chapter 4 and AGG 93-102 that the highest standard of ethics must be personal.\n340\nThis is the common Reformed view, in contrast with the Roman Catholic position I discussed\nbriefly in Chapter 17. On the Roman view, Adam is created with an inner tension between his\nsenses and reason, a tension that required a special gift of grace (donum superadditum) to\nrelieve. Reformed theology does not recognize any such tension in Adamâs original constitution.\nBut WCF does say that Adam was âyet under a possibility of transgressingâ (4.2). It does not\nspecify what it was in Adam that made sin to be possible.\n341\nJohn Murray calls this an âinsoluble psychological and moral problemâ in Collected Writings 2\n(Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1977), 75.\n342\n119-159. 295\nA person can obey another simply out of fear. But in our relation to God,\nthat is hardly the ideal. God wants us to obey him because we believe that his\nnorms are right, that he is indeed the highest standard of goodness. One who\nobeys only out of fear might think that the one he obeys has false standards. But\nhe obeys anyway, because he doesnât want to be hurt. But to obey God in the\nfullest sense is always to confess that his standards are right and true. And to\nconfess that is to adopt his standards as our own. And so a Christian who has\nfaithfully internalized Godâs standards lives by standards that are both Godâs and\nhis own. Such Christians do what they want to do, living by their own desires.\nThat is the limited truth in the existential tradition of secular ethics (Chapter 6).\nSince there is no ethical tension within man as originally created, I can\nadd that Adam also reflected God in the unity of his ethical commitment. He did\nnot have to wrestle with tensions between will and intellect, or emotions and\nreason,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: between heavenly ends and earthly ends. All of his being was an image\nof Godâs goodness.\nHuman beings reflect Godâs goodness in another way as well. As Godâs\nvassal kings, charged with taking dominion of the earth (Gen. 1:28), we have the\nresponsibility to apply Godâs norms to the rest of creation. Everything in creation\nis subject to us as we carry out our cultural task. So God intends us not only to\nbe good in our inmost being, but also to be lawgivers to the rest of creation. So\nas the image of God, we reflect Godâs ethical authority. As God is lawgiver, he\nhas made us also to be lawgivers, as well as law-keepers. As such we seek to fill\nthe earth with the righteousness and love of God.\nSo God created Adam to be something truly wonderful, a glorious image\nof God himself. Like God, though on a different level, Adam was worthy of\nrespect and honor. The image of God is what makes human life exceedingly\nprecious (Gen. 9:5-6, James 3:9).\nGodâs Image and the Fall\nThere is controversy in the church as to whether in the fall the image of\nGod was lost (as in Lutheran teaching) or merely defaced or marred (as in\nReformed). I hold to the latter view because of Bible references to the existence\nof the image in sinful people (Gen. 9:6, James 3:9). The continuance of the\nimage implies that even after the fall, human beings are exceedingly precious in\nGodâs sight and ought to be in manâs as well. Gen. 9:6 and James 3:9 invoke that\npreciousness as a principle to which we are morally responsible. Clearly the fall\ntakes nothing away from our moral responsibility, though it inhibits us from\ncarrying out that responsibility. 296\nSo it remains true, even after the fall, that we are responsible to internalize\nthe law of God, so that it becomes the law of our being as well. Our sinfulness\nwill impede this process until glory; but we should still seek as an ethical goal that\nunity of goodness with our being. As that unity increases, we will be more\nconfident in deciding for ourselves what
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: is right and wrong: that is, deciding\naccording to our internalized divine standards.\nWe must never be satisfied with less than obedience to God from the\nheart. That is a large order, and it is a measure of our fallenness that we never\ndo that perfectly in this life. Even when we conform outwardly to the law, we often\nnote in ourselves some deficiency in inward motivation.\nHow does the fall affect the unity of human nature discussed earlier? As I\nsaid in the previous section, sin is not the result of inevitable conflict between\nvarious aspects of our being. Rather, it is the result of personal, willful choice, a\nchoice of the whole person. It is true that following the fall, human beings often\nhave to wrestle with ethical choices. A part of us wants to do right, another part to\ndo wrong (Rom. 7). Sometimes we present this wrestling as a conflict between\nintellect and emotions, or between intellect and will. But as we shall see later, this\nis not the best way to describe such moral instability. Intellect, emotions, and will,\neven assuming that they can be distinguished in the conventional way, are\nequally fallen, equally subject to regeneration. So our struggle is not between\nintellect, emotions, and will, but between right and wrong.\nAll of our faculties and capacities are subject to temptation and therefore\nto inward ethical anxiety. We experience struggle between good and bad\nemotions, good and bad volitions, and good and bad thinking. These are different\nways of saying that we struggle as whole persons between obedience and\ndisobedience to our God. So even as fallen creatures, there is a unity in human\nnature, though there is inward tension as well.\nGodâs Image and Redemption\nThe atonement of Christ, applied to our hearts by the continuing work of\nthe Spirit, renews us in the image of Christ (Eph. 4:24, Col. 3:10). This restores in\nprinciple the moral excellencies with which God originally created Adam. Sin\ndoes remain in the believer, not to be wholly eradicated until the return o
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f Christ.\nBut the dominion of sin is gone forever (Rom. 6:14).\nThe basis of Paulâs confidence in Rom. 6:14 is that when Jesus died we\ndied with him, and we were raised from the dead with him to newness of life\n(verses 1-11). John Murray 343 argues thoroughly and cogently that the believerâs\n343\nIn his Principles of Conduct (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 202-228. 297\nâold manâ (verse 6), the unregenerate self enslaved to sin, is dead once for all,\nnever to be resuscitated. He is not âdead, but still alive,â but simply dead.\nOur ethical struggle, then, is not a struggle to put to death our\nunregenerate self, but rather to grow as regenerate people. Murray says,\nThe definitive transformation, summed up in the putting off of the\nold man and the putting on of the new, does not remove the necessity or\nthe fact of progressive renewal. 344\nReferring to this progressive renewal, he cites Eph. 4:23, Col. 3:10, 2 Cor. 3:18,\nRom. 12:2.\nBut this progressive renewal is not represented as the putting off of the old\nman and the putting on of the new, nor is it to be conceived of as the\nprogressive crucifixion of the old man. It does mean the mortification of the\ndeeds of the flesh and of all sin in heart and life. But it is the renewal of the\nânew manâ unto the attainment of that glory for which he is destined,\nconformity to the image of Godâs Son. 345\nIf, of course, the old man is simply dead, then it is something of a mystery\nas to why there is any sin in the new man, why anything remains to be\nmortified. 346 But this is the mystery of the âalready and the not-yetâ that we\ndiscussed in Chapter 16. Our present concern, however, is to indicate the unity\nof goodness and being in the new man. Our union with Christ in his death and\nresurrection leads to a unity in our own being. The ethical struggle is anomalous.\nOur deepest desire as regenerate believers, and the Spiritâs overall purpose for\nus, is to remove the remnants of sin from our hearts, so that our character is\nconsist
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ently righteous. The goal of Godâs dealing with us is that one day it will be\nimpossible for anyone to conceive of us apart from our good character, that our\ngoodness becomes an essential and defining attribute of our being, as with God\nhimself.\nSo Paul says of believers that they are light in the Lord (Eph. 5:8; cf. Matt.\n5:14). As new covenant believers, the law is written on our hearts (Jer. 31:33,\n344\nIbid., 218.\nIbid., 219.\n346\nStrangely, Murray does not refer to the two passages in the New Testament that speak of\nmortification, Rom. 8:13 and Col. 3:5, though he does affirm the concept in the above quotes. But\nwhat is it that is mortified, if the old man is already dead? Perhaps we should recognize that\nalthough Scripture is consistent with itself, metaphors in the Bible need not be perfectly consistent\nwith other metaphors. For example, Jesus is both the foundation of the church (1 Cor. 3:11) and\nthe chief cornerstone (Eph. 2:20, where the apostles and prophets are the foundation). The point\nwe should take from the mortification language of Scripture is that there is something in us that\nhas irrevocably died with Christ, but there is something in us that remains to be put to death.\nMortification, like other aspects of the Christian life, is both already and not-yet.\n345 298\nHeb. 8:10). We have Godâs word, not only as general and special revelation, but\nas existential revelation as well (Chapter 9): Godâs word illumined by Godâs Spirit.\nIn the meantime, there is a battle to be fought. Scripture attributes\nsanctification to a work of Godâs grace that begins in our death and resurrection\nwith Christ and continues as God constantly renews us in the image of Christ\n(Eph. 4:24, Col. 3:10), creating us as his workmanship unto good works (Eph.\n2:10, Tit. 2:14). But this work of divine grace does not justify a passive attitude on\nour part. We are not to wait for the Holy Spirit to act in our lives. Rather we are to\ntake up arms against the forces of evil (Eph. 6:10-20) and to de
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: vote ourselves to\ngood works (Tit. 3:8). The Christian life is not a walk in the park. It is a war, a\nrace (1 Cor. 9:24-27). We are not to âlet go and let God,â but rather to follow\nPaulâs mandate, âwork out your own salvation with fear and trembling,â not in\nspite of the fact, but because âit is God who works in you, both to will and to work\nfor his good pleasureâ (Phil. 2:12-13).\nSometimes the sovereignty of God excludes human responsibility. For\nexample, because God alone is the creator, we cannot create ourselves.\nBecause God is absolutely sovereign in providing atonement, we cannot atone\nfor ourselves. His sovereignty excludes any attempt on our part to claim his\ndistinctive prerogatives. But most often, Godâs sovereignty engages our\nresponsibility, rather than detracting from it. So it is with sanctification. 347\nSo Cornelius Van Til, perhaps to the surprise of some of his readers, says\nthat âthe primary ethical duty for man is self-realization,â for âWhen man becomes\ntruly the king of the universe the kingdom of God is realized, and when the\nkingdom of God is realized, God is glorified.â 348 Van Til expounds the concept of\nself-realization in three subheadings: (1) âManâs will needs to become\nincreasingly spontaneous in its reactivity,â 349 (2) ââ¦manâs will needs to become\nincreasingly fixed in its self-determination,â 350 and (3) âmanâs will must increase in\nmomentum.â 351 His illustration of momentum is a growing business: as the\nbusiness increases, its managers need to increase in âalertness, stability, and\ncomprehensiveness of decision.â 352\nHere Van Til uses many bywords of the existential tradition. But he sees\nno tension between this language and his overall emphasis on the authority of\nGodâs law and the kingdom of God as manâs summum bonum. For Van Til as for\n347\nFor the general relation between divine sovereignty and human responsibility, see DG, 119-\n159. See also my comments on quietism in Chapter 12 of the present vo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lume. Quietism has\nappeared, not only in Lutheranism, but also in other Christian circles, such as the âvictorious lifeâ\nteaching of the Keswick Bible conferences. See B. B. Warfield, Perfectionism (Phila.:\nPresbyterian and Reformed, 1958).\n348\nVan Til, Christian-Theistic Ethics (NP: Den Dulk Christian Foundation, 1971), 45.\n349\nIbid.\n350\nIbid.\n351\nIbid., 46.\n352\nIbid. 299\nScripture, Godâs sovereign control and authority do not exclude, but encourage a\nbracing sense of human responsibility and a deep reflection upon human ethical\nsubjectivity. Note especially his emphasis on the freedom of the believer. Our\ntrust in God does not extinguish our spontaneity, but rather fires it up. Our will is\nindeed God-determined, but also self-determined. And redemption creates within\nus a âmomentumâ toward godliness, a momentum that comes from within, as well\nas from without.\nSo we should not follow those who think that a proper emphasis on the\nobjectivity of redemption excludes an emphasis on subjectivity. Divine grace,\natonement, and justification are certainly objectiveârealities occurring outside\nourselves, which we cannot change. But regeneration and sanctification are\nrealities also. They too are objective works of Godâs grace, but they are also\nevents that occur within us. And sanctification is a process for which we, together\nwith God, must take responsibility. Christian ethics requires consideration of both\nthe objective and the subjective, and of both divine sovereignty and human\nresponsibility. 300\nChapter 19: Motives and Virtues\nIn Chapter 3, I discussed three ânecessary and sufficient conditions of\ngood worksâ mentioned in WCF 16.7, namely right standard, right goal, and right\nmotive. Under the normative perspective (especially Chapter 9), I discussed the\nstandard, the word of God in its various forms. Under the situational perspective\n(especially Chapter 17), I discussed the goal, the glory of God, which, like the\nword of God, can be particularized in various w
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ays (human enjoyment of God,\nthe kingdom of God, the Cultural Mandate, the Great Commission). In this\nchapter, as part of the existential perspective, I shall consider the motive of\nChristian ethics.\nA motive is âan emotion, desire, physiological need, or similar impulse that\nacts as an incitement to action.â 353 Some motives are desires to accomplish\nsome specific result in the external world, as when a prosecutor says of a\ndefendant, âhis motive was revenge.â In that context, âmotiveâ becomes roughly\nsynonymous with âgoal.â We discussed goals under the situational perspective,\nbut since the desire to achieve a goal is subjective we might have carried on\nmuch of that discussion under the existential perspective. This is another\nexample of how the three perspectives overlap.\nBut in the present discussion, I will focus on the inner, subjective\ndimensions of motive, those aspects of character, desire and feeling that incite\nus to good actions or bad.\nScripture is clear in teaching that a right motive is necessary for a human\naction to be good. Both Old Testament (Deut. 6:5-6) and New (Matt. 5:8, 28,\n6:21, 12:34-35, 15:8, 18-19, 22:37, Rom. 6:17, 10:9-10, etc.) emphasize that true\nobedience to God is from the heart. As we have seen, God intends for his law to\nbe written, not only on stone and paper, but also on the human heart (Jer. 31:33,\nHeb. 8:10). The heart is the center of human existence, the whole person as God\nsees him, the true self when all its masks are removed. So the heart is the motive\nof motives, the fundamental disposition of every person. The heart is the source\nof our most fundamental commitment, either to the service of God or to an idol.\nSo it governs our actions (Matt. 15:19), words (Matt. 12:34), and thoughts (Matt.\n9:4, 15:19).\nScripture strongly opposes hypocrisy, apparently good deeds done by\npeople whose hearts are directed against God (Isa. 29:13-14, Matt. 15:8-9).\nJesus sees this especially in the Pharisees, who did their good works to be seen\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: by other people (Matt. 6:1-8, 23:5). External goodness is not enough, says\n353\nThe American Heritage College Dictionary, Third Edition (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2000),\n890. 301\nJesus. Not only the outside, but the inside of the cup must be clean (Matt. 23:25-\n26).\nSo the apostle Paul tells us that love is necessary for any good work (1\nCor. 13), and the author of Hebrews (11:6) says that âwithout faith, it is\nimpossible to please [God].â WCF 16.7 speaks of faith as that which purifies the\nheart, without mentioning any other motive to purity, evidently because faith is\nthe sole instrument of justification. But Scripture, concerned not only with initial\njustification, but also with the continuing process of sanctification, mentions other\nmotives as well, most notably love.\nIf love and faith are motives of good works, there is evidently a significant\noverlap between motives and virtues. That should not surprise us. Virtues, in\nScripture, are the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23) applied to the heart (Eph. 6:6,\nmany other passages). If the Spirit applies love, for example, to the heart of the\nbeliever, that believer becomes a loving person. He displays love in his behavior.\nOur behavior is always governed, motivated, by the character of our heart (Matt.\n12:35). So the qualities of the regenerate character are motives, and our motives\nare virtues. This is to say that in a Christian view of things virtues never lie\ndormant. They are active, dynamic. They seek expression. They motivate.\nMotives are virtues and virtues are motives.\nA Christian Virtue Ethic\nSo the existential perspective of Christian ethics is not only a Christian\ncounterpart of secular existential ethics. It is also a Christian virtue ethic. Recall\nin Chapter 3 the distinction between command ethics, narrative ethics, and virtue\nethics. I maintain that a complete Christian ethic contains all three of these, and\nthat each includes the others perspectivally. I have presented a command ethic\nunder the normative perspec
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tive, a narrative ethic under the situational. Now we\nshould consider under the existential perspective what an ethic of virtue might\nmean in a covenantal Christian setting.\nFrom what we have seen earlier, it is possible to teach ethics in several\nways. In a command ethic, one sets forth the requirements of Godâs word and\nseeks to apply those to all areas of human life. In a narrative ethic, we tell the\nstory of Godâs people, from creation, through the incarnation, atonement,\nresurrection, ascension of Jesus, to the present day as we anticipate the\neschaton. There is no inconsistency between these two approaches, and they\nreinforce one another substantially. The commands of God must be applied to\nthe whole situation of mankind, that situation described in the narrative. The 302\nnarrative includes events in which God gives commands to us, and it declares to\nus the resources that God has given us by grace to keep those commands. 354\nA Christian virtue ethic will focus on a description of the regenerate heart.\nIt will describe the biblical virtues and show how they motivate us to do good\nworks. It will give examples of people who are loving, faithful, self-controlled, and\nso on. In doing so, of course, it will also expound Godâs commands, for the\nvirtues are what God requires of us. And it will expound the Christian narrative,\nfor that story tells us what God has done to plant such virtues in our hearts.\nUltimately, then, a Christian virtue ethic will differ from the other two only in\nemphasis, in perspective. But that perspective is very important. It provides a\nwindow into the soul.\nIn this book, my main discussion of ethical issues will be an exposition of\nthe Ten Commandments, thus a command approach. This is in line with the\nReformed tradition, which typically expounds Christian ethics in terms of the law\nof God. But it is important for us to know that this is not the only biblical option. A\ncommand ethic operates in terms of the normative perspective, but it is also\npossible to
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: teach ethics focusing on the situational (narrative ethics) and\nexistential (virtue ethics) perspectives. I would hope that authors other than me\nwill take up this challenge: to write genuinely Reformed ethical treatises from\nsituational and existential perspectives.\nWhat follows will not be a complete virtue ethic or anything close to it. But\nit will attempt to list and describe some of the more important biblical virtues,\nvirtues which, of course, motivate us to good works.\nFaith\nThe WLC, 72, defines saving or justifying faith as follows: âJustifying faith\nis a saving grace, wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit and word of God,\nwhereby he, being convinced of his sin and misery, and of the disability in himself\nand all other creatures to recover him out of his lost condition, not only assenteth\nto the truth of the promise of the gospel, but receiveth and resteth upon Christ\nand his righteousness, therein held forth, for pardon of sin, and for the accepting\nand accounting of his person righteous in the sight of God for salvation.â\n354\nâNarrative ethicsâ in recent theology sometimes means an ethic without commands, an ethic in\nwhich we tell the story only to encourage ethical action and to suggest ethical possibilities or\nâtrajectories,â but not to define our ethical responsibilities. But that is to eviscerate the narrative of\nScripture. The narrative as Scripture presents it is a narrative of God making demands on us, as\nwell as making and fulfilling promises. To base ethics on a narrative devoid of revealed\ncommands leaves us with no ethical standards except those derived from would-be autonomous\nhuman thought. 303\nScripture emphasizes faith 355 in two contexts: as the way in which we\ninitially receive Godâs saving grace, and as a mentality that pervades the\nChristian life. Initial saving faith is the âalone instrument of justification.â 356 It is not\nthe basis or ground of salvation; Christâs atonement is the only basis or ground.\nNor is faith the effici
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ent cause of salvation; that can only be the grace of God.\nRather, we are âjustified by faith aloneâ in an âinstrumentalâ sense. Faith is the\ninstrument, or means, by which we receive the grace of God in Christ.\nThere is nothing in our faith that deserves, or merits salvation. We should\nnot think that faith is the one work we can perform to earn Godâs favor. None of\nour works deserve that. Even our faith is defiled, weak, contaminated by sinful\nimpulses. In that respect, faith is no different from any other work we perform.\nWhy, then, does Scripture single out faith from among all our other works so that\nwe are saved by faith, rather than by love or by longsuffering? Because the\nnature of faith is to receive grace. What saves is not faith itself, but what faith\nreceives.\nHow does saving faith receive the grace of God? By believing Godâs\npromise. 357 Believe is the verb-form of the noun faith. Concerning Abraham, Paul\nsays, âNo distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew\nstrong in his faith as he gave glory to God, 21 fully convinced that God was able\nto do what he had promisedâ (Rom. 4:20-21). Paul adds, âThat is why his faith\nwas counted to him as righteousnessâ (22), and he presents such faith as a\nmodel of saving faith in Christ (24-25).\nThe example of Abraham connects the two phases of faith that I\nmentioned in the first paragraph: initial saving faith and faith as a mentality that\npervades the Christian life. Paulâs concern in Rom. 4 is the doctrine of\njustification by faith. But Abrahamâs faith did not occur only at the beginning of his\nrelationship with God. It continued through his whole life. Rom. 4 describes\nincidents that occurred long after he first responded to Godâs call in Gen. 12:1-4.\nSo Heb. 11 lists Abraham among the many Old Testament saints who lived by\nfaith. Like them, he trusted Godâs promise, despite the fact that it was unfulfilled\n355\nHere I enumerate Scriptureâs most theologically significant uses of faith a
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nd the corresponding\nverb believe. But there are other uses of these terms, uses that do not imply the salvation of the\none who believes. For example, in John 8:31-59, Jesus addresses some Jews who are said to\nhave âbelieved in himâ (verse 31). The later conversation reveals, however, that these are in fact\nopposed to him. Here, belief or faith is a kind of initial and superficial commitment, not based on\nany inward change.\n356\nWCF 11.2.\n357\nFollowing the main part of the Reformed tradition, I identify saving faith-belief with trust, not\nmerely with assent to propositions. See the relation between these in the definition given earlier\nfrom the WLC. For the relationship between trust and assent to propositions, see DKG, 54-57. To\nsummarize: it is not entirely wrong to identify faith with propositional assent, as long as that\nassent is strong enough to govern our behavior and attitudes. But it is far less confusing to say\nthat faith is trust in Christ through his word. In our usual way of speaking, trust includes assent\nand more: covenant friendship, reliance, and a disposition to obey. 304\nthrough his earthly life. He looked toward âa better country, that is, a heavenly\noneâ (Heb. 11:16).\nSo Paul contrasts living by faith with living by sight (2 Cor. 5:7; cf. Mark\n10:52). Many of Godâs promises remain unfulfilled. We cannot verify them by our\nexperience. But we look forward to them, because we trust Godâs word above all\nother sources of authority, even above our own eyes. So âfaith is the assurance\nof things hoped for, the conviction of things not seenâ (Heb. 11:1). We trust in\nGod, who made the world from no visible source (verse 3). With Moses, we see\nhim âwho is invisibleâ (27), so the visible challenges to our faith cannot prevail.\nThe world says that seeing is believing. Jesus says, âDid I not tell you that if you\nbelieved you would see the glory of God?â (John 11:40)\nSo faith, both in its initial and later expressions, is trusting Godâs promise\nabove any
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: other considerations.\nThat trust is shown through our works. To trust another person is not\nmerely to commend his words, but to act on them. So James says, âBut someone\nwill say, âYou have faith and I have works.â Show me your faith apart from your\nworks, and I will show you my faith by my worksâ (James 2:18). This is the\ncontext of his later statement, âYou see that a person is justified by works and not\nby faith aloneâ (verse 24). James is not contradicting Paul statements that we are\njustified apart from works (Rom. 3:27, 4:2, 6, 9:11, 32, 11:6, Gal. 2:16, 3:5, 10,\netc.). He is saying that saving faith is necessarily a living, working faith. Faith\njustifies, not because it brings about good works, but because it is the means of\nreceiving Godâs grace. Yet it is not genuine unless it motivates good works. The\nWestminster Confession (11.2) tells us, âFaith, thus receiving and resting on\nChrist and his righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification: yet is it not\nalone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving\ngraces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love.â\nThat fact should not surprise us, and we should not regard it as some kind\nof theological puzzle. The grace that faith receives is a grace that leads to good\nworks. Scripture emphasizes this:\nFor by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not\nyour own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one\nmay boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for\ngood works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in\nthem. (Eph. 2:8-10)\nâ¦he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness,\nbut according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and\nrenewal of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us richly through\nJesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that being justified by his grace we might\nbecome heirs according to the hope of eternal life. 8 The saying is 305\ntrustworthy, and I want you to insist on these t
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hings, so that those who\nhave believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works.\nThese things are excellent and profitable for people. (Tit. 3:5-8, cf. 2:14)\nSo in Gal. 5:6, Paul speaks of âfaith working through love.â God saves us by\ngrace apart from works; but that grace produces works, for that is Godâs intent,\nhis reason for saving us. Our faith receives this grace and through it we begin to\ndo good works, as God has planned.\nEvangelicals are sometimes inclined to think of faith as an event that takes\nplace in the mind, perhaps the experience of saying inaudibly âYes, Lord, I\nbelieve.â But when we say phrases like that in our heads, we may sometimes be\ndeceiving ourselves. It is possible to say such phrases to ourselves as mere\nforms, without any intention of changing our behavior. In those cases, these\nwords are not expressions of faith; much less can we identify them with faith.\nâYes, Lord, I believeâ may be an expression of true faith, or it might not be.\nWe should identify faith, not with that phrase itself, but with the motive that\nunderlies that phrase, when the phrase is uttered sincerely. 358 It is misleading,\nthen, to say that faith is a âmental act,â 359 as much as it is misleading to call it a\nphysical act (perhaps the act of coming forward in response to an altar call). It is\nrather a motivation underlying both mental and physical acts, when those are\ndone to the glory of God. Faith can be seen equally, then, in faithful thoughts,\nwords, or deeds. This analysis helps us to see more clearly both the distinction\nbetween faith and our other actions and the close relation between these. They\nare not identical, for the motivation of an act is not identical to the act. But, as\nJames teaches us, our only means of recognizing faith in ourselves and others is\nthrough good works. Or, as Jesus says of false teachers, âyou will recognize\nthem through their fruitsâ (Matt. 7:16).\nScripture tells us that faith is both necessary and sufficient for go
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: od works.\nIt is necessary, because âwithout faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever\nwould draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those\nwho seek himâ (Heb. 11:6), and because âwhatever does not proceed from faith\nis sinâ (Rom. 14:23). It is sufficient, because when we believe God, as did\nAbraham, God credits it to us for righteousness (Gen. 15:6). As Jesus said, âThis\n358\nNotice that I am not defining faith as a motive. My definition of faith is that of the WLC, cited\nearlier. I am only trying to indicate how faith is related to good works. Since saving faith receives\nand rests on Christ, it motivates us to live as Jesus does.\n359\nHere I take issue with the position of Gordon Clark, set forth in his Religion, Reason, and\nRevelation (Philadelphia: P&R, 1961), 94-100. If one wishes to divide the human being\nexhaustively into two parts, mental and physical, then faith, not being a physical action, would\nhave to be in the mental category. But it is very different from those episodic experiences we\nusually call âmental acts,â experiences of visualizing things to ourselves, talking to ourselves,\nsolving problems, etc. It rather seems that motivations, like faith, require another category in\naddition to the physical and the mental. But I am disinclined toward such categorizations in\ngeneral (see DKG, 319-346, and in the following chapter of this volume). 306\nis the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sentâ (John 6:29). When\nour works (thoughts, words, and deeds) are true expressions of faith, they cannot\nbe anything other than good and right.\nSo in a sense it is true to say âbelieve God and do as you please.â But as\nwe have seen, to believe God is always to believe his word, and that includes his\nlaw. So the existential perspective never permits us to transgress the normative.\nBut the existential perspective gives us a different image of the Christian\nlife from the others. We are not only scribes, poring over Godâs statutes\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (normative) and pilgrims, walking toward a goal (situational), but also children,\ntrusting their heavenly Father, knowing that he will prove true though everyone\nelse is a liar (Rom. 3:4). So Scripture regularly commends those who believe,\nwho have faith, even amid temptations to disbelieve (Matt. 8:10, 9:2, 22, 17:20,\n21:22, Rom. 4:20-21, Heb. 11). The Christian life is a wonderful adventure, as\nwe live by Godâs promises, even when Satan tempts us to doubt and fear.\nRepentance\nRepentance is not just believing that one is a sinner, or feeling sorry for\noneâs sins, or even hating them. 360 It is the very act of turning away from them.\nTo turn from sin is to turn to goodness. So there is a very close relationship\nbetween repentance and faith. âRepentance unto lifeâ in Acts 11:18 is virtually a\nsynonym of faith. And in the WCF, 15.3, the relationship between repentance\nand pardon (part of justification) is the same as that between faith and\njustification:\nAlthough repentance be not to be rested in, as any satisfaction for sin, or\nany cause of the pardon thereof, which is the act of God's free grace in\nChrist; yet it is of such necessity to all sinners, that none may expect\npardon without it.\nRepentance and faith are opposite sides of a coin. You canât have the one\nwithout the other. Faith is turning to Christ, and repentance is turning away from\nsin. These two turnings are the same motion. You canât turn toward Christ\nwithout turning away from sin, and vice versa.\nSo as faith is a motive of good works, so is repentance. When the\nPharisees and Sadducees came for Johnâs baptism, the Baptist exhorted them to\nâbear fruit in keeping with repentanceâ (Matt. 3:8). If repentance is true\n360\nNor is it the Roman Catholic concept of penance, which includes the idea that one may\npartially pay God back for transgressions by making sacrifices or engaging in various devotional\nexercises. 307\nrepentance, it issues in good deeds. Paul presented the same challenge to\nGentile converts (A
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: cts 26:20). Compare 2 Tim. 2:25-26, Rev. 2:5.\nSo as the Christian life is a life of faith, it is also a life of repentance. As we\njourney ahead by trusting in Godâs promises, so we look back from time to time,\nnoting how we have offended God and others, and asking forgiveness. All\nChristians confess in at least a theoretical way that repentance is important. We\nbelieve that all are sinners. Practically, however, we find it difficult to admit, to\nothers, ourselves, and God, that we have personally done wrong and need to\nchange. When someone criticizes our behavior, our first instinct is, too often, to\ndefend ourselves. Although we confess in general terms that we have sinned, we\ndonât want anyone to think that we have sinned in any specific way. That attitude\nis even more prominent among people in authority. For them, the stakes are\nhigher. For a prominent person, to admit wrong is to endanger the status that one\nmay have carefully nurtured for a long time.\nSo when a Christian leader freely admits wrong and asks forgiveness,\nmany of us find that passing strange, but, in the long run, impressive. It is\nimpressive, not only because of its rarity, but also because of its profoundly\nbiblical character. It marks people who aim to lead as servants, rather than as\nmasters (Matt. 20:25-28). It also enhances the leaderâs ability to deal with the\nsins of others, as Paul says in Gal. 6:1, âBrothers, if anyone is caught in any\ntransgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness.\nKeep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted.â 361\nHope\nHaving looked at faith, and repentance as an aspect of faith, we now look\nat the other two of the three âtheological virtuesâ I mentioned in Chapter 3 and\nthat occur together frequently in the New Testament. There I suggested that\nfaith, hope, and love correspond to the three lordship attributes: faith focusing on\nthe authority of Godâs word, hope on his control, his ability to bring about his\npurposes in the future, and
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: love on his intimate presence with us. Each of these\ninvolve the other two; neither can be practiced without the others.\nHope is faith directed toward the future aspect of salvation, the ânot-yet.â\nLike faith, it is firm and sure, not tentative and wishful as our English usage often\nsuggests. It is âa sure and steadfast anchor of the soulâ (Heb. 6:19, cf. Rom. 5:5)\nbased, like faith, on the revelation of God.\n361\nIn this section I have benefited greatly from the ministry of C. John Miller and his writings,\nparticularly Repentance and Twentieth-Century Man (Fort Washington,. PA: Christian Literature\nCrusade, 1980, 1998). 308\nAs such, hope, like faith, is a motive to good works. Our hope makes us\nbold (2 Cor. 3:12). The hope of salvation is the helmet that keeps us from the\nattacks of Satan, in 1 Thess. 5:8. In Col. 1:5, hope motivates faith and love!\nThese passages review for us the teaching we considered in Chapter16, that\nGodâs promises for the future motivate our behavior today. If we know that a\nwonderful reward awaits us, then we will let all our decisions be governed by that\nhope.\nLove\nIn Chapter 12, I mentioned that love is the center of biblical ethics. We\nsaw there that the term love expresses the fundamental loyalty of the vassal to\nthe Lord in a covenant. So love should be defined triperspectivally as allegiance\n(normative), as well as action (situational) and affection (existential). In that\nchapter my main concern was to show the relation of love to law. My conclusion\nwas that there is no conflict between these. The command of love requires\nobedience to God, though it also serves as a âprovocative characterizationâ of the\nlaw. We also considered, under the heading of âmoral heroism,â the radicalism of\nlove, that it goes beyond the surface meaning of the law to its depth, leading to\nextreme forms of obedience. The model is the love of Christ, giving himself in\ndeath for his people, setting us a standard of love far beyond that we normally\nset for ourselves
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (John 13:34-35).\nHere I wish to consider various characteristics of love as a motive of good\nworks. Paul in 1 Cor. 13:1-3 makes clear that no human work (including faith!)\ncan be good unless it is motivated by love:\nIf I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I\nam a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers,\nand understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so\nas to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away\nall I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I\ngain nothing.\nWithout love, any attempt to do good will be a failure. Here are certain qualities of\nlove that motivate good works:\n1. Covenant Loyalty\nAs I indicated in Chapter 12, the fundamental demand of a suzerainty\ntreaty is love, in the sense of exclusive loyalty. The vassal is not to make treaties\nwith any king other than his covenant lord. The same is true in the covenant 309\nbetween Yahweh and Israel. Notice how the term love is used in the great\nconfession of the Mosaic Covenant, the shema:\nHear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 You shall\nlove the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with\nall your might. (Deut. 6:4-5)\nIsraelâs love for Yahweh is one that allows no competition, that tolerates no rivals.\nSo in the covenant document called the Decalogue, the first commandment is\nâYou shall have no other gods before meâ (Ex. 20:3). This first commandment is,\nin effect, a law of love. In its exclusiveness, this love is closely parallel to marital\nlove, so that in Scripture adultery and idolatry are symbols of one another.\nIn the New Testament as well, love is covenant loyalty, to Christ as lord.\nHe has loved us in an exclusive way, by giving his life for his sheep (John 10:15).\nHe gives that love to us (John 17:26), and we return that love to him, and to one\nanother as members of his body (1 John 4:19-21). Our love to Jesus and to one\nanother marks us as distinct
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: from those outside the covenant (John 13:34-35).\nHere we find prominently that element of love I earlier called âallegiance.â\nGod has chosen us, and we have chosen to be his servants, together with the\nbody of his people. Love is being faithful to our covenant vows. Johan Douma\nsays,\nWe understand more clearly exactly what love toward God really is\nwhen we see love is a choice. Because only Yahweh is God, Israel and\nwe must choose for Him. To love means to stick with your choice. 362\nDouma also draws out well the parallel with marriage:\nWhen a marriage gets into trouble, the only path to resolution is the choice\nto love. The emotional element in that love may be wholly or partially\nabsent, but faithfulness must come out. Concretely, then, love means that\nhusband and wife form no relationships with third parties, but maintain the\nchoice they made for each other with their wedding vows. The same is\ntrue with our relationship with the Lord. 363\nBoth in divine and human covenants, loyalty is not only a negative\nrequirement, forbidding rival alliances, but also a positive virtue, motivating us to\nserve the one to whom we are committed. So allegiance leads to action. In the\nDecalogue, the first commandment motivates the remaining nine, and in the New\nTestament, Jesus tells his disciples that if they love him, they will keep his\ncommandments (John 14:15, etc.).\n362\n363\nDouma, The Ten Commandments (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1996), 21.\nIbid. 310\n2. Gratefulness\nIn the suzerainty-treaty structure of the covenant document (see Chapter\n3), the love command follows the historical prologue, which sets out the gracious\ndeeds of the Great King. So in the Decalogue, the first commandment, the\nrequirement of exclusive love, follows the statement of Yahwehâs deliverance: âI\nam the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the\nhouse of slaveryâ (Ex. 20:2). Here love is Israelâs grateful response to\nredemption.\nSimilarly, in the New Testament, we love because God first loved
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: us in\nChrist (1 John 4:7-21), and we love as he loved us (John 13:34-35). So the\nHeidelberg Catechism treats the Decalogue under the category of âgratitudeâ in\nits general outline of guilt, grace, and gratitude:\nQ2: How many things are necessary for you to know, that in this\ncomfort you may live and die happily?\nA2: Three things: First, the greatness of my sin and misery.\nSecond, how I am redeemed from all my sins and misery. Third, how I am\nto be thankful to God for such redemption.\nIt is not that we can pay God back for salvation, or even try to pay back a small\nportion. Godâs gift of salvation is too large for us to even begin to measure (Eph.\n3:18-19). Nevertheless, the only appropriate attitude for those bought with so\ngreat a price is thankfulness (Luke 17:12-19). And thankfulness, like loyalty, is\nnot only a feeling, but a disposition toward actions that express that thankfulness.\nThose who are thankful to God will not bow to idols, take his name in vain, violate\nhis day, dishonor their parents, and so on.\nGratefulness and allegiance, therefore, are inseparable. But gratefulness\nadds to allegiance a further perspective on our love. Even on the human level,\nwhen someone gives us a large gift, we feel an obligation to please him.\nIngratitude, though widely practiced, is universally despised. If our salvation is\nthe greatest gift anyone has ever given, the greatest gift imaginable, then how\ncan we do anything other than give ourselves wholeheartedly to our covenant\nLord? How can we be other than deeply wounded at the very thought of\nbetraying him?\n3. Comprehensive Reorientation of Life 311\nThe grateful allegiance we owe to God is comprehensive. That is, it\nreorients every aspect of life. 364 Earlier we saw in Deut. 6:4-5 the command to\nlove God with heart, soul, and might. Jesus replaces âmightâ with âmindâ in Matt.\n22:37, and he adds mind to might in Mark 12:30 and Luke 10:27. Certainly Jesus\nis not distorting the meaning of Deut. 6:4-5. Love with the mind is impli
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: cit in that\npassage, the purpose of which is not to limit our love to certain specific human\nfaculties, but to expand it to every area of life, centered in the heart. Similarly, we\nhave seen the apostle Paul exhorting us, âwhether you eat or drink, or whatever\nyou do, do all to the glory of Godâ (1 Cor. 10:31). Note also the\ncomprehensiveness of love as a way of life in 1 Cor. 13, its necessity for all other\nhuman moral acts (verses 1-3), and its connection with other moral virtues:\n4\nLove is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant 5\nor rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it\ndoes not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. 7 Love bears all\nthings, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. (1 Cor.\n13:4-7)\nSo covenant love reorients everything we say, do-- and feel. People have\nsometimes said that the love described in Deuteronomy is a kind of political\nallegiance, which does not gain any emotional content until later in Israelâs\nhistory, as in Hoseaâs love for his unfaithful wife. Certainly covenant love is\nallegiance, and I donât object to the term political. But opposition between the\npolitical and the emotional fails to account for the comprehensive language of\nDeut. 6:4-5 and the nature of our âpoliticalâ allegiance to Yahweh. The covenant\nis a political relationship, at least metaphorically, but a political relationship of a\nunique kind. If our exclusive love for Yahweh the lord permeates all of our\nexistence from the heart, as in Deut. 6, it certainly permeates all of life: our\nemotions, as our intellect and will. The heart governs all aspects of human life.\nAnd if God is the greatest allegiance of our heart, he is our greatest passion as\nwell. Our greatest desire is to serve him. One cannot love another\nwholeheartedly while remaining emotionally cool toward him.\nSo it shouldnât surprise us when in Scripture Godâs love for us takes on a\npassionate character (Ezek. 16),
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: with marital and even sexual imagery. Similarly,\nnote fatherly and maternal figures of Godâs compassion in Ps. 103:13, Isa. 49:15,\n66:13, Hos. 11:3. Our allegiance to God should be equally passionate. A faithful\nheart creates faithful emotions. So, as I indicated earlier, biblical love is\nallegiance, action, and affection, existing together as a perspectival whole.\n4. Imitation of Godâs Atoning Grace\n364\nRecall the discussion of the comprehensiveness of Scripture in Chapter 10. 312\nWe saw in Chapter 9 that imitation of God is the fundamental principle of\nChristian ethics. We saw above how our love should image Godâs, in its depth,\ncomprehensiveness, and passion.\nIn the history of redemption, God reveals himself particularly as the\ngracious God, the one who delivers those who have no claim on his mercy, even\nat the price of the death of his beloved Son. The love Scripture commands is a\nlove that images Godâs love, specifically his redemptive love. As he has given\nIsrael rest in redeeming them from Egypt, so they should give rest to others\n(Deut. 5:15). As he has forgiven us, we should forgive others (Matt. 6:12, 14-15,\n18:21-35). And, more generally, as he has loved us, so we should love others\n(John 13:34-35, 1 John 4:7-21).\nWe might think that we can imitate Jesus in many ways, but not in his\natoning love. After all, none of us can bring about the salvation of others by\ngiving our lives. But remarkably, in the New Testament, it is the atonement that is\nthe main point of comparison between the love of Christ and the love of the\nChristian. The love of God that we are to imitate is most fully displayed in the\natonement, according to John 3:16, 15:13, Rom. 5:8, 8:39 (in context), Eph. 2:4-\n5, 2 Thess. 2:16, 1 John 3:16, 4:9-10, Rev. 1:5. Cf. Mark 10:45, 1 Pet. 2:18-25,\nPhil. 2:1-11.\nGodâs love to us in the atonement is beyond measure (Eph. 3:18-19), in\nthe depth of Jesusâ suffering, including his estrangement from his Father, in the\ngreatness of the blessing he bought for us
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: , and also in our total lack of fitness for\nthis blessing. As recipients of Godâs grace, we are supremely unattractive to him.\nWe are the tax collectors and sinners (Matt. 9:9-13), the âpoor and crippled and\nblind and lameâ (Luke 14:21), those âstill sinnersâ (Rom. 5:8) when Jesus came\nto die for us.\nTruly, no sacrifice of ours can atone for the sins of someone else. But\nthese passages make abundantly clear that our obligation is nothing less than to\nlay down our lives for one another, as Jesus did for us. Moral heroism, extreme\nself-sacrifice, as we discussed it in Chapter 12, is the heart of the Christianâs\nethical obligation.\nFor examples, revisit the discussions in Chapter 12 of the heroism of\nDavidâs mighty men and of the poor widow who gave everything she had to the\ntemple treasury. Paul generalizes in Phil. 2: to love in imitation of Christ is to put\nthe interests of others ahead of our own: â 3 Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but\nin humility count others more significant than yourselves. 4 Let each of you look\nnot only to his own interests, but also to the interests of othersâ (verses 3-4). It is\nremarkable that he produces one of the richest Christological passages in 313\nScripture in order to persuade people in the church to set aside their rivalries\n(perhaps especially Euodia and Syntyche, named specifically in 4:2). 365\nWhen we meditate on the cross, indeed our rivalries with Christians of\nother traditions, denominations, parties, usually seem rather trivial. Jesus died for\nus; can we not just bend a little to accommodate a brother or sister? The\ndemands of love upon us seem so little compared to what love demanded of him.\nAnd, when we consider how unattractive we were in Godâs eyes prior to\nthe atonement, his love should move us especially to love the unlovely,\nespecially those who donât seem to merit the compassion of the world: the poor,\nthe weak, the disabled, hated minorities, and, least, but not least, the unborn.\n5. Imitation of Godâs Commo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n Grace: Loving Our Enemies\nâCommon grace,â defined as Godâs kindness to the nonelect, is something\nof a misnomer, since the word âgraceâ in English translations of Scripture almost\nalways has a redemptive meaning. Yet it is clear that Godâs love extends to the\nunregenerate and even to the nonelect. 366 In Matt. 5:43-48, Jesus says that God\nloves his enemies and gives them good gifts. Godâs enemies certainly include the\nunregenerate and the nonelect. And Jesus presents this common-grace love as\nan example to us:\nYou have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate\nyour enemy.' 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those\nwho persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in\nheaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends\nrain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you,\nwhat reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47\nAnd if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others?\nDo not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect,\nas your heavenly Father is perfect.\nThis teaching is not unique to the New Testament. In Ex. 23:4, God tells us to\nreturn our enemyâs ox or donkey if we find it wandering away. Enmity with\nsomeone else, for whatever cause, should not keep us from showing kindness to\nhim.\nThe parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:29-37), following Jesusâ\naffirmation of love as the heart of the law, shows that we are to offer help to\n365\nThis is another illustration of my general thesis (see Chapter 16) that the redemptive-historical\nemphasis of Scripture is not opposed to ethical teaching, but is given for the purpose of ethical\napplication, as is all Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16-17).\n366\nFor a systematic discussion of the doctrine of common grace, see DG, 429-437. 314\npeople without putting them to a religious test. In Gal. 6:10, Paul says, âSo then,\nas we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and esp
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ecially to those who\nare of the household of faith.â Especially, he says, not exclusively. The\nhousehold of faith, the church as our extended family, has first claim on our\nresources. But our hearts should be generous enough to help those outside the\nfellowship as God gives us opportunity.\nJesusâ teaching on the love of enemies faces a major problem: the\nimprecatory Psalms, and other imprecatory passages in Scripture. In\nimprecation, one calls down Godâs judgments on others. Some of these\npassages even commend hatred of the wicked, as Psm. 119:113, 139:21-22. It\nwould seem that such passages are incompatible with the Jesusâ teaching that\nwe should love our enemies.\nBut imprecations are found in the New Testament as well as the Old, on\nthe lips of Christ and the apostles as well as the Psalmists. See Matt. 23:13-39,\nGal. 1:8-9, Rev. 6:10, 18:20. On the other hand, as we have seen, the biblical\nethic of love is also found in both Testaments. Scripture always proscribes\npersonal vengeance 367 and calls us to love our enemies: Ex. 23:4-5, Lev. 19:17-\n18, Ps. 7:4-5, Prov. 20:22. So the problem we have in reconciling these two\nbiblical themes cannot be met by some view of dispensational change.\nJesus did refuse to exercise divine vengeance during his earthly life,\nbecause he came not to judge the world, but to save. Thus he rebuked his\ndisciples who wanted to call down fire from heaven upon a city that rejected them\n(Luke 9:54-55), but he did promise judgment on unbelieving cities in the last day\n(Matt. 11:20-24). In these passages we learn that Jesus' first advent was not to\nbring vengeance, but that ultimate vengeance is postponed until his return (which\nwill be vengeful, II Thess. 1:6-10). But these facts in themselves neither authorize\nnor forbid the use of imprecatory prayers today.\nNor is it a sufficient solution to say that the imprecatory Psalms are\nprayers of Christ himself through his people. 368 While this is true in a sense, that\nmerely raises the same question (the love/
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: justice relation) again with respect\nto Christ's own motives, and it renders problematic the use of such sentiments in\nfree prayer.\nMeredith G. Kline 369 suggests that imprecatory Psalms represent an\nâintrusionâ of the end-times into the present. In the final judgment, there will be no\nmore common grace, but only eternal punishment, for the wicked. In that day, we\n367\nOf course, the state is given the power to carry out divine vengeance in limited ways. See\nRom 13 and our later discussion of the Fifth Commandment.\n368\nAs in James E. Adams, War Psalms of the Prince of Peace (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1991). There\nare, however, a number of useful observations in this book.\n369\nIn âThe Intrusion and the Decalogue,â Westminster Theological Journal 16 (1953-54), 1-22,\nreprinted in Klineâs The Structure of Biblical Authority (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 154-171. 315\nwill not be called to love our enemies, for those will be manifested as Godâs\neternal enemies, subject only to death. In imprecatory Psalms, then, the speaker\ncalls down upon his enemies Godâs final judgment.\nKline says that we may never call down Godâs wrath on people on our own\ninitiative: the intrusion is exclusively within Godâs prerogative. The imprecations\nare divinely inspired. In the imprecatory Psalms, God knows that Davidâs\nenemies are nonelect, eternally lost, so he inspires David to pronounce divine\njudgment upon them. But to make this view consistent, we should also conclude\nthat we should not pray or sing the imprecatory Psalms, or at least we should not\napply their sentiments to anyone other than the immediate enemies David had in\nmind. And we should not compose other songs like them. Yet it seems obvious to\nmost readers of Scripture that the Book of Psalms is given for our present\nliturgical and devotional use, that they should be applied to analogous situations\nin our own experience, and that they serve as a model for our prayers and\nworship songs.\nImprecation does belong to the end-time, as an
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: invocation of final\njudgment. Our own time is not that final time. But as we have seen in Chapter 16,\nours is a time in which the last days have begun. Godâs final dealing with\nmankind is, as of now, already as well as not-yet. That Scripture seems\nsometimes to encourage, sometimes to discourage, imprecation expresses the\ntension between the fulfilled and the unfulfilled aspects of Godâs plan. The\nproblem is that, contrary to Kline, Scripture does not clearly tell us when to use\nimprecations and when not to. There is nothing in Scripture that says specifically\nthat we may pray imprecatory prayers only when they are divinely inspired, and\nonly when we are not applying them to anyone in our own time.\nI was helped by J. A. Motyer, 370 who reminds us of the larger biblical\npattern, \"vengeance is mine, says the Lord.\" The imprecatory Psalms, he points\nout, are prayers, calling upon God to remedy those injustices which neither we as\nindividuals, nor the state, are competent to remedy. They do not seek personal\nvengeance; rather they leave vengeance to God, as God has demanded.\nImprecatory prayers are like all prayers in that there is always the\nqualification implicit in the phrases \"thy will be done\" or \"in Jesus' name.\" When\nwe ask for things, we should do it with the realization that our ultimate desire is\nGod's glory. If God will be glorified in giving us our request, then we thank him; if\nhe is more glorified in denying our request, our prayer has not thereby become\nuseless; for all prayer is a recommitment to God's purpose, his kingdom. The\nLord's Prayer beautifully exemplifies this spirit.\nNow sometimes we are persuaded that someone is guilty of a great\ninjustice that we are not able to deal with in our own strength. As in Biblical\nimprecations, the believer is to share this concern with God. In doing so, he must\n370\nIn Walter Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 554. 316\nshare God's evaluation of injustice: that \"because of these thing
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s God's\nwrath comes upon the sons of disobedience\" (Eph. 5:6). And so he calls for\ndivine vengeance to be exercised: not by himself, but by God.\nCan we love an enemy and still call for God's wrath against him? Is a\ndesire for divine judgment consistent with a desire for our enemy's salvation?\nThe psychology of it is difficult, to be sure. But consider this example: when Idi\nAmin went abroad in Uganda, killing Christians right and left simply to satisfy his\npersonal hatred, many Christians prayed that God would bring vengeance upon\nhim. Such vengeance, of course, does not, either in the Psalms or in our\nexample, necessarily entail ultimate damnation. The prayer is primarily for a\nhistorical judgment. Though historical judgment is not entirely divorced in the\nbiblical mind from ultimate damnation, the two are not inseparably conjoined\neither.\nBut what if God had converted Amin, instead of judging him? Would those\nChristians have been disappointed? Surely not; they would have glorified God for\nanswering their prayer beyond their wildest expectations. Answering their\nprayer? Certainly. (1) In one sense, such a conversion would have precisely\nbrought vengeance against this man, a vengeance visited by God's grace upon\nChrist in his atoning sacrifice. (2) Their prayer would have been answered in that\nAmin the persecutor would have received the sharpest divine rebuke (cf. \"Saul,\nwhy do you persecute me?\") and a historical defeat for his murderous regime. (3)\nTheir prayer would have been answered in that their deepest desire was\nthe glory of God.\nShould the Christians, then, have prayed for his salvation rather than his\njudgment? No. Prayer is often somewhat immediate, and rightly so. Of course,\nChristians sometimes get into a mood where they start praying for all sorts of\nwild things: the conversion of people like Hitler, the conversion of all the\nmembers of the US Congress, the coming of Christ at 6 p.m. tonight, and so on. I\ndo not rebuke the naive, immature faith that motivates such pray
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ers. God often\ngives special help to those who are children at heart. Indeed, there are even\ntimes when the prayer of mature believers properly anticipates the broad sweep\nof history: \"Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven.\" But\nmost often, prayer is based on our hopes for the near-term. And biblical prayer\nfollows this pattern: it is often realistically short-term in its expectations. We see a\nsituation before us, and we make a tentative judgment, based on our\nunderstanding of God's usual workings (from Scripture and providence), as to\nwhat help we might reasonably expect. When Peter was in prison, the\nchurch prayed for his release, not for the conversion of everybody in the\ncorrectional system.\nWhen Amin was ravaging the church, the immediate need was for\njudgment. Though one with a great childlike faith might have anticipated the\npossibility of Amin's conversion, to most Christians that was not an immediate 317\npossibility, even taking account of the riches of God's grace. Amin was a militant\nMuslim, a hater of all things Christian, and mentally irrational to boot. Yes, God's\ngrace has converted hopeless cases before; but this was not a time for\nconsidering big theological possibilities. It was time for an earnest cry for help,\nbased on present realities in the light of Scripture. The best short-term possibility\nwas judgment: the death of Amin or his expulsion from the country. So the prayer\nof these believers often did not explicitly include his conversion. But as I said\nearlier their prayer did not exclude that either; indeed that possibility was always\nimplicit in the nature of divine judgment (which provides for and\noffers atonement), in the nature of salvation (which is always a judgment upon\nsin) and in the qualification \"thy will be done.\" I suspect that this is also the way\nthe earliest believers prayed for Saul the persecutor.\nWhat about the \"hatred\" expressed in the imprecatory Psalms (e.g.,\n139:21f)? How is this compatible with Jesus's comma
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nd to love, not hate, our\nenemies? Again, as we have distinguished between personal and divine\nvengeance, I think we must distinguish between two kinds of hatred. Love and\nhate in Scripture are patterns of behavior, as well as emotions. 371 To love is to\nseek another's benefit; to hate is to seek his destruction. When we pray for divine\nvengeance, granting all the above qualifications on that prayer, we are seeking\nthe destruction of an enemy of God. We are \"hating\" that person. But in our\nindividual relationships with that person, in which vengeance is excluded, we are\nto love, to seek what is best for our enemy. So Scripture similarly distinguishes\nbetween good and bad anger: the quickly aroused, difficult to\nextinguish, murderous anger of personal vengeance (Matt. 5:22), and the slowly\naroused, easily extinguished, righteous anger of God's servants defending His\nhonor (Eph. 4:26) (like the anger of God itself). So hatred and love are not\ncontrary to one another in every respect. It is possible to have a godly hatred and\na godly love toward the same person, paradoxical as that seems. 372\nWe today may be called to cry for divine justice: against abortionists and\nabortion advocates, against homosexual militants who try to destroy the church's\nfreedom to proclaim God's word, against the remaining anti-Christian dictators of\nthe world, against those in bondage to false religions who think God has given\nthem the right to kill innocent people. We crave great historical signs of God's\ndispleasure with injustice. That desire is quite legitimate. But if God pleases\ninstead to rebuke these movements by sending revival and converting the hearts\nof His enemies, our desire for divine judgment will be completely fulfilled. And in\nour cry for divine justice, the imprecatory Psalms will rightly guide our prayers.\nAnd, strange as it may sound, we do have a responsibility to cultivate\nhatred of evil. In an age that takes the vilest behavior for granted, we are called\n371\nIn terms of our earlier analy
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sis, love is action as well as affection, and hatred is action as well\nas revulsion.\n372\nFor a more thorough analysis of the relationship between love and hatred, see the discussion\nof Godâs own love and hatred in DG, 460-63. 318\nto hate what God hates, as to love what God loves. Holy hatred and holy love are\ninseparable. If we love God, we will join him in his hatreds, both in our actions\nand in our feelings. So godly hatred, like godly love, is a virtue. And both serve\nas motives of Christian ethics.\n6. Seeking Out Responsibility\nIn Chapter 12, I emphasized that love is a disposition to keep all the\ncommandments of God. If we love him, we should keep his commandments. So I\nshould here list as a characteristic of love that it seeks our responsibility.\nAll the commandments of the Decalogue except the fourth and fifth are put\nin negative terms, and that is the predominant mode of legal instruction in\nScripture. One might imagine, then, that Christian ethics is largely negative, that\nit is a matter of avoiding things. Now the negative focus of biblical law is not\nwrong. It is a good warning that we live in a spiritually dangerous world, where\ntemptation is rife. The Christian must learn to say no. But in fact, the biblical ethic\nis very positive, and we learn that especially from the law of love. For love is,\nemphatically, not just avoiding this or that spiritual danger. Love seeks every\npossible way to serve God and the neighbor. Love seeks, indeed, modes of\nmoral heroism.\nOther Motive-Virtues in the New Testament\nThe Scriptures refer to many other virtues as well. There are several long\nlists of them and others noted here and there. These lists are not intended to be\nexhaustive, nor is it possible to define each virtue in sharp distinction from all the\nrest. The virtues overlap considerably. Each one implies and presupposes many\nothers, perhaps all the others, just as faith, hope, and love, imply one another. So\nthe virtues are more like multiple perspectives on the whole ethical li
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: fe than like\nindependent atomic constituents of ethical rectitude.\nI have focused on the three âtheological virtues,â faith, hope, and love.\nThese include one another, as weâve seen, and they include all the other biblical\nvirtues as well. Someone with perfect love would also be perfectly joyful,\npeaceful, patient, kind, good, faithful, gentle, self-controlled, to use the list of\nvirtues in Gal. 5:22-23. Col. 3:12-13 adds to this list compassion, humility,\nmeekness, forbearance, and forgiveness, then adds âand above all these put on\nlove, which binds everything together in perfect harmony.â Compare 2 Pet. 1:5-7:\nFor this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with\nvirtue, and virtue with knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and 319\nself-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and\ngodliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love.\nAgain, love is the conclusion and the summation.\nIn each of these virtues, then, we see the workings of love, as in 1 Cor.\n13:4-7 which I quoted earlier in this chapter.\nAny of these virtues would reward further study, study that could be\nsupplemented by a survey of the various non-virtues, with which Scripture\ncontrasts the virtues (as in Rom. 1:29-31, Gal. 5:19-21, Eph. 5:3-5, Col. 3:5-10).\nI shall not be able here to go through these lists one by one. If I did, much of that\ndiscussion, of course, would overlap our later consideration of the Ten\nCommandments.\nHowever, I should report some impressions that occurred to my\nhypertriadic mind as I perused these virtues. I would suggest that there are three\nmajor emphases in these virtues that parallel the three perspectives based on\nthe Lordship attributes.\nLooking only at the lists of positive qualities, I am struck by the\nfollowing themes:\n1. Acceptance of Godâs Promises (normative perspective)\nWe saw earlier that faith in Scripture is directed toward the promises of\nGod and toward the fulfillment of those promises, as in Rom. 4
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and Heb. 11. The\ngodly person trusts Godâs word, even when it seems to conflict with other sorts of\nevidence, even the evidence of the senses. We see this theme also in the virtues\nof faithfulness, steadfastness, godliness (piety), patience, joy, and knowledge.\nWe might call these the virtues of faith. Here the child of God continues steadfast\nin his trust, faithful to Godâs covenant, patient to the end. Having knowledge of\nGodâs revealed truth, he worships God in all of life (Rom. 12:1-2), recognizing\nGod as Lord in everything.\n2. Humility Before Other People (situational perspective)\nIf Godâs promises govern our lives, they free us from any autonomous\nattempts to create significance for ourselves. Such attempts are always at the\nexpense of other people. With God as Lord, however, we need not fear man, and\nwe need not define ourselves by dominating other people. Hence in the list of\nbiblical virtues we see a prominent emphasis on humility, under such names as 320\nmeekness, forbearance, forgiveness, gentleness, peace. So in Jesusâ teaching,\nwe return good for evil, turning the other cheek, walking the second mile (Matt.\n5:38-42; cf. Rom. 12:14-21).\nStretching our conceptual scheme a bit, these virtues might be called\nvirtues of hope, which I connected earlier in this chapter with the situational\nperspective. The point is that God is in control of this world, and we are not.\nTherefore, we are free from the need to be in control of every situation and to\ndominate other people. We recognize ourselves as what we are, sinners saved\nby grace, and we honor one another, knowing that our own honor comes from\nGod and not from any source in this world. So we can be genuinely humble\n(knowing, as in the classic gag-line, that we have a lot to be humble about). We\ncan ignore offenses, be gentle in correcting others (considering our own\nproneness to temptation, Gal 6:1-3), and seek peace with others, even when we\nare not entirely satisfied with the terms of peace.\n3. Affection for Others (
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: existential perspective)\nAs we trust in God and humble ourselves before him and other people, we\nfind ourselves, not resenting others, but caring for them from the heart. So our list\nof virtues includes compassion, brotherly love, kindness, and goodness\n(benevolence). Although all the virtues display love in different ways, these\naffections seem to be most obviously virtues of love.\nThe Fear of the Lord\nI have so far been restricting my consideration of biblical virtues mainly to\nthe New Testament. The New Testament contains lists of virtues, lists that are\nrare or nonexistent in the Old. The Old Testament teaches godly living mainly\nthrough laws, applying those laws by narratives, psalmody, wisdom teaching,\nand the covenant admonitions of the prophets. It does not focus much on virtues\nas subjective elements of godly character.\nYet there is one virtue that the Old Testament mentions very prominently,\nand which the New Testament also emphasizes, the fear of the Lord. So John\nMurray, in a profoundly enlightening discussion of the subject, says,\nThe fear of God is the soul of godliness. The emphasis of Scripture\nin both the Old Testament and the New requires no less significant a\nproposition. 373\n373\nMurray, Principles of Conduct (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 229. Much of this section\nsummarizes Murrayâs discussion. 321\nHe mentions that in Scripture the fear of God is the beginning of knowledge\n(Prov. 1:7) and of wisdom (Ps. 111:10). Jobâs unique, exemplary piety is founded\non the fear of God (Job 1:8). In Isa. 11:2-3, the Messiahâs unique endowment of\nthe Spirit brings a delight in the fear of the Lord. The Preacher of Ecclesiastes,\nafter describing alternative value systems, gives us his final word: âThe end of\nthe matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is\nthe whole duty of manâ (12:13). In the New Testament as well, the fear of God\nsums up the godly life (Luke 1:50, Acts 9:31, 2 Cor. 7:1, Col. 3:22, 1 Pet. 2:17).\nMurray observes,\nThis e
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: mphasis which Scripture places upon the fear of God evinces\nthe bond that exists between religion and ethics. The fear of God is\nessentially a religious concept; it refers to the conception we entertain of\nGod and the attitude of heart and mind that is ours by reason of that\nconception. Since the biblical ethic is grounded in and is the fruit of the\nfear of the Lord, we are apprised again that ethics has its source in\nreligion and as our religion is so will be our ethic. This is to say also that\nwhat or whom we worship determines our behavior. 374\nMurray then distinguishes between two senses of âfear of God.â The first is\nbeing afraid of God, which brings âterror and dread.â 375 The second is âthe fear of\nreverenceâ which âelicits confidence and love.â 376 The first is appropriate when\nsinners stand in the presence of God, anticipating judgment. Murray says, âit is\nthe essence of impiety not to be afraid of God when there is reason to be\nafraid.â 377 He finds examples of this legitimate terror in Deut. 17:13, 21:21, Ps.\n119:120. This theme is not absent either from the New Testament (Matt. 10:28,\nLuke 12:4-5, Rom. 11:20-21, Heb. 4:1, 10:27, 31, Rev. 15:3-4). Considering how\nterrible the judgments of God are, it would be wrong for us not to dread them.\nBut this fear of dread and terror cannot of itself lead us to love God. So it\nis not, Murray argues, the fear of God that is the soul of godliness. Rather,\nThe fear of God in which godliness consists is the fear which constrains\nadoration and love. It is the fear which consists in awe, reverence, honour,\nand worship, and all of these on the highest level of exercise. 378\nReverential fear of God is the sense of living in Godâs constant presence. In\nconsidering the life of Abraham, Murray argues that it was because Abraham\n374\nIbid., 231. Note that Murray does not advocate an ethic of natural law, as that phrase is\nsometimes understood (see Chapter 14).\n375\nIbid., 232.\n376\nIbid., 233.\n377\nIbid.\n378\nIbid., 236. 32
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 2\nfeared God that he obeyed Godâs commands, even the command to sacrifice his\nson Isaac (Gen. 22:11-12).\nThe same relationship can be traced in the other virtues that\nadorned Abrahamâs character. Why could he have been so magnanimous\nto Lot? It was because he feared the Lord and trusted his promise and his\nprovidence. He had no need to be mean. He feared and trusted the Lord.\nWhy could he have been magnanimous to the king of Sodom? It was\nbecause he feared the Lord, God Most High, possessor of heaven and\nearth, and might not allow the enrichment offered to prejudice the\nindependence of his faith; he needed not to be graspingly acquisitiveâ¦\nThat is all-pervasive God-consciousness, and it is God-consciousness\nconditioned by covenant-consciousness. This is the fear of God, or its\nindispensable corollary. 379\nMurray concludes by presenting the fear of God as an antidote to the\nsuperficial Christianity of our time. The phrase âGod-fearingâ seems to have\ndisappeared from the vocabulary of Christian virtues, reflecting a lack of\nunderstanding of Godâs majesty, glory, and holiness:\nThe fear of God in us is that frame of heart and mind which reflects our\napprehension of who and what God is, and who and what God is will\ntolerate nothing less than totality commitment to him. 380\nI have expounded Murray at length, because I think he provides here a\nnecessary and neglected perspective on the Christian life. What he says here, of\ncourse, must be balanced by other emphases we have already considered, the\nvirtues of faith, hope, and love. Although there is no contradiction between\nfearing God and loving him, we often find it hard to achieve an emotional state\nthat incorporates both and neglects neither. Another reason for the difficulty\nwhich Murray does not discuss is the problem of relating the fear of God to the\nNew Testament concept of the friendship of God (John 15:13-15), based on the\nredemptive work of Christ. Because Jesus has torn the temple veil by his\nsacrifice of himself, bel
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ievers have bold access into the holiest place, such as\nwas not known in the Old Testament (Heb. 10:19). How is this new intimacy,\nconferred by grace, compatible with the fear of the Lord?\nIt erases the need for fear in the sense of terror and dread (1 John 4:18),\nbut not the need for reverence as we stand in Godâs presence. At the present\ntime, however, it is not always easy in our experience to separate the two kinds\nof fear. Until the consummation, I suspect, there will always be some element of\nterror in our reverence for God. Thus there will always be some tension between\nthe fear of the Lord and our experience of sonship.\n379\nIbid., 139-140. Murray follows this discussion with an interesting reflection on God as âthe fear\nof Isaacâ (Gen. 31:42, 53).\n380\nIbid., 242. 323\nBut as for the relation between reverence and intimacy, we need to remind\nourselves that our new friend Jesus, our heavenly Father, and the Spirit who\ndwells intimately within us are God indeed, the majestic, sovereign ruler of\nheaven and earth. The praise of God in the Psalms and the Book of Revelation\nexpress both intimacy and reverence. For many of us, there is tension here. But\nwe do sometimes feel these two qualities fuse together in times of worship,\nsometimes in surprising ways. Christians are often overwhelmed with the\nconsciousness that our Father God is the holy one who works all things\naccording to his eternal plan. May that unity of fear and love extend to all aspects\nof our lives. 324\nChapter 20: The New Life as a Source of Ethical Knowledge\nAs I indicated in DKG, knowledge always involves a subject (the knower),\nan object (the known) and a norm (the standard or criterion). This triperspectival\nunderstanding of epistemology pertains to ethical knowledge as well as to all\nother knowledge. Under the normative perspective, Chapters 9-13, I considered\nthe criterion of ethical knowledge. Under the situational perspective, Chapters\n14-17, I discussed the object of ethical knowledge, as well as such i
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ssues as\ngeneral revelation, context, and goal.\nNow under the existential perspective I shall talk about the subjective\naspect of ethical knowledge. In this chapter we shall see the overlap between the\nexistential and normative perspectives, for we shall see that the existential\nperspective is an indispensable means of coming to know ethical norms.\nWe cannot know anything without minds, that is, without sense organs,\nreason, and other mental capacities. And we cannot know anything without these\ncapacities functioning together in a subjective process by which we discover\ntruth.\nIn one sense, these subjective capacities and processes are themselves\nrevelation. In Chapter 9, I argued that knowledge of Godâs revelation can be\nfound through nature and history, through language, and through persons.\nHuman beings are made in the image of God, and so they are themselves\nrevelation. We find that revelation in everything human beings are and do,\nincluding their thought processes. So we need not fear that in investigating these\nthought processes we are abandoning revelation.\nFurther, as we have seen, Scripture teaches that God actually writes his\nwords on our hearts: that is inwardly, subjectively. Without this divine act we\ncannot understand, believe, or apply the revelation of Scripture itself.\nTraditionally, Reformed theology has described this divine work as illumination,\nbut in Chapter 9 I argued that it is equally biblical to call it âexistential revelation,â\ncoordinated with âgeneral revelationâ and âspecial revelationâ in a triperspectival\nset. So our own subjectivity is an important locus of divine revelation, and we\nexamine that here under the existential perspective.\nIn all of this, we should not forget the primacy of Scripture, as I presented\nit under the normative perspective. Although everything is revelation, including\nour own thought processes, Scripture plays a special role within this organism of\nrevelation: (1) Scripture is the document of the covenant, the writte
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n constitution\nof the people of God. (2) It contains the gospel that alone can enable us to see\nother forms of revelation rightly. (3) It alone is an infallible text, words and 325\nsentences authored by God himself. So, even though we come to know the\ncontent of Scripture through the processes of our own thinking, with the help of\nnatural revelation (knowledge of languages, ancient culture, archaeology, etc.),\nthe words of Scripture take precedence over any other source of knowledge.\nWhen by responsible methods of exegesis I come to believe Scripture teaches A,\nI must believe it, even though other sources teach not-A.\nSo Scripture is our primary guide even concerning the existential\nperspective, as it was concerning the situational and normative. But we have\nseen and shall see that Scripture gives great importance to the subjective side of\nknowledge.\nEthical Knowledge a Product of Sanctification\n1. The Knowledge of God\nIn DKG I argued that knowing God, in Scripture, is not merely learning an\nadditional fact or becoming familiar with an additional object. Rather, since God\nis a person, to know him is to enter a personal relationship with him. His\nrelationship to us is covenantal, for he is Lord. Therefore to know him is to\nbecome his covenant servant. 381 Here the meaning of âknowâ is very close to\nâhave as a friend,â as in âI know Bill.â In the covenant, we are Godâs people and\nhe is our God. He makes everything work for our good, and we seek to glorify\nhim. Thus obedience is a constituent aspect of this knowledge (as Jer. 22:16,\nHos. 6:6).\nAs we grow in grace, therefore, we grow in the knowledge of God. We\ncome to know God better when we become more obedient to him. Knowing God,\ntherefore, is not merely an intellectual process, but an ethical one as well. And,\nas we shall see, the intellectual itself presupposes the ethical.\n2. Wisdom\nBesides the knowledge of God, wisdom is another virtue in Scripture that\nis both intellectual and ethical. Wisdom is a knowledge that pe
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: netrates to the\ndeeper significance of things and therefore enables us to apply that knowledge to\npractical situations. Scripture often represents it as a skill, a knowing how, rather\nthan knowing that. In Ex. 31:1-5, Bezalel and Oholiab have wisdom (ESV\n381\nI am speaking here, of course, and through this chapter, of the believerâs knowledge of God.\nScripture teaches (Rom. 1:21) that unbelievers also âknow God,â but in a very different way: as an\nenemy, rather than as a friend. See DKG, 49-61. 326\ntranslates âabilityâ) from the Spirit of God to produce designs and crafts for the\ntabernacle. In James 3:13-17, wisdom is clearly ethical, the skill of godly living:\nWho is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct\nlet him show his works in the meekness of wisdom. 14 But if you have\nbitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be\nfalse to the truth. 15 This is not the wisdom that comes down from above,\nbut is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where jealousy and selfish\nambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice. 17 But the\nwisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason,\nfull of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.\nSpecifically, wisdom is the ability to do the right thing in difficult situations (Luke\n21:14-15), especially to say the right thing (Acts 6:10, 1 Cor. 2:6 (cf. 1, 4, 13),\n12:8, Col. 1:28, 2 Pet. 3:15).\nSo wisdom, personified as the wisdom of God, serves as an ethical guide\n(Prov. 3:5-6, 21-26). Wisdom is Godâs own attribute, by which he made all things\n(Prov. 3:19, 8:22-31). He communicates it to us by his word and Spirit (Deut.\n34:9, Prov. 30:5, Jer. 8:8-9, Acts 6:3, 1 Cor. 2:6-16, Col. 3:16, 2 Tim. 3:16) on the\nbasis of our union with Christ (1 Cor. 1:24, 30, Col. 2:3).\nLike the knowledge of God, then, wisdom is ethical in character, and our\nprogress in wisdom is parallel to our progress in sanctification.\n3. Truth\nTruth has several dimensions in Scripture. There is âmet
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: aphysicalâ truth,\nwhich John Murray defines as\nnot so much the true in contrast with the false, or the real in contrast with\nthe fictitious. It is the absolute as contrasted with the relative, the ultimate\nas contrasted with the derived, the eternal as contrasted with the\ntemporal, the permanent as contrasted with the temporary, the complete\nin contrast with the partial, the substantial in contrast with the shadowy. 382\nExamples of this usage abound in the Johannine literature, as in John 1:9, 17,\n14:6, 17:3, 1 John 5:20, and in Heb. 8:2.\nThe term truth is often used also in an âepistemologicalâ sense, for correct\nstatements, language that neither errs nor deceives. This usage is far more\ncommon in our language. Note, for example, how the Johannine writings speak\n382\nMurray, Principles of Conduct (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 123. 327\nof an authentic witness as true (John 5:31-32, 8:13-14, 16-17, 10:41, 19:35,\n21:34).\nThen there is also an âethicalâ meaning of truth. Truth is something we can\nwalk in, according to 1 Kings 2:4, Ps. 86:11, 1 John 1:6-7, 3 John 3-4. To walk in\ntruth is to obey the commands of God. This language reflects the figure of the\nword of God as a light on our path (Ps. 119:105). Because Godâs word is true in\nthe metaphysical and epistemological senses, it can keep us from stumbling in\nour ethical pilgrimage.\nHere too, then, we can see an ethical dimension to an epistemological\nterm. We do not respond adequately to the truth until we apply it to life, until that\ntruth changes our lives.\n4. Doctrine\nThe Greek terms based on didasko typically refer in the Pastoral Epistles\nto a teaching of the word of God that leads to spiritual health. This is âsoundâ or\nâhealthyâ teaching (1 Tim. 1:10, 4:6, 6:3, 2 Tim. 1:13, 4:3, Tit. 1:9). So doctrine,\ndefined as this kind of teaching, also has an ethical goal. It is not given to us\nmerely for intellectual contemplation.\nDoctrine, or theology in this sense, comes to us in all parts of Scripture,\nnot in fo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rmal propositions, but also in narratives, poetry, prophecy, letters, and\napocalyptic. In Col. 3:16, Paul says that we teach one another in song. What\ndistinguishes doctrine, then, is not an academic style or an intellectually rigorous\napproach, though the academic approach should not be despised. What rather\ndistinguishes theology is its ethical goal, to bring the biblical message to bear on\npeopleâs lives. That indeed is the goal of Scripture itself (2 Tim. 3:16-17).\nIn this brief look at four terms important to theological epistemology, we\nhave seen that knowledge has an ethical goal, and that therefore Godâs\nregenerating and sanctifying grace is active in the processes by which we gain\nand deepen such knowledge.\nIntellectual Knowledge and Ethical Knowledge\nWe have seen that the knowledge of God, together with wisdom, truth,\nand doctrine, is an ethical knowledge. But the same is true even of âintellectualâ\nor propositional knowledge, such as the knowledge that there is a bookstore on\nthe corner. There is, indeed, no propositional knowledge without ethical\nknowledge. Let us look at this matter from two perspectives. 328\n1. The ethical presupposes the intellectual.\nIt is common to hear Christians of various traditions (especially the\nReformed) say that life is built on doctrine. 383 This statement is based on\npassages like Heb. 11:6 and 1 John 4:2-3. To live the Christian life, it is\nnecessary (at least in the case of reasonably intelligent adults) to believe certain\npropositions: that God exists, that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, that Jesus\ndied for our sins, that he has risen from the dead (1 Cor. 15:17-19).\nThe statement that life is built on doctrine misleads us, I think, by equating\ndoctrine with a set of propositions. See the previous section to the contrary. But\nthe intent of this slogan is biblical. Even if we define doctrine in a more biblical\nway, it is true that propositional beliefs are part of doctrine, that God calls us to\nbelieve those propositions, and th
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: at belief in those propositions changes our\nlives.\nIf the intellect is the organ that evaluates, believes, and disbelieves\npropositions (and I shall question that definition also at a later point), then it\nfollows that Christian ethics presupposes intellectual beliefs. Certainly, as we\nsaw in Chapter 16, Scripture regularly motivates us to obey Godâs word by a\nnarrative, a set of historical facts. And we can receive that motivation only if we\nbelieve that the events of that narrative actually took place.\n2. The intellectual presupposes the ethical.\nBut the opposite relationship also exists between obedience and\npropositional belief. It is also true that propositional belief, in the context of the\nChristian life, presupposes obedience. That is, it is not only true that life is built\non doctrine, but also that doctrine is built on life.\nRom. 1:18-32, 1 Cor. 1:18-2:16 and other passages indicate that when\npeople make an ethical decision to suppress the truth of God (Rom. 1:18), that\nleads them to believe lies (verse 25). So unbelief is defective, not only ethically,\nbut intellectually as well. According to Rom. 1:19-20, God makes himself clearly\nknown through the creation. Those who refuse to acknowledge him are âwithout\n383\nâLife is built on doctrineâ was a slogan of J. Gresham Machen and his movement to restore\nbiblical orthodoxy to American Presbyterianism. This needed to be said, over against the liberals\nof the day (taking their cue from Friedrich Schleiermacher) who maintained the opposite.\nHowever, neither the liberals nor the Machenites, in my view, presented the full biblical picture,\nthough the Machenites were, in their overall theology, far closer to the truth than the liberals. The\npresent chapter is an attempt to restore balance. 329\nexcuseâ (verse 20). That response to revelation is stupid. Even Satan, who\nappears in Scripture to be intellectually superior to human beings, is a model of\nirrationality, when, knowing Godâs power, he seeks to supplant Godâs rule.\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Satanâs disobedience infects his intellect, and the intellects of all who follow him.\nBut if disobedience leads to stupidity, the opposite is also true: obedience\nleads to knowledge, to understanding. Jesus says, âIf anyone's will is to do God's\nwill, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on\nmy own authorityâ (John 7:17). Here Jesus teaches that an obedient disposition\ncan lead to intellectual assurance. So begins a general theme of the Johannine\nwritings that to know God we must keep his commandments (1 John 2:3-6, 4:8,\n5:2-3). Those who do not love their brothers are in darkness (1 John 2:9-11), a\nmetaphor of both moral and intellectual privation. 1 Cor. 8:1-4, 13:7, 11-13, 1\nTim. 1:5-11 also make knowledge dependent on love. Jesus makes knowledge\nof the glory of God to rest upon faith in John 11:40.\nSo the knowledge of God, even in its intellectual dimensions, requires the\nsame work of the Spirit that brings ethical transformation (1 John 2:20-27, 4:2-3,\n13-17, Eph. 1:17-18, 3:14-19).\nIn DKG 384 I discussed three passages that use the word dokimazein,\nmeaning to approve through testing: Rom. 12:1-2, Eph. 5:8-10, and Phil. 1:9-11.\nIn these passages it is clear that we come to know the will of God, not only by\nreading the Bible or otherwise receiving propositional information, but through the\nprocess of ethical discipline: the sacrifice of our bodies (Rom. 12:1),\nnonconformity to the world, transformation by the renewal of our mind (Rom.\n12:2), walking as children of light (Eph. 5:8), abounding in love (Phil. 1:9). In the\nPhilippians passage, we learn again that love produces discernment.\nHeb. 5:11-14 385 makes a similar point, though it does not use the word\ndokimazein. Deep doctrinal discussion (in context, the Melchizedek priesthood of\nJesus) can be appreciated only by those who are ethically and spiritually mature,\nâwho have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish\ngood from evil.â Theology is most helpful for
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: people on the front lines of the\nspiritual warfare, people who see in actual moral combat how important the\ndoctrines are.\nSo sanctification presupposes knowing our duty; but the reverse is also\nthe case.\nSo we can see that the intellect is part of life. Its health depends on the\nhealth of the whole person, both physically and ethically. As with all other human\nactions, intellectual actions are subject to the effects of sin and of regeneration-\nsanctification. Thinking, like everything else we do, may be done in two ways: to\n384\n385\n154-55.\nSee discussion in Ibid. 330\nthe glory of God or to the glory of an idol. So thinking, like every other human act,\nis subject to Godâs norms, should seek the glory of God, and should be motivated\nby faith and love. The intellectual is ethical, and epistemology may be seen as a\nsubdivision of ethics. 386\nRegularly, we use practical tests to determine if someone understands a\nconcept. If someone has the right concept of a triangle, for example, we expect\nhim to be able to draw one. Having a concept entails a disposition to action. This\nfact is especially, though not exclusively, important in religious knowledge. One\ndoes not fully understand who God is unless he regards God as the most\nimportant person in his life, unless he is prepared to sacrifice his own pleasures\nfor the overwhelming blessing of knowing God in Christ. Here, concepts and\npassions are not easily separated. Life and doctrine are interdependent.\nMoral Discernment\nSo we are prepared to look more closely at ethical epistemology, at the\nprocess by which we learn Godâs will for our actions. This is the process that we\noften refer to as ethical guidance.\nWe saw in Chapters 9-13 the importance of Scripture as the law of God. I\nargued that we gain knowledge of Godâs will by applying that law to our own\ncircumstances, circumstances that I focused on in Chapters 14-17. Here I focus\non the process of application, the subjective experience of applying Godâs word\nto circumstances.\nT
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: o apply the word of God to circumstances requires a kind of moral vision.\nSuch applications require the ability to see the circumstances in the light of\nbiblical principles. In moral quandaries, we often ask questions such as âis this\nact murder?â or âis this act stealing?â For Christians, this is the challenge to give\nbiblical names to human actions. Sometimes it is obvious: taking money out of a\nfriendâs wallet without authorization is what the Bible calls stealing. Sometimes it\nis less obvious: is it murder to remove this terminal patient from life support? 387 Is\nit fornication for unmarried people to engage in intimacies short of intercourse?\nAlthough Scripture is sufficient as a source of Godâs words concerning our\nethical life (Chapter 11), it does not speak directly to every situation, especially to\n386\nCf. DKG, 62-64.\nIn Chapter 11, I discussed moral syllogisms, in which the first premise is a moral principle, the\nsecond a factual statement, and the conclusion an application of the moral principle to the factual\nstatement. Example: Stealing is wrong, embezzling is stealing, therefore embezzling is wrong. In\nthe present context I am referring to the same sort of application, but focusing on the capacities\nwe have to formulate the second premise. We ask here, for example, how do we come to believe\nthat embezzling is stealing, that abortion is murder, or that violating a speed limit is disrespect for\nruling powers?\n387 331\nsituations distinctive to modern life. It does not mention nuclear war, or internet\npornography, or even abortion. So much of the work of application lies with us,\nled by the Spirit and by the general principles of Scripture. We also receive help,\nof course, from the churchâs traditions, the preaching of the word, parents,\nteachers and friends. As we mature in the faith (Heb. 5:11-14, again), we are\nbetter able to make such judgments.\nThe process of learning how to apply the word is somewhat, as the\nworkings of the Holy Spirit are always difficult
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: to describe (John 3:8). But one\ncrucial element is learning to see patterns in our experience that can be\ncompared with similar patterns mentioned in Scripture. Hijacking airplanes, for\nexample, is different from stealing oxen, but there is a common pattern between\nthese two kinds of events. Common patterns create analogies between the\nvirtues and sins mentioned in the Bible and the various actions and moral\nqualities of people today. For example, we should ask how our dispositions\ncompare with biblical characters that are positively or negatively exemplary: to\nwhat extent am I like King Saul? Like David? Like Judas? Like Peter?\nIn the last paragraph I have mentioned âseeingâ as the source of our\nknowledge of analogous moral patterns. But this seeing is not the same as\nphysical sight. Rather I am here using physical sight as a metaphor for the moral\nsensitivity described in Phil. 1:9 (âdiscernmentâ) 388 and Heb. 5:11-14 (âpowers of\ndiscernmentâ).\nEven in non-moral cases, there are forms of perception that transcend the\npowers of physical sight. In DKG 389 I referred to the âduck-rabbit,â a set of lines\nwhich can resemble a duck or a rabbit depending on oneâs mental focus. One\ncan have 20/20 vision, see all the lines in the diagram, without being able to\nidentify it as a picture of a duck, or a picture of a rabbit, or both. Indeed, it is\npossible to look at the lines without seeing them as a picture of anything. 390 So\nâseeing asâ is different from seeing. One can look at the lines without noting the\npattern or the analogy.\nThe same is true in moral contexts. People with healthy sense organs may\nnot be able to âseeâ moral patterns and analogies. Someone may be very much\naware of something he has done, without being able to make the right moral\nevaluation of his act. For example, someone may assault another person,\nseriously injuring him, without understanding the wrongness of what he has\ndone.\n388\nThis is the Greek term aesthesis from which we get English word
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s like âaesthetic.â In the\nHebrews passage, the word aistheterion, from the same root, occurs in verse 14.\n389\n157.\n390\nOne can imagine such a response from members of a tribe that did not know about rabbits or\nducks, or that did not use drawn lines to represent objects. 332\nEven for believers, our inability to âsee asâ can lead to moral difficulty.\nLetâs say that I have a feeling of rage. I know how I feel, and I know what actions\nthat feeling has impelled me to do. But what is the moral evaluation of that\nfeeling? That may not be obvious. In part, I resist any negative evaluation of my\nown actions because of my pride. But there is also ambiguity in the concept of\nrage itself. Scripture says that rage, or anger, comes in two forms. One is\nrighteous indignation, such as Scripture attributes to God and to Jesus when he\ncleansed the temple (John 2:17). The other is an outworking of murderous hatred\n(Matt. 5:22). How should I evaluate my own rage? Is it righteous indignation, or\nmurderous hatred?\nThese questions cannot be answered by simple factual perceptions, in the\nusual sense. I may be aware of all the relevant passages of Scripture (such as\nthe two mentioned above) without knowing how they apply in my case. Further, I\nmay be very much aware of my own feelings and actions, and of the\ncircumstances of those actions, without being able to make the right moral\njudgments. These judgments, therefore, are not merely the result of sense-\nexperience or intellectual reasoning. Again, one can know the facts, without\nseeing the relevant patterns and analogies. 391\nBut it does often happen that moral discernment comes upon us, that we\nare compelled to note that something is good or bad, right or wrong. Sometimes\nthat discernment does happen simultaneously with a factual discovery: a\nScripture text or a relevant fact, even though the discernment is not identical with\nsuch a discovery.\nBut sometimes moral discernment occurs in unexpected ways. In DKG 392 I\nreferred to Davidâs adulter
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: y with Bathsheba, followed by his murder (in effect) of\nher husband Uriah (2 Sam. 11). After these events, David went through a period\nwhen he was complacent, unrepentant. We wonder how that can be. David, after\nall, was not ignorant of Godâs law (see Ps. 19:7-13, for example). And he\ncertainly was not ignorant about what he had done with Bathsheba and Uriah.\nBut somehow David did not make the connection between Godâs law and his\nown actions, in a way that would impress upon him the wrongness of his actions\nand his obligation to repent.\nWhat did bring David to repentance was not the revelation of some fact\nabout Scripture or the situation of which he was previously unaware, but an\nemotional shock. The prophet Nathan told him a story of a poor man who had\none ewe lamb that he raised as a family pet. A rich man, who owned many\nsheep, stole the poor manâs lamb and killed it to feed a guest.\n391\nThis discussion is related to that of the naturalistic fallacy in Chapter 5. Moral values are\nmysterious in that they cannot be sensed, nor can they be simply deduced from factual premises.\nAttempts to derive them from non-moral premises are fallacious.\n392\n156-57. 333\nThen Davidâs anger was greatly kindled against the man, and he said to\nNathan, âAs the Lord lives, the man who has done this deserves to die,\nand he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and\nbecause he had no pity. Nathan said to David, âYou are the man!...â (2\nSam. 12:5-7)\nThat story, with Nathanâs application, drove David to repentance. Nathan\npresented no new facts, but he told a story that made evident the ethical pattern\nof Davidâs actions. David had behaved as the wicked rich man, as one who took\nwhat was not his and who had no pity. Now David could see. Now he was able to\napply the principles of Godâs law to his own actions.\nEthical discourse, therefore, is never merely a matter of setting forth facts\nand Bible passages. It is also a matter of wise counseling, of dealing with the\nsu
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: bjective issues that stand in the way of moral insight. Scripture, therefore,\nteaches ethics in many ways: through laws and through narrative as we have\nseen, but also by Proverbs, parables, songs, personal address (as in both the\nOld Testament prophets and the letters of the New Testament), eschatological\npromises (see Chapter 16), apocalyptic vision.\nWe can also learn from such considerations that spiritual maturity plays a\nmajor role in ethical understanding. Two people may know the same Bible verses\nand the same facts, but they may disagree on the application of the former to the\nlatter. That sort of disagreement may have many sources, but one may be simply\nthat the one person is more mature spiritually than the other. The one, more than\nthe other, may have his âpowers of discernment trained by constant practice to\ndistinguish good from evilâ (Heb. 11:14). Such maturity comes through\nexperience in fighting the spiritual warfare, availing oneself of Godâs means of\ngrace in the word, the sacraments, worship and fellowship.\nSome ethical arguments can be resolved by Bible teaching, or by learning\nmore about relevant circumstances. Still others cannot be resolved until one or\nboth parties develop more spiritual maturity. So perhaps the best way to deal\nwith some ethical controversies is benign neglect: set them aside until one or\nboth parties gain more spiritual maturity, that is, until God gives more resources\nfor dealing with the problem.\nSo it is wrong to suppose that we must get all the answers to ethical\nquestions before we fight the spiritual warfare, as if the intellect were in every\nrespect prior to life. Rather, there may well be some ethical questions (like the\ntheological questions of Heb. 5:11-14) that we will not be able to answer (or even\nfully appreciate) until we have been in spiritual combat with the forces of\ndarkness.\nThe Doctrine of Guidance 334\nIn John 8:12, Jesus said, âI am the light of the world. Whoever follows me\nwill not walk in darkness, but will have
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the light of life.â Here and elsewhere\nScripture promises that God will guide his people. We have seen that Scripture is\nan important aspect of that guidance, as it is applied to natural revelation. If my\nprevious discussion is correct, he also guides us subjectively, to enable us to\napply Scripture to the circumstances of general revelation. This is part of the\nnature of âexistential revelationâ (Chapter 9).\nThis view of divine guidance contrasts with two others that are generally\nthought to be opposite to one another. One is an intellectualist view, that\nguidance is an academic affair, the process of intellectually studying the\nScriptures. This view is often found, in practice if not in formulation, in Reformed\ncircles. The other view is the view that God guides us by whispering in our ears,\nby giving us special revelation over and above the canon of Scripture. That view\nis sometimes found in the charismatic movement, though I do not believe it is\nheld by all charismatics.\nThe interesting thing is that both of these views are intellectualist. Both\nagree that God guides mainly through revealing propositions and commands. On\nthe first view, these are limited to Scripture; on the second view, they give\nknowledge beyond Scripture. Both views suppose that when we need guidance\nwhat we need is more information.\nBut if I am right, then guidance also requires a subjective competence, the\nability to recognize analogous patterns and to apply those to oneself. Scripture is\na great help to us in this respect: after all, Nathanâs parable is in the Bible. But\nthe Spirit also operates on us from within, giving us new eyes and hearts, giving\nus spiritual perception.\nSo Godâs ethical guidance of his people does not add new sentences to\nthe canon of Scripture. But neither is it necessarily an academic or intellectual\nprocess. God deals with us personally, even inwardly. His operations within us\nare mysterious also, not to be simply described or categorized. He can work\nthrough the subconsci
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ous, through dreams, through memory and intuition, as\nwell as through what we usually call the intellect. 335\nChapter 21: The Organs of Ethical Knowledge\nWhen we think of ethics as a subjective process of decision-making, we\noften consider various ethical âfaculties,â aspects of the mind that play important\nroles in ethical knowledge, decisions, actions, and character. In a Christian\ncontext, these capacities are ways in which God enables us to make the right\nchoices. In Chapter 20, we considered the process of gaining ethical knowledge\nin general terms. Here I shall become more specific and look at ethical\ncapacities, faculties, abilities that function in ethical thought and action.\nIt is sometimes thought that reason, emotion, conscience, imagination,\nwill, etc. are more or less autonomous units, battling one another for supremacy\nin each human life. I believe it is more scriptural to say that the whole person is\nthe one who makes ethical decisions, and that the ethical faculties are ways of\ndescribing the person as he makes those decisions. In my view, reason, emotion,\nand so on are not conflicting voices within us, but are rather different ways of\ncharacterizing and describing the whole person. Reason is the whole person\nreasoning, emotion the whole person feeling, etc. Further, each of these is\ndependent on the others: reason is dependent on emotions, will, imagination,\netc., and vice versa. The best model, in my judgment, is perspectival. All these\nfaculties are perspectives on one another and on the whole person.\nI made the same argument in DKG, Chapter 10 393 in regard to theology.\nBut on my definition (Chapter 2), theology is ethics and ethics is theology. So\nwhat can be said about theological knowledge can also be said about ethical\nknowledge, with, again, some difference of perspective.\nThe Heart\nIn general, the heart is the âcenterâ of manâs being. It is what we are most\nfundamentally, as God sees us. It is what we are when all the masks are off. The\nheart is comm
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: itted either to God (Deut. 6:4-5) or to an idol, âhardenedâ (Ex. 4:21,\nDeut. 15:7, 1 Sam. 6:6, 2 Chron. 36:13, Psm. 95:8, Mark 6:52, 8:17, Rom. 9:18,\nHeb. 3:8). That heart-commitment governs the fundamental direction of human\nlife. In Luke 6:45, Jesus teaches us,\nThe good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces\ngood, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of\nthe abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.\n393\n319-346. 336\nThe heart is the seat of honesty and goodness (Luke 8:15), as well as evil lusts\n(Matt. 5:28). When the heart is hardened, the result is not only wickedness, but\nalso ignorance (Isa. 6:10, John 12:40). The hypocrite may profess allegiance to\nGod, but his heart is far from him (Matt. 15:8). Yet God knows the heart and will\njudge it (Jer. 11:20, Rom. 2:5), disclosing its inmost secrets (1 Cor. 4:5).\nAs we have seen, God writes his word upon the hearts of the regenerate.\nThis means that we not only know Godâs word, but also that our deepest\ninclination is to obey it.\nSo the heart is the chief organ of moral knowledge and of our moral will,\nour desire to obey. As we have seen throughout our discussion of the existential\nperspective, knowledge and obedience are inseparable. In the heart, God places\nknowledge and obedience, and these nourish one another.\nTo say that the heart discerns Godâs will is to say that the whole person\ndiscerns it. That being the case, we should not press too hard the various\ndivisions of the human mind into faculties such as reason, will, emotion. These\ndistinctions are only aspects of the whole person as he thinks, decides, acts, and\nfeels. Nevertheless, if the human person as a whole is the organ of ethical\nknowledge, then all aspects of that person are somehow involved in ethical\nknowledge. Thus there is some value in making further distinctions to see in\nmore detail how that knowledge arises and functions.\nConscience\nConscience is our God-given ability to discern good and evil. 394\nConscience c
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: onvicts of sin (John 8:9) and commends us when we do right (Rom.\n2:15, 2 Cor. 1:2). A âgoodâ or âpureâ conscience is one that generally approves\noneâs behavior and does so accurately (Acts 23:1, 24:16, 1 Tim. 1:5, 19, 3:9, 2\nTim. 1:3, Heb. 13:18, 1 Pet. 3:16, 21), an âevilâ conscience one that condemns in\nsome important way (Heb. 10:22).\nSo conscience is a source of ethical knowledge, of existential revelation.\nWe may identify it with that moral sense (aisthesis, aistheterion) we discussed in\nconnection with Phil. 1:9 and Heb. 5:14. It enables us to see the patterns and\nanalogies we discussed in Chapter 20.\n394\nScholastic philosophy distinguished between synteresis (or synderesis), our natural tendency\ntoward good, and conscience (sometimes designated by the Greek syneidesis), which applies\nthat moral sense to practical actions. In terms of the moral syllogism, synteresis determines the\nmajor premise, and conscience deduces the conclusion. (The minor premise comes from âan\ninferior sort of reason.â) However, conscience certainly functions in other ways than in the\nproduction of syllogisms. In my vocabulary, and, I believe, that of Scripture, conscience includes\nsynteresis and broadly indicates the source of all moral knowledge. 337\nNevertheless, conscience is not infallible. Paul speaks of some who have\nâweakâ consciences (1 Cor. 8:7, 12). These have moral scruples (in this case\nagainst the eating of food offered to idols) that are not based in Godâs word.\nCompare also Paulâs discussion in Rom. 14. I discussed both these passages in\nChapter 11.\nConscience can be even more deeply perverted. In 1 Tim. 4:2 (cf. Tit.\n1:15), Paul speaks of false teachers âwhose consciences are seared.â A seared\nconscience is nearly destroyed, 395 no longer a reliable moral guide. When people\nrefuse again and again to follow God and indulge in worse and worse sin, they\nmay reach a point at which they have almost no consciousness of the difference\nbetween good and evil.\nThe perve
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rsion of the conscience leads to an ethical problem: should we\nalways obey conscience, or should we sometimes disobey it? We might say that\nif conscience is weak or seared, we ought sometimes to disobey it. The problem,\nhowever, is that conscience defines for a person what is right. For a theist,\nconscience defines the will of God. So if we disobey conscience, even when\nconscience misleads, we see ourselves as doing what is wrong, even as violating\nthe will of God. So if we violate a seared conscience, our action may be ethically\nright, but in our hearts, our intentions, we are choosing what is wrong. So the\nâstrongâ of Rom 14 must not induce the weak to act against their conscience,\neven though the consciences of the weak are misleading them. When you have a\nweak conscience, you can sin in one way by rejecting its dictates, and in another\nway by accepting them. I call this the paradox of ethical decision.\nThe only solution is a practical one: we need to train our consciences, so\nthat they will rejoice in what is really good and condemn what is really evil.\nTranslations of the Old Testament rarely use the term conscience. But in 2\nSam. 24:10, after David has sinfully conducted a census of the people, we read\nthat his âheart struck him.â Here, Davidâs heart serves as what the New\nTestament calls conscience. Cf. 1 Sam. 24:5, 1 Kings 9:4, 15:3, 14. So there is\nno metaphysical difference between heart and conscience. The two are\nperspectives on one another. The heart is the center of human personality. The\nconscience is the heart in its function as a moral guide. As we make moral\ndecisions as whole persons, so we gain moral knowledge as whole persons.\nExperience\n395\nI donât believe that conscience can ever be totally destroyed. God always maintains his moral\nwitness against sinners, as Rom. 1:18-32 indicates. 338\nIn the history of philosophy, experience usually refers to knowledge\ngained from the senses. An empiricist (taken from a Latin word for experience)\nbelieves that all h
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: uman knowledge is based in sense experience.\nEnglish translations of Scripture rarely use the term experience or the\nvarious forms of empirical. But they do mention the sense organs of sight,\nhearing, smell, taste, and touch. Scripture sometimes speaks negatively of\nsensation, as when it contrasts faith with sight (see Chapter 19). But for the most\npart, it regards the senses positively, even with regard to the knowledge of God.\nHear the excitement of the aged apostle in 1 John 1:1-3, as he recalls the\napostlesâ experience of Jesus:\nThat which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which\nwe have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched\nwith our hands, concerning the word of life- 2 the life was made manifest,\nand we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life,\nwhich was with the Father and was made manifest to us- 3 that which we\nhave seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have\nfellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with\nhis Son Jesus Christ.\nOf course, we do not have today that kind of sense-experience of Jesus.\nBut it is biblically important to understand that our faith is based on eyewitness\ntestimony. As Peter says, âFor we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we\nmade known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were\neyewitnesses of his majestyâ (2 Pet. 1:16; cf. Luke 1:2, 1 Cor. 15:1-12). Though\nJesus commends those who believe without seeing, he offers to Thomas the\nopportunity to believe through sight (John 20:27). So, although we should not\ndemand of God that he provide us with evidence of the senses, he has provided\nthat to some people. And our faith rests upon the sense-experience of those God\nhas chosen to be eyewitnesses.\nAlthough we today cannot be witnesses in the same sense, nevertheless\nGod continues to use our senses to communicate his truth. We could not read\nthe Bible, for example, without sense organs. And the sacraments are, as the\nR
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: eformers called them, âvisible words,â revelation given by God to the eyes, and\nto the touch, smell, and taste as well. The Lordâs Supper fulfills in literal fashion\nthe invitation of Ps. 34:8, âOh, taste and see that the LORD is good! Blessed is\nthe man who takes refuge in him!â\nFurther, it is through the senses that we encounter natural revelation and\nlearn of the situations to which we must apply the word of God. So the senses\nare not to be despised. God has given them to us as means of receiving his\nrevelation, including moral revelation. 339\nOf course, to deduce moral laws from sensations alone would be a\nnaturalistic fallacy. But sensation is never alone. It is part of an epistemological\ncomplex. Critics of empiricism are right to say that we never learn anything from\nthe senses by themselves. For one thing, there are such things as optical and\naural illusions. To determine where the truth lies in the sensory world, we need\nminds, logical capacities, as well as sense organs. The senses provide data, but\nthat data must be interpreted.\nWhen I perceive a cow in the pasture, I not only experience an image on\nthe retina of my eye. I also relate that image to a package of mental concepts, of\nwhich one is âcow.â âCow,â as an abstract universal concept, does not come from\nsense experience alone, but by a combination of sensation and other mental\ncapacities. So perceiving a cow is an act of the whole mind, not only of the sense\norgans. Indeed, whenever we speak of âseeingâ or âhearingâ something, we are\nusually referring, not to the sheer physiological process of receiving sensory\ndata, but to an interpretive action involving all the faculties of the mind.\nSo we can understand further how experience has dimensions beyond the\nmerely sensory. Seeing a cow in the field is an experience. But it is also an\nexperience to observe oneâs own thinking processes, to sense Godâs presence in\nworship, to feel convicted of sin.\nSo experience is an important perspective on et
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hical knowledge. Like\nconscience, experience is a concept that refers to the whole process of gaining\nethical knowledge. As a perspective on this process, it focuses on oneâs\nintrospective awareness of things that are happening within himself and his\n(particularly sensory) apprehension of his environment. But that awareness in\nturn presupposes all other aspects of knowledge.\nThe obvious implication is that, as Heb. 5:14 tells us, experience is\nimportant for ethical discernment. Believers learn to make the right decisions by\nwrestling with such decisions day by day. They learn to defeat Satan by\nengaging in spiritual warfare.\nA respected teacher of mine once described a Sunday School program in\nwhich five-year-old children sang âWe are more than conquerors.â Cute, my\nprofessor said, but somewhat laughable: they hadnât actually conquered\nanything. Well, I disagreed somewhat. As members of the body of Christ, these\nchildren had already conquered Satan, sin, and death, as surely as had the\napostle Paul in Romans 8. Our conquest is not first an item of personal\nexperience, but a conquest accomplished by Christ and by ourselves in him. Still,\nmy professorâs point was not entirely wrong. âWe are more than conquerorsâ\n(Rom. 8:37) means a lot more coming from Paul than coming from five-year-old\nkids. Paul actually went experiences of tribulation, distress, persecution, famine,\nnakedness, peril and sword (as verse 35). When a man goes through such\nexperiences and emerges victorious in Christ, that is deeply edifying to other " ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:tableOfContents "LIVING UNDER GOD'S LAW: CHRISTIAN ETHICS CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION Why Study Ethics What Should Be Our Ethical Bias? CHAPTER 2 - AN ETHICAL GLOSSARY Ethics and Theology Value Terms CHAPTER 3 - ETHICS AND DIVINIE LORDSHIP The Lordship Attributes The Lordship Attributes and Christian Decision-Making Triperspetivalism and the Reformed Faith Part Two: Non-Christian Ethics CHAPTER 4 - LORDSHIP AND NON-CHRISTIAN ETHICS Transcendence and Immanence Irrationalism and Rationalism Specifically Ethical Interpretations of the Rectangle Three Ethical Principles Are the Three Principles Consistent? Teleological Ethics CHAPTER 5 - ETHICS AND THE RELIGIONS Outline of the Treatise on Ethics Ethics and Religion Ethics Based on Fate Ethics as Self-Realization Ethics as Law Without Gospel CHAPTER 6: THE EXISTENTIAL TRADITION Philosophy and Ethics The Existential Focus The Sophists Hume and Rousseau Karl Marx Ludwig Wittgenstein Emotivism Existentialism Postmodernism Friedrich Nietzsche CHAPTER 7 - THE TELEOLOGICAL TRADITION Cyrenaicism Epicurus Aristotle Utilitarianism John Dewey CHAPTER 8 - THE DEONTOLOGICAL TRADITION Plato Cynicism Stoicism Immanuel Kant Idealism Moore and Prichard Conclusions on Non-Christian Ethical Philosophy Part Three: Christian Ethical Methodology CHAPTER 9 - THE ORGANISM OF REVELATIONS God Himself as Ethical Norm The Word of God as Norm The Unity of the Word CHAPTER 10 - ATTRIBUTES OF SCRIPTURE Power Authority Clarity Comprehensiveness Necessity CHAPTER 11 - THE SUFFICIENCY OF SCRIPTURE Confessional Formulation Biblical Basis General and Particular Sufficiency The Use of Extra-Biblical Data The Logic of Application Adiaphora The Strong and the Weak CHAPTER 12 - LAW IN BIBLICAL ETHICS God's Law as the Christian's Norm Law and Gospel Law and Love Moral Heroism CHAPTER 13 - APPLYING THE LAW Creation Ordinances The Decalogue and the Case Laws Old and New Covenants Moral, Ceremonial, and Judicial Law Theonomy Priorities Tragic Moral Choice Casuistry CHAPTER 14 - SITUATION AND NORM Natural La
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: w CHAPTER 15 - OUR ETHICAL SITUATION God The Angels Human Society Living With Ourselves Our Natural Environment CHAPTER 16 - REDEMPTIVE HISTORY Narrative The Redemptive Story The Two Ages Ethics and the Millennium Ethics and Eschatology in Scripture Between the Resurrection and the Parousia: Bearing the Burdens of Change and of Knwledge Ethics, Preaching, and Biblical Theology CHAPTER 17 - OUR CHIEF END The Doctrine of the Twofold End To Glorify God To Enjoy Him Forever The Kingdom of God The Cultural Mandate and the Great Commission Vocation Short Range Goals CHAPTER 18 - GOODNESS AND BEING God's Image and Human Goodness God's Imange and the Fall God's Image and Redemption CHAPTER 19 - MOTIVES AND VIRTUES A Christian Virtue Ethic Faith Repentance Hope Love Other Motive-Virtues in the New Testament The Fear of the Lord CHAPTER 20 - THE NEW LIFE AS A SOURCE OF ETHICAL KNOWLEDGE Ethical Knowledge a Product of Sanctification Intellectual Knowledge and Ethical Knowledge Moral Discernment The Doctrine of Guidance CHAPTER 21 - THE ORGANS OF ETHICAL KNOWLEDGE The Heart Conscience Experience Reason Will Imagination The Emotions The Pathos Game " .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 36, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:ca6fd3ae-1891-916a-e48b-0dc0e4f93e8e' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '102058', new value: 'urn:uuid:cee1022d-de53-3f6b-8293-cea5be7c3c52')
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:ca6fd3ae-1891-916a-e48b-0dc0e4f93e8e> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:ca6fd3ae-1891-916a-e48b-0dc0e4f93e8e> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "G & S Kopchinski"] ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 2 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "IFC6410\nSnapdragonâ¢ S4 Pro Pico-ITX Single-Board Computer\nProcessing, Power, and Performance\nï¨ QualcommÂ® Snapdragonâ¢ S4 Pro APQ8064\nï¨ Quad core Krait , 1.7GHz, 2MB L2 cache\nï¨ 2 GB on-board DDR3\nï¨ Independent Clock Scaling Per Core\nConnectivity, Storage & I/O\nï¨ MicroSD card connector, External SATA,\neMMC 4GB\nï¨ ÂµHDMI output HD1080p Video\nHigh performance, Cost-effective solution\nbased on the Snapdragon S4 Pro chipset\nThe IFC6410 is an ultra-small, cost-effective single-\nboard computer solution for embedded developers in a\nï¨ Available interface for LVDS-based flat panel\nand touch screen display\nï¨ HD Audio and Mic-in\nï¨ Supports up to a 20MP Camera MIPI-CSI2\nconvenient Pico-ITX standard form factor. The IFC6410 ï¨ Bluetooth 4.0 and Wi-Fi via Atheros QCA6234\nprovides developers access to the rich I/O features of the ï¨ Standard I/O interfaces including GbE, I2C,\nSnapdragon S4 Pro System-on-Chip at a cost that will not\nbreak your budget. The standalone IFC6410 provides quad\nSPI, UART, UIM, GPIOs, etc. and on-board\nSerial Console and USB\ncore A15 class computing in a space-saving footprint with\neasy access to industry standard I/Os which creates the\nperfect environment for a variety of unique Android and\nLinux\nbased\nsignage,\nthin\nmultimedia\nclients,\napplications\nindustrial\nincluding\nrobotics,\nconferencing.\nFeatures of Snapdragon APQ8064\nand\ndigital\nvideo\nThin Clients\nMedical\nEquipment\nVideo\nSurveillance\nï¨ High Performance A15-class Computing\nï¨ Best-in-class energy efficiency with\ndedicated power management\nï¨ Best-in-class GPU performance\nï¨ Rich multimedia 1080p capabilities\nï¨ Dedicated DSP for Audio Processing\nRobotics\nVideo\nConferencing\nDigital\nSignage Block Diagram\n2x2 WiFi/BT\nQCA6234\nPMIC\nPMM8920\n+5vDC-in (LED)\n2GB DDR3\nGigE\nAtheros 8151\nSerial Port\nSnapdragon\nS4 Pro\nAPQ8064\nMicro USB (OTG)\n2x USB host\nMicro-SD\nÂµHMDI\n4GB eMMC\nI/O Expansion*\n(I2C, SPI, UIM, UART, GPIOs)\nHD Audio/Mic
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nMIPI-CSI\nLVDS with\nBacklight\nSATA\n* Not all interfaces can be used at the same time\nTechnical Specifications\nProcessor, GPU, and Memory Network Interfaces\nï¨ Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro APQ8064 Quad ï¨ 802.11 b/g/n WiFi + Bluetooth 4.0\nï¨ 10/100/1000bps Ethernet\nCore Processor (1.7GHz)\nï¨ 2GB on-board PCDDR3, up to 533MHz\nï¨ Adreno 320 (QXGA/1080p)\nPower, Mechanical, and Environmental\nStorage Interfaces\nï¨ ÂµSD card connector\nï¨ eMMC 4GB\nï¨ External SATA\nVideo, Audio, and I/O Interfaces\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nÂµHDMI for HD1080p\nLVDS\nMIPI-CSI2 (4-lane)\nHD Audio and Mic-in\n2x USB 2.0\n1x USB OTG\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nPower: +5V Input Socket (3A typ.)\nDimensions: 10cm x 7cm (Pico-ITX)\nOperating Temp: 0 to 70 C\nStorage Temp: -20 to 80 C\nRelative Humidity: 5 to 95% non-condensing\nRoHS and WEE compliant\nï¨ Serial Console on 3-pin\nheader\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\nï¨\n1x I2C\n1x SPI\n1x UART\nUIM\n8x GPIO\nIndia Sales & Support\nInforce Computing India Pvt Ltd.\n#24, 3 rd Floor, 1 st Cross, Magrath Road\nBangalore, 560025, India\nPhone: +91 80 2556 6699\nwww.inforcecomputing.com\nÂ©2013 Inforce Computing, Inc. Specifications subject to change without notice.\nOrdering Info\nPart Number Description Available\nSYS6440-00-P1 Development Kit NOW\nIFC6400-00-P1 Qseven Module NOW\nIFC6410-00-P1 Pico-ITX SBC NOW\nCorporate Headquarters\nInforce Computing Inc.\n48820 Kato Road Ste 600B,\nFremont, CA 94538 USA\nPhone: (510) 683-9999\nsales@inforcecomputing.com\nDocument Number: 001772 Rev A " .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 37, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:644d463e-5fcc-2920-3417-76f290f80a26' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '102060', new value: 'urn:uuid:43d5ddf3-c711-044b-8038-7de2c358e556')
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:644d463e-5fcc-2920-3417-76f290f80a26> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:644d463e-5fcc-2920-3417-76f290f80a26> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "Microsoft Word - Dokument1" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "xsmerk"] ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 12 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 40, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:a7b71284-594a-7c89-1ae7-a13dacb39c0e' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '102084', new value: 'urn:uuid:e497f85f-1978-fb04-a8ac-5db918667aef')
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "electronic components" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "electronic components" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datasheets" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datasheets" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "data sheet" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "data sheet" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "pdf" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "pdf" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datasheetarchive" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datasheetarchive" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "semiconductors" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "semiconductors" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "ics" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "ics" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "transistors" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "transistors" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "diodes" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "diodes" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "thyristors" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "thyristors" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "specsheet" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "specsheet" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "download" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "download" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "rohs" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "rohs" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "equivalent" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "equivalent" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "application notes" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "application notes" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "integrated circuit" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "integrated circuit" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "free" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "free" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "data book" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "data book" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "rfq" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "rfq" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT { GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> { _:tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datablad" }  }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE { FILTER (NOT EXISTS { ?tag a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datablad" }) }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:a7b71284-594a-7c89-1ae7-a13dacb39c0e> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:a7b71284-594a-7c89-1ae7-a13dacb39c0e> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "The DatasheetArchive - Datasheet Search Engine" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:subject "http://www.datasheetarchive.com" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "The DatasheetArchive"] ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag1 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag2 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag3 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag4 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag5 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag6 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag7 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag8 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag9 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag10 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag11 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag12 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag13 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag14 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag15 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag16 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag17 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag18 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag19 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nao:hasTag ?tag20 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 30 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "8088\n8-BIT HMOS MICROPROCESSOR\n8088/8088-2\nY 8-Bit Data Bus Interface Y Byte, Word, and Block Operations\nY 16-Bit Internal Architecture Y Y Direct Addressing Capability to 1 Mbyte\nof Memory 8-Bit and 16-Bit Signed and Unsigned\nArithmetic in Binary or Decimal,\nIncluding Multiply and Divide\nDirect Software Compatibility with 8086\nCPU Y Y Y 14-Word by 16-Bit Register Set with\nSymmetrical Operations Two Clock Rates:\nÃ 5 MHz for 8088\nÃ 8 MHz for 8088-2\nY Available in EXPRESS\nÃ Standard Temperature Range\nÃ Extended Temperature Range\nY\n24 Operand Addressing Modes\nThe Intel 8088 is a high performance microprocessor implemented in N-channel, depletion load, silicon gate\ntechnology (HMOS-II), and packaged in a 40-pin CERDIP package. The processor has attributes of both 8-\nand 16-bit microprocessors. It is directly compatible with 8086 software and 8080/8085 hardware and periph-\nerals.\n231456 â 2\n231456 â 1\nFigure 2. 8088 Pin Configuration\nFigure 1. 8088 CPU Functional Block Diagram\nAugust 1990\nOrder Number: 231456-006 8088\nTable 1. Pin Description\nThe following pin function descriptions are for 8088 systems in either minimum or maximum mode. The ââlocal\nbusââ in these descriptions is the direct multiplexed bus interface connection to the 8088 (without regard to\nadditional bus buffers).\nSymbol\nPin No. Type\nName and Function\nAD7âAD0\n9â16\nI/O ADDRESS DATA BUS: These lines constitute the time multiplexed\nmemory/IO address (T1) and data (T2, T3, Tw, T4) bus. These lines are\nactive HIGH and float to 3-state OFF during interrupt acknowledge and\nlocal bus ââhold acknowledgeââ.\nA15âA8\n2â8, 39\nO\nADDRESS BUS: These lines provide address bits 8 through 15 for the\nentire bus cycle (T1 â T4). These lines do not have to be latched by ALE\nto remain valid. A15 â A8 are active HIGH and float to 3-state OFF\nduring interrupt acknowledge and local bus ââhold acknowledgeââ.\nA19/S6, A18/S5, 35â38\nO\nADDRESS/STATUS: During T1, th
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ese are the four most significant\nA17/S4, A16/S3\naddress lines for memory operations. During I/O operations, these lines\nare LOW. During memory and I/O operations, status information is\navailable on these lines during T2, T3, Tw, and T4. S6 is always low.\nThe status of the interrupt enable flag bit (S5) is updated at the\nbeginning of each clock cycle. S4 and S3 are encoded as shown.\nThis information indicates which segment register is presently being\nused for data accessing.\nThese lines float to 3-state OFF during local bus ââhold acknowledgeââ.\nS4\nS3\nCharacteristics\n0 (LOW)\n0\nAlternate Data\n0\n1\nStack\n1 (HIGH)\n0\nCode or None\n1\n1\nData\nS6 is 0 (LOW)\nRD\n32\nO\nREAD: Read strobe indicates that the processor is performing a\nmemory or I/O read cycle, depending on the state of the IO/M pin or\nS2. This signal is used to read devices which reside on the 8088 local\nbus. RD is active LOW during T2, T3 and Tw of any read cycle, and is\nguaranteed to remain HIGH in T2 until the 8088 local bus has floated.\nThis signal floats to 3-state OFF in ââhold acknowledgeââ.\nREADY\n22\nI\nREADY: is the acknowledgement from the addressed memory or I/O\ndevice that it will complete the data transfer. The RDY signal from\nmemory or I/O is synchronized by the 8284 clock generator to form\nREADY. This signal is active HIGH. The 8088 READY input is not\nsynchronized. Correct operation is not guaranteed if the set up and hold\ntimes are not met.\nINTR\n18\nI\nINTERRUPT REQUEST: is a level triggered input which is sampled\nduring the last clock cycle of each instruction to determine if the\nprocessor should enter into an interrupt acknowledge operation. A\nsubroutine is vectored to via an interrupt vector lookup table located in\nsystem memory. It can be internally masked by software resetting the\ninterrupt enable bit. INTR is internally synchronized. This signal is active\nHIGH.\nTEST\n23\nI\nTEST: input is examined by the ââwait for testââ instruction. If the TEST\ninput is LOW, executio
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n continues, otherwise the processor waits in an\nââidleââ state. This input is synchronized internally during each clock\ncycle on the leading edge of CLK.\n2 8088\nTable 1. Pin Description (Continued)\nSymbol\nNMI Pin No.\n17 Type\nI Name and Function\nNON-MASKABLE INTERRUPT: is an edge triggered input which causes a\ntype 2 interrupt. A subroutine is vectored to via an interrupt vector lookup\ntable located in system memory. NMI is not maskable internally by\nsoftware. A transition from a LOW to HIGH initiates the interrupt at the end\nof the current instruction. This input is internally synchronized.\nRESET 21 I RESET: causes the processor to immediately terminate its present activity.\nThe signal must be active HIGH for at least four clock cycles. It restarts\nexecution, as described in the instruction set description, when RESET\nreturns LOW. RESET is internally synchronized.\nCLK 19 I CLOCK: provides the basic timing for the processor and bus controller. It is\nasymmetric with a 33% duty cycle to provide optimized internal timing.\nV CC : is the a 5V g 10% power supply pin.\nV CC\nGND\nMN/MX\n40\n1, 20\n33\nI\nGND: are the ground pins.\nMINIMUM/MAXIMUM: indicates what mode the processor is to operate in.\nThe two modes are discussed in the following sections.\nThe following pin function descriptions are for the 8088 minimum mode (i.e., MN/MX e V CC ). Only the pin\nfunctions which are unique to minimum mode are described; all other pin functions are as described above.\nSymbol Pin No. Type\nName and Function\nIO/M\n28\nO\nSTATUS LINE: is an inverted maximum mode S2. It is used to distinguish a\nmemory access from an I/O access. IO/M becomes valid in the T4 preceding a\nbus cycle and remains valid until the final T4 of the cycle (I/O e HIGH, M e\nLOW). IO/M floats to 3-state OFF in local bus ââhold acknowledgeââ.\nWR\n29\nO\nWRITE: strobe indicates that the processor is performing a write memory or write\nI/O cycle, depending on the state of the IO/M signal. WR is active for T2, T3, and\nTw
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of any write cycle. It is active LOW, and floats to 3-state OFF in local bus\nââhold acknowledgeââ.\nINTA\n24\nO\nINTA: is used as a read strobe for interrupt acknowledge cycles. It is active LOW\nduring T2, T3, and Tw of each interrupt acknowledge cycle.\nALE\n25\nO\nADDRESS LATCH ENABLE: is provided by the processor to latch the address\ninto an address latch. It is a HIGH pulse active during clock low of T1 of any bus\ncycle. Note that ALE is never floated.\nDT/R\n27\nO\nDATA TRANSMIT/RECEIVE: is needed in a minimum system that desires to use\na data bus transceiver. It is used to control the direction of data flow through the\ntransceiver. Logically, DT/R is equivalent to S1 in the maximum mode, and its\ntiming is the same as for IO/M (T e HIGH, R e LOW). This signal floats to\n3-state OFF in local ââhold acknowledgeââ.\nDEN\n26\nO\nDATA ENABLE: is provided as an output enable for the data bus transceiver in a\nminimum system which uses the transceiver. DEN is active LOW during each\nmemory and I/O access, and for INTA cycles. For a read or INTA cycle, it is\nactive from the middle of T2 until the middle of T4, while for a write cycle, it is\nactive from the beginning of T2 until the middle of T4. DEN floats to 3-state OFF\nduring local bus ââhold acknowledgeââ.\n3 8088\nTable 1. Pin Description (Continued)\nSymbol Pin No. Type\nName and Function\nHOLD,\n31, 30\nI, O HOLD: indicates that another master is requesting a local bus ââholdââ. To be\nHLDA\nacknowledged, HOLD must be active HIGH. The processor receiving the ââholdââ\nrequest will issue HLDA (HIGH) as an acknowledgement, in the middle of a T4 or\nTi clock cycle. Simultaneous with the issuance of HLDA the processor will float\nthe local bus and control lines. After HOLD is detected as being LOW, the\nprocessor lowers HLDA, and when the processor needs to run another cycle, it\nwill again drive the local bus and control lines. HOLD and HLDA have internal\npull-up resistors.\nHold is not an asynchronous input. Ext
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ernal synchronization should be provided if\nthe system cannot otherwise guarantee the set up time.\nSSO\n34\nO\nSTATUS LINE: is logically equivalent to SO in the maximum mode. The\ncombination of SSO, IO/M and DT/R allows the system to completely decode the\ncurrent bus cycle status.\nIO/M\n1(HIGH)\n1\n1\n1\n0(LOW)\n0\n0\n0\nDT/R SSO\n0\n0\n1\n1\n0\n0\n1\n1 0\n1\n0\n1\n0\n1\n0\n1\nCharacteristics\nInterrupt Acknowledge\nRead I/O Port\nWrite I/O Port\nHalt\nCode Access\nRead Memory\nWrite Memory\nPassive\nThe following pin function descriptions are for the 8088/8288 system in maximum mode (i.e., MN/MX e\nGND). Only the pin functions which are unique to maximum mode are described; all other pin functions are as\ndescribed above.\nSymbol Pin No. Type\nName and Function\nS2, S1, S0 26â28\nO\nSTATUS: is active during clock high of T4, T1, and T2, and is returned to the\npassive state (1,1,1) during T3 or during Tw when READY is HIGH. This status is\nused by the 8288 bus controller to generate all memory and I/O access control\nsignals. Any change by S2, S1, or S0 during T4 is used to indicate the beginning\nof a bus cycle, and the return to the passive state in T3 and Tw is used to\nindicate the end of a bus cycle.\nThese signals float to 3-state OFF during ââhold acknowledgeââ. During the first\nclock cycle after RESET becomes active, these signals are active HIGH. After\nthis first clock, they float to 3-state OFF.\nS2\nS1\nS0\nCharacteristics\n0(LOW)\n0\n0\nInterrupt Acknowledge\n0\n0\n1\nRead I/O Port\n0\n1\n0\nWrite I/O Port\n0\n1\n1\nHalt\n1(HIGH)\n0\n0\nCode Access\n1\n0\n1\nRead Memory\n1\n1\n0\nWrite Memory\n1\n1\n1\nPassive\n4 8088\nTable 1. Pin Description (Continued)\nSymbol\nRQ/GT0,\nRQ/GT1\nLOCK\nQS1, QS0\nPin No.\n30, 31 Type\nI/O Name and Function\nREQUEST/GRANT: pins are used by other local bus masters to force the\nprocessor to release the local bus at the end of the processorâs current bus\ncycle. Each pin is bidirectional with RQ/GT0 having higher priority than RQ/\nGT1. RQ/GT has an i
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nternal pull-up resistor, so may be left unconnected.\nThe request/grant sequence is as follows (See Figure 8):\n1. A pulse of one CLK wide from another local bus master indicates a local\nbus request (ââholdââ) to the 8088 (pulse 1).\n2. During a T4 or TI clock cycle, a pulse one clock wide from the 8088 to the\nrequesting master (pulse 2), indicates that the 8088 has allowed the local\nbus to float and that it will enter the ââhold acknowledgeââ state at the next\nCLK. The CPUâs bus interface unit is disconnected logically from the local\nbus during ââhold acknowledgeââ. The same rules as for HOLD/HOLDA apply\nas for when the bus is released.\n3. A pulse one CLK wide from the requesting master indicates to the 8088\n(pulse 3) that the ââholdââ request is about to end and that the 8088 can\nreclaim the local bus at the next CLK. The CPU then enters T4.\nEach master-master exchange of the local bus is a sequence of three\npulses. There must be one idle CLK cycle after each bus exchange. Pulses\nare active LOW.\nIf the request is made while the CPU is performing a memory cycle, it will\nrelease the local bus during T4 of the cycle when all the following conditions\nare met:\n1. Request occurs on or before T2.\n2. Current cycle is not the low bit of a word.\n3. Current cycle is not the first acknowledge of an interrupt acknowledge\nsequence.\n4. A locked instruction is not currently executing.\nIf the local bus is idle when the request is made the two possible events will\nfollow:\n1. Local bus will be released during the next clock.\n2. A memory cycle will start within 3 clocks. Now the four rules for a currently\nactive memory cycle apply with condition number 1 already satisfied.\n29 O LOCK: indicates that other system bus masters are not to gain control of the\nsystem bus while LOCK is active (LOW). The LOCK signal is activated by\nthe ââLOCKââ prefix instruction and remains active until the completion of the\nnext instruction. This signal is active LOW, and floats to 3
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: -state off in ââhold\nacknowledgeââ.\n24, 25 O QUEUE STATUS: provide status to allow external tracking of the internal\n8088 instruction queue.\nThe queue status is valid during the CLK cycle after which the queue\noperation is performed.\nQS1\n0(LOW)\n0\n1(HIGH)\n1\nÃ\n34\nO\nQS0\n0\n1\n0\n1\nCharacteristics\nNo Operation\nFirst Byte of Opcode from Queue\nEmpty the Queue\nSubsequent Byte from Queue\nPin 34 is always high in the maximum mode.\n5 8088\n231456 â 3\nFigure 3. Memory Organization\nFUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTION\nMemory Organization\nThe processor provides a 20-bit address to memory\nwhich locates the byte being referenced. The memo-\nry is organized as a linear array of up to 1 million\nbytes, addressed as 00000(H) to FFFFF(H). The\nmemory is logically divided into code, data, extra\ndata, and stack segments of up to 64K bytes each,\nwith each segment falling on 16-byte boundaries\n(See Figure 3).\nAll memory references are made relative to base ad-\ndresses contained in high speed segment registers.\nThe segment types were chosen based on the ad-\nMemory\nReference Used\n6\nSegment\nRegister Used\ndressing needs of programs. The segment register\nto be selected is automatically chosen according to\nthe rules of the following table. All information in one\nsegment type share the same logical attributes (e.g.\ncode or data). By structuring memory into relocat-\nable areas of similar characteristics and by automati-\ncally selecting segment registers, programs are\nshorter, faster, and more structured.\nWord (16-bit) operands can be located on even or\nodd address boundaries. For address and data oper-\nands, the least significant byte of the word is stored\nin the lower valued address location and the most\nsignificant byte in the next higher address location.\nThe BIU will automatically execute two fetch or write\ncycles for 16-bit operands.\nSegment Selection Rule\nInstructions CODE (CS) Automatic with all instruction prefetch.\nStack STACK (SS) All stack pushes and pops. Memory references\nrelat
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ive to BP base register except data references.\nLocal Data DATA (DS) Data references when: relative to stack, destination\nof string operation, or explicity overridden.\nExternal (Global) Data EXTRA (ES) Destination of string operations: Explicitly selected\nusing a segment override. 8088\nCertain locations in memory are reserved for specific\nCPU operations (See Figure 4). Locations from ad-\ndresses FFFF0H through FFFFFH are reserved for\noperations including a jump to the initial system ini-\ntialization routine. Following RESET, the CPU will al-\nways begin execution at location FFFF0H where the\njump must be located. Locations 00000H through\n003FFH are reserved for interrupt operations. Four-\nbyte pointers consisting of a 16-bit segment address\nand a 16-bit offset address direct program flow to\none of the 256 possible interrupt service routines.\nThe pointer elements are assumed to have been\nstored at their respective places in reserved memory\nprior to the occurrence of interrupts. figuration. The definition of a certain subset of the\npins changes, dependent on the condition of the\nstrap pin. When the MN/MX pin is strapped to GND,\nthe 8088 defines pins 24 through 31 and 34 in maxi-\nmum mode. When the MN/MX pin is strapped to\nV CC , the 8088 generates bus control signals itself on\npins 24 through 31 and 34.\nMinimum and Maximum Modes The demultiplexed mode requires one latch (for 64K\naddressability) or two latches (for a full megabyte of\naddressing). A third latch can be used for buffering if\nthe address bus loading requires it. A transceiver\ncan also be used if data bus buffering is required\n(See Figure 6). The 8088 provides DEN and DT/R to\ncontrol the transceiver, and ALE to latch the ad-\ndresses. This configuration of the minimum mode\nprovides the standard demultiplexed bus structure\nwith heavy bus buffering and relaxed bus timing re-\nquirements.\nThe requirements for supporting minimum and maxi-\nmum 8088 systems are sufficiently different that\nthey cannot be done efficiently with
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 40 uniquely de-\nfined pins. Consequently, the 8088 is equipped with\na strap pin (MN/MX) which defines the system con-\nThe minimum mode 8088 can be used with either a\nmultiplexed or demultiplexed bus. The multiplexed\nbus configuration is compatible with the MCS-85\nmultiplexed bus peripherals. This configuration (See\nFigure 5) provides the user with a minimum chip\ncount system. This architecture provides the 8088\nprocessing power in a highly integrated form.\nThe maximum mode employs the 8288 bus control-\nler (See Figure 7). The 8288 decodes status lines\nS0, S1, and S2, and provides the system with all bus\ncontrol signals. Moving the bus control to the 8288\nprovides better source and sink current capability to\nthe control lines, and frees the 8088 pins for extend-\ned large system features. Hardware lock, queue\nstatus, and two request/grant interfaces are provid-\ned by the 8088 in maximum mode. These features\nallow co-processors in local bus and remote bus\nconfigurations.\n231456 â 4\nFigure 4. Reserved Memory Locations\n7 8088\n231456 â 5\nFigure 5. Multiplexed Bus Configuration\n8 8088\n231456 â 6\nFigure 6. Demultiplexed Bus Configuration\n231456 â 7\nFigure 7. Fully Buffered System Using Bus Controller\n9 8088\nBus Operation\nThe 8088 address/data bus is broken into three\npartsÃthe lower eight address/data bits (AD0 â\nAD7), the middle eight address bits (A8âA15), and\nthe upper four address bits (A16âA19). The ad-\ndress/data bits and the highest four address bits are\ntime multiplexed. This technique provides the most\nefficient use of pins on the processor, permitting the\nuse of a standard 40 lead package. The middle eight\naddress bits are not multiplexed, i.e. they remain val-\nid throughout each bus cycle. In addition, the bus\ncan be demultiplexed at the processor with a single\naddress latch if a standard, non-multiplexed bus is\ndesired for the system.\nEach processor bus cycle consists of at least four\nCLK cycles. These are referred to as T1, T2, T3, and\nT4 (See Fi
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: gure 8). The address is emitted from the\nprocessor during T1 and data transfer occurs on the\nbus during T3 and T4. T2 is used primarily for chang-\n231456 â 8\nFigure 8. Basic System Timing\n10 8088\ning the direction of the bus during read operations. In\nthe event that a ââNOT READYââ indication is given\nby the addressed device, ââwaitââ states (Tw) are in-\nserted between T3 and T4. Each inserted ââwaitââ\nstate is of the same duration as a CLK cycle. Periods\ncan occur between 8088 driven bus cycles. These\nare referred to as ââidleââ states (Ti), or inactive CLK\ncycles. The processor uses these cycles for internal\nhousekeeping.\nDuring T1 of any bus cycle, the ALE (address latch\nenable) signal is emitted (by either the processor or\nthe 8288 bus controller, depending on the MN/MX\nstrap). At the trailing edge of this pulse, a valid ad-\ndress and certain status information for the cycle\nmay be latched.\nwhich use register DX as a pointer, have full address\ncapability, while the direct I/O instructions directly\naddress one or two of the 256 I/O byte locations in\npage 0 of the I/O address space. I/O ports are ad-\ndressed in the same manner as memory locations.\nDesigners familiar with the 8085 or upgrading an\n8085 design should note that the 8085 addresses\nI/O with an 8-bit address on both halves of the 16-\nbit address bus. The 8088 uses a full 16-bit address\non its lower 16 address lines.\nEXTERNAL INTERFACE\nProcessor Reset and Initialization\nStatus bits S0, S1, and S2 are used by the bus con-\ntroller, in maximum mode, to identify the type of bus\ntransaction according to the following table:\nS2 S1 S0 Characteristics\n0(LOW)\n0\n0\n0\n1(HIGH)\n1\n1\n1 0\n0\n1\n1\n0\n0\n1\n1 0\n1\n0\n1\n0\n1\n0\n1 Interrupt Acknowledge\nRead I/O\nWrite I/O\nHalt\nInstruction Fetch\nRead Data from Memory\nWrite Data to Memory\nPassive (No Bus Cycle)\nStatus bits S3 through S6 are multiplexed with high\norder address bits and are therefore valid during T2\nthrough T4. S3 and S
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 4 indicate which segment reg-\nister was used for this bus cycle in forming the ad-\ndress according to the following table:\nProcessor initialization or start up is accomplished\nwith activation (HIGH) of the RESET pin. The 8088\nRESET is required to be HIGH for greater than four\nclock cycles. The 8088 will terminate operations on\nthe high-going edge of RESET and will remain dor-\nmant as long as RESET is HIGH. The low-going\ntransition of RESET triggers an internal reset se-\nquence for approximately 7 clock cycles. After this\ninterval the 8088 operates normally, beginning with\nthe instruction in absolute locations FFFF0H (See\nFigure 4). The RESET input is internally synchroniz-\ned to the processor clock. At initialization, the HIGH\nto LOW transition of RESET must occur no sooner\nthan 50 ms after power up, to allow complete initiali-\nzation of the 8088.\nS 4 S 3 Characteristics NMI asserted prior to the 2nd clock after the end of\nRESET will not be honored. If NMI is asserted after\nthat point and during the internal reset sequence,\nthe processor may execute one instruction before\nresponding to the interrupt. A hold request active\nimmediately after RESET will be honored before the\nfirst instruction fetch.\n0(LOW)\n0\n1(HIGH)\n1 0\n1\n0\n1 Alternate Data (Extra Segment)\nStack\nCode or None\nData All 3-state outputs float to 3-state OFF during\nRESET. Status is active in the idle state for the first\nclock after RESET becomes active and then floats\nto 3-state OFF. ALE and HLDA are driven low.\nS5 is a reflection of the PSW interrupt enable bit. S6\nis always equal to 0.\nI/O Addressing\nIn the 8088, I/O operations can address up to a\nmaximum of 64K I/O registers. The I/O address ap-\npears in the same format as the memory address on\nbus lines A15âA0. The address lines A19âA16 are\nzero in I/O operations. The variable I/O instructions,\nInterrupt Operations\nInterrupt operations fall into two classes: software or\nhardware initiated. The software initiated interrupts\nand software aspects of h
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ardware interrupts are\nspecified in the instruction set description in the\niAPX 88 book or the iAPX 86,88 Userâs Manual.\nHardware interrupts can be classified as nonmaska-\nble or maskable.\n11 8088\nInterrupts result in a transfer of control to a new pro-\ngram location. A 256 element table containing ad-\ndress pointers to the interrupt service program loca-\ntions resides in absolute locations 0 through 3FFH\n(See Figure 4), which are reserved for this purpose.\nEach element in the table is 4 bytes in size and cor-\nresponds to an interrupt ââtype.ââ An interrupting de-\nvice supplies an 8-bit type number, during the inter-\nrupt acknowledge sequence, which is used to vector\nthrough the appropriate element to the new interrupt\nservice program location.\nNon-Maskable Interrupt (NMI)\nThe processor provides a single non-maskable inter-\nrupt (NMI) pin which has higher priority than the\nmaskable interrupt request (INTR) pin. A typical use\nwould be to activate a power failure routine. The\nNMI is edge-triggered on a LOW to HIGH transition.\nThe activation of this pin causes a type 2 interrupt.\nenable bit will be zero unless specifically set by an\ninstruction.\nDuring the response sequence (See Figure 9), the\nprocessor executes two successive (back to back)\ninterrupt acknowledge cycles. The 8088 emits the\nLOCK signal (maximum mode only) from T2 of the\nfirst bus cycle until T2 of the second. A local bus\nââholdââ request will not be honored until the end of\nthe second bus cycle. In the second bus cycle, a\nbyte is fetched from the external interrupt system\n(e.g., 8259A PIC) which identifies the source (type)\nof the interrupt. This byte is multiplied by four and\nused as a pointer into the interrupt vector lookup\ntable. An INTR signal left HIGH will be continually\nresponded to within the limitations of the enable bit\nand sample period. The interrupt return instruction\nincludes a flags pop which returns the status of the\noriginal interrupt enable bit when it restores the\nflags.\
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nNMI is required to have a duration in the HIGH state\nof greater than two clock cycles, but is not required\nto be synchronized to the clock. Any higher going\ntransition of NMI is latched on-chip and will be serv-\niced at the end of the current instruction or between\nwhole moves (2 bytes in the case of word moves) of\na block type instruction. Worst case response to\nNMI would be for multiply, divide, and variable shift\ninstructions. There is no specification on the occur-\nrence of the low-going edge; it may occur before,\nduring, or after the servicing of NMI. Another high-\ngoing edge triggers another response if it occurs af-\nter the start of the NMI procedure. The signal must\nbe free of logical spikes in general and be free of\nbounces on the low-going edge to avoid triggering\nextraneous responses. HALT\nMaskable Interrupt (INTR) Read/Modify/Write (Semaphore)\nOperations via LOCK\nThe 8088 provides a single interrupt request input\n(INTR) which can be masked internally by software\nwith the resetting of the interrupt enable (IF) flag bit.\nThe interrupt request signal is level triggered. It is\ninternally synchronized during each clock cycle on\nthe high-going edge of CLK. To be responded to,\nINTR must be present (HIGH) during the clock peri-\nod preceding the end of the current instruction or the\nend of a whole move for a block type instruction.\nDuring interrupt response sequence, further inter-\nrupts are disabled. The enable bit is reset as part of\nthe response to any interrupt (INTR, NMI, software\ninterrupt, or single step), although the FLAGS regis-\nter which is automatically pushed onto the stack re-\nflects the state of the processor prior to the inter-\nrupt. Until the old FLAGS register is restored, the\n12\nWhen a software HALT instruction is executed, the\nprocessor indicates that it is entering the HALT state\nin one of two ways, depending upon which mode is\nstrapped. In minimum mode, the processor issues\nALE, delayed by one clock cycle, to allow the sys-\ntem to latch the halt st
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: atus. Halt status is available\non IO/M, DT/R, and SSO. In maximum mode, the\nprocessor issues appropriate HALT status on S2,\nS1, and S0, and the 8288 bus controller issues one\nALE. The 8088 will not leave the HALT state when a\nlocal bus hold is entered while in HALT. In this case,\nthe processor reissues the HALT indicator at the\nend of the local bus hold. An interrupt request or\nRESET will force the 8088 out of the HALT state.\nThe LOCK status information is provided by the\nprocessor when consecutive bus cycles are required\nduring the execution of an instruction. This allows\nthe processor to perform read/modify/write opera-\ntions on memory (via the ââexchange register with\nmemoryââ instruction), without another system bus\nmaster receiving intervening memory cycles. This is\nuseful in multiprocessor system configurations to ac-\ncomplish ââtest and set lockââ operations. The LOCK\nsignal is activated (LOW) in the clock cycle following\ndecoding of the LOCK prefix instruction. It is deacti-\nvated at the end of the last bus cycle of the instruc-\ntion following the LOCK prefix. While LOCK is active,\na request on a RQ/GT pin will be recorded, and then\nhonored at the end of the LOCK. 8088\n231456 â 9\nFigure 9. Interrupt Acknowledge Sequence\nExternal Synchronization via TEST\nAs an alternative to interrupts, the 8088 provides a\nsingle software-testable input pin (TEST). This input\nis utilized by executing a WAIT instruction. The sin-\ngle WAIT instruction is repeatedly executed until the\nTEST input goes active (LOW). The execution of\nWAIT does not consume bus cycles once the queue\nis full.\nIf a local bus request occurs during WAIT execution,\nthe 8088 3-states all output drivers. If interrupts are\nenabled, the 8088 will recognize interrupts and pro-\ncess them. The WAIT instruction is then refetched,\nand reexecuted.\nBasic System Timing\nIn minimum mode, the MN/MX pin is strapped to\nV CC and the processor emits bus control signals\ncompatible with the 8085 bus structure. In
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: maximum\nmode, the MN/MX pin is strapped to GND and the\nprocessor emits coded status information which the\n8288 bus controller uses to generate MULTIBUS\ncompatible bus control signals.\nSystem TimingÃMinimum System\n(See Figure 8)\ngoing) edge of this signal is used to latch the ad-\ndress information, which is valid on the address/\ndata bus (AD0 â AD7) at this time, into the\n8282/8283 latch. Address lines A8 through A15 do\nnot need to be latched because they remain valid\nthroughout the bus cycle. From T1 to T4 the IO/M\nsignal indicates a memory or I/O operation. At T2\nthe address is removed from the address/data bus\nand the bus goes to a high impedance state. The\nread control signal is also asserted at T2. The read\n(RD) signal causes the addressed device to enable\nits data bus drivers to the local bus. Some time later,\nvalid data will be available on the bus and the ad-\ndressed device will drive the READY line HIGH.\nWhen the processor returns the read signal to a\nHIGH level, the addressed device will again 3-state\nits bus drivers. If a transceiver is required to buffer\nthe 8088 local bus, signals DT/R and DEN are pro-\nvided by the 8088.\nA write cycle also begins with the assertion of ALE\nand the emission of the address. The IO/M signal is\nagain asserted to indicate a memory or I/O write\noperation. In T2, immediately following the address\nemission, the processor emits the data to be written\ninto the addressed location. This data remains valid\nuntil at least the middle of T4. During T2, T3, and\nTw, the processor asserts the write control signal.\nThe write (WR) signal becomes active at the begin-\nning of T2, as opposed to the read, which is delayed\nsomewhat into T2 to provide time for the bus to\nfloat.\nThe read cycle begins in T1 with the assertion of the\naddress latch enable (ALE) signal. The trailing (low\n13 8088\nThe basic difference between the interrupt acknowl-\nedge cycle and a read cycle is that the interrupt ac-\nknowledge (INTA) signal is asserted in place of the\nrea
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d (RD) signal and the address bus is floated.\n(See Figure 9) In the second of two successive INTA\ncycles, a byte of information is read from the data\nbus, as supplied by the interrupt system logic (i.e.\n8259A priority interrupt controller). This byte identi-\nfies the source (type) of the interrupt. It is multiplied\nby four and used as a pointer into the interrupt vec-\ntor lookup table, as described earlier.\nBus TimingÃMedium Complexity\nSystems\n(See Figure 10)\nFor medium complexity systems, the MN/MX pin is\nconnected to GND and the 8288 bus controller is\nadded to the system, as well as a latch for latching\nthe system address, and a transceiver to allow for\nbus loading greater than the 8088 is capable of han-\ndling. Signals ALE, DEN, and DT/R are generated\nby the 8288 instead of the processor in this configu-\nration, although their timing remains relatively the\nsame. The 8088 status outputs (S2, S1, and S0) pro-\nvide type of cycle information and become 8288 in-\nputs. This bus cycle information specifies read\n(code, data, or I/O), write (data or I/O), interrupt ac-\nknowledge, or software halt. The 8288 thus issues\ncontrol signals specifying memory read or write, I/O\nread or write, or interrupt acknowledge. The 8288\nprovides two types of write strobes, normal and ad-\nvanced, to be applied as required. The normal write\nstrobes have data valid at the leading edge of write.\nThe advanced write strobes have the same timing\nas read strobes, and hence, data is not valid at the\nleading edge of write. The transceiver receives the\nusual T and OE inputs from the 8288âs DT/R and\nDEN outputs.\nThe pointer into the interrupt vector table, which is\npassed during the second INTA cycle, can derive\nfrom an 8259A located on either the local bus or the\nsystem bus. If the master 8289A priority interrupt\ncontroller is positioned on the local bus, a TTL gate\nis required to disable the transceiver when reading\nfrom the master 8259A during the interrupt acknowl-\nedge sequence and software ââpol
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lââ.\nThe 8088 Compared to the 8086\nThe 8088 CPU is an 8-bit processor designed\naround the 8086 internal structure. Most internal\nfunctions of the 8088 are identical to the equivalent\n8086 functions. The 8088 handles the external bus\n14\nthe same way the 8086 does with the distinction of\nhandling only 8 bits at a time. Sixteen-bit operands\nare fetched or written in two consecutive bus cycles.\nBoth processors will appear identical to the software\nengineer, with the exception of execution time. The\ninternal register structure is identical and all instruc-\ntions have the same end result. The differences be-\ntween the 8088 and 8086 are outlined below. The\nengineer who is unfamiliar with the 8086 is referred\nto the iAPX 86, 88 Userâs Manual, Chapters 2 and 4,\nfor function description and instruction set informa-\ntion. Internally, there are three differences between\nthe 8088 and the 8086. All changes are related to\nthe 8-bit bus interface.\n# The queue length is 4 bytes in the 8088, whereas\nthe 8086 queue contains 6 bytes, or three words.\nThe queue was shortened to prevent overuse of\nthe bus by the BIU when prefetching instructions.\nThis was required because of the additional time\nnecessary to fetch instructions 8 bits at a time.\n# To further optimize the queue, the prefetching al-\ngorithm was changed. The 8088 BIU will fetch a\nnew instruction to load into the queue each time\nthere is a 1 byte hole (space available) in the\nqueue. The 8086 waits until a 2-byte space is\navailable.\n# The internal execution time of the instruction set\nis affected by the 8-bit interface. All 16-bit fetches\nand writes from/to memory take an additional\nfour clock cycles. The CPU is also limited by the\nspeed of instruction fetches. This latter problem\nonly occurs when a series of simple operations\noccur. When the more sophisticated instructions\nof the 8088 are being used, the queue has time to\nfill and the execution proceeds as fast as the exe-\ncution unit will allow.\nThe 8088 and 8086 are complete
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ly software com-\npatible by virtue of their identical execution units.\nSoftware that is system dependent may not be com-\npletely transferable, but software that is not system\ndependent will operate equally as well on an 8088\nand an 8086.\nThe hardware interface of the 8088 contains the ma-\njor differences between the two CPUs. The pin as-\nsignments are nearly identical, however, with the fol-\nlowing functional changes:\n# A8 â A15ÃThese pins are only address outputs\non the 8088. These address lines are latched in-\nternally and remain valid throughout a bus cycle\nin a manner similar to the 8085 upper address\nlines.\n# BHE has no meaning on the 8088 and has been\neliminated. 8088\n# SSO provides the SO status information in the # IO/M has been inverted to be compatible with the\nminimum mode. This output occurs on pin 34 in\nminimum mode only. DT/R, IO/M, and SSO pro-\nvide the complete bus status in minimum mode. # ALE is delayed by one clock cycle in the mini-\nMCS-85 bus structure.\nmum mode when entering HALT, to allow the\nstatus to be latched with ALE.\n231456 â 10\nFigure 10. Medium Complexity System Timing\n15 8088\nABSOLUTE MAXIMUM RATINGS*\nNOTICE: This is a production data sheet. The specifi-\ncations are subject to change without notice.\nAmbient Temperature Under Bias ÃÃÃÃ0 Â§ C to a 70 Â§ C\nCase Temperature (Plastic) ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ0 Â§ C to a 95 Â§ C\nCase Temperature (CERDIP) ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ0 Â§ C to a 75 Â§ C\nStorage Temperature ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ b 65 Â§ C to a 150 Â§ C\nVoltage on Any Pin with\nRespect to Ground ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ b 1.0 to a 7V\nPower DissipationÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃ2.5 Watt\n* WARNING: Stressing the device beyond the ââAbsolute\nMaximum Ratingsââ may cause permanent damage.\nThese are stress ratings only. Operation beyond the\nââOperating Conditionsââ is not recommended and ex-\ntended exposure beyond the ââOperating Conditionsââ\nmay affect device reliability.\nD.C. CHARACTERISTICS\n(T A e
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 0 Â§ C to 70 Â§ C, T CASE (Plastic) e 0 Â§ C to 95 Â§ C, T CASE (CERDIP) e 0 Â§ C to 75 Â§ C,\nT A e 0 Â§ C to 55 Â§ C and T CASE e 0 Â§ C to 75 Â§ C for P8088-2 only\nT A is guaranteed as long as T CASE is not exceeded)\n(V CC e 5V g 10% for 8088, V CC e 5V g 5% for 8088-2 and Extended Temperature EXPRESS)\nMin Max Units V IL\nSymbol\nInput Low Voltage\nParameter\nb 0.5 a 0.8 V V IH Input High Voltage 2.0 V CC a 0.5 V (Notes 1, 2)\nV OL Output Low Voltage 0.45 V I OL e 2.0 mA\nV OH Output High Voltage V I OH e b 400 mA\nI CC 8088\nPower Supply Current: 8088-2\nP8088 340\n350\n250 mA T A e 25 Â§ C\nI LI Input Leakage Current g 10 mA 0V s V IN s V CC (Note 3)\nI LO Output and I/O Leakage Current g 10 mA 0.45V s V OUT s V CC\nV CL Clock Input Low Voltage b 0.5 a 0.6 V V CH Clock Input High Voltage 3.9 V CC a 1.0 V C IN Capacitance If Input Buffer\n(All Input Except\nAD 0 âAD 7 , RQ/GT) 15 pF fc e 1 MHz\nC IO Capacitance of I/O Buffer\nAD 0 âAD 7 , RQ/GT) 15 pF fc e 1 MHz\n2.4\nNOTES:\n1. V IL tested with MN/MX Pin e 0V\nV IH tested with MN/MX Pin e 5V\nMN/MX Pin is a strap Pin\n2. Not applicable to RQ/GT0 and RQ/GT1 Pins (Pins 30 and 31)\n3. HOLD and HLDA I LI Min e 30 mA, Max e 500 mA\n16\nTest Conditions\n(Note 1) 8088\nA.C. CHARACTERISTICS\n(T A e 0 Â§ C to 70 Â§ C, T CASE (Plastic) e 0 Â§ C to 95 Â§ C, T CASE (CERDIP) e 0 Â§ C to 75 Â§ C,\nT A e 0 Â§ C to 55 Â§ C and T CASE e 0 Â§ C to 80 Â§ C for P8088-2 only\nT A is guaranteed as long as T CASE is not exceeded)\n(V CC e 5V g 10% for 8088, V CC e 5V g 5% for 8088-2 and Extended Temperature EXPRESS)\nMINIMUM COMPLEXITY SYSTEM TIMING REQUIREMENTS\nSymbol\nParameter\n8088\n8088-2\nMin Max Min Max\n500 125 500\nUnits\nTest\nConditions\nTCLCL CLK Cycle Period 200 TCLCH CLK Low Time 118 TCHCL CLK High Time 69 TCH1CH2 CLK Rise Time TCL2CL2 CLK Fall Time TDVCL Data in Setup Time TCLDX Data in Hold Time 10 10 ns TR1VCL RDY Setup Time into 8284\n(Notes 1, 2) 35 35 ns TCLR1X RDY Hold Time into 8284\n(Notes 1, 2) 0 0 ns TRYHCH READY Setup Time\ninto 8088 118 68 ns TC
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: HRYX READY Hold Time\ninto 8088 30 20 ns TRYLCL READY Inactive to CLK\n(Note 3) b 8 b 8 ns THVCH HOLD Setup Time 35 20 ns TINVCH INTR, NMI, TEST Setup Time\n(Note 2) 30 15 ns TILIH Input Rise Time (Except CLK) 20 20 ns From 0.8V to 2.0V\nTIHIL Input Fall Time (Except CLK) 12 12 ns From 2.0V to 0.8V\n68\n44\n10\nns\n10\n10\n30\nns\nns\n10\n20\nns From 1.0V to 3.5V\nns From 3.5V to 1.0V\nns\n17 8088\nA.C. CHARACTERISTICS (Continued)\nTIMING RESPONSES\nSymbol\nParameter\n8088\n8088-2\nMin Max\n110\nTCLAV Address Valid Delay 10\nTCLAX Address Hold Time 10\nTCLAX\nMin Max\n10 60\n10\n80\nTCLAX\nns\nns\nTCLAZ Address Float Delay TLHLL ALE Width TCLLH ALE Active Delay 80 50 ns\nTCHLL ALE Inactive Delay 85 55 ns\nTCLCH b 20\n50\nTCLCH b 10\nns\nns\nTLLAX Address Hold Time to\nALE Inactive TCLDV Data Valid Delay 10 TCHDX Data Hold Time 10 10 TWHDX Data Hold Time after WR TCLCH b 30 TCLCH b 30 TCVCTV Control Active Delay 1 10 110 10 70 ns\nTCHCTV Control Active Delay 2 10 110 10 60 ns\nTCVCTX Control Inactive Delay 10 110 10 70 ns\nTAZRL Address Float to READ\nActive 0 TCLRL RD Active Delay 10 165 10 100 ns\nTCLRH RD Inactive Delay 10 150 10 80 ns\nTRHAV\nRD Inactive to Next\nAddress Active\nTCHCL b 10\nTCHCL b 10\n110\nns\n60\nns\nns\nTCLCL b 40\n160\n10\nns\nns\n0\nTCLCL b 45\n10\n10\nTest\nConditions\nUnits\nns\nTCLHAV HLDA Valid Delay TRLRH RD Width 2TCLCL b 75 2TCLCL b 50\n100\nns\nns TWLWH WR Width 2TCLCL b 60 2TCLCL b 40 ns TAVAL Address Valid to ALE Low TCLCH b 60 TCLCH b 40 ns TOLOH Output Rise Time 20 20 ns From 0.8V to 2.0V\nTOHOL Output Fall Time 12 12 ns From 2.0V to 0.8V\nNOTES:\n1. Signal at 8284A shown for reference only. See 8284A data sheet for the most recent specifications.\n2. Set up requirement for asynchronous signal only to guarantee recognition at next CLK.\n3. Applies only to T2 state (8 ns into T3 state).\n18 8088\nA.C. TESTING INPUT, OUTPUT WAVEFORM\nA.C. TESTING LOAD CIRCUIT\n231456 â 11\nA.C. Testing; Inputs are driven at 2.4V for a logic ââ1ââ and 0.45V\nfor a logic ââ0ââ. T
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: iming measurements are made at 1.5V for both a\nlogic ââ1ââ and logic ââ0ââ.\n231456 â 12\nC L Includes Jig Capacitance\nWAVEFORMS\nBUS TIMINGÃMINIMUM MODE SYSTEM\n231456 â 13\n19 8088\nWAVEFORMS (Continued)\nBUS TIMINGÃMINIMUM MODE SYSTEM (Continued)\n231456 â 14\nNOTES:\n1. All signals switch between V OH and V OL unless otherwise specified.\n2. RDY is sampled near the end of T 2 , T 3 , T w to determine if T w machines states are to be inserted.\n3. Two INTA cycles run back-to-back. The 8088 local ADDR/DATA bus is floating during both INTA cycles. Control\nsignals are shown for the second INTA cycle.\n4. Signals at 8284 are shown for reference only.\n5. All timing measurements are made at 1.5V unless otherwise noted.\n20 8088\nA.C. CHARACTERISTICS\nMAX MODE SYSTEM (USING 8288 BUS CONTROLLER)\nTIMING REQUIREMENTS\nSymbol\nParameter\n8088\n8088-2\nMin Max Min Max\n500 125 500\nUnits\nTest\nConditions\nTCLCL CLK Cycle Period 200\nns\nTCLCH CLK Low Time 118 68 ns TCHCL CLK High Time 69 44 ns TCH1CH2 CLK Rise Time 10 10 ns From 1.0V to 3.5V\nTCL2CL1 CLK Fall Time 10 10 ns From 3.5V to 1.0V\nTDVCL Data in Setup Time 30 20 ns TCLDX Data in Hold Time 10 10 ns TR1VCL RDY Setup Time into 8284\n(Notes 1, 2) 35 35 ns TCLR1X RDY Hold Time into 8284\n(Notes 1, 2) 0 0 ns TRYHCH READY Setup Time into 8088 118 68 ns TCHRYX READY Hold Time into 8088 30 20 ns TRYLCL READY Inactive to CLK\n(Note 4) b 8 b 8 ns TINVCH Setup Time for Recognition\n(INTR, NMI, TEST) (Note 2) 30 15 ns TGVCH RQ/GT Setup Time 30 15 ns TCHGX RQ Hold Time into 8088 40 30 ns TILIH Input Rise Time (Except CLK) 20 20 ns From 0.8V to 2.0V\nTIHIL Input Fall Time (Except CLK) 12 12 ns From 2.0V to 0.8V\n21 8088\nA.C. CHARACTERISTICS (Continued)\nTIMING RESPONSES\nSymbol\nTCLML\nTCLMH\nTRYHSH\nTCHSV\nTCLSH\nTCLAV\nTCLAX\nTCLAZ\nTSVLH\nTSVMCH\nTCLLH\nTCLMCH\nTCHLL\nTCLMCL\nTCLDV\nTCHDX\nTCVNV\nTCVNX\nTAZRL\nTCLRL\nTCLRH\nTRHAV\nTCHDTL\nTCHDTH\nTCLGL\nTCLGH\nTRLRH\nTOLOH\nTOHOL\nParameter\n8088\nMin\n10\nCommand Active Delay\n(Note 1)\nComma
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nd Inactive Delay\n10\n(Note 1)\nREADY Active to\nStatus Passive (Note 3)\nStatus Active Delay\n10\nStatus Inactive Delay\n10\nAddress Valid Delay\n10\nAddress Hold Time\n10\nAddress Float Delay\nTCLAX\nStatus Valid to ALE High\n(Note 1)\nStatus Valid to MCE High\n(Note 1)\nCLK Low to ALE Valid\n(Note 1)\nCLK Low to MCE (Note 1)\nALE Inactive Delay (Note 1)\nMCE Inactive Delay (Note 1)\nData Valid Delay\n10\nData Hold Time\n10\nControl Active Delay\n5\n(Note 1)\nControl Inactive Delay\n10\n(Note 1)\nAddress Float to\n0\nRead Active\nRD Active Delay\n10\nRD Inactive Delay\n10\nRD Inactive to Next\nTCLCL b 45\nAddress Active\nDirection Control\nActive Delay (Note 1)\nDirection Control\nInactive Delay (Note 1)\nGT Active Delay\nGT Inactive Delay\nRD Width\n2TCLCL b 75\nOutput Rise Time\nOutput Fall Time\nMax\n35\n35\n8088-2\nUnits\nMin\nMax\n10\n35\nns\n10\n35 ns\n65 ns\n60\n70\n60 50\n15 ns\nns\nns\nns\nns\nns\n15 15 ns\n15 15 ns\n15\n15\n15\n110 15\n15\n15\n60\n110\n110\n130\n110\n80\n15\n10\n10\n10\n10\nTCLAX\n45 10\n10\n5 45 ns\nns\nns\nns\nns\nns\n45 10 45 ns\n0\n165\n150\n10\n10\nTCLCL b 40\nns\nns\nns\n50 50 ns\n30 30 ns\n85\n85 50\n50 ns\nns\nns\nns\nns\n2TCLCL b 50\n20\n12\nNOTES:\n1. Signal at 8284 or 8288 shown for reference only.\n2. Setup requirement for asynchronous signal only to guarantee recognition at next CLK.\n3. Applies only to T3 and wait states.\n4. Applies only to T2 state (8 ns into T3 state).\n22\nC L e 20 â 100 pF for\nAll 8088 Outputs\nin Addition to\nInternal Loads\nns\n100\n80\n20\n12\nTest\nConditions\nFrom 0.8V to 2.0V\nFrom 2.0V to 0.8V 8088\nA.C. TESTING INPUT, OUTPUT WAVEFORM\nA.C. TESTING LOAD CIRCUIT\n231456 â 11\nA.C. Testing; Inputs are driven at 2.4V for a logic ââ1ââ and 0.45V\nfor a logic ââ0ââ. Timing measurements are made at 1.5V for both a\nlogic ââ1ââ and logic ââ0ââ.\n231456 â 12\nC L Includes Jig Capacitance\nWAVEFORMS (Continued)\nBUS TIMINGÃMAXIMUM MODE SYSTEM\n231456 â 15\n23 8088\nWAVEFORMS (Continued)\nBUS TIMINGÃMAXIMUM M
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ODE SYSTEM (USING 8288)\nNOTES:\n231456 â 16\n1. All signals switch between V OH and V OL unless otherwise specified.\n2. RDY is sampled near the end of T 2 , T 3 , T w to determine if T w machines states are to be inserted.\n3. Cascade address is valid between first and second INTA cycles.\n4. Two INTA cycles run back-to-back. The 8088 local ADDR/DATA bus is floating during both INTA cycles. Control for\npointer address is shown for second INTA cycle.\n5. Signals at 8284 or 8288 are shown for reference only.\n6. The issuance of the 8288 command and control signals (MRDC, MWTC, AMWC, IORC, IOWC, AIOWC, INTA and\nDEN) lags the active high 8288 CEN.\n7. All timing measurements are made at 1.5V unless otherwise noted.\n8. Status inactive in state just prior to T 4 .\n24 8088\nWAVEFORMS (Continued)\nASYNCHRONOUS SIGNAL RECOGNITION\nBUS LOCK SIGNAL TIMING\n(MAXIMUM MODE ONLY)\nNOTE:\n231456 â 17\n1. Setup requirements for asynchronous signals only to\nguarantee recognition at next CLK.\n231456 â 18\nREQUEST/GRANT SEQUENCE TIMING (MAXIMUM MODE ONLY)\nNOTE:\n1. The coprocessor may not drive the busses outside the region shown without risking contention.\n231456 â 19\nHOLD/HOLD ACKNOWLEDGE TIMING (MINIMUM MODE ONLY)\n231456 â 20\n25 8088\n8086/8088 Instruction Set Summary\nMnemonic and\nDescription\nInstruction Code\nDATA TRANSFER\nMOV e Move: 76543210\nRegister/Memory to/from Register 100010dw\nImmediate to Register/Memory 76543210 76543210\n1100011w\n1 0 1 1 w reg\nmod 0 0 0 r/m data data if w e 1\ndata data if w e 1 Memory to Accumulator Accumulator to Memory 1010000w addr-low addr-high 1010001w addr-low addr-high Register/Memory to Segment Register 10001110 mod 0 reg r/m Segment Register to Register/Memory 10001100 mod 0 reg r/m 11111111 mod 1 1 0 r/m\nImmediate to Register\n76543210\nmod reg\nr/m\nPUSH e Push:\nRegister/Memory\nRegister\nSegment Register\n0 1 0 1 0 reg\n0 0 0 reg 1 1 0\nPOP e Pop:\nRegister/Memory\nRegister\nSegment Register\n10001111\nmod 0 0 0 r/m\n0 1 0 1 1 reg\n0 0 0 reg 1 1 1\nXCHG e
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Exchange:\nRegister/Memory with Register\nRegister with Accumulator\n1000011w\nmod reg r/m\n1 0 0 1 0 reg\nIN e Input from:\nFixed Port 1110010w\nVariable Port 1110110w\nport\nOUT e Output to:\nFixed Port 1110011w\nVariable Port 1110111w\nXLAT e Translate Byte to AL 11010111\nport\nLEA e Load EA to Register 10001101 mod reg r/m\nLDS e Load Pointer to DS 11000101 mod reg r/m\nLES e Load Pointer to ES 11000100 mod reg r/m\nLAHF e Load AH with Flags 10011111 SAHF e Store AH into Flags 10011110\nPUSHF e Push Flags 10011100\nPOPF e Pop Flags 10011101\n26 8088\n8086/8088 Instruction Set Summary (Continued)\nMnemonic and\nDescription\nARITHMETIC\nInstruction Code\n76543210\n76543210\n76543210 76543210\ndata if s:w e 01\nADD e Add:\nReg./Memory with Register to Either 000000dw mod reg r/m Immediate to Register/Memory 100000sw mod 0 0 0 r/m data\nImmediate to Accumulator 0000010w data data if w e 1\nADC e Add with Carry:\nReg./Memory with Register to Either 000100dw mod reg r/m Immediate to Register/Memory 100000sw mod 0 1 0 r/m data\n0001010w data data if w e 1\n1111111w mod 0 0 0 r/m\nImmediate to Accumulator\ndata if s:w e 01\nINC e Increment:\nRegister/Memory\nRegister\n0 1 0 0 0 reg\nAAA e ASCII Adjust for Add 00110111\nBAA e Decimal Adjust for Add 00100111\nSUB e Subtract:\nReg./Memory and Register to Either 001010dw mod reg r/m Immediate from Register/Memory 100000sw mod 1 0 1 r/m data\nImmediate from Accumulator 0010110w data data if w e 1\ndata if s:w e 01\nSSB e Subtract with Borrow\nReg./Memory and Register to Either 000110dw mod reg r/m Immediate from Register/Memory 100000sw mod 0 1 1 r/m data\n000111w data data if w e 1\n1111111w mod 0 0 1 r/m\nImmediate from Accumulator\ndata if s:w e 01\nDEC e Decrement:\nRegister/memory\nRegister\nNEG e Change sign\n0 1 0 0 1 reg\n1111011w\nmod 0 1 1 r/m\nCMP e Compare:\nRegister/Memory and Register 001110dw mod reg r/m Immediate with Register/Memory 100000sw mod 1 1 1 r/m data\nImmediate with Accumulator 0011110w data data if w e 1\nAAS e ASCII Adjust for Subtract 001111
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 11 DAS e Decimal Adjust for Subtract 00101111 MUL e Multiply (Unsigned) 1111011w mod 1 0 0 r/m\nIMUL e Integer Multiply (Signed) 1111011w mod 1 0 1 r/m\nAAM e ASCII Adjust for Multiply 11010100 00001010\nDIV e Divide (Unsigned) 1111011w mod 1 1 0 r/m\nIDIV e Integer Divide (Signed) 1111011w mod 1 1 1 r/m\nAAD e ASCII Adjust for Divide 11010101 00001010\nCBW e Convert Byte to Word 10011000 CWD e Convert Word to Double Word 10011001\ndata if s:w e 01\n27 8088\n8086/8088 Instruction Set Summary (Continued)\nMnemonic and\nDescription\nInstruction Code\nLOGIC 76543210 76543210\nNOT e Invert 1111011w mod 0 1 0 r/m\nSHL/SAL e Shift Logical/Arithmetic Left 110100vw mod 1 0 0 r/m\nSHR e Shift Logical Right 110100vw mod 1 0 1 r/m\nSAR e Shift Arithmetic Right 110100vw mod 1 1 1 r/m\nROL e Rotate Left 110100vw mod 0 0 0 r/m\nROR e Rotate Right 110100vw mod 0 0 1 r/m\nRCL e Rotate Through Carry Flag Left 110100vw mod 0 1 0 r/m\nRCR e Rotate Through Carry Right 110100vw mod 0 1 1 r/m\n76543210 76543210\ndata if w e 1\nAND e And:\nReg./Memory and Register to Either 001000dw mod reg r/m Immediate to Register/Memory 1000000w mod 1 0 0 r/m data\nImmediate to Accumulator 0010010w data data if w e 1\nRegister/Memory and Register 1000010w mod reg r/m Immediate Data and Register/Memory 1111011w mod 0 0 0 r/m data\nImmediate Data and Accumulator 1010100w data data if w e 1\nTEST e And Function to Flags. No Result:\ndata if w e 1\nOR e Or:\nReg./Memory and Register to Either 000010dw mod reg r/m Immediate to Register/Memory 1000000w mod 0 0 1 r/m data\ndata data if w e 1\nImmediate to Accumulator\n0000110w\ndata if w e 1\nXOR e Exclusive or:\nReg./Memory and Register to Either 001100dw mod reg r/m Immediate to Register/Memory 1000000w mod 1 1 0 r/m data\nImmediate to Accumulator 0011010w data data if w e 1\ndisp-high\nSTRING MANIPULATION\nREP e Repeat 1111001z\nMOVS e Move Byte/Word 1010010w\nCMPS e Compare Byte/Word 1010011w\nSCAS e Scan Byte/Word 1010111w\nLODS e Load Byte/Wd to AL/AX 1010110w\nSTOS e Stor Byte/Wd from AL/A 1010101w\
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nCONTROL TRANSFER\nCALL e Call:\nDirect Within Segment 11101000 disp-low Indirect Within Segment 11111111 mod 0 1 0 r/m Direct Intersegment 10011010 offset-low offset-high\nseg-low seg-high\nIndirect Intersegment\n28\n11111111\nmod 0 1 1 r/m\ndata if w e 1 8088\n8086/8088 Instruction Set Summary (Continued)\nMnemonic and\nDescription\nInstruction Code\nJMP e Unconditional Jump: 76543210 76543210 76543210\nDirect Within Segment 11101001 disp-low disp-high\nDirect Within Segment-Short 11101011 disp Indirect Within Segment 11111111 mod 1 0 0 r/m Direct Intersegment 11101010 offset-low offset-high\nseg-low seg-high\nIndirect Intersegment\n11111111\nmod 1 0 1 r/m\nRET e Return from CALL:\nWithin Segment 11000011\nWithin Seg Adding Immed to SP 11000010\nIntersegment 11001011\ndata-low data-high\ndata-high\nIntersegment Adding Immediate to SP 11001010 data-low\nJE/JZ e Jump on Equal/Zero 01110100 disp\nJL/JNGE e Jump on Less/Not Greater\nor Equal\nJLE/JNG e Jump on Less or Equal/\nNot Greater 01111100 disp\n01111110 disp\nJB/JNAE e Jump on Below/Not Above 01110010 disp\n01110110 disp\n01111010 disp\nJO e Jump on Overflow 01110000 disp\nJS e Jump on Sign 01111000 disp\nJNE/JNZ e Jump on Not Equal/Not Zero 01110101 disp\nJNL/JGE e Jump on Not Less/Greater\nor Equal\nJNLE/JG e Jump on Not Less or Equal/\nGreater\nJNB/JAE e Jump on Not Below/Above\nor Equal\nJNBE/JA e Jump on Not Below or\nEqual/Above\nJNP/JPO e Jump on Not Par/Par Odd 01111101 disp\n01111111 disp\n01110011 disp\n01110111 disp\n01111011 disp\nJNO e Jump on Not Overflow 01110001 disp\nJNS e Jump on Not Sign 01111001 disp\nLOOP e Loop CX Times 11100010 disp\nor Equal\nJBE/JNA e Jump on Below or Equal/\nNot Above\nJP/JPE e Jump on Parity/Parity Even\nLOOPZ/LOOPE e Loop While Zero/Equal 11100001 disp\nLOOPNZ/LOOPNE e Loop While Not\nZero/Equal\nJCXZ e Jump on CX Zero 11100000 disp\n11100011 disp\nType Specified 11001101 type\nType 3 11001100 INTO e Interrupt on Overflow 11001110 IRET e Interrupt Return 11001111\nINT e Interrupt\n29 8088\n8086/8088 Instruction S
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: et Summary (Continued)\nMnemonic and\nDescription\nInstruction Code\n76543210\n76543210\nPROCESSOR CONTROL\nCLC e Clear Carry 11111000\nCMC e Complement Carry 11110101\nSTC e Set Carry 11111001\nCLD e Clear Direction 11111100\nSTD e Set Direction 11111101\nCLI e Clear Interrupt 11111010\nSTI e Set Interrupt 11111011\nHLT e Halt 11110100\nWAIT e Wait 10011011\nESC e Escape (to External Device) 11011xxx\nLOCK e Bus Lock Prefix 11110000\nNOTES:\nAL e 8-bit accumulator\nAX e 16-bit accumulator\nCX e Count register\nDS e Data segment\nES e Extra segment\nAbove/below refers to unsigned value\nGreater e more positive:\nLess e less positive (more negative) signed values\nif d e 1 then ââtoââ reg; if d e 0 then ââfromââ reg\nif w e 1 then word instruction; if w e 0 then byte\ninstruction\nif mod e 11 then r/m is treated as a REG field\nif mod e 00 then DISP e 0*, disp-low and disp-high are\nabsent\nif mod e 01 then DISP e disp-low sign-extended to\n16 bits, disp-high is absent\nif mod e 10 then DISP e disp-high; disp-low\nif r/m e 000 then EA e (BX) a (SI) a DISP\nif r/m e 001 then EA e (BX) a (DI) a DISP\nif r/m e 010 then EA e (BP) a (SI) a DISP\nif r/m e 011 then EA e (BP) a (DI) a DISP\nif r/m e 100 then EA e (SI) a DISP\nif r/m e 101 then EA e (DI) a DISP\nif r/m e 110 then EA e (BP) a DISP*\nif r/m e 111 then EA e (BX) a DISP\nDISP follows 2nd byte of instruction (before data if re-\nquired)\n*except if mod e 00 and r/m e then EA e disp-high:\ndisp-low.\nif s:w e 01 then 16 bits of immediate data form the oper-\nand\nif s:w e 11 then an immediate data byte is sign extended\nto form the 16-bit operand\nif v e 0 then ââcountââ e 1; if v e 1 then ââcountââ in (CL)\nregister\nx e donât care\nz is used for string primitives for comparison with ZF FLAG\nSEGMENT OVERRIDE PREFIX\n0 0 1 reg 1 1 0\n30\nmod x x x r/m\nREG is assigned according to the following table:\n16-Bit (w e 1)\n000 AX\n001 CX\n010 DX\n011 BX\n100 SP\n101 BP\n110 SI\n111 DI\n8-Bit (w e 0)\n000 AL\n001 CL\n010 DL\n011 BL\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 100 AH\n101 CH\n110 DH\n111 BH\nSegment\n00 ES\n01 CS\n10 SS\n11 DS\nInstructions which reference the flag register file as a 16-bit\nobject use the symbol FLAGS to represent the file:\nFLAGS e\nX:X:X:X:(OF):(DF):(IF):(TF):(SF):(ZF):X:(AF):X:(PF):X:(CF)\nMnemonics Â© Intel, 1978\nDATA SHEET REVISION REVIEW\nThe following list represents key differences be-\ntween this and the -005 data sheet. Please review\nthis summary carefully.\n1. The Intel 8088 implementation technology\n(HMOS) has been changed to (HMOS-II). " .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: WHERE {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag1 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "electronic components" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag2 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datasheets" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag3 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "data sheet" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag4 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "pdf" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag5 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datasheetarchive" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag6 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "semiconductors" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag7 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "ics" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag8 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "transistors" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag9 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "diodes" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag10 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "thyristors" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag11 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "specsheet" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag12 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "download" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag13 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "rohs" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag14 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "equivalent" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag15 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "application notes" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag16 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "integrated circuit" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag17 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "free" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag18 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "data book" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag19 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "rfq" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ?tag20 a nao:Tag ; nao:prefLabel "datablad" .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 42, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:a62e8160-d877-60ae-6fbf-eed56477dff2' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '102087', new value: 'urn:uuid:83e03c4b-6518-adb1-8dba-6798467f232b')
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:a62e8160-d877-60ae-6fbf-eed56477dff2> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:a62e8160-d877-60ae-6fbf-eed56477dff2> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "Brave New World" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Aldous Huxley"] ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:contentCreated "2002-04-23T17:13:53Z" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 252 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "Chapter One\nA\nSQUAT grey building of only thirty-four stories. Over\nthe main entrance the words, CENTRAL LONDON\nHATCHERY AND CONDITIONING CENTRE, and, in a\nshield, the World State's motto, COMMUNITY, IDENTITY,\nSTABILITY.\nThe enormous room on the ground floor faced towards\nthe north. Cold for all the summer beyond the panes, for\nall the tropical heat of the room itself, a harsh thin light\nglared through the windows, hungrily seeking some\ndraped lay figure, some pallid shape of academic goose-\nflesh, but finding only the glass and nickel and bleakly\nshining porcelain of a laboratory. Wintriness responded to\nwintriness. The overalls of the workers were white, their\nhands gloved with a pale corpse-coloured rubber. The\nlight was frozen, dead, a ghost. Only from the yellow\nbarrels of the microscopes did it borrow a certain rich and\nliving substance, lying along the polished tubes like\nbutter, streak after luscious streak in long recession down\nthe work tables.\n\"And this,\" said the Director opening the door, \"is the\nFertilizing Room.\"\nBent over their instruments, three hundred Fertilizers\nwere plunged, as the Director of Hatcheries and\nConditioning entered the room, in the scarcely breathing\nsilence, the absent-minded, soliloquizing hum or whistle,\nof absorbed concentration. A troop of newly arrived\nstudents, very young, pink and callow, followed\nnervously, rather abjectly, at the Director's heels. Each of\nthem carried a notebook, in which, whenever the great\nman spoke, he desperately scribbled. Straight from the\nhorse's mouth. It was a rare privilege. The D. H. C. for\nCentral London always made a point of personally conducting his\ndepartments.\nnew\nstudents\nround\nthe\nvarious\n\"Just to give you a general idea,\" he would explain to\nthem. For of course some sort of general idea they must\nhave, if they were to do their work intelligentlyâthough\nas little of one, if they were to be good and happy\nmembers of society, as possible. For particulars, as ev
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ery\none knows, make for virtue and happiness; generalities\nare intellectually necessary evils. Not philosophers but\nfret-sawyers and stamp collectors compose the backbone\nof society.\n\"To-morrow,\" he would add, smiling at them with a\nslightly menacing geniality, \"you'll be settling down to\nserious work. You won't have time for generalities.\nMeanwhile ...\"\nMeanwhile, it was a privilege. Straight from the horse's\nmouth into the notebook. The boys scribbled like mad.\nTall and rather thin but upright, the Director advanced\ninto the room. He had a long chin and big rather\nprominent teeth, just covered, when he was not talking,\nby his full, floridly curved lips. Old, young? Thirty? Fifty?\nFifty-five? It was hard to say. And anyhow the question\ndidn't arise; in this year of stability, A. F. 632, it didn't\noccur to you to ask it.\n\"I shall begin at the beginning,\" said the D.H.C. and the\nmore zealous students recorded his intention in their\nnotebooks: Begin at the beginning. \"These,\" he waved his\nhand, \"are the incubators.\" And opening an insulated\ndoor he showed them racks upon racks of numbered test-\ntubes. \"The week's supply of ova. Kept,\" he explained,\n\"at blood heat; whereas the male gametes,\" and here he\nopened another door, \"they have to be kept at thirty-five instead of thirty-seven. Full blood heat sterilizes.\" Rams\nwrapped in theremogene beget no lambs.\nStill leaning against the incubators he gave them, while\nthe pencils scurried illegibly across the pages, a brief\ndescription of the modern fertilizing process; spoke first,\nof course, of its surgical introductionâ\"the operation\nundergone voluntarily for the good of Society, not to\nmention the fact that it carries a bonus amounting to six\nmonths' salary\"; continued with some account of the\ntechnique for preserving the excised ovary alive and\nactively developing; passed on to a consideration of\noptimum temperature, salinity, viscosity; referred to the\nliquor in which the detached and ripened eggs were kept;\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and, leading his charges to the work tables, actually\nshowed them how this liquor was drawn off from the\ntest-tubes; how it was let out drop by drop onto the\nspecially warmed slides of the microscopes; how the eggs\nwhich it contained were inspected for abnormalities,\ncounted and transferred to a porous receptacle; how (and\nhe now took them to watch the operation) this receptacle\nwas immersed in a warm bouillon containing free-\nswimming spermatozoaâat a minimum concentration of\none hundred thousand per cubic centimetre, he insisted;\nand how, after ten minutes, the container was lifted out\nof the liquor and its contents re-examined; how, if any of\nthe eggs remained unfertilized, it was again immersed,\nand, if necessary, yet again; how the fertilized ova went\nback to the incubators; where the Alphas and Betas\nremained until definitely bottled; while the Gammas,\nDeltas and Epsilons were brought out again, after only\nthirty-six hours, to undergo Bokanovsky's Process.\n\"Bokanovsky's Process,\" repeated the Director, and the\nstudents underlined the words in their little notebooks.\nOne egg, one embryo, one adult-normality. But a\nbokanovskified egg will bud, will proliferate, will divide. From eight to ninety-six buds, and every bud will grow\ninto a perfectly formed embryo, and every embryo into a\nfull-sized adult. Making ninety-six human beings grow\nwhere only one grew before. Progress.\n\"Essentially,\" the D.H.C. concluded, \"bokanovskification\nconsists of a series of arrests of development. We check\nthe normal growth and, paradoxically enough, the egg\nresponds by budding.\"\nResponds by budding. The pencils were busy.\nHe pointed. On a very slowly moving band a rack-full of\ntest-tubes was entering a large metal box, another, rack-\nfull was emerging. Machinery faintly purred. It took eight\nminutes for the tubes to go through, he told them. Eight\nminutes of hard X-rays being about as much as an egg\ncan stand. A few died; of the rest, the least susceptible\ndivided into two; most put out
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: four buds; some eight; all\nwere returned to the incubators, where the buds began\nto develop; then, after two days, were suddenly chilled,\nchilled and checked. Two, four, eight, the buds in their\nturn budded; and having budded were dosed almost to\ndeath with alcohol; consequently burgeoned again and\nhaving buddedâbud out of bud out of budâwere\nthereafterâfurther arrest being generally fatalâleft to\ndevelop in peace. By which time the original egg was in a\nfair way to becoming anything from eight to ninety-six\nembryosâ a prodigious improvement, you will agree, on\nnature. Identical twinsâbut not in piddling twos and\nthrees as in the old viviparous days, when an egg would\nsometimes accidentally divide; actually by dozens, by\nscores at a time.\n\"Scores,\" the Director repeated and flung out his arms,\nas though he were distributing largesse. \"Scores.\" But one of the students was fool enough to ask where the\nadvantage lay.\n\"My good boy!\" The Director wheeled sharply round on\nhim. \"Can't you see? Can't you see?\" He raised a hand;\nhis expression was solemn. \"Bokanovsky's Process is one\nof the major instruments of social stability!\"\nMajor instruments of social stability.\nStandard men and women; in uniform batches. The\nwhole of a small factory staffed with the products of a\nsingle bokanovskified egg.\n\"Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical\nmachines!\" The voice was almost tremulous with\nenthusiasm. \"You really know where you are. For the first\ntime in history.\" He quoted the planetary motto.\n\"Community, Identity, Stability.\" Grand words. \"If we\ncould bokanovskify indefinitely the whole problem would\nbe solved.\"\nSolved by standard Gammas, unvarying Deltas, uniform\nEpsilons. Millions of identical twins. The principle of mass\nproduction at last applied to biology.\n\"But, alas,\" the Director shook his head, \"we can't\nbokanovskify indefinitely.\"\nNinety-six seemed to be the limit; seventy-two a good\naverage. From the same ovary and with gametes
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of the\nsame male to manufacture as many batches of identical\ntwins as possibleâthat was the best (sadly a second best)\nthat they could do. And even that was difficult.\n\"For in nature it takes thirty years for two hundred eggs\nto reach maturity. But our business is to stabilize the\npopulation at this moment, here and now. Dribbling out twins over a quarter of a centuryâwhat would be the use\nof that?\"\nObviously, no use at all. But Podsnap's Technique had\nimmensely accelerated the process of ripening. They\ncould make sure of at least a hundred and fifty mature\neggs within two years. Fertilize and bokanovskifyâin\nother words, multiply by seventy-twoâand you get an\naverage of nearly eleven thousand brothers and sisters in\na hundred and fifty batches of identical twins, all within\ntwo years of the same age.\n\"And in exceptional cases we can make one ovary yield\nus over fifteen thousand adult individuals.\"\nBeckoning to a fair-haired, ruddy young man who\nhappened to be passing at the moment. \"Mr. Foster,\" he\ncalled. The ruddy young man approached. \"Can you tell\nus the record for a single ovary, Mr. Foster?\"\n\"Sixteen thousand and twelve in this Centre,\" Mr. Foster\nreplied without hesitation. He spoke very quickly, had a\nvivacious blue eye, and took an evident pleasure in\nquoting figures. \"Sixteen thousand and twelve; in one\nhundred and eighty-nine batches of identicals. But of\ncourse they've done much better,\" he rattled on, \"in\nsome of the tropical Centres. Singapore has often\nproduced over sixteen thousand five hundred; and\nMombasa has actually touched the seventeen thousand\nmark. But then they have unfair advantages. You should\nsee the way a negro ovary responds to pituitary! It's\nquite astonishing, when you're used to working with\nEuropean material. Still,\" he added, with a laugh (but the\nlight of combat was in his eyes and the lift of his chin was\nchallenging), \"still, we mean to beat them if we can. I'm\nworking on a wonderful Delta-Minus ovary at this\nmome
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nt. Only just eighteen months old. Over twelve\nthousand seven hundred children already, either decanted or in embryo. And still going strong. We'll beat\nthem yet.\"\n\"That's the spirit I like!\" cried the Director, and clapped\nMr. Foster on the shoulder. \"Come along with us, and\ngive these boys the benefit of your expert knowledge.\"\nMr. Foster smiled modestly. \"With pleasure.\" They went.\nIn the Bottling Room all was harmonious bustle and\nordered activity. Flaps of fresh sow's peritoneum ready\ncut to the proper size came shooting up in little lifts from\nthe Organ Store in the sub-basement. Whizz and then,\nclick! the lift-hatches hew open; the bottle-liner had only\nto reach out a hand, take the flap, insert, smooth-down,\nand before the lined bottle had had time to travel out of\nreach along the endless band, whizz, click! another flap\nof peritoneum had shot up from the depths, ready to be\nslipped into yet another bottle, the next of that slow\ninterminable procession on the band.\nNext to the Liners stood the Matriculators. The procession\nadvanced; one by one the eggs were transferred from\ntheir test-tubes to the larger containers; deftly the\nperitoneal lining was slit, the morula dropped into place,\nthe saline solution poured in ... and already the bottle\nhad passed, and it was the turn of the labellers. Heredity,\ndate of fertilization, membership of Bokanovsky Groupâ\ndetails were transferred from test-tube to bottle. No\nlonger anonymous, but named, identified, the procession\nmarched slowly on; on through an opening in the wall,\nslowly on into the Social Predestination Room.\n\"Eighty-eight cubic metres of card-index,\" said Mr. Foster\nwith relish, as they entered.\n\"Containing all the relevant information,\" added the\nDirector. \"Brought up to date every morning.\"\n\"And co-ordinated every afternoon.\"\n\"On the basis of which they make their calculations.\"\n\"So many individuals, of such and such quality,\" said Mr.\nFoster.\n\"Distributed in such and such quantities.\"\n\"The
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: optimum Decanting Rate at any given moment.\"\n\"Unforeseen wastages promptly made good.\"\n\"Promptly,\" repeated Mr. Foster. \"If you knew the\namount of overtime I had to put in after the last\nJapanese earthquake!\" He laughed goodhumouredly and\nshook his head.\n\"The Predestinators\nFertilizers.\"\nsend\nin\ntheir\nfigures\nto\nthe\n\"Who give them the embryos they ask for.\"\n\"And the bottles come in here to be predestined in\ndetail.\"\n\"After which they are sent down to the Embryo Store.\"\n\"Where we now proceed ourselves.\"\nAnd opening a door Mr. Foster led the way down a\nstaircase into the basement.\nThe temperature was still tropical. They descended into a\nthickening twilight. Two doors and a passage with a\ndouble turn insured the cellar against any possible\ninfiltration of the day. \"Embryos are like photograph film,\" said Mr. Foster\nwaggishly, as he pushed open the second door. \"They\ncan only stand red light.\"\nAnd in effect the sultry darkness into which the students\nnow followed him was visible and crimson, like the\ndarkness of closed eyes on a summer's afternoon. The\nbulging flanks of row on receding row and tier above tier\nof bottles glinted with innumerable rubies, and among\nthe rubies moved the dim red spectres of men and\nwomen with purple eyes and all the symptoms of lupus.\nThe hum and rattle of machinery faintly stirred the air.\n\"Give them a few figures, Mr. Foster,\" said the Director,\nwho was tired of talking.\nMr. Foster was only too happy to give them a few figures.\nTwo hundred and twenty metres long, two hundred wide,\nten high. He pointed upwards. Like chickens drinking, the\nstudents lifted their eyes towards the distant ceiling.\nThree tiers of racks: ground floor level, first gallery,\nsecond gallery.\nThe spidery steel-work of gallery above gallery faded\naway in all directions into the dark. Near them three red\nghosts were busily unloading demijohns from a moving\nstaircase.\nThe escalator from the Social Predestination Room.\nEach bottle could be placed
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: on one of fifteen racks, each\nrack, though you couldn't see it, was a conveyor traveling\nat the rate of thirty-three and a third centimetres an\nhour. Two hundred and sixty-seven days at eight metres\na day. Two thousand one hundred and thirty-six metres\nin all. One circuit of the cellar at ground level, one on the\nfirst gallery, half on the second, and on the two hundred and sixty-seventh morning, daylight in the Decanting\nRoom. Independent existenceâso called.\n\"But in the interval,\" Mr. Foster concluded, \"we've\nmanaged to do a lot to them. Oh, a very great deal.\" His\nlaugh was knowing and triumphant.\n\"That's the spirit I like,\" said the Director once more.\n\"Let's walk around. You tell them everything, Mr. Foster.\"\nMr. Foster duly told them.\nTold them of the growing embryo on its bed of\nperitoneum. Made them taste the rich blood surrogate on\nwhich it fed. Explained why it had to be stimulated with\nplacentin and thyroxin. Told them of the corpus luteum\nextract. Showed them the jets through which at every\ntwelfth metre from zero to 2040 it was automatically\ninjected. Spoke of those gradually increasing doses of\npituitary administered during the final ninety-six metres\nof their course. Described the artificial maternal\ncirculation installed in every bottle at Metre 112; showed\nthem the reservoir of blood-surrogate, the centrifugal\npump that kept the liquid moving over the placenta and\ndrove it through the synthetic lung and waste product\nfilter. Referred to the embryo's troublesome tendency to\nanÃ¦mia, to the massive doses of hog's stomach extract\nand foetal foal's liver with which, in consequence, it had\nto be supplied.\nShowed them the simple mechanism by means of which,\nduring the last two metres out of every eight, all the\nembryos were simultaneously shaken into familiarity with\nmovement. Hinted at the gravity of the so-called \"trauma\nof decanting,\" and enumerated the precautions taken to\nminimize, by a suitable training of the bottled embryo,\nthat dangerous shock.
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Told them of the test for sex\ncarried out in the neighborhood of Metre 200. Explained the system of labellingâa T for the males, a circle for the\nfemales and for those who were destined to become\nfreemartins a question mark, black on a white ground.\n\"For of course,\" said Mr. Foster, \"in the vast majority of\ncases, fertility is merely a nuisance. One fertile ovary in\ntwelve hundredâthat would really be quite sufficient for\nour purposes. But we want to have a good choice. And of\ncourse one must always have an enormous margin of\nsafety. So we allow as many as thirty per cent of the\nfemale embryos to develop normally. The others get a\ndose of male sex-hormone every twenty-four metres for\nthe rest of the course. Result: they're decanted as\nfreemartinsâstructurally quite normal (except,\" he had to\nadmit, \"that they do have the slightest tendency to grow\nbeards), but sterile. Guaranteed sterile. Which brings us\nat last,\" continued Mr. Foster, \"out of the realm of mere\nslavish imitation of nature into the much more interesting\nworld of human invention.\"\nHe rubbed his hands. For of course, they didn't content\nthemselves with merely hatching out embryos: any cow\ncould do that.\n\"We also predestine and condition. We decant our babies\nas socialized human beings, as Alphas or Epsilons, as\nfuture sewage workers or future ...\" He was going to say\n\"future World controllers,\" but correcting himself, said\n\"future Directors of Hatcheries,\" instead.\nThe D.H.C. acknowledged the compliment with a smile.\nThey were passing Metre 320 on Rack 11. A young Beta-\nMinus mechanic was busy with screw-driver and spanner\non the blood-surrogate pump of a passing bottle. The\nhum of the electric motor deepened by fractions of a tone\nas he turned the nuts. Down, down ... A final twist, a\nglance at the revolution counter, and he was done. He moved two paces down the line and began the same\nprocess on the next pump.\n\"Reducing the number of revolutions per minute,\" Mr.\nFoster explained. \"The surr
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ogate goes round slower;\ntherefore passes through the lung at longer intervals;\ntherefore gives the embryo less oxygen. Nothing like\noxygen-shortage for keeping an embryo below par.\"\nAgain he rubbed his hands.\n\"But why do you want to keep the embryo below par?\"\nasked an ingenuous student.\n\"Ass!\" said the Director, breaking a long silence. \"Hasn't\nit occurred to you that an Epsilon embryo must have an\nEpsilon environment as well as an Epsilon heredity?\"\nIt evidently hadn't occurred to him. He was covered with\nconfusion.\n\"The lower the caste,\" said Mr. Foster, \"the shorter the\noxygen.\" The first organ affected was the brain. After\nthat the skeleton. At seventy per cent of normal oxygen\nyou got dwarfs. At less than seventy eyeless monsters.\n\"Who are no use at all,\" concluded Mr. Foster.\nWhereas (his voice became confidential and eager), if\nthey could discover a technique for shortening the period\nof maturation what a triumph, what a benefaction to\nSociety!\n\"Consider the horse.\"\nThey considered it.\nMature at six; the elephant at ten. While at thirteen a\nman is not yet sexually mature; and is only full-grown at twenty. Hence, of course, that fruit\ndevelopment, the human intelligence.\nof\ndelayed\n\"But in Epsilons,\" said Mr. Foster very justly, \"we don't\nneed human intelligence.\"\nDidn't need and didn't get it. But though the Epsilon mind\nwas mature at ten, the Epsilon body was not fit to work\ntill eighteen. Long years of superfluous and wasted\nimmaturity. If the physical development could be\nspeeded up till it was as quick, say, as a cow's, what an\nenormous saving to the Community!\n\"Enormous!\" murmured the\nenthusiasm was infectious.\nstudents.\nMr.\nFoster's\nHe became rather technical; spoke of the abnormal\nendocrine co-ordination which made men grow so slowly;\npostulated a germinal mutation to account for it. Could\nthe effects of this germinal mutation be undone? Could\nthe individual Epsilon embryo be made a revert, by a\nsuitable technique, to the normality
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of dogs and cows?\nThat was the problem. And it was all but solved.\nPilkington, at Mombasa, had produced individuals who\nwere sexually mature at four and full-grown at six and a\nhalf. A scientific triumph. But socially useless. Six-year-\nold men and women were too stupid to do even Epsilon\nwork. And the process was an all-or-nothing one; either\nyou failed to modify at all, or else you modified the whole\nway. They were still trying to find the ideal compromise\nbetween adults of twenty and adults of six. So far without\nsuccess. Mr. Foster sighed and shook his head.\nTheir wanderings through the crimson twilight had\nbrought them to the neighborhood of Metre 170 on Rack\n9. From this point onwards Rack 9 was enclosed and the\nbottle performed the remainder of their journey in a kind of tunnel, interrupted here and there by openings two or\nthree metres wide.\n\"Heat conditioning,\" said Mr. Foster.\nHot tunnels alternated with cool tunnels. Coolness was\nwedded to discomfort in the form of hard X-rays. By the\ntime they were decanted the embryos had a horror of\ncold. They were predestined to emigrate to the tropics, to\nbe miner and acetate silk spinners and steel workers.\nLater on their minds would be made to endorse the\njudgment of their bodies. \"We condition them to thrive on\nheat,\" concluded Mr. Foster. \"Our colleagues upstairs will\nteach them to love it.\"\n\"And that,\" put in the Director sententiously, \"that is the\nsecret of happiness and virtueâliking what you've got to\ndo. All conditioning aims at that: making people like their\nunescapable social destiny.\"\nIn a gap between two tunnels, a nurse was delicately\nprobing with a long fine syringe into the gelatinous\ncontents of a passing bottle. The students and their\nguides stood watching her for a few moments in silence.\n\"Well, Lenina,\" said Mr. Foster, when at last she withdrew\nthe syringe and straightened herself up.\nThe girl turned with a start. One could see that, for all\nthe lupus and the purple eyes, she was uncommonly\
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: npretty.\n\"Henry!\" Her smile flashed redly at himâa row of coral\nteeth.\n\"Charming, charming,\" murmured the Director and,\ngiving her two or three little pats, received in exchange a\nrather deferential smile for himself. \"What are you giving them?\" asked Mr. Foster, making\nhis tone very professional.\n\"Oh, the usual typhoid and sleeping sickness.\"\n\"Tropical workers start being inoculated at Metre 150,\"\nMr. Foster explained to the students. \"The embryos still\nhave gills. We immunize the fish against the future man's\ndiseases.\" Then, turning back to Lenina, \"Ten to five on\nthe roof this afternoon,\" he said, \"as usual.\"\n\"Charming,\" said the Director once more, and, with a\nfinal pat, moved away after the others.\nOn Rack 10 rows of next generation's chemical workers\nwere being trained in the toleration of lead, caustic soda,\ntar, chlorine. The first of a batch of two hundred and fifty\nembryonic rocket-plane engineers was just passing the\neleven hundred metre mark on Rack 3. A special\nmechanism kept their containers in constant rotation. \"To\nimprove their sense of balance,\" Mr. Foster explained.\n\"Doing repairs on the outside of a rocket in mid-air is a\nticklish job. We slacken off the circulation when they're\nright way up, so that they're half starved, and double the\nflow of surrogate when they're upside down. They learn\nto associate topsy-turvydom with well-being; in fact,\nthey're only truly happy when they're standing on their\nheads.\n\"And now,\" Mr. Foster went on, \"I'd like to show you\nsome very interesting conditioning for Alpha Plus\nIntellectuals. We have a big batch of them on Rack 5.\nFirst Gallery level,\" he called to two boys who had started\nto go down to the ground floor.\n\"They're round about Metre 900,\" he explained. \"You\ncan't really do any useful intellectual conditioning till the\nfoetuses have lost their tails. Follow me.\" But the Director had looked at his watch. \"Ten to three,\"\nhe said. \"No time for the intellectual embryos, I'm afraid.\nW
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e must go up to the Nurseries before the children have\nfinished their afternoon sleep.\"\nMr. Foster was disappointed. \"At least one glance at the\nDecanting Room,\" he pleaded.\n\"Very well then.\" The Director smiled indulgently. \"Just\none glance.\" Chapter Two\nM R. F OSTER was left in the Decanting Room. The D.H.C.\nand his students stepped into the nearest lift and were\ncarried up to the fifth floor.\nINFANT NURSERIES. NEO-PAVLOVIAN CONDITIONING\nROOMS, announced the notice board.\nThe Director opened a door. They were in a large bare\nroom, very bright and sunny; for the whole of the\nsouthern wall was a single window. Half a dozen nurses,\ntrousered and jacketed in the regulation white viscose-\nlinen uniform, their hair aseptically hidden under white\ncaps, were engaged in setting out bowls of roses in a\nlong row across the floor. Big bowls, packed tight with\nblossom. Thousands of petals, ripe-blown and silkily\nsmooth, like the cheeks of innumerable little cherubs, but\nof cherubs, in that bright light, not exclusively pink and\nAryan, but also luminously Chinese, also Mexican, also\napoplectic with too much blowing of celestial trumpets,\nalso pale as death, pale with the posthumous whiteness\nof marble.\nThe nurses stiffened to attention as the D.H.C. came in.\n\"Set out the books,\" he said curtly.\nIn silence the nurses obeyed his command. Between the\nrose bowls the books were duly set outâa row of nursery\nquartos opened invitingly each at some gaily coloured\nimage of beast or fish or bird.\n\"Now bring in the children.\"\nThey hurried out of the room and returned in a minute or\ntwo, each pushing a kind of tall dumb-waiter laden, on all\nits four wire-netted shelves, with eight-month-old babies, all exactly alike (a Bokanovsky Group, it was evident)\nand all (since their caste was Delta) dressed in khaki.\n\"Put them down on the floor.\"\nThe infants were unloaded.\n\"Now turn them so that they can see the flowers and\nbooks.\"\nTurned, the babies at once fell silent, then began to crawl
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \ntowards those clusters of sleek colours, those shapes so\ngay and brilliant on the white pages. As they approached,\nthe sun came out of a momentary eclipse behind a cloud.\nThe roses flamed up as though with a sudden passion\nfrom within; a new and profound significance seemed to\nsuffuse the shining pages of the books. From the ranks of\nthe crawling babies came little squeals of excitement,\ngurgles and twitterings of pleasure.\nThe Director rubbed his hands. \"Excellent!\" he said. \"It\nmight almost have been done on purpose.\"\nThe swiftest crawlers were already at their goal. Small\nhands reached out uncertainly, touched, grasped,\nunpetaling the transfigured roses, crumpling the\nilluminated pages of the books. The Director waited until\nall were happily busy. Then, \"Watch carefully,\" he said.\nAnd, lifting his hand, he gave the signal.\nThe Head Nurse, who was standing by a switchboard at\nthe other end of the room, pressed down a little lever.\nThere was a violent explosion. Shriller and ever shriller, a\nsiren shrieked. Alarm bells maddeningly sounded.\nThe children started,\ndistorted with terror.\nscreamed;\ntheir\nfaces\nwere \"And now,\" the Director shouted (for the noise was\ndeafening), \"now we proceed to rub in the lesson with a\nmild electric shock.\"\nHe waved his hand again, and the Head Nurse pressed a\nsecond lever. The screaming of the babies suddenly\nchanged its tone. There was something desperate, almost\ninsane, about the sharp spasmodic yelps to which they\nnow gave utterance. Their little bodies twitched and\nstiffened; their limbs moved jerkily as if to the tug of\nunseen wires.\n\"We can electrify that whole strip of floor,\" bawled the\nDirector in explanation. \"But that's enough,\" he signalled\nto the nurse.\nThe explosions ceased, the bells stopped ringing, the\nshriek of the siren died down from tone to tone into\nsilence. The stiffly twitching bodies relaxed, and what had\nbecome the sob and yelp of infant maniacs broadened\nout once more into a normal howl of ordinary
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: terror.\n\"Offer them the flowers and the books again.\"\nThe nurses obeyed; but at the approach of the roses, at\nthe mere sight of those gaily-coloured images of pussy\nand cock-a-doodle-doo and baa-baa black sheep, the\ninfants shrank away in horror, the volume of their\nhowling suddenly increased.\n\"Observe,\" said the Director triumphantly, \"observe.\"\nBooks and loud noises, flowers and electric shocksâ\nalready in the infant mind these couples were\ncompromisingly linked; and after two hundred repetitions\nof the same or a similar lesson would be wedded\nindissolubly. What man has joined, nature is powerless to\nput asunder. \"They'll grow up with what the psychologists used to call\nan 'instinctive' hatred of books and flowers. Reflexes\nunalterably conditioned. They'll be safe from books and\nbotany all their lives.\" The Director turned to his nurses.\n\"Take them away again.\"\nStill yelling, the khaki babies were loaded on to their\ndumb-waiters and wheeled out, leaving behind them the\nsmell of sour milk and a most welcome silence.\nOne of the students held up his hand; and though he\ncould see quite well why you couldn't have lower-cast\npeople wasting the Community's time over books, and\nthat there was always the risk of their reading something\nwhich might undesirably decondition one of their reflexes,\nyet ... well, he couldn't understand about the flowers.\nWhy go to the trouble of making it psychologically\nimpossible for Deltas to like flowers?\nPatiently the D.H.C. explained. If the children were made\nto scream at the sight of a rose, that was on grounds of\nhigh economic policy. Not so very long ago (a century or\nthereabouts), Gammas, Deltas, even Epsilons, had been\nconditioned to like flowersâflowers in particular and wild\nnature in general. The idea was to make them want to be\ngoing out into the country at every available opportunity,\nand so compel them to consume transport.\n\"And didn't they consume transport?\" asked the student.\n\"Quite a lot,\" the D.H.C. replied. \"But
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nothing else.\"\nPrimroses and landscapes, he pointed out, have one\ngrave defect: they are gratuitous. A love of nature keeps\nno factories busy. It was decided to abolish the love of\nnature, at any rate among the lower classes; to abolish\nthe love of nature, but not the tendency to consume\ntransport. For of course it was essential that they should\nkeep on going to the country, even though they hated it. The problem was to find an economically sounder reason\nfor consuming transport than a mere affection for\nprimroses and landscapes. It was duly found.\n\"We condition the masses to hate the country,\" concluded\nthe Director. \"But simultaneously we condition them to\nlove all country sports. At the same time, we see to it\nthat all country sports shall entail the use of elaborate\napparatus. So that they consume manufactured articles\nas well as transport. Hence those electric shocks.\"\n\"I see,\" said the student, and was silent, lost in\nadmiration.\nThere was a silence; then, clearing his throat, \"Once\nupon a time,\" the Director began, \"while our Ford was\nstill on earth, there was a little boy called Reuben\nRabinovitch. Reuben was the child of Polish-speaking\nparents.\"\nThe Director interrupted himself. \"You know what Polish\nis, I suppose?\"\n\"A dead language.\"\n\"Like French and German,\" added another student,\nofficiously showing off his learning.\n\"And 'parent'?\" questioned the D.H.C.\nThere was an uneasy silence. Several of the boys\nblushed. They had not yet learned to draw the significant\nbut often very fine distinction between smut and pure\nscience. One, at last, had the courage to raise a hand.\n\"Human beings used to be ...\" he hesitated; the blood\nrushed to his cheeks. \"Well, they used to be viviparous.\"\n\"Quite right.\" The Director nodded approvingly. \"And when the babies were decanted ...\"\n\"'Born,'\" came the correction.\n\"Well, then they were the parentsâI mean, not the\nbabies, of course; the other ones.\" The poor boy was\noverwhelmed with confusion.\n\"In
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: brief,\" the Director summed up, \"the parents were the\nfather and the mother.\" The smut that was really science\nfell with a crash into the boys' eye-avoiding silence.\n\"Mother,\" he repeated loudly rubbing in the science; and,\nleaning back in his chair, \"These,\" he said gravely, \"are\nunpleasant facts; I know it. But then most historical facts\nare unpleasant.\"\nHe returned to Little Reubenâto Little Reuben, in whose\nroom, one evening, by an oversight, his father and\nmother (crash, crash!) happened to leave the radio\nturned on.\n(\"For you must remember that in those days of gross\nviviparous reproduction, children were always brought up\nby their parents and not in State Conditioning Centres.\")\nWhile the child was asleep, a broadcast programme from\nLondon suddenly started to come through; and the next\nmorning, to the astonishment of his crash and crash (the\nmore daring of the boys ventured to grin at one another),\nLittle Reuben woke up repeating word for word a long\nlecture by that curious old writer (\"one of the very few\nwhose works have been permitted to come down to us\"),\nGeorge Bernard Shaw, who was speaking, according to a\nwell-authenticated tradition, about his own genius. To\nLittle Reuben's wink and snigger, this lecture was, of\ncourse, perfectly incomprehensible and, imagining that\ntheir child had suddenly gone mad, they sent for a\ndoctor. He, fortunately, understood English, recognized\nthe discourse as that which Shaw had broadcasted the previous evening, realized the significance of what had\nhappened, and sent a letter to the medical press about it.\n\"The principle of sleep-teaching, or hypnopÃ¦dia, had\nbeen discovered.\" The D.H.C. made an impressive pause.\nThe principle had been discovered; but many, many\nyears were to elapse before that principle was usefully\napplied.\n\"The case of Little Reuben occurred only twenty-three\nyears after Our Ford's first T-Model was put on the\nmarket.\" (Here the Director made a sign of the T on his\nstomach and all the students
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: reverently followed suit.)\n\"And yet ...\"\nFuriously the students scribbled. \"HypnopÃ¦dia, first used\nofficially in A.F. 214. Why not before? Two reasons. (a)\n...\"\n\"These early experimenters,\" the D.H.C. was saying,\n\"were on the wrong track. They thought that hypnopÃ¦dia\ncould be made an instrument of intellectual education ...\"\n(A small boy asleep on his right side, the right arm stuck\nout, the right hand hanging limp over the edge of the\nbed. Through a round grating in the side of a box a voice\nspeaks softly.\n\"The Nile is the longest river in Africa and the second in\nlength of all the rivers of the globe. Although falling short\nof the length of the Mississippi-Missouri, the Nile is at the\nhead of all rivers as regards the length of its basin, which\nextends through 35 degrees of latitude ...\"\nAt breakfast the next morning, \"Tommy,\" some one says,\n\"do you know which is the longest river in Africa?\" A\nshaking of the head. \"But don't you remember something\nthat begins: The Nile is the ...\" \"The - Nile - is - the - longest - river - in - Africa - and -\nthe - second - in - length - of - all - the - rivers - of - the\n- globe ...\" The words come rushing out. \"Although -\nfalling - short - of ...\"\n\"Well now, which is the longest river in Africa?\"\nThe eyes are blank. \"I don't know.\"\n\"But the Nile, Tommy.\"\n\"The - Nile - is - the - longest - river - in - Africa - and -\nsecond ...\"\n\"Then which river is the longest, Tommy?\"\nTommy burst into tears. \"I don't know,\" he howls.)\nThat howl, the Director made it plain, discouraged the\nearliest investigators. The experiments were abandoned.\nNo further attempt was made to teach children the length\nof the Nile in their sleep. Quite rightly. You can't learn a\nscience unless you know what it's all about.\n\"Whereas, if they'd only started on moral education,\" said\nthe Director, leading the way towards the door. The\nstudents followed him, desperately scribbling as they\nwalked and all the way up in the lift. \"Moral educa
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tion,\nwhich ought never, in any circumstances, to be rational.\"\n\"Silence, silence,\" whispered a loud speaker as they\nstepped out at the fourteenth floor, and \"Silence,\nsilence,\" the trumpet mouths indefatigably repeated at\nintervals down every corridor. The students and even the\nDirector himself rose automatically to the tips of their\ntoes. They were Alphas, of course, but even Alphas have\nbeen well conditioned. \"Silence, silence.\" All the air of the\nfourteenth floor was sibilant with the categorical\nimperative. Fifty yards of tiptoeing brought them to a door which the\nDirector cautiously opened. They stepped over the\nthreshold into the twilight of a shuttered dormitory.\nEighty cots stood in a row against the wall. There was a\nsound of light regular breathing and a continuous\nmurmur, as of very faint voices remotely whispering.\nA nurse rose as they entered and came to attention\nbefore the Director.\n\"What's the lesson this afternoon?\" he asked.\n\"We had Elementary Sex for the first forty minutes,\" she\nanswered. \"But now it's switched over to Elementary\nClass Consciousness.\"\nThe Director walked slowly down the long line of cots.\nRosy and relaxed with sleep, eighty little boys and girls\nlay softly breathing. There was a whisper under every\npillow. The D.H.C. halted and, bending over one of the\nlittle beds, listened attentively.\n\"Elementary Class Consciousness, did you say? Let's have\nit repeated a little louder by the trumpet.\"\nAt the end of the room a loud speaker projected from the\nwall. The Director walked up to it and pressed a switch.\n\"... all wear green,\" said a soft but very distinct voice,\nbeginning in the middle of a sentence, \"and Delta\nChildren wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play with\nDelta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They're too\nstupid to be able to read or write. Besides they wear\nblack, which is such a beastly colour. I'm so glad I'm a\nBeta.\"\nThere was a pause; then the voice began again. \"Alpha children wear grey They work much h
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: arder than\nwe do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm really\nawfuly glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard.\nAnd then we are much better than the Gammas and\nDeltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and\nDelta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play\nwith Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They're\ntoo stupid to be able ...\"\nThe Director pushed back the switch. The voice was\nsilent. Only its thin ghost continued to mutter from\nbeneath the eighty pillows.\n\"They'll have that repeated forty or fifty times more\nbefore they wake; then again on Thursday, and again on\nSaturday. A hundred and twenty times three times a\nweek for thirty months. After which they go on to a more\nadvanced lesson.\"\nRoses and electric shocks, the khaki of Deltas and a whiff\nof asafÅtidaâwedded indissolubly before the child can\nspeak. But wordless conditioning is crude and wholesale;\ncannot bring home the finer distinctions, cannot inculcate\nthe more complex courses of behaviour. For that there\nmust be words, but words without reason. In brief,\nhypnopÃ¦dia.\n\"The greatest moralizing and socializing force of all time.\"\nThe students took it down in their little books. Straight\nfrom the horse's mouth.\nOnce more the Director touched the switch.\n\"... so frightfully clever,\" the soft, insinuating,\nindefatigable voice was saying, \"I'm really awfully glad\nI'm a Beta, because ...\" Not so much like drops of water, though water, it is true,\ncan wear holes in the hardest granite; rather, drops of\nliquid sealing-wax, drops that adhere, incrust, incorporate\nthemselves with what they fall on, till finally the rock is\nall one scarlet blob.\n\"Till at last the child's mind is these suggestions, and the\nsum of the suggestions is the child's mind. And not the\nchild's mind only. The adult's mind tooâall his life long.\nThe mind that judges and desires and decidesâmade up\nof these suggestions. But all these suggestions are our\nsuggestions!\" The Director almost shouted in his tri
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: umph.\n\"Suggestions from the State.\" He banged the nearest\ntable. \"It therefore follows ...\"\nA noise made him turn round.\n\"Oh, Ford!\" he said in another tone, \"I've gone and\nwoken the children.\" Chapter Three\nO UTSIDE,\nin the garden, it was playtime. Naked in the\nwarm June sunshine, six or seven hundred little boys and\ngirls were running with shrill yells over the lawns, or\nplaying ball games, or squatting silently in twos and\nthrees among the flowering shrubs. The roses were in\nbloom, two nightingales soliloquized in the boskage, a\ncuckoo was just going out of tune among the lime trees.\nThe air was drowsy with the murmur of bees and\nhelicopters.\nThe Director and his students stood for a short time\nwatching a game of Centrifugal Bumble-puppy. Twenty\nchildren were grouped in a circle round a chrome steel\ntower. A ball thrown up so as to land on the platform at\nthe top of the tower rolled down into the interior, fell on a\nrapidly revolving disk, was hurled through one or other of\nthe numerous apertures pierced in the cylindrical casing,\nand had to be caught.\n\"Strange,\" mused the Director, as they turned away,\n\"strange to think that even in Our Ford's day most games\nwere played without more apparatus than a ball or two\nand a few sticks and perhaps a bit of netting. imagine the\nfolly of allowing people to play elaborate games which do\nnothing whatever to increase consumption. It's madness.\nNowadays the Controllers won't approve of any new\ngame unless it can be shown that it requires at least as\nmuch apparatus as the most complicated of existing\ngames.\" He interrupted himself.\n\"That's a charming little group,\" he said, pointing.\nIn a little grassy bay between tall clumps of\nMediterranean heather, two children, a little boy of about\nseven and a little girl who might have been a year older, were playing, very gravely and with all the focussed\nattention of scientists intent on a labour of discovery, a\nrudimentary sexual game.\n\"Charming,\ncharming!\"\nsentimentally.\nt
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he\nD.H.C.\nrepeated\n\"Charming,\" the boys politely agreed. But their smile was\nrather patronizing. They had put aside similar childish\namusements too recently to be able to watch them now\nwithout a touch of contempt. Charming? but it was just a\npair of kids fooling about; that was all. Just kids.\n\"I always think,\" the Director was continuing in the same\nrather maudlin tone, when he was interrupted by a loud\nboo-hooing.\nFrom a neighbouring shrubbery emerged a nurse, leading\nby the hand a small boy, who howled as he went. An\nanxious-looking little girl trotted at her heels.\n\"What's the matter?\" asked the Director.\nThe nurse shrugged her shoulders. \"Nothing much,\" she\nanswered. \"It's just that this little boy seems rather\nreluctant to join in the ordinary erotic play. I'd noticed it\nonce or twice before. And now again to-day. He started\nyelling just now ...\"\n\"Honestly,\" put in the anxious-looking little girl, \"I didn't\nmean to hurt him or anything. Honestly.\"\n\"Of course you didn't, dear,\" said the nurse reassuringly.\n\"And so,\" she went on, turning back to the Director, \"I'm\ntaking him in to see the Assistant Superintendent of\nPsychology. Just to see if anything's at all abnormal.\" \"Quite right,\" said the Director. \"Take him in. You stay\nhere, little girl,\" he added, as the nurse moved away with\nher still howling charge. \"What's your name?\"\n\"Polly Trotsky.\"\n\"And a very good name too,\" said the Director. \"Run\naway now and see if you can find some other little boy to\nplay with.\"\nThe child scampered off into the bushes and was lost to\nsight.\n\"Exquisite little creature!\" said the Director, looking after\nher. Then, turning to his students, \"What I'm going to tell\nyou now,\" he said, \"may sound incredible. But then,\nwhen you're not accustomed to history, most facts about\nthe past do sound incredible.\"\nHe let out the amazing truth. For a very long period\nbefore the time of Our Ford, and even for some\ngenerations afterwards, erotic play between child
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ren had\nbeen regarded as abnormal (there was a roar of\nlaughter); and not only abnormal, actually immoral (no!):\nand had therefore been rigorously suppressed.\nA look of astonished incredulity appeared on the faces of\nhis listeners. Poor little kids not allowed to amuse\nthemselves? They could not believe it.\n\"Even adolescents,\" the D.H.C.\nadolescents like yourselves ...\"\nwas\nsaying,\n\"even\n\"Not possible!\"\n\"Barring\na\nlittle\nsurreptitious\nhomosexualityâabsolutely nothing.\"\n\"Nothing?\"\nauto-erotism\nand \"In most cases, till they were over twenty years old.\"\n\"Twenty years old?\" echoed the students in a chorus of\nloud disbelief.\n\"Twenty,\" the Director repeated. \"I told you that you'd\nfind it incredible.\"\n\"But what happened?\" they asked. \"What were the\nresults?\"\n\"The results were terrible.\" A deep resonant voice broke\nstartlingly into the dialogue.\nThey looked around. On the fringe of the little group\nstood a strangerâa man of middle height, black-haired,\nwith a hooked nose, full red lips, eyes very piercing and\ndark. \"Terrible,\" he repeated.\nThe D.H.C. had at that moment sat down on one of the\nsteel and rubber benches conveniently scattered through\nthe gardens; but at the sight of the stranger, he sprang\nto his feet and darted forward, his hand outstretched,\nsmiling with all his teeth, effusive.\n\"Controller! What an unexpected pleasure! Boys, what\nare you thinking of? This is the Controller; this is his\nfordship, Mustapha Mond.\"\nIn the four thousand rooms of the Centre the four\nthousand electric clocks simultaneously struck four.\nDiscarnate voices called from the trumpet mouths.\n\"Main Day-shift off duty. Second Day-shift take over.\nMain Day-shift off ...\"\nIn the lift, on their way up to the changing rooms, Henry\nFoster and the Assistant Director of Predestination rather\npointedly turned their backs on Bernard Marx from the Psychology Bureau: averted\nunsavoury reputation.\nthemselves\nfrom\nthat\nThe faint hum and rattle of machinery still s
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tirred the\ncrimson air in the Embryo Store. Shifts might come and\ngo, one lupus-coloured face give place to another;\nmajestically and for ever the conveyors crept forward\nwith their load of future men and women.\nLenina Crowne walked briskly towards the door.\nHis fordship Mustapha Mond! The eyes of the saluting\nstudents almost popped out of their heads. Mustapha\nMond! The Resident Controller for Western Europe! One\nof the Ten World Controllers. One of the Ten ... and he\nsat down on the bench with the D.H.C., he was going to\nstay, to stay, yes, and actually talk to them ... straight\nfrom the horse's mouth. Straight from the mouth of Ford\nhimself.\nTwo shrimp-brown children emerged from a neighbouring\nshrubbery, stared at them for a moment with large,\nastonished eyes, then returned to their amusements\namong the leaves.\n\"You all remember,\" said the Controller, in his strong\ndeep voice, \"you all remember, I suppose, that beautiful\nand inspired saying of Our Ford's: History is bunk.\nHistory,\" he repeated slowly, \"is bunk.\"\nHe waved his hand; and it was as though, with an\ninvisible feather wisk, he had brushed away a little dust,\nand the dust was Harappa, was Ur of the Chaldees; some\nspider-webs, and they were Thebes and Babylon and\nCnossos and Mycenae. Whisk. Whiskâand where was\nOdysseus, where was Job, where were Jupiter and\nGotama and Jesus? Whiskâand those specks of antique\ndirt called Athens and Rome, Jerusalem and the Middle\nKingdomâall were gone. Whiskâthe place where Italy had been was empty. Whisk, the cathedrals; whisk, whisk,\nKing Lear and the Thoughts of Pascal. Whisk, Passion;\nwhisk, Requiem; whisk, Symphony; whisk ...\n\"Going to the Feelies this evening, Henry?\" enquired the\nAssistant Predestinator. \"I hear the new one at the\nAlhambra is first-rate. There's a love scene on a bearskin\nrug; they say it's marvellous. Every hair of the bear\nreproduced. The most amazing tactual effects.\"\n\"That's why you're taught no history,\" the Controller was\nsaying. \"
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: But now the time has come ...\"\nThe D.H.C. looked at him nervously. There were those\nstrange rumours of old forbidden books hidden in a safe\nin the Controller's study. Bibles, poetryâFord knew what.\nMustapha Mond intercepted his anxious glance and the\ncorners of his red lips twitched ironically.\n\"It's all right, Director,\" he said in a tone of faint derision,\n\"I won't corrupt them.\"\nThe D.H.C. was overwhelmed with confusion.\nThose who feel themselves despised do well to look\ndespising. The smile on Bernard Marx's face was\ncontemptuous. Every hair on the bear indeed!\n\"I shall make a point of going,\" said Henry Foster.\nMustapha Mond leaned forward, shook a finger at them.\n\"Just try to realize it,\" he said, and his voice sent a\nstrange thrill quivering along their diaphragms. \"Try to\nrealize what it was like to have a viviparous mother.\"\nThat smutty word again. But none of them dreamed, this\ntime, of smiling.\n\"Try to imagine what 'living with one's family' meant.\" They tried; but obviously without the smallest success.\n\"And do you know what a 'home' was?\"\nThey shook their heads.\nFrom her dim crimson cellar Lenina Crowne shot up\nseventeen stories, turned to the right as she stepped out\nof the lift, walked down a long corridor and, opening the\ndoor marked GIRLS' DRESSING-ROOM, plunged into a\ndeafening chaos of arms and bosoms and underclothing.\nTorrents of hot water were splashing into or gurgling out\nof a hundred baths. Rumbling and hissing, eighty vibro-\nvacuum\nmassage\nmachines\nwere\nsimultaneously\nkneading and sucking the firm and sunburnt flesh of\neighty superb female specimens. Every one was talking\nat the top of her voice. A Synthetic Music machine was\nwarbling out a super-cornet solo.\n\"Hullo, Fanny,\" said Lenina to the young woman who had\nthe pegs and locker next to hers.\nFanny worked in the Bottling Room, and her surname\nwas also Crowne. But as the two thousand million\ninhabitants of the plant had only ten thousand names\nbetween them, the coincidence
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: was not particularly\nsurprising.\nLenina pulled at her zippers-downwards on the jacket,\ndownwards with a double-handed gesture at the two that\nheld trousers, downwards again to loosen her\nundergarment. Still wearing her shoes and stockings, she\nwalked off towards the bathrooms.\nHome, homeâa few small rooms, stiflingly over-inhabited\nby a man, by a periodically teeming woman, by a rabble\nof boys and girls of all ages. No air, no space; an\nundersterilized prison; darkness, disease, and smells. (The Controller's evocation was so vivid that one of the\nboys, more sensitive than the rest, turned pale at the\nmere description and was on the point of being sick.)\nLenina got out of the bath, toweled herself dry, took hold\nof a long flexible tube plugged into the wall, presented\nthe nozzle to her breast, as though she meant to commit\nsuicide, pressed down the trigger. A blast of warmed air\ndusted her with the finest talcum powder. Eight different\nscents and eau-de-Cologne were laid on in little taps over\nthe wash-basin. She turned on the third from the left,\ndabbed herself with chypre and, carrying her shoes and\nstockings in her hand, went out to see if one of the vibro-\nvacuum machines were free.\nAnd home was as squalid psychically as physically.\nPsychically, it was a rabbit hole, a midden, hot with the\nfrictions of tightly packed life, reeking with emotion. What\nsuffocating intimacies, what dangerous, insane, obscene\nrelationships between the members of the family group!\nManiacally, the mother brooded over her children (her\nchildren) ... brooded over them like a cat over its kittens;\nbut a cat that could talk, a cat that could say, \"My baby,\nmy baby,\" over and over again. \"My baby, and oh, oh, at\nmy breast, the little hands, the hunger, and that\nunspeakable agonizing pleasure! Till at last my baby\nsleeps, my baby sleeps with a bubble of white milk at the\ncorner of his mouth. My little baby sleeps ...\"\n\"Yes,\" said Mustapha Mond, nodding his head, \"you may\nwell shudder.\"\n\"Who
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: are you going out with to-night?\" Lenina asked,\nreturning from the vibro-vac like a pearl illuminated from\nwithin, pinkly glowing.\n\"Nobody.\"\nLenina raised her eyebrows in astonishment. \"I've been feeling rather out of sorts lately,\" Fanny\nexplained. \"Dr. Wells advised me to have a Pregnancy\nSubstitute.\"\n\"But, my dear, you're only nineteen. The first Pregnancy\nSubstitute isn't compulsory till twenty-one.\"\n\"I know, dear. But some people are better if they begin\nearlier. Dr. Wells told me that brunettes with wide\npelvises, like me, ought to have their first Pregnancy\nSubstitute at seventeen. So I'm really two years late, not\ntwo years early.\" She opened the door of her locker and\npointed to the row of boxes and labelled phials on the\nupper shelf.\n\"SYRUP OF CORPUS LUTEUM,\" Lenina read the names\naloud. \"OVARIN, GUARANTEED FRESH: NOT TO BE USED\nAFTER AUGUST 1ST, A.F. 632. MAMMARY GLAND\nEXTRACT: TO BE TAKEN THREE TIMES DAILY, BEFORE\nMEALS, WITH A LITTLE WATER. PLACENTIN: 5cc TO BE\nINJECTED INTRAVENALLY EVERY THIRD DAY ... Ugh!\"\nLenina shuddered. \"How I loathe intravenals, don't you?\"\n\"Yes. But when they do one good ...\" Fanny was a\nparticularly sensible girl.\nOur Fordâor Our Freud, as, for some inscrutable reason,\nhe chose to call himself whenever he spoke of\npsychological mattersâOur Freud had been the first to\nreveal the appalling dangers of family life. The world was\nfull of fathersâwas therefore full of misery; full of\nmothersâtherefore of every kind of perversion from\nsadism to chastity; full of brothers, sisters, uncles,\nauntsâfull of madness and suicide.\n\"And yet, among the savages of Samoa, in certain islands\noff the coast of New Guinea ...\" The tropical sunshine lay like warm honey on the naked\nbodies of children tumbling promiscuously among the\nhibiscus blossoms. Home was in any one of twenty palm-\nthatched houses. In the Trobriands conception was the\nwork of ancestral ghosts; nobody had ever heard of a\nfather.\n\"Extremes,\" said the Contro
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ller, \"meet. For the good\nreason that they were made to meet.\"\n\"Dr. Wells says that a three months' Pregnancy\nSubstitute now will make all the difference to my health\nfor the next three or four years.\"\n\"Well, I hope he's right,\" said Lenina. \"But, Fanny, do you\nreally mean to say that for the next three months you're\nnot supposed to ...\"\n\"Oh no, dear. Only for a week or two, that's all. I shall\nspend the evening at the Club playing Musical Bridge. I\nsuppose you're going out?\"\nLenina nodded.\n\"Who with?\"\n\"Henry Foster.\"\n\"Again?\" Fanny's kind, rather moon-like face took on an\nincongruous expression of pained and disapproving\nastonishment. \"Do you mean to tell me you're still going\nout with Henry Foster?\"\nMothers and fathers, brothers and sisters. But there were\nalso husbands, wives, lovers. There were also monogamy\nand romance.\n\"Though you probably don't know what those are,\" said\nMustapha Mond. They shook their heads.\nFamily, monogamy, romance. Everywhere exclusiveness,\na narrow channelling of impulse and energy.\n\"But every one belongs to every one else,\" he concluded,\nciting the hypnopÃ¦dic proverb.\nThe students nodded, emphatically agreeing with a\nstatement which upwards of sixty-two thousand\nrepetitions in the dark had made them accept, not merely\nas true, but as axiomatic, self-evident, utterly\nindisputable.\n\"But after all,\" Lenina was protesting, \"it's only about four\nmonths now since I've been having Henry.\"\n\"Only four months! I like that. And what's more,\" Fanny\nwent on, pointing an accusing finger, \"there's been\nnobody else except Henry all that time. Has there?\"\nLenina blushed scarlet; but her eyes, the tone of her\nvoice remained defiant. \"No, there hasn't been any one\nelse,\" she answered almost truculently. \"And I jolly well\ndon't see why there should have been.\"\n\"Oh, she jolly well doesn't see why there should have\nbeen,\" Fanny repeated, as though to an invisible listener\nbehind Lenina's left shoulder. Then, with a sudden\ncha
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nge of tone, \"But seriously,\" she said, \"I really do\nthink you ought to be careful. It's such horribly bad form\nto go on and on like this with one man. At forty, or thirty-\nfive, it wouldn't be so bad. But at your age, Lenina! No, it\nreally won't do. And you know how strongly the D.H.C.\nobjects to anything intense or long-drawn. Four months\nof Henry Foster, without having another manâwhy, he'd\nbe furious if he knew ...\" \"Think of water under pressure in a pipe.\" They thought\nof it. \"I pierce it once,\" said the Controller. \"What a jet!\"\nHe pierced it twenty times. There were twenty piddling\nlittle fountains.\n\"My baby. My baby ...!\"\n\"Mother!\" The madness is infectious.\n\"My love, my one and only, precious, precious ...\"\nMother, monogamy, romance. High spurts the fountain;\nfierce and foamy the wild jet. The urge has but a single\noutlet. My love, my baby. No wonder these poor pre-\nmoderns were mad and wicked and miserable. Their\nworld didn't allow them to take things easily, didn't allow\nthem to be sane, virtuous, happy. What with mothers\nand lovers, what with the prohibitions they were not\nconditioned to obey, what with the temptations and the\nlonely remorses, what with all the diseases and the\nendless isolating pain, what with the uncertainties and\nthe povertyâthey were forced to feel strongly. And feeling\nstrongly (and strongly, what was more, in solitude, in\nhopelessly individual isolation), how could they be stable?\n\"Of course there's no need to give him up. Have\nsomebody else from time to time, that's all. He has other\ngirls, doesn't he?\"\nLenina admitted it.\n\"Of course he does. Trust Henry Foster to be the perfect\ngentlemanâalways correct. And then there's the Director\nto think of. You know what a stickler ...\"\nNodding, \"He patted me on the behind this afternoon,\"\nsaid Lenina. \"There, you see!\" Fanny was triumphant. \"That shows\nwhat he stands for. The strictest conventionality.\"\n\"Stability,\" said the Controller, \"stability. No civilization\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: without social stability. No social stability without\nindividual stability.\" His voice was a trumpet. Listening\nthey felt larger, warmer.\nThe machine turns, turns and must keep on turningâfor\never. It is death if it stands still. A thousand millions\nscrabbled the crust of the earth. The wheels began to\nturn. In a hundred and fifty years there were two\nthousand millions. Stop all the wheels. In a hundred and\nfifty weeks there are once more only a thousand millions;\na thousand thousand thousand men and women have\nstarved to death.\nWheels must turn steadily, but cannot turn untended.\nThere must be men to tend them, men as steady as the\nwheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, stable\nin contentment.\nCrying: My baby, my mother, my only, only love\ngroaning: My sin, my terrible God; screaming with pain,\nmuttering with fever, bemoaning old age and povertyâ\nhow can they tend the wheels? And if they cannot tend\nthe wheels ... The corpses of a thousand thousand\nthousand men and women would be hard to bury or burn.\n\"And after all,\" Fanny's tone was coaxing, \"it's not as\nthough there were anything painful or disagreeable about\nhaving one or two men besides Henry. And seeing that\nyou ought to be a little more promiscuous ...\"\n\"Stability,\" insisted the Controller, \"stability. The primal\nand the ultimate need. Stability. Hence all this.\"\nWith a wave of his hand he indicated the gardens, the\nhuge building of the Conditioning Centre, the naked children furtive in the undergrowth or running across the\nlawns.\nLenina shook her head. \"Somehow,\" she mused, \"I hadn't\nbeen feeling very keen on promiscuity lately. There are\ntimes when one doesn't. Haven't you found that too,\nFanny?\"\nFanny nodded her sympathy and understanding. \"But\none's got to make the effort,\" she said, sententiously,\n\"one's got to play the game. After all, every one belongs\nto every one else.\"\n\"Yes, every one belongs to every one else,\" Lenina\nrepeated slowly and, sighing, was silent for a moment;\nt
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hen, taking Fanny's hand, gave it a little squeeze.\n\"You're quite right, Fanny. As usual. I'll make the effort.\"\nImpulse arrested spills over, and the flood is feeling, the\nflood is passion, the flood is even madness: it depends on\nthe force of the current, the height and strength of the\nbarrier. The unchecked stream flows smoothly down its\nappointed channels into a calm well-being. (The embryo\nis hungry; day in, day out, the blood-surrogate pump\nunceasingly turns its eight hundred revolutions a minute.\nThe decanted infant howls; at once a nurse appears with\na bottle of external secretion. Feeling lurks in that\ninterval of time between desire and its consummation.\nShorten that interval, break down all those old\nunnecessary barriers.\n\"Fortunate boys!\" said the Controller. \"No pains have\nbeen spared to make your lives emotionally easyâto\npreserve you, so far as that is possible, from having\nemotions at all.\"\n\"Ford's in his flivver,\" murmured the D.H.C. \"All's well\nwith the world.\" \"Lenina Crowne?\" said Henry Foster, echoing the\nAssistant Predestinator's question as he zipped up his\ntrousers. \"Oh, she's a splendid girl. Wonderfully\npneumatic. I'm surprised you haven't had her.\"\n\"I can't think how it is I haven't,\" said the Assistant\nPredestinator. \"I certainly will. At the first opportunity.\"\nFrom his place on the opposite side of the changing-room\naisle, Bernard Marx overheard what they were saying and\nturned pale.\n\"And to tell the truth,\" said Lenina, \"I'm beginning to get\njust a tiny bit bored with nothing but Henry every day.\"\nShe pulled on her left stocking. \"Do you know Bernard\nMarx?\" she asked in a tone whose excessive casualness\nwas evidently forced.\nFanny looked startled. \"You don't mean to say ...?\"\n\"Why not? Bernard's an Alpha Plus. Besides, he asked me\nto go to one of the Savage Reservations with him. I've\nalways wanted to see a Savage Reservation.\"\n\"But his reputation?\"\n\"What do I care about his reputation?\"\n\"They say he doesn't l
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ike Obstacle Golf.\"\n\"They say, they say,\" mocked Lenina.\n\"And then he spends most of his time by himselfâalone.\"\nThere was horror in Fanny's voice.\n\"Well, he won't be alone when he's with me. And anyhow,\nwhy are people so beastly to him? I think he's rather\nsweet.\" She smiled to herself; how absurdly shy he had\nbeen! Frightened almostâas though she were a World\nController and he a Gamma-Minus machine minder. \"Consider your own lives,\" said Mustapha Mond. \"Has any\nof you ever encountered an insurmountable obstacle?\"\nThe question was answered by a negative silence.\n\"Has any of you been compelled to live through a long\ntime-interval between the consciousness of a desire and\nits fufilment?\"\n\"Well,\" began one of the boys, and hesitated.\n\"Speak up,\" said the D.H.C. \"Don't keep his fordship\nwaiting.\"\n\"I once had to wait nearly four weeks before a girl I\nwanted would let me have her.\"\n\"And you felt a strong emotion in consequence?\"\n\"Horrible!\"\n\"Horrible; precisely,\" said the Controller. \"Our ancestors\nwere so stupid and short-sighted that when the first\nreformers came along and offered to deliver them from\nthose horrible emotions, they wouldn't have anything to\ndo with them.\"\n\"Talking about her as though she were a bit of meat.\"\nBernard ground his teeth. \"Have her here, have her\nthere.\" Like mutton. Degrading her to so much mutton.\nShe said she'd think it over, she said she'd give me an\nanswer this week. Oh, Ford, Ford, Ford.\" He would have\nliked to go up to them and hit them in the faceâhard,\nagain and again.\n\"Yes, I really do advise you to try her,\" Henry Foster was\nsaying.\n\"Take Ectogenesis. Pfitzner and Kawaguchi had got the\nwhole technique worked out. But would the Governments look at it? No. There was something called Christianity.\nWomen were forced to go on being viviparous.\"\n\"He's so ugly!\" said Fanny.\n\"But I rather like his looks.\"\n\"And then so small.\" Fanny made a grimace; smallness\nwas so horribly and typically low-caste
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: .\n\"I think that's rather sweet,\" said Lenina. \"One feels one\nwould like to pet him. You know. Like a cat.\"\nFanny was shocked. \"They say somebody made a\nmistake when he was still in the bottleâthought he was a\nGamma and put alcohol into his blood-surrogate. That's\nwhy he's so stunted.\"\n\"What nonsense!\" Lenina was indignant.\n\"Sleep teaching was actually prohibited in England. There\nwas something called liberalism. Parliament, if you know\nwhat that was, passed a law against it. The records\nsurvive. Speeches about liberty of the subject. Liberty to\nbe inefficient and miserable. Freedom to be a round peg\nin a square hole.\"\n\"But, my dear chap, you're welcome, I assure you. You're\nwelcome.\"\nHenry\nFoster\npatted\nthe\nAssistant\nPredestinator on the shoulder. \"Every one belongs to\nevery one else, after all.\"\nOne hundred repetitions three nights a week for four\nyears, thought Bernard Marx, who was a specialist on\nhypnopÃ¦dia. Sixty-two thousand four hundred repetitions\nmake one truth. Idiots! \"Or the Caste System. Constantly proposed, constantly\nrejected. There was something called democracy. As\nthough men were more than physico-chemically equal.\"\n\"Well, all I can say is that I'm going to accept his\ninvitation.\"\nBernard hated them, hated them. But they were two,\nthey were large, they were strong.\n\"The Nine Years' War began in A.F. 141.\"\n\"Not even if it were true about the alcohol in his blood-\nsurrogate.\"\n\"Phosgene,\nchloropicrin,\nethyl\niodoacetate,\ndiphenylcyanarsine,\ntrichlormethyl,\nchloroformate,\ndichlorethyl sulphide. Not to mention hydrocyanic acid.\"\n\"Which I simply don't believe,\" Lenina concluded.\n\"The noise of fourteen thousand aeroplanes advancing in\nopen order. But in the Kurfurstendamm and the Eighth\nArrondissement, the explosion of the anthrax bombs is\nhardly louder than the popping of a paper bag.\"\n\"Because I do want to see a Savage Reservation.\"\nCh 3 C 6 H 2 (NO 2 ) 3 +Hg(CNO) 2 =well, what? An enormous hole\nin the ground, a pile o
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f masonry, some bits of flesh and\nmucus, a foot, with the boot still on it, flying through the\nair and landing, flop, in the middle of the geraniumsâthe\nscarlet ones; such a splendid show that summer!\n\"You're hopeless, Lenina, I give you up.\"\n\"The Russian technique for infecting water supplies was\nparticularly ingenious.\" Back turned to back, Fanny and Lenina continued their\nchanging in silence.\n\"The Nine Years' War, the great Economic Collapse. There\nwas a choice between World Control and destruction.\nBetween stability and ...\"\n\"Fanny Crowne's a nice girl too,\" said the Assistant\nPredestinator.\nIn the nurseries, the Elementary Class Consciousness\nlesson was over, the voices were adapting future demand\nto future industrial supply. \"I do love flying,\" they\nwhispered, \"I do love flying, I do love having new clothes,\nI do love ...\"\n\"Liberalism, of course, was dead of anthrax, but all the\nsame you couldn't do things by force.\"\n\"Not nearly so pneumatic as Lenina. Oh, not nearly.\"\n\"But old clothes are beastly,\" continued the untiring\nwhisper. \"We always throw away old clothes. Ending is\nbetter than mending, ending is better than mending,\nending is better ...\"\n\"Government's an affair of sitting, not hitting. You rule\nwith the brains and the buttocks, never with the fists. For\nexample, there was the conscription of consumption.\"\n\"There, I'm ready,\" said Lenina, but Fanny remained\nspeechless and averted. \"Let's make peace, Fanny\ndarling.\"\n\"Every man, woman and child compelled to consume so\nmuch a year. In the interests of industry. The sole result\n...\"\n\"Ending is better than mending. The more stitches, the\nless riches; the more stitches ...\" \"One of these days,\" said Fanny, with dismal emphasis,\n\"you'll get into trouble.\"\n\"Conscientious objection on an enormous scale. Anything\nnot to consume. Back to nature.\"\n\"I do love flying. I do love flying.\"\n\"Back to culture. Yes, actually to culture. You can't\nconsume much if you sit still and read boo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ks.\"\n\"Do I look all right?\" Lenina asked. Her jacket was made\nof bottle green acetate cloth with green viscose fur; at\nthe cuffs and collar.\n\"Eight hundred Simple Lifers were mowed down by\nmachine guns at Golders Green.\"\n\"Ending is better than mending, ending is better than\nmending.\"\nGreen corduroy shorts and white\nstockings turned down below the knee.\nviscose-woollen\n\"Then came the famous British Museum Massacre. Two\nthousand culture fans gassed with dichlorethyl sulphide.\"\nA green-and-white jockey cap shaded Lenina's eyes; her\nshoes were bright green and highly polished.\n\"In the end,\" said Mustapha Mond, \"the Controllers\nrealized that force was no good. The slower but infinitely\nsurer methods of ectogenesis, neo-Pavlovian conditioning\nand hypnopÃ¦dia ...\"\nAnd round her waist she wore a silver-mounted green\nmorocco-surrogate cartridge belt, bulging (for Lenina was\nnot a freemartin) with the regulation supply of\ncontraceptives. \"The discoveries of Pfitzner and Kawaguchi were at last\nmade use of. An intensive propaganda against viviparous\nreproduction ...\"\n\"Perfect!\" cried Fanny enthusiastically. She could never\nresist Lenina's charm for long. \"And what a perfectly\nsweet Malthusian belt!\"\n\"Accompanied by a campaign against the Past; by the\nclosing of museums, the blowing up of historical\nmonuments (luckily most of them had already been\ndestroyed during the Nine Years' War); by the\nsuppression of all books published before A.F. 15O.''\n\"I simply must get one like it,\" said Fanny.\n\"There were some things called the pyramids, for\nexample.\n\"My old black-patent bandolier ...\"\n\"And a man called Shakespeare. You've never heard of\nthem of course.\"\n\"It's an absolute disgraceâthat bandolier of mine.\"\n\"Such are the advantages of a really scientific education.\"\n\"The more stitches the less riches; the more stitches the\nless ...\"\n\"The introduction of Our Ford's first T-Model ...\"\n\"I've had it nearly three months.\"\n\"Chosen as the opening date of
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the new era.\"\n\"Ending is better than mending; ending is better ...\" \"There was a\nChristianity.\"\nthing,\nas\nI've\nsaid\nbefore,\ncalled\n\"Ending is better than mending.\"\n\"The ethics and philosophy of under-consumption ...\"\n\"I love new clothes, I love new clothes, I love ...\"\n\"So essential when there was under-production; but in an\nage of machines and the fixation of nitrogenâpositively a\ncrime against society.\"\n\"Henry Foster gave it me.\"\n\"All crosses had their tops cut and became T's. There was\nalso a thing called God.\"\n\"It's real morocco-surrogate.\"\n\"We have the World State now. And Ford's Day\ncelebrations, and Community Sings, and Solidarity\nServices.\"\n\"Ford, how I hate them!\" Bernard Marx was thinking.\n\"There was a thing called Heaven; but all the same they\nused to drink enormous quantities of alcohol.\"\n\"Like meat, like so much meat.\"\n\"There was a thing called the soul and a thing called\nimmortality.\"\n\"Do ask Henry where he got it.\"\n\"But they used to take morphia and cocaine.\"\n\"And what makes it worse, she thinks of herself as meat.\" \"Two thousand pharmacologists and bio-chemists were\nsubsidized in A.P. 178.\"\n\"He does look glum,\" said the Assistant Predestinator,\npointing at Bernard Marx.\n\"Six years later it was being produced commercially. The\nperfect drug.\"\n\"Let's bait him.\"\n\"Euphoric, narcotic, pleasantly hallucinant.\"\n\"Glum, Marx, glum.\" The clap on the shoulder made him\nstart, look up. It was that brute Henry Foster. \"What you\nneed is a gramme of soma.\"\n\"All the advantages of Christianity and alcohol; none of\ntheir defects.\"\n\"Ford, I should like to kill him!\" But all he did was to say,\n\"No, thank you,\" and fend off the proffered tube of\ntablets.\n\"Take a holiday from reality whenever you like, and come\nback without so much as a headache or a mythology.\"\n\"Take it,\" insisted Henry Foster, \"take it.\"\n\"Stability was practically assured.\"\n\"One cubic centimetre cures ten gloomy sentiments,\" said\nthe As
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sistant Predestinator citing a piece of homely\nhypnopÃ¦dic wisdom.\n\"It only remained to conquer old age.\"\n\"Damn you, damn you!\" shouted Bernard Marx.\n\"Hoity-toity.\" \"Gonadal hormones,\nmagnesium salts ...\"\ntransfusion\nof\nyoung\nblood,\n\"And do remember that a gramme is better than a\ndamn.\" They went out, laughing.\n\"All the physiological stigmata of old age have been\nabolished. And along with them, of course ...\"\n\"Don't forget to ask him about that Malthusian belt,\" said\nFanny.\n\"Along with them all the old man's mental peculiarities.\nCharacters remain constant throughout a whole lifetime.\"\n\"... two rounds of Obstacle Golf to get through before\ndark. I must fly.\"\n\"Work, playâat sixty our powers and tastes are what they\nwere at seventeen. Old men in the bad old days used to\nrenounce, retire, take to religion, spend their time\nreading, thinkingâthinking!\"\n\"Idiots, swine!\" Bernard Marx was saying to himself, as\nhe walked down the corridor to the lift.\n\"Nowâsuch is progressâthe old men work, the old men\ncopulate, the old men have no time, no leisure from\npleasure, not a moment to sit down and thinkâor if ever\nby some unlucky chance such a crevice of time should\nyawn in the solid substance of their distractions, there is\nalways soma, delicious soma, half a gramme for a half-\nholiday, a gramme for a week-end, two grammes for a\ntrip to the gorgeous East, three for a dark eternity on the\nmoon; returning whence they find themselves on the\nother side of the crevice, safe on the solid ground of daily\nlabour and distraction, scampering from feely to feely,\nfrom girl to pneumatic girl, from Electromagnetic Golf\ncourse to ...\" \"Go away, little girl,\" shouted the D.H.C. angrily. \"Go\naway, little boy! Can't you see that his fordship's busy?\nGo and do your erotic play somewhere else.\"\n\"Suffer little children,\" said the Controller.\nSlowly, majestically, with a faint humming of machinery,\nthe Conveyors moved forward, thirty-three centimters an\nhour. In t
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he red darkness glinted innumerable rubies. Chapter Four\nT HE\nLIFT was crowded with men from the Alpha\nChanging Rooms, and Lenina's entry wars greeted by\nmany friendly nods and smiles. She was a popular girl\nand, at one time or another, had spent a night with\nalmost all of them.\nThey were dear boys, she thought, as she returned their\nsalutations. Charming boys! Still, she did wish that\nGeorge Edzel's ears weren't quite so big (perhaps he'd\nbeen given just a spot too much parathyroid at Metre\n328?). And looking at Benito Hoover, she couldn't help\nremembering that he was really too hairy when he took\nhis clothes off.\nTurning, with eyes a little saddened by the recollection, of\nBenito's curly blackness, she saw in a corner the small\nthin body, the melancholy face of Bernard Marx.\n\"Bernard!\" she stepped up to him. \"I was looking for\nyou.\" Her voice rang clear above the hum of the\nmounting lift. The others looked round curiously. \"I\nwanted to talk to you about our New Mexico plan.\" Out of\nthe tail of her eye she could see Benito Hoover gaping\nwith astonishment. The gape annoyed her. \"Surprised I\nshouldn't be begging to go with him again!\" she said to\nherself. Then aloud, and more warmly than ever, \"I'd\nsimply love to come with you for a week in July,\" she\nwent on. (Anyhow, she was publicly proving her\nunfaithfulness to Henry. Fanny ought to be pleased, even\nthough it was Bernard.) \"That is,\" Lenina gave him her\nmost deliciously significant smile, \"if you still want to\nhave me.\" Bernard's pale face flushed. \"What on earth for?\" she\nwondered, astonished, but at the same time touched by\nthis strange tribute to her power.\n\"Hadn't we better talk about it somewhere else?\" he\nstammered, looking horribly uncomfortable.\n\"As though I'd been saying something shocking,\" thought\nLenina. \"He couldn't look more upset if I'd made a dirty\njokeâasked him who his mother was, or something like\nthat.\"\n\"I mean, with all these people about ...\" He was choked\nwith confusion.\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Lenina's laugh was frank and wholly unmalicious. \"How\nfunny you are!\" she said; and she quite genuinely did\nthink him funny. \"You'll give me at least a week's\nwarning, won't you,\" she went on in another tone. \"I\nsuppose we take the Blue Pacific Rocket? Does it start\nfrom the Charing-T Tower? Or is it from Hampstead?\"\nBefore Bernard could answer, the lift came to a standstill.\n\"Roof!\" called a creaking voice.\nThe liftman was a small simian creature, dressed in the\nblack tunic of an Epsilon-Minus Semi-Moron.\n\"Roof!\"\nHe flung open the gates. The warm glory of afternoon\nsunlight made him start and blink his eyes. \"Oh, roof!\" he\nrepeated in a voice of rapture. He was as though\nsuddenly and joyfully awakened from a dark annihilating\nstupor. \"Roof!\"\nHe smiled up with a kind of doggily expectant adoration\ninto the faces of his passengers. Talking and laughing together, they stepped out into the light. The liftman\nlooked after them.\n\"Roof?\" he said once more, questioningly.\nThen a bell rang, and from the ceiling of the lift a loud\nspeaker began, very softly and yet very imperiously, to\nissue its commands.\n\"Go down,\" it said, \"go down. Floor Eighteen. Go down,\ngo down. Floor Eighteen. Go down, go ...\"\nThe liftman slammed the gates, touched a button and\ninstantly dropped back into the droning twilight of the\nwell, the twilight of his own habitual stupor.\nIt was warm and bright on the roof. The summer\nafternoon was drowsy with the hum of passing\nhelicopters; and the deeper drone of the rocket-planes\nhastening, invisible, through the bright sky five or six\nmiles overhead was like a caress on the soft air. Bernard\nMarx drew a deep breath. He looked up into the sky and\nround the blue horizon and finally down into Lenina's\nface.\n\"Isn't it beautiful!\" His voice trembled a little.\nShe smiled at him with an expression of the most\nsympathetic understanding. \"Simply perfect for Obstacle\nGolf,\" she answered rapturously. \"And now I must fly,\nBernard. Henry gets cross if I
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: keep him waiting. Let me\nknow in good time about the date.\" And waving her hand\nshe ran away across the wide flat roof towards the\nhangars. Bernard stood watching the retreating twinkle of\nthe white stockings, the sunburnt knees vivaciously\nbending and unbending again, again, and the softer\nrolling of those well-fitted corduroy shorts beneath the\nbottle green jacket. His face wore an expression of pain. \"I should say she was pretty,\" said a loud and cheery\nvoice just behind him.\nBernard started and looked around. The chubby red face\nof Benito Hoover was beaming down at himâbeaming\nwith manifest cordiality. Benito was notoriously good-\nnatured. People said of him that he could have got\nthrough life without ever touching soma. The malice and\nbad tempers from which other people had to take\nholidays never afflicted him. Reality for Benito was\nalways sunny.\n\"Pneumatic too. And how!\" Then, in another tone: \"But, I\nsay,\" he went on, \"you do look glum! What you need is a\ngramme of soma.\" Diving into his right-hand trouser-\npocket, Benito produced a phial. \"One cubic centimetre\ncures ten gloomy ... But, I say!\"\nBernard had suddenly turned and rushed away.\nBenito stared after him. \"What can be the matter with the\nfellow?\" he wondered, and, shaking his head, decided\nthat the story about the alcohol having been put into the\npoor chap's blood-surrogate must be true. \"Touched his\nbrain, I suppose.\"\nHe put away the soma bottle, and taking out a packet of\nsex-hormone chewing-gum, stuffed a plug into his cheek\nand walked slowly away towards the hangars,\nruminating.\nHenry Foster had had his machine wheeled out of its\nlock-up and, when Lenina arrived, was already seated in\nthe cockpit, waiting.\n\"Four minutes late,\" was all his comment, as she climbed\nin beside him. He started the engines and threw the\nhelicopter screws into gear. The machine shot vertically\ninto the air. Henry accelerated; the humming of the propeller shrilled from hornet to wasp, from wasp to\nmosquito; the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: speedometer showed that they were rising\nat the best part of two kilometres a minute. London\ndiminished beneath them. The huge table-topped\nbuildings were no more, in a few seconds, than a bed of\ngeometrical mushrooms sprouting from the green of park\nand garden. In the midst of them, thin-stalked, a taller,\nslenderer fungus, the Charing-T Tower lifted towards the\nsky a disk of shining concrete.\nLike the vague torsos of fabulous athletes, huge fleshy\nclouds lolled on the blue air above their heads. Out of one\nof them suddenly dropped a small scarlet insect, buzzing\nas it fell.\n\"There's the Red Rocket,\" said Henry, \"just come in from\nNew York.\" Looking at his watch. \"Seven minutes behind\ntime,\" he added, and shook his head. \"These Atlantic\nservicesâthey're really scandalously unpunctual.\"\nHe took his foot off the accelerator. The humming of the\nscrews overhead dropped an octave and a half, back\nthrough wasp and hornet to bumble bee, to cockchafer,\nto stag-beetle. The upward rush of the machine\nslackened off; a moment later they were hanging\nmotionless in the air. Henry pushed at a lever; there was\na click. Slowly at first, then faster and faster, till it was a\ncircular mist before their eyes, the propeller in front of\nthem began to revolve. The wind of a horizontal speed\nwhistled ever more shrilly in the stays. Henry kept his\neye on the revolution-counter; when the needle touched\nthe twelve hundred mark, he threw the helicopter screws\nout of gear. The machine had enough forward momentum\nto be able to fly on its planes.\nLenina looked down through the window in the floor\nbetween her feet. They were flying over the six kilometre\nzone of park-land that separated Central London from its first ring of satellite suburbs. The green was maggoty\nwith fore-shortened life. Forests of Centrifugal Bumble-\npuppy towers gleamed between the trees. Near\nShepherd's Bush two thousand Beta-Minus mixed doubles\nwere playing Riemann-surface tennis. A double row of\nEscalator Fives Courts line
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d the main road from Notting\nHill to Willesden. In the Ealing stadium a Delta gymnastic\ndisplay and community sing was in progress.\n\"What a hideous colour khaki is,\" remarked Lenina,\nvoicing the hypnopÃ¦dic prejudices of her caste.\nThe buildings of the Hounslow Feely Studio covered seven\nand a half hectares. Near them a black and khaki army of\nlabourers was busy revitrifying the surface of the Great\nWest Road. One of the huge travelling crucibles was\nbeing tapped as they flew over. The molten stone poured\nout in a stream of dazzling incandescence across the\nroad, the asbestos rollers came and went; at the tail of\nan insulated watering cart the steam rose in white clouds.\nAt Brentford the Television Corporation's factory was like\na small town.\n\"They must be changing the shift,\" said Lenina.\nLike aphides and ants, the leaf-green Gamma girls, the\nblack Semi-Morons swarmed round the entrances, or\nstood in queues to take their places in the monorail tram-\ncars. Mulberry-coloured Beta-Minuses came and went\namong the crowd. The roof of the main building was alive\nwith the alighting and departure of helicopters.\n\"My word,\" said Lenina, \"I'm glad I'm not a Gamma.\"\nTen minutes later they were at Stoke Poges and had\nstarted their first round of Obstacle Golf. WITH eyes for the most part downcast and, if ever they\nlighted on a fellow creature, at once and furtively\naverted, Bernard hastened across the roof. He was like a\nman pursued, but pursued by enemies he does not wish\nto see, lest they should seem more hostile even than he\nhad supposed, and he himself be made to feel guiltier\nand even more helplessly alone.\n\"That horrible Benito Hoover!\" And yet the man had\nmeant well enough. Which only made it, in a way, much\nworse. Those who meant well behaved in the same way\nas those who meant badly. Even Lenina was making him\nsuffer. He remembered those weeks of timid indecision,\nduring which he had looked and longed and despaired of\never having the courage to ask her. Dared he face the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nrisk of being humiliated by a contemptuous refusal? But if\nshe were to say yes, what rapture! Well, now she had\nsaid it and he was still wretchedâwretched that she\nshould have thought it such a perfect afternoon for\nObstacle Golf, that she should have trotted away to join\nHenry Foster, that she should have found him funny for\nnot wanting to talk of their most private affairs in public.\nWretched, in a word, because she had behaved as any\nhealthy and virtuous English girl ought to behave and not\nin some other, abnormal, extraordinary way.\nHe opened the door of his lock-up and called to a\nlounging couple of Delta-Minus attendants to come and\npush his machine out on to the roof. The hangars were\nstaffed by a single Bokanovsky Group, and the men were\ntwins, identically small, black and hideous. Bernard gave\nhis orders in the sharp, rather arrogant and even\noffensive tone of one who does not feel himself too\nsecure in his superiority. To have dealings with members\nof the lower castes was always, for Bernard, a most\ndistressing experience. For whatever the cause (and the\ncurrent gossip about the alcohol in his blood-surrogate\nmay very likelyâfor accidents will happenâhave been true) Bernard's physique as hardly better than that of the\naverage Gamma. He stood eight centimetres short of the\nstandard Alpha height and was slender in proportion.\nContact with members of he lower castes always\nreminded him painfully of this physical inadequacy. \"I am\nI, and wish I wasn't\"; his self-consciousness was acute\nand stressing. Each time he found himself looking on the\nlevel, instead of downward, into a Delta's face, he felt\nhumiliated. Would the creature treat him with the respect\ndue to his caste? The question haunted him. Not without\nreason. For Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons had been to\nsome extent conditioned to associate corporeal mass with\nsocial superiority. Indeed, a faint hypnopÃ¦dic prejudice\nin favour of size was universal. Hence the laughter of the\nwomen to whom he made proposals,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the practical joking\nof his equals among the men. The mockery made him\nfeel an outsider; and feeling an outsider he behaved like\none, which increased the prejudice against him and\nintensified the contempt and hostility aroused by his\nphysical defects. Which in turn increased his sense of\nbeing alien and alone. A chronic fear of being slighted\nmade him avoid his equals, made him stand, where his\ninferiors were concerned, self-consciously on his dignity.\nHow bitterly he envied men like Henry Foster and Benito\nHoover! Men who never had to shout at an Epsilon to get\nan order obeyed; men who took their position for\ngranted; men who moved through the caste system as a\nfish through waterâso utterly at home as to be unaware\neither of themselves or of the beneficent and comfortable\nelement in which they had their being.\nSlackly, it seemed to him, and with reluctance, the twin\nattendants wheeled his plane out on the roof.\n\"Hurry up!\" said Bernard irritably. One of them glanced at\nhim. Was that a kind of bestial derision that he detected\nin those blank grey eyes? \"Hurry up!\" he shouted more\nloudly, and there was an ugly rasp in his voice. He climbed into the plane and, a minute later, was flying\nsouthwards, towards the river.\nThe various Bureaux of Propaganda and the College of\nEmotional Engineering were housed in a single sixty-story\nbuilding in Fleet Street. In the basement and on the low\nfloors were the presses and offices of the three great\nLondon newspapersâThe Hourly Radio, an upper-caste\nsheet, the pale green Gamma Gazette, and, on khaki\npaper and in words exclusively of one syllable, The Delta\nMirror. Then came the Bureaux of Propaganda by\nTelevision, by Feeling Picture, and by Synthetic Voice and\nMusic respectivelyâtwenty-two floors of them. Above\nwere the search laboratories and the padded rooms in\nwhich Sound-Track Writers and Synthetic Composers did\nthe delicate work. The top eighteen floors were occupied\nthe College of Emotional Engineering.\nBernard landed on the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: roof of Propaganda House and\nstepped out.\n\"Ring down to Mr. Helmholtz Watson,\" he ordered the\nGamma-Plus porter, \"and tell him that Mr. Bernard Marx\nis waiting for him on the roof.\"\nHe sat down and lit a cigarette.\nHelmholtz Watson was writing when the message came\ndown.\n\"Tell him I'm coming at once,\" he said and hung up the\nreceiver. Then, turning to his secretary, \"I'll leave you to\nput my things away,\" he went on in the same official and\nimpersonal tone; and, ignoring her lustrous smile, got up\nand walked briskly to the door.\nHe was a powerfully built man, deep-chested, broad-\nshouldered, massive, and yet quick in his movements,\nspringy and agile. The round strong pillar of his neck supported a beautifully shaped head. His hair was dark\nand curly, his features strongly marked. In a forcible\nemphatic way, he was handsome and looked, as his\nsecretary was never tired of repeating, every centimetre\nan Alpha Plus. By profession he was a lecturer at the\nCollege of Emotional Engineering (Department of Writing)\nand the intervals of his educational activities, a working\nEmotional Engineer. He wrote regularly for The Hourly\nRadio, composed feely scenarios, and had the happiest\nknack for slogans and hypnopÃ¦dic rhymes.\n\"Able,\" was the verdict of his superiors. \"Perhaps, (and\nthey would shake their heads, would significantly lower\ntheir voices) \"a little too able.\"\nYes, a little too able; they were right. A mental excess\nhad produced in Helmholtz Watson effects very similar to\nthose which, in Bernard Marx, were the result of a\nphysical defect. Too little bone and brawn had isolated\nBernard from his fellow men, and the sense of this\napartness, being, by all the current standards, a mental\nexcess, became in its turn a cause of wider separation.\nThat which had made Helmholtz so uncomfortably aware\nof being himself and all alone was too much ability. What\nthe two men shared was the knowledge that they were\nindividuals. But whereas the physically defective Bernard\nhad suffere
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d all his life from the consciousness of being\nseparate, it was only quite recently that, grown aware of\nhis mental excess, Helmholtz Watson had also become\naware of his difference from the people who surrounded\nhim. This Escalator-Squash champion, this indefatigable\nlover (it was said that he had had six hundred and forty\ndifferent girls in under four years), this admirable\ncommittee man and best mixer had realized quite\nsuddenly that sport, women, communal activities were\nonly, so far as he was concerned, second bests. Really,\nand at the bottom, he was interested in something else.\nBut in what? In what? That was the problem which Bernard had come to discuss with himâor rather, since it\nwas always Helmholtz who did all the talking, to listen to\nhis friend discussing, yet once more.\nThree charming girls from the Bureau of Propaganda by\nSynthetic Voice waylaid him as he stepped out of the lift.\n\"Oh, Helmholtz, darling, do come and have a picnic\nsupper with us on Exmoor.\" They clung round him\nimploringly.\nHe shook his head, he pushed his way through them.\n\"No, no.\"\n\"We're not inviting any other man.\"\nBut Helmholtz remained unshaken even by this delightful\npromise. \"No,\" he repeated, \"I'm busy.\" And he held\nresolutely on his course. The girls trailed after him. It was\nnot till he had actually climbed into Bernard's plane and\nslammed the door that they gave up pursuit. Not without\nreproaches.\n\"These women!\" he said, as the machine rose into the\nair. \"These women!\" And he shook his head, he frowned.\n\"Too awful,\" Bernard hypocritically agreed, wishing, as he\nspoke the words, that he could have as many girls as\nHelmholtz did, and with as little trouble. He was seized\nwith a sudden urgent need to boast. \"I'm taking Lenina\nCrowne to New Mexico with me,\" he said in a tone as\ncasual as he could make it.\n\"Are you?\" said Helmholtz, with a total absence of\ninterest. Then after a little pause, \"This last week or two,\"\nhe went on, \"I've been cutting all my committees
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and all\nmy girls. You can't imagine what a hullabaloo they've\nbeen making about it at the College. Still, it's been worth\nit, I think. The effects ...\" He hesitated. \"Well, they're\nodd, they're very odd.\" A physical shortcoming could produce a kind of mental\nexcess. The process, it seemed, was reversible. Mental\nexcess could produce, for its own purposes, the voluntary\nblindness and deafness of deliberate solitude, the\nartificial impotence of asceticism.\nThe rest of the short flight was accomplished in silence.\nWhen they had arrived and were comfortably stretched\nout on the pneumatic sofas in Bernard's room, Helmholtz\nbegan again.\nSpeaking very slowly, \"Did you ever feel,\" he asked, \"as\nthough you had something inside you that was only\nwaiting for you to give it a chance to come out? Some\nsort of extra power that you aren't usingâyou know, like\nall the water that goes down the falls instead of through\nthe turbines?\" He looked at Bernard questioningly.\n\"You mean all the emotions one might be feeling if things\nwere different?\"\nHelmholtz shook his head. \"Not quite. I'm thinking of a\nqueer feeling I sometimes get, a feeling that I've got\nsomething important to say and the power to say itâonly\nI don't know what it is, and I can't make any use of the\npower. If there was some different way of writing ... Or\nelse something else to write about ...\" He was silent;\nthen, \"You see,\" he went on at last, \"I'm pretty good at\ninventing phrasesâyou know, the sort of words that\nsuddenly make you jump, almost as though you'd sat on\na pin, they seem so new and exciting even though they're\nabout something hypnopÃ¦dically obvious. But that\ndoesn't seem enough. It's not enough for the phrases to\nbe good; what you make with them ought to be good\ntoo.\"\n\"But your things are good, Helmholtz.\" \"Oh, as far as they go.\" Helmholtz shrugged his\nshoulders. \"But they go such a little way. They aren't\nimportant enough, somehow. I feel I could do something\nmuch more important. Yes, an
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d more intense, more\nviolent. But what? What is there more important to say?\nAnd how can one be violent about the sort of things one's\nexpected to write about? Words can be like X-rays, if you\nuse them properlyâthey'll go through anything. You read\nand you're pierced. That's one of the things I try to teach\nmy studentsâhow to write piercingly. But what on earth's\nthe good of being pierced by an article about a\nCommunity Sing, or the latest improvement in scent\norgans? Besides, can you make words really piercingâyou\nknow, like the very hardest X-raysâwhen you're writing\nabout that sort of thing? Can you say something about\nnothing? That's what it finally boils down to. I try and I\ntry ...\"\n\"Hush!\" said Bernard suddenly, and lifted a warning\nfinger; they listened. \"I believe there's somebody at the\ndoor,\" he whispered.\nHelmholtz got up, tiptoed across the room, and with a\nsharp quick movement flung the door wide open. There\nwas, of course, nobody there.\n\"I'm sorry,\" said Bernard, feeling and looking\nuncomfortably foolish. \"I suppose I've got things on my\nnerves a bit. When people are suspicious with you, you\nstart being suspicious with them.\"\nHe passed his hand across his eyes, he sighed, his voice\nbecame plaintive. He was justifying himself. \"If you knew\nwhat I'd had to put up with recently,\" he said almost\ntearfullyâand the uprush of his self-pity was like a\nfountain suddenly released. \"If you only knew!\" Helmholtz Watson listened with a certain sense of\ndiscomfort. \"Poor little Bernard!\" he said to himself. But\nat the same time he felt rather ashamed for his friend. He\nwished Bernard would show a little more pride. Chapter Five\nB Y\nEIGHT O'CLOCK the light was failing. The loud\nspeaker in the tower of the Stoke Poges Club House\nbegan, in a more than human tenor, to announce the\nclosing of the courses. Lenina and Henry abandoned their\ngame and walked back towards the Club. From the\ngrounds of the Internal and External Secretion Trust\ncame the lowing o
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f those thousands of cattle which\nprovided, with their hormones and their milk, the raw\nmaterials for the great factory at Farnham Royal.\nAn incessant buzzing of helicopters filled the twilight.\nEvery two and a half minutes a bell and the screech of\nwhistles announced the departure of one of the light\nmonorail trains which carried the lower caste golfers back\nfrom their separate course to the metropolis.\nLenina and Henry climbed into their machine and started\noff. At eight hundred feet Henry slowed down the\nhelicopter screws, and they hung for a minute or two\npoised above the fading landscape. The forest of\nBurnham Beeches stretched like a great pool of darkness\ntowards the bright shore of the western sky. Crimson at\nthe horizon, the last of the sunset faded, through orange,\nupwards into yellow and a pale watery green.\nNorthwards, beyond and above the trees, the Internal\nand External Secretions factory glared with a fierce\nelectric brilliance from every window of its twenty stories.\nBeneath them lay the buildings of the Golf Clubâthe huge\nLower Caste barracks and, on the other side of a dividing\nwall, the smaller houses reserved for Alpha and Beta\nmembers. The approaches to the monorail station were\nblack with the ant-like pullulation of lower-caste activity.\nFrom under the glass vault a lighted train shot out into\nthe open. Following its southeasterly course across the\ndark plain their eyes were drawn to the majestic buildings of the Slough Crematorium. For the safety of night-flying\nplanes, its four tall chimneys were flood-lighted and\ntipped with crimson danger signals. It was a landmark.\n\"Why do the smoke-stacks have those things like\nbalconies around them?\" enquired Lenina.\n\"Phosphorus recovery,\" explained Henry telegraphically.\n\"On their way up the chimney the gases go through four\nseparate treatments. P 2 O 5 used to go right out of\ncirculation every time they cremated some one. Now they\nrecover over ninety-eight per cent of it. More than a kilo\nand a half per adu
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lt corpse. Which makes the best part of\nfour hundred tons of phosphorus every year from\nEngland alone.\" Henry spoke with a happy pride, rejoicing\nwhole-heartedly in the achievement, as though it had\nbeen his own. \"Fine to think we can go on being socially\nuseful even after we're dead. Making plants grow.\"\nLenina, meanwhile, had turned her eyes away and was\nlooking perpendicularly downwards at the monorail\nstation. \"Fine,\" she agreed. \"But queer that Alphas and\nBetas won't make any more plants grow than those nasty\nlittle Gammas and Deltas and Epsilons down there.\"\n\"All men are physico-chemically equal,\" said Henry\nsententiously.\n\"Besides,\neven\nEpsilons\nperform\nindispensable services.\"\n\"Even an Epsilon ...\" Lenina suddenly remembered an\noccasion when, as a little girl at school, she had woken\nup in the middle of the night and become aware, for the\nfirst time, of the whispering that had haunted all her\nsleeps. She saw again the beam of moonlight, the row of\nsmall white beds; heard once more the soft, soft voice\nthat said (the words were there, unforgotten,\nunforgettable after so many night-long repetitions):\n\"Every one works for every one else. We can't do without any one. Even Epsilons are useful. We couldn't do without\nEpsilons. Every one works for every one else. We can't do\nwithout any one ...\" Lenina remembered her first shock of\nfear and surprise; her speculations through half a wakeful\nhour; and then, under the influence of those endless\nrepetitions, the gradual soothing of her mind, the\nsoothing, the smoothing, the stealthy creeping of sleep.\n...\n\"I suppose Epsilons don't really mind being Epsilons,\" she\nsaid aloud.\n\"Of course they don't. How can they? They don't know\nwhat it's like being anything else. We'd mind, of course.\nBut then we've been differently conditioned. Besides, we\nstart with a different heredity.\"\n\"I'm glad I'm\nconviction.\nnot\nan\nEpsilon,\"\nsaid\nLenina,\nwith\n\"And if you were an Epsilon,\" said Henry, \"your\nconditioning w
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ould have made you no less thankful that\nyou weren't a Beta or an Alpha.\" He put his forward\npropeller into gear and headed the machine towards\nLondon. Behind them, in the west, the crimson and\norange were almost faded; a dark bank of cloud had\ncrept into the zenith. As they flew over the crematorium,\nthe plane shot upwards on the column of hot air rising\nfrom the chimneys, only to fall as suddenly when it\npassed into the descending chill beyond.\n\"What a marvellous\ndelightedly.\nswitchback!\"\nLenina\nlaughed\nBut Henry's tone was almost, for a moment, melancholy.\n\"Do you know what that switchback was?\" he said. \"It\nwas\nsome\nhuman\nbeing\nfinally\nand\ndefinitely\ndisappearing. Going up in a squirt of hot gas. It would be\ncurious to know who it wasâa man or a woman, an Alpha or an Epsilon. ...\" He sighed. Then, in a resolutely\ncheerful voice, \"Anyhow,\" he concluded, \"there's one\nthing we can be certain of; whoever he may have been,\nhe was happy when he was alive. Everybody's happy\nnow.\"\n\"Yes, everybody's happy now,\" echoed Lenina. They had\nheard the words repeated a hundred and fifty times every\nnight for twelve years.\nLanding on the roof of Henry's forty-story apartment\nhouse in Westminster, they went straight down to the\ndining-hall. There, in a loud and cheerful company, they\nate an excellent meal. Soma was served with the coffee.\nLenina took two half-gramme tablets and Henry three. At\ntwenty past nine they walked across the street to the\nnewly opened Westminster Abbey Cabaret. It was a night\nalmost without clouds, moonless and starry; but of this\non the whole depressing fact Lenina and Henry were\nfortunately unaware. The electric sky-signs effectively\nshut off the outer darkness. \"CALVIN STOPES AND HIS\nSIXTEEN SEXOPHONISTS.\" From the faÃ§ade of the new\nAbbey the giant letters invitingly glared. \"LONDON'S\nFINEST SCENT AND COLOUR ORGAN. ALL THE LATEST\nSYNTHETIC MUSIC.\"\nThey entered. The air seemed hot and somehow\nbreathless with the scent of ambergris and
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sandalwood.\nOn the domed ceiling of the hall, the colour organ had\nmomentarily painted a tropical sunset. The Sixteen\nSexophonists were playing an old favourite: \"There ain't\nno Bottle in all the world like that dear little Bottle of\nmine.\" Four hundred couples were five-stepping round\nthe polished floor. Lenina and Henry were soon the four\nhundred and first. The saxophones wailed like melodious\ncats under the moon, moaned in the alto and tenor\nregisters as though the little death were upon them. Rich\nwith a wealth of harmonics, their tremulous chorus mounted towards a climax, louder and ever louderâuntil\nat last, with a wave of his hand, the conductor let loose\nthe final shattering note of ether-music and blew the\nsixteen merely human blowers clean out of existence.\nThunder in A flat major. And then, in all but silence, in all\nbut darkness, there followed a gradual deturgescence, a\ndiminuendo sliding gradually, through quarter tones,\ndown, down to a faintly whispered dominant chord that\nlingered on (while the five-four rhythms still pulsed\nbelow) charging the darkened seconds with an intense\nexpectancy. And at last expectancy was fulfilled. There\nwas a sudden explosive sunrise, and simultaneously, the\nSixteen burst into song:\n\"Bottle of mine, it's you I've always wanted!\nBottle of mine, why was I ever decanted?\nSkies are blue inside of you,\nThe weather's always fine;\nFor\nThere ain't no Bottle in all the world\nLike that dear little Bottle of mine.\"\nFive-stepping with the other four hundred round and\nround Westminster Abbey, Lenina and Henry were yet\ndancing in another worldâthe warm, the richly coloured,\nthe infinitely friendly world of soma-holiday. How kind,\nhow good-looking, how delightfully amusing every one\nwas! \"Bottle of mine, it's you I've always wanted ...\" But\nLenina and Henry had what they wanted ... They were\ninside, here and now-safely inside with the fine weather,\nthe perennially blue sky. And when, exhausted, the\nSixteen had laid by their saxophones
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and the Synthetic\nMusic apparatus was producing the very latest in slow Malthusian Blues, they might have been twin embryos\ngently rocking together on the waves of a bottled ocean\nof blood-surrogate.\n\"Good-night, dear friends. Good-night, dear friends.\" The\nloud speakers veiled their commands in a genial and\nmusical politeness. \"Good-night, dear friends ...\"\nObediently, with all the others, Lenina and Henry left the\nbuilding. The depressing stars had travelled quite some\nway across the heavens. But though the separating\nscreen of the sky-signs had now to a great extent\ndissolved, the two young people still retained their happy\nignorance of the night.\nSwallowing half an hour before closing time, that second\ndose of soma had raised a quite impenetrable wall\nbetween the actual universe and their minds. Bottled,\nthey crossed the street; bottled, they took the lift up to\nHenry's room on the twenty-eighth floor. And yet, bottled\nas she was, and in spite of that second gramme of soma,\nLenina did not forget to take all the contraceptive\nprecautions prescribed by the regulations. Years of\nintensive hypnopÃ¦dia and, from twelve to seventeen,\nMalthusian drill three times a week had made the taking\nof these precautions almost as automatic and inevitable\nas blinking.\n\"Oh, and that reminds me,\" she said, as she came back\nfrom the bathroom, \"Fanny Crowne wants to know where\nyou found that lovely green morocco-surrogate cartridge\nbelt you gave me.\"\nÂ§ 2\nA LTERNATE\nThursdays were Bernard's Solidarity Service\ndays. After an early dinner at the Aphroditzeum (to which\nHelrnholtz had recently been elected under Rule Two) he took leave of his friend and, hailing a taxi on the roof told\nthe man to fly to the Fordson Community Singery. The\nmachine rose a couple of hundred metres, then headed\neastwards, and as it turned, there before Bernard's eyes,\ngigantically beautiful, was the Singery. Flood-lighted, its\nthree hundred and twenty metres of white Carrara-\nsurrogate gleamed with a snowy in
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: candescence over\nLudgate Hill; at each of the four corners of its helicopter\nplatform an immense T shone crimson against the night,\nand from the mouths of twenty-four vast golden trumpets\nrumbled a solemn synthetic music.\n\"Damn, I'm late,\" Bernard said to himself as he first\ncaught sight of Big Henry, the Singery clock. And sure\nenough, as he was paying off his cab, Big Henry sounded\nthe hour. \"Ford,\" sang out an immense bass voice from\nall the golden trumpets. \"Ford, Ford, Ford ...\" Nine times.\nBernard ran for the lift.\nThe great auditorium for Ford's Day celebrations and\nother massed Community Sings was at the bottom of the\nbuilding. Above it, a hundred to each floor, were the\nseven thousand rooms used by Solidarity Groups for their\nfortnight services. Bernard dropped down to floor thirty-\nthree, hurried along the corridor, stood hesitating for a\nmoment outside Room 3210, then, having wound himself\nup, opened the door and walked in.\nThank Ford! he was not the last. Three chairs of the\ntwelve arranged round the circular table were still\nunoccupied. He slipped into the nearest of them as\ninconspicuously as he could and prepared to frown at the\nyet later comers whenever they should arrive.\nTurning towards him, \"What were you playing this\nafternoon?\" the girl on his left enquired. \"Obstacle, or\nElectro-magnetic?\" Bernard looked at her (Ford! it was Morgana Rothschild)\nand blushingly had to admit that he had been playing\nneither. Morgana stared at him with astonishment. There\nwas an awkward silence.\nThen pointedly she turned away and addressed herself to\nthe more sporting man on her left.\n\"A good beginning for a Solidarity Service,\" thought\nBernard miserably, and foresaw for himself yet another\nfailure to achieve atonement. If only he had given himself\ntime to look around instead of scuttling for the nearest\nchair! He could have sat between Fifi Bradlaugh and\nJoanna Diesel. Instead of which he had gone and blindly\nplanted himself next to Morgana. Morgana! Ford! Those
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nblack eyebrows of hersâthat eyebrow, ratherâfor they\nmet above the nose. Ford! And on his right was Clara\nDeterding. True, Clara's eyebrows didn't meet. But she\nwas really too pneumatic. Whereas Fifi and Joanna were\nabsolutely right. Plump, blonde, not too large ... And it\nwas that great lout, Tom Kawaguchi, who now took the\nseat between them.\nThe last arrival was Sarojini Engels.\n\"You're late,\" said the President of the Group severely.\n\"Don't let it happen again.\"\nSarojini apologized and slid into her place between Jim\nBokanovsky and Herbert Bakunin. The group was now\ncomplete, the solidarity circle perfect and without flaw.\nMan, woman, man, in a ring of endless alternation round\nthe table. Twelve of them ready to be made one, waiting\nto come together, to be fused, to lose their twelve\nseparate identities in a larger being.\nThe President stood up, made the sign of the T and,\nswitching on the synthetic music, let loose the soft\nindefatigable beating of drums and a choir of instrumentsânear-wind and super-stringâthat plangently\nrepeated and repeated the brief and unescapably\nhaunting melody of the first Solidarity Hymn. Again,\nagainâand it was not the ear that heard the pulsing\nrhythm, it was the midriff; the wail and clang of those\nrecurring harmonies haunted, not the mind, but the\nyearning bowels of compassion.\nThe President made another sign of the T and sat down.\nThe service had begun. The dedicated soma tablets were\nplaced in the centre of the table. The loving cup of\nstrawberry ice-cream soma was passed from hand to\nhand and, with the formula, \"I drink to my annihilation,\"\ntwelve times quaffed. Then to the accompaniment of the\nsynthetic orchestra the First Solidarity Hymn was sung.\n\"Ford, we are twelve; oh, make us one,\nLike drops within the Social River,\nOh, make us now together run\nAs swiftly as thy shining Flivver.\"\nTwelve yearning stanzas. And then the loving cup was\npassed a second time. \"I drink to the Greater Being\" was\nnow the formula. All
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: drank. Tirelessly the music played.\nThe drums beat. The crying and clashing of the\nharmonies were an obsession in the melted bowels. The\nSecond Solidarity Hymn was sung.\n\"Come, Greater Being, Social Friend,\nAnnihilating Twelve-in-One!\nWe long to die, for when we end,\nOur larger life has but begun.\" Again twelve stanzas. By this time the soma had begun\nto work. Eyes shone, cheeks were flushed, the inner light\nof universal benevolence broke out on every face in\nhappy, friendly smiles. Even Bernard felt himself a little\nmelted. When Morgana Rothschild turned and beamed at\nhim, he did his best to beam back. But the eyebrow, that\nblack two-in-oneâalas, it was still there; he couldn't\nignore it, couldn't, however hard he tried. The melting\nhadn't gone far enough. Perhaps if he had been sitting\nbetween Fifi and Joanna ... For the third time the loving\ncup went round; \"I drink to the imminence of His\nComing,\" said Morgana Rothschild, whose turn it\nhappened to be to initiate the circular rite. Her tone was\nloud, exultant. She drank and passed the cup to Bernard.\n\"I drink to the imminence of His Coming,\" he repeated,\nwith a sincere attempt to feel that the coming was\nimminent; but the eyebrow continued to haunt him, and\nthe Coming, so far as he was concerned, was horribly\nremote. He drank and handed the cup to Clara Deterding.\n\"It'll be a failure again,\" he said to himself. \"I know it\nwill.\" But he went on doing his best to beam.\nThe loving cup had made its circuit. Lifting his hand, the\nPresident gave a signal; the chorus broke out into the\nthird Solidarity Hymn.\n\"Feel how the Greater Being comes!\nRejoice and, in rejoicings, die!\nMelt in the music of the drums!\nFor I am you and you are I.\"\nAs verse succeeded verse the voices thrilled with an ever\nintenser excitement. The sense of the Coming's\nimminence was like an electric tension in the air. The\nPresident switched off the music and, with the final note\nof the final stanza, there was absolute silenceâthe silence of st
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: retched expectancy, quivering and creeping with a\ngalvanic life. The President reached out his hand; and\nsuddenly a Voice, a deep strong Voice, more musical than\nany merely human voice, richer, warmer, more vibrant\nwith love and yearning and compassion, a wonderful,\nmysterious, supernatural Voice spoke from above their\nheads. Very slowly, \"Oh, Ford, Ford, Ford,\" it said\ndiminishingly and on a descending scale. A sensation of\nwarmth radiated thrillingly out from the solar plexus to\nevery extremity of the bodies of those who listened; tears\ncame into their eyes; their hearts, their bowels seemed\nto move within them, as though with an independent life.\n\"Ford!\" they were melting, \"Ford!\" dissolved, dissolved.\nThen, in another tone, suddenly, startlingly. \"Listen!\"\ntrumpeted the voice. \"Listen!\" They listened. After a\npause, sunk to a whisper, but a whisper, somehow, more\npenetrating than the loudest cry. \"The feet of the Greater\nBeing,\" it went on, and repeated the words: \"The feet of\nthe Greater Being.\" The whisper almost expired. \"The\nfeet of the Greater Being are on the stairs.\" And once\nmore there was silence; and the expectancy,\nmomentarily relaxed, was stretched again, tauter, tauter,\nalmost to the tearing point. The feet of the Greater\nBeingâoh, they heard them, they heard them, coming\nsoftly down the stairs, coming nearer and nearer down\nthe invisible stairs. The feet of the Greater Being. And\nsuddenly the tearing point was reached. Her eyes staring,\nher lips parted. Morgana Rothschild sprang to her feet.\n\"I hear him,\" she cried. \"I hear him.\"\n\"He's coming,\" shouted Sarojini Engels.\n\"Yes, he's coming, I hear him.\" Fifi Bradlaugh and Tom\nKawaguchi rose simultaneously to their feet.\n\"Oh, oh, oh!\" Joanna inarticulately testified. \"He's coming!\" yelled Jim Bokanovsky.\nThe President leaned forward and, with a touch, released\na delirium of cymbals and blown brass, a fever of tom-\ntomming.\n\"Oh, he's coming!\" screamed Clara Deterding. \"Aie!\" and\ni
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t was as though she were having her throat cut.\nFeeling that it was time for him to do something, Bernard\nalso jumped up and shouted: \"I hear him; He's coming.\"\nBut it wasn't true. He heard nothing and, for him, nobody\nwas coming. Nobodyâin spite of the music, in spite of the\nmounting excitement. But he waved his arms, he shouted\nwith the best of them; and when the others began to jig\nand stamp and shuffle, he also jigged and shuffled.\nRound they went, a circular procession of dancers, each\nwith hands on the hips of the dancer preceding, round\nand round, shouting in unison, stamping to the rhythm of\nthe music with their feet, beating it, beating it out with\nhands on the buttocks in front; twelve pairs of hands\nbeating as one; as one, twelve buttocks slabbily\nresounding. Twelve as one, twelve as one. \"I hear Him, I\nhear Him coming.\" The music quickened; faster beat the\nfeet, faster, faster fell the rhythmic hands. And all at\nonce a great synthetic bass boomed out the words which\nannounced the approaching atonement and final\nconsummation of solidarity, the coming of the Twelve-in-\nOne, the incarnation of the Greater Being. \"Orgy-porgy,\"\nit sang, while the tom-toms continued to beat their\nfeverish tattoo:\n\"Orgy-porgy, Ford and fun,\nKiss the girls and make them One.\nBoys at One with girls at peace; Orgy-porgy gives release.\"\n\"Orgy-porgy,\" the dancers caught up the liturgical refrain,\n\"Orgy-porgy, Ford and fun, kiss the girls ...\" And as they\nsang, the lights began slowly to fadeâto fade and at the\nsame time to grow warmer, richer, redder, until at last\nthey were dancing in the crimson twilight of an Embryo\nStore. \"Orgy-porgy ...\" In their blood-coloured and foetal\ndarkness the dancers continued for a while to circulate,\nto beat and beat out the indefatigable rhythm. \"Orgy-\nporgy ...\" Then the circle wavered, broke, fell in partial\ndisintegration on the ring of couches which surroundedâ\ncircle enclosing circleâthe table and its planetary chairs.\n\"Orgy-porgy
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ...\" Tenderly the deep Voice crooned and\ncooed; in the red twilight it was as though some\nenormous negro dove were hovering benevolently over\nthe now prone or supine dancers.\nThey were standing on the roof; Big Henry had just sung\neleven. The night was calm and warm.\n\"Wasn't it wonderful?\" said Fifi Bradlaugh. \"Wasn't it\nsimply wonderful?\" She looked at Bernard with an\nexpression of rapture, but of rapture in which there was\nno trace of agitation or excitementâfor to be excited is\nstill to be unsatisfied. Hers was the calm ecstasy of\nachieved consummation, the peace, not of mere vacant\nsatiety and nothingness, but of balanced life, of energies\nat rest and in equilibrium. A rich and living peace. For the\nSolidarity Service had given as well as taken, drawn off\nonly to replenish. She was full, she was made perfect,\nshe was still more than merely herself. \"Didn't you think\nit was wonderful?\" she insisted, looking into Bernard's\nface with those supernaturally shining eyes.\n\"Yes, I thought it was wonderful,\" he lied and looked\naway; the sight of her transfigured face was at once an\naccusation and an ironical reminder of his own separateness. He was as miserably isolated now as he\nhad been when the service beganâmore isolated by\nreason of his unreplenished emptiness, his dead satiety.\nSeparate and unatoned, while the others were being\nfused into the Greater Being; alone even in Morgana's\nembraceâmuch more alone, indeed, more hopelessly\nhimself than he had ever been in his life before. He had\nemerged from that crimson twilight into the common\nelectric glare with a self-consciousness intensified to the\npitch of agony. He was utterly miserable, and perhaps\n(her shining eyes accused him), perhaps it was his own\nfault. \"Quite wonderful,\" he repeated; but the only thing\nhe could think of was Morgana's eyebrow. Chapter Six\nO DD,\nODD, odd, was Lenina's verdict on Bernard Marx.\nSo odd, indeed, that in the course of the succeeding\nweeks she had wondered more than once whethe
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: r she\nshouldn't change her mind about the New Mexico holiday,\nand go instead to the North Pole with Benito Hoover. The\ntrouble was that she knew the North Pole, had been there\nwith George Edzel only last summer, and what was more,\nfound it pretty grim. Nothing to do, and the hotel too\nhopelessly old-fashionedâno television laid on in the\nbedrooms, no scent organ, only the most putrid synthetic\nmusic, and not more than twenty-five Escalator-Squash\nCourts for over two hundred guests. No, decidedly she\ncouldn't face the North Pole again. Added to which, she\nhad only been to America once before. And even then,\nhow inadequately! A cheap week-end in New Yorkâhad it\nbeen with Jean-Jacques Habibullah or Bokanovsky Jones?\nShe couldn't remember. Anyhow, it was of absolutely no\nimportance. The prospect of flying West again, and for a\nwhole week, was very inviting. Moreover, for at least\nthree days of that week they would be in the Savage\nReservation. Not more than half a dozen people in the\nwhole Centre had ever been inside a Savage Reservation.\nAs an Alpha-Plus psychologist, Bernard was one of the\nfew men she knew entitled to a permit. For Lenina, the\nopportunity was unique. And yet, so unique also was\nBernard's oddness that she had hesitated to take it, had\nactually thought of risking the Pole again with funny old\nBenito. At least Benito was normal. Whereas Bernard ...\n\"Alcohol in his blood-surrogate,\" was Fanny's explanation\nof every eccentricity. But Henry, with whom, one evening\nwhen they were in bed together, Lenina had rather\nanxiously discussed her new lover, Henry had compared\npoor Bernard to a rhinoceros. \"You can't teach a rhinoceros tricks,\" he had explained in\nhis brief and vigorous style. \"Some men are almost\nrhinoceroses;\nthey\ndon't\nrespond\nproperly\nto\nconditioning. Poor Devils! Bernard's one of them. Luckily\nfor him, he's pretty good at his job. Otherwise the\nDirector would never have kept him. However,\" he added\nconsolingly, \"I think he's pretty harmless.\
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: "\nPretty harmless, perhaps; but also pretty disquieting.\nThat mania, to start with, for doing things in private.\nWhich meant, in practice, not doing anything at all. For\nwhat was there that one could do in private. (Apart, of\ncourse, from going to bed: but one couldn't do that all\nthe time.) Yes, what was there? Precious little. The first\nafternoon they went out together was particularly fine.\nLenina had suggested a swim at Toquay Country Club\nfollowed by dinner at the Oxford Union. But Bernard\nthought there would be too much of a crowd. Then what\nabout a round of Electro-magnetic Golf at St. Andrew's?\nBut again, no: Bernard considered that Electro-magnetic\nGolf was a waste of time.\n\"Then what's\nastonishment.\ntime\nfor?\"\nasked\nLenina\nin\nsome\nApparently, for going walks in the Lake District; for that\nwas what he now proposed. Land on the top of Skiddaw\nand walk for a couple of hours in the heather. \"Alone with\nyou, Lenina.\"\n\"But, Bernard, we shall be alone all night.\"\nBernard blushed and looked away. \"I meant, alone for\ntalking,\" he mumbled.\n\"Talking? But what about?\" Walking and talkingâthat\nseemed a very odd way of spending an afternoon. In the end she persuaded him, much against his will, to\nfly over to Amsterdam to see the Semi-Demi-Finals of the\nWomen's Heavyweight Wrestling Championship.\n\"In a crowd,\" he grumbled. \"As usual.\" He remained\nobstinately gloomy the whole afternoon; wouldn't talk to\nLenina's friends (of whom they met dozens in the ice-\ncream soma bar between the wrestling bouts); and in\nspite of his misery absolutely refused to take the half-\ngramme raspberry sundae which she pressed upon him.\n\"I'd rather be myself,\" he said. \"Myself and nasty. Not\nsomebody else, however jolly.\"\n\"A gramme in time saves nine,\" said Lenina, producing a\nbright treasure of sleep-taught wisdom. Bernard pushed\naway the proffered glass impatiently.\n\"Now don't lose your temper,\" she said. \"Remember one\ncubic centimetre cures ten gloomy sentiments.\"\n\"O
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: h, for Ford's sake, be quiet!\" he shouted.\nLenina shrugged her shoulders. \"A gramme is always\nbetter than a damn,\" she concluded with dignity, and\ndrank the sundae herself.\nOn their way back across the Channel, Bernard insisted\non stopping his propeller and hovering on his helicopter\nscrews within a hundred feet of the waves. The weather\nhad taken a change for the worse; a south-westerly wind\nhad sprung up, the sky was cloudy.\n\"Look,\" he commanded.\n\"But it's horrible,\" said Lenina, shrinking back from the\nwindow. She was appalled by the rushing emptiness of\nthe night, by the black foam-flecked water heaving\nbeneath them, by the pale face of the moon, so haggard\nand distracted among the hastening clouds. \"Let's turn on the radio. Quick!\" She reached for the dialling knob on\nthe dash-board and turned it at random.\n\"... skies are blue inside of you,\" sang sixteen tremoloing\nfalsettos, \"the weather's always ...\"\nThen a hiccough and silence. Bernard had switched of the\ncurrent.\n\"I want to look at the sea in peace,\" he said. \"One can't\neven look with that beastly noise going on.\"\n\"But it's lovely. And I don't want to look.\"\n\"But I do,\" he insisted. \"It makes me feel as though ...\"\nhe hesitated, searching for words with which to express\nhimself, \"as though I were more me, if you see what I\nmean. More on my own, not so completely a part of\nsomething else. Not just a cell in the social body. Doesn't\nit make you feel like that, Lenina?\"\nBut Lenina was crying. \"It's horrible, it's horrible,\" she\nkept repeating. \"And how can you talk like that about not\nwanting to be a part of the social body? After all, every\none works for every one else. We can't do without any\none. Even Epsilons ...\"\n\"Yes, I know,\" said Bernard derisively. \"'Even Epsilons are\nuseful'! So am I. And I damned well wish I weren't!\"\nLenina was shocked by his blasphemy. \"Bernard!\" She\nprotested in a voice of amazed distress. \"How can you?\"\nIn a different key, \"How can I?\" he repeated m
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: editatively.\n\"No, the real problem is: How is it that I can't, or ratherâ\nbecause, after all, I know quite well why I can'tâwhat\nwould it be like if I could, if I were freeânot enslaved by\nmy conditioning.\" \"But, Bernard, you're saying the most awful things.\"\n\"Don't you wish you were free, Lenina?\"\n\"I don't know what you mean. I am free. Free to have the\nmost wonderful time. Everybody's happy nowadays.\"\nHe laughed, \"Yes, 'Everybody's happy nowadays.' We\nbegin giving the children that at five. But wouldn't you\nlike to be free to be happy in some other way, Lenina? In\nyour own way, for example; not in everybody else's\nway.\"\n\"I don't know what you mean,\" she repeated. Then,\nturning to him, \"Oh, do let's go back, Bernard,\" she\nbesought; \"I do so hate it here.\"\n\"Don't you like being with me?\"\n\"But of course, Bernard. It's this horrible place.\"\n\"I thought we'd be more ... more together hereâwith\nnothing but the sea and moon. More together than in that\ncrowd, or even in my rooms. Don't you understand that?\"\n\"I don't understand anything,\" she said with decision,\ndetermined to preserve her incomprehension intact.\n\"Nothing. Least of all,\" she continued in another tone\n\"why you don't take soma when you have these dreadful\nideas of yours. You'd forget all about them. And instead\nof feeling miserable, you'd be jolly. So jolly,\" she\nrepeated and smiled, for all the puzzled anxiety in her\neyes, with what was meant to be an inviting and\nvoluptuous cajolery.\nHe looked at her in silence, his face unresponsive and\nvery graveâlooked at her intently. After a few seconds\nLenina's eyes flinched away; she uttered a nervous little laugh, tried to think of something to say and couldn't.\nThe silence prolonged itself.\nWhen Bernard spoke at last, it was in a small tired voice.\n\"All right then,\" he said, \"we'll go back.\" And stepping\nhard on the accelerator, he sent the machine rocketing\nup into the sky. At four thousand he started his propeller.\nThey flew in sile
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nce for a minute or two. Then, suddenly,\nBernard began to laugh. Rather oddly, Lenina thought,\nbut still, it was laughter.\n\"Feeling better?\" she ventured to ask.\nFor answer, he lifted one hand from the controls and,\nslipping his arm around her, began to fondle her breasts.\n\"Thank Ford,\" she said to herself, \"he's all right again.\"\nHalf an hour later they were back in his rooms. Bernard\nswallowed four tablets of soma at a gulp, turned on the\nradio and television and began to undress.\n\"Well,\" Lenina enquired, with significant archness when\nthey met next afternoon on the roof, \"did you think it was\nfun yesterday?\"\nBernard nodded. They climbed into the plane. A little jolt,\nand they were off.\n\"Every one says I'm awfully pneumatic,\" said Lenina\nreflectively, patting her own legs.\n\"Awfully.\" But there was an expression of pain in\nBernard's eyes. \"Like meat,\" he was thinking.\nShe looked up with a certain anxiety. \"But you don't think\nI'm too plump, do you?\"\nHe shook his head. Like so much meat. \"You think I'm all right.\" Another nod. \"In every way?\"\n\"Perfect,\" he said aloud. And inwardly. \"She thinks of\nherself that way. She doesn't mind being meat.\"\nLenina smiled triumphantly. But her satisfaction was\npremature.\n\"All the same,\" he went on, after a little pause, \"I still\nrather wish it had all ended differently.\"\n\"Differently?\" Were there other endings?\n\"I didn't want it to end with our going to bed,\" he\nspecified.\nLenina was astonished.\n\"Not at once, not the first day.\"\n\"But then what ...?\"\nHe began to talk a lot of incomprehensible and dangerous\nnonsense. Lenina did her best to stop the ears of her\nmind; but every now and then a phrase would insist on\nbecoming audible. \"... to try the effect of arresting my\nimpulses,\" she heard him say. The words seemed to\ntouch a spring in her mind.\n\"Never put off till to-morrow the fun you can have to-\nday,\" she said gravely.\n\"Two hundred repetitions, twice a week from fourteen to\nsixteen and a hal
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f,\" was all his comment. The mad bad\ntalk rambled on. \"I want to know what passion is,\" she\nheard him saying. \"I want to feel something strongly.\"\n\"When the individual feels, the community reels,\" Lenina\npronounced. \"Well, why shouldn't it reel a bit?\"\n\"Bernard!\"\nBut Bernard remained unabashed.\n\"Adults intellectually and during working hours,\" he went\non. \"Infants where feeling and desire are concerned.\"\n\"Our Ford loved infants.\"\nIgnoring the interruption. \"It suddenly struck me the\nother day,\" continued Bernard, \"that it might be possible\nto be an adult all the time.\"\n\"I don't understand.\" Lenina's tone was firm.\n\"I know you don't. And that's why we went to bed\ntogether yesterdayâlike infantsâinstead of being adults\nand waiting.\"\n\"But it was fun,\" Lenina insisted. \"Wasn't it?\"\n\"Oh, the greatest fun,\" he answered, but in a voice so\nmournful, with an expression so profoundly miserable,\nthat Lenina felt all her triumph suddenly evaporate.\nPerhaps he had found her too plump, after all.\n\"I told you so,\" was all that Fanny said, when Lenina\ncame and made her confidences. \"It's the alcohol they\nput in his surrogate.\"\n\"All the same,\" Lenina insisted. \"I do like him. He has\nsuch awfully nice hands. And the way he moves his\nshouldersâthat's very attractive.\" She sighed. \"But I wish\nhe weren't so odd.\"\nÂ§ 2 H ALTING for a moment outside the door of the Director's\nroom, Bernard drew a deep breath and squared his\nshoulders, bracing himself to meet the dislike and\ndisapproval which he was certain of finding within. He\nknocked and entered.\n\"A permit for you to initial, Director,\" he said as airily as\npossible, and laid the paper on the writing-table.\nThe Director glanced at him sourly. But the stamp of the\nWorld Controller's Office was at the head of the paper\nand the signature of Mustapha Mond, bold and black,\nacross the bottom. Everything was perfectly in order. The\ndirector had no choice. He pencilled his initialsâtwo small\npale lett
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ers abject at the feet of Mustapha Mondâand was\nabout to return the paper without a word of comment or\ngenial Ford-speed, when his eye was caught by\nsomething written in the body of the permit.\n\"For the New Mexican Reservation?\" he said, and his\ntone, the face he lifted to Bernard, expressed a kind of\nagitated astonishment.\nSurprised by his surprise, Bernard nodded. There was a\nsilence.\nThe Director leaned back in his chair, frowning. \"How\nlong ago was it?\" he said, speaking more to himself than\nto Bernard. \"Twenty years, I suppose. Nearer twenty-\nfive. I must have been your age ...\" He sighed and shook\nhis head.\nBernard felt extremely uncomfortable. A man so\nconventional, so scrupulously correct as the Directorâand\nto commit so gross a solecism! lt made him want to hide\nhis face, to run out of the room. Not that he himself saw\nanything intrinsically objectionable in people talking\nabout the remote past; that was one of those hypnopÃ¦dic prejudices he had (so he imagined)\ncompletely got rid of. What made him feel shy was the\nknowledge that the Director disapprovedâdisapproved\nand yet had been betrayed into doing the forbidden\nthing. Under what inward compulsion? Through his\ndiscomfort Bernard eagerly listened.\n\"I had the same idea as you,\" the Director was saying.\n\"Wanted to have a look at the savages. Got a permit for\nNew Mexico and went there for my summer holiday. With\nthe girl I was having at the moment. She was a Beta-\nMinus, and I think\" (he shut his eyes), \"I think she had\nyellow hair. Anyhow she was pneumatic, particularly\npneumatic; I remember that. Well, we went there, and\nwe looked at the savages, and we rode about on horses\nand all that. And thenâit was almost the last day of my\nleaveâthen ... well, she got lost. We'd gone riding up one\nof those revolting mountains, and it was horribly hot and\noppressive, and after lunch we went to sleep. Or at least\nI did. She must have gone for a walk, alone. At any rate,\nwhen I woke up, she wasn't there. An
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d the most frightful\nthunderstorm I've ever seen was just bursting on us. And\nit poured and roared and flashed; and the horses broke\nloose and ran away; and I fell down, trying to catch\nthem, and hurt my knee, so that I could hardly walk.\nStill, I searched and I shouted and I searched. But there\nwas no sign of her. Then I thought she must have gone\nback to the rest-house by herself. So I crawled down into\nthe valley by the way we had come. My knee was\nagonizingly painful, and I'd lost my soma. It took me\nhours. I didn't get back to the rest-house till after\nmidnight. And she wasn't there; she wasn't there,\" the\nDirector repeated. There was a silence. \"Well,\" he\nresumed at last, \"the next day there was a search. But\nwe couldn't find her. She must have fallen into a gully\nsomewhere; or been eaten by a mountain lion. Ford\nknows. Anyhow it was horrible. It upset me very much at\nthe time. More than it ought to have done, I dare say. Because, after all, it's the sort of accident that might\nhave happened to any one; and, of course, the social\nbody persists although the component cells may change.\"\nBut this sleep-taught consolation did not seem to be very\neffective. Shaking his head, \"I actually dream about it\nsometimes,\" the Director went on in a low voice. \"Dream\nof being woken up by that peal of thunder and finding her\ngone; dream of searching and searching for her under\nthe trees.\" He lapsed into the silence of reminiscence.\n\"You must have had a terrible shock,\" said Bernard,\nalmost enviously.\nAt the sound of his voice the Director started into a guilty\nrealization of where he was; shot a glance at Bernard,\nand averting his eyes, blushed darkly; looked at him\nagain with sudden suspicion and, angrily on his dignity,\n\"Don't imagine,\" he said, \"that I'd had any indecorous\nrelation with the girl. Nothing emotional, nothing long-\ndrawn. It was all perfectly healthy and normal.\" He\nhanded Bernard the permit. \"I really don't know why I\nbored you with this trivial anecdote.
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \" Furious with himself\nfor having given away a discreditable secret, he vented\nhis rage on Bernard. The look in his eyes was now frankly\nmalignant. \"And I should like to take this opportunity, Mr.\nMarx,\" he went on, \"of saying that I'm not at all pleased\nwith the reports I receive of your behaviour outside\nworking hours. You may say that this is not my business.\nBut it is. I have the good name of the Centre to think of.\nMy workers must be above suspicion, particularly those of\nthe highest castes. Alphas are so conditioned that they\ndo not have to be infantile in their emotional behaviour.\nBut that is all the more reason for their making a special\neffort to conform. lt is their duty to be infantile, even\nagainst their inclination. And so, Mr. Marx, I give you fair\nwarning.\" The Director's voice vibrated with an\nindignation that had now become wholly righteous and\nimpersonalâwas the expression of the disapproval of Society itself. \"If ever I hear again of any lapse from a\nproper standard of infantile decorum, I shall ask for your\ntransference to a Sub-Centreâpreferably to Iceland. Good\nmorning.\" And swivelling round in his chair, he picked up\nhis pen and began to write.\n\"That'll teach him,\" he said to himself. But he was\nmistaken. For Bernard left the room with a swagger,\nexulting, as he banged the door behind him, in the\nthought that he stood alone, embattled against the order\nof things; elated by the intoxicating consciousness of his\nindividual significance and importance. Even the thought\nof persecution left him undismayed, was rather tonic than\ndepressing. He felt strong enough to meet and overcome\naffliction, strong enough to face even Iceland. And this\nconfidence was the greater for his not for a moment\nreally believing that he would be called upon to face\nanything at all. People simply weren't transferred for\nthings like that. Iceland was just a threat. A most\nstimulating and life-giving threat. Walking along the\ncorridor, he actually whistled.\nHeroic was the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: account he gave that evening of his\ninterview with the D.H.C. \"Whereupon,\" it concluded, \"I\nsimply told him to go to the Bottomless Past and\nmarched out of the room. And that was that.\" He looked\nat Helmholtz Watson expectantly, awaiting his due\nreward of sympathy, encouragement, admiration. But no\nword came. Helmholtz sat silent, staring at the floor.\nHe liked Bernard; he was grateful to him for being the\nonly man of his acquaintance with whom he could talk\nabout the subjects he felt to be important. Nevertheless,\nthere were things in Bernard which he hated. This\nboasting, for example. And the outbursts of an abject\nself-pity with which it alternated. And his deplorable habit\nof being bold after the event, and full, in absence, of the\nmost extraordinary presence of mind. He hated these thingsâjust because he liked Bernard. The seconds\npassed. Helmholtz continued to stare at the floor. And\nsuddenly Bernard blushed and turned away.\nÂ§ 3\nT HE\njourney was quite uneventful. The Blue Pacific\nRocket was two and a half minutes early at New Orleans,\nlost four minutes in a tornado over Texas, but flew into a\nfavourable air current at Longitude 95 West, and was\nable to land at Santa FÃ© less than forty seconds behind\nschedule time.\n\"Forty seconds on a six and a half hour flight. Not so\nbad,\" Lenina conceded.\nThey slept that night at Santa FÃ©. The hotel was\nexcellentâincomparably better, for example, than that\nhorrible Aurora Bora Palace in which Lenina had suffered\nso much the previous summer. Liquid air, television,\nvibro-vacuum massage, radio, boiling caffeine solution,\nhot contraceptives, and eight different kinds of scent\nwere laid on in every bedroom. The synthetic music plant\nwas working as they entered the hall and left nothing to\nbe desired. A notice in the lift announced that there were\nsixty Escalator-Squash-Racket Courts in the hotel, and\nthat Obstacle and Electro-magnetic Golf could both be\nplayed in the park.\n\"But it sounds simply too lovely,\" cried Lenina. \
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: "I almost\nwish we could stay here. Sixty Escalator-Squash Courts\n...\"\n\"There won't be any in the Reservation,\" Bernard warned\nher. \"And no scent, no television, no hot water even. If\nyou feel you can't stand it, stay here till I come back.\" Lenina was quite offended. \"Of course I can stand it. I\nonly said it was lovely here because ... well, because\nprogress is lovely, isn't it?\"\n\"Five hundred repetitions once a week from thirteen to\nseventeen,\" said Bernard wearily, as though to himself.\n\"What did you say?\"\n\"I said that progress was lovely. That's why you mustn't\ncome to the Reservation unless you really want to.\"\n\"But I do want to.\"\n\"Very well, then,\" said Bernard; and it was almost a\nthreat.\nTheir permit required the signature of the Warden of the\nReservation, at whose office next morning they duly\npresented themselves. An Epsilon-Plus negro porter took\nin Bernard's card, and they were admitted almost\nimmnediately.\nThe Warden was a blond and brachycephalic Alpha-Minus,\nshort, red, moon-faced, and broad-shouldered, with a\nloud booming voice, very well adapted to the utterance of\nhypnopÃ¦dic wisdom. He was a mine of irrelevant\ninformation and unasked-for good advice. Once started,\nhe went on and onâboomingly.\n\"... five hundred and sixty thousand square kilometres,\ndivided into four distinct Sub-Reservations, each\nsurrounded by a high-tension wire fence.\"\nAt this moment, and for no apparent reason, Bernard\nsuddenly remembered that he had left the Eau de\nCologne tap in his bathroom wide open and running. \"... supplied with current from the Grand Canyon hydro-\nelectric station.\"\n\"Cost me a fortune by the time I get back.\" With his\nmind's eye, Bernard saw the needle on the scent meter\ncreeping round and round, antlike, indefatigable. \"Quickly\ntelephone to Helmholtz Watson.\"\n\"... upwards of five thousand kilometres of fencing at\nsixty thousand volts.\"\n\"You don't say so,\" said Lenina politely, not knowing in\nthe least what the Warden had said, but
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: taking her cue\nfrom his dramatic pause. When the Warden started\nbooming, she had inconspicuously swallowed half a\ngramme of soma, with the result that she could now sit,\nserenely not listening, thinking of nothing at all, but with\nher large blue eyes fixed on the Warden's face in an\nexpression of rapt attention.\n\"To touch the fence is instant death,\" pronounced the\nWarden solemnly. \"There is no escape from a Savage\nReservation.\"\nThe word \"escape\" was suggestive. \"Perhaps,\" said\nBernard, half rising, \"we ought to think of going.\" The\nlittle black needle was scurrying, an insect, nibbling\nthrough time, eating into his money.\n\"No escape,\" repeated the Warden, waving him back into\nhis chair; and as the permit was not yet countersigned\nBernard had no choice but to obey. \"Those who are born\nin the Reservationâand remember, my dear young lady,\"\nhe added, leering obscenely at Lenina, and speaking in\nan improper whisper, \"remember that, in the\nReservation, children still are born, yes, actually born,\nrevolting as that may seem ...\" (He hoped that this\nreference to a shameful subject would make Lenina\nblush; but she only smiled with simulated intelligence and said, \"You don't say so!\" Disappointed, the Warden began\nagain. ) \"Those, I repeat who are born in the Reservation\nare destined to die there.\"\nDestined to die ... A decilitre of Eau de Cologne every\nminute. Six litres an hour. \"Perhaps,\" Bernard tried again,\n\"we ought ...\"\nLeaning forward, the Warden tapped the table with his\nforefinger. \"You ask me how many people live in the\nReservation. And I reply\"âtriumphantlyâ\"I reply that we\ndo not know. We can only guess.\"\n\"You don't say so.\"\n\"My dear young lady, I do say so.\"\nSix times twenty-fourâno, it would be nearer six times\nthirty-six. Bernard was pale and trembling with\nimpatience. But inexorably the booming continued.\n\"... about sixty thousand Indians and half-breeds ...\nabsolute savages ... our inspectors occasionally visit ...\notherwis
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e, no communication whatever with the civilized\nworld ... still preserve their repulsive habits and customs\n... marriage, if you know what that is, my dear young\nlady; families ... no conditioning ... monstrous\nsuperstitions ... Christianity and totemism and ancestor\nworship ... extinct languages, such as ZuÃ±i and Spanish\nand Athapascan ... pumas, porcupines and other\nferocious animals ... infectious diseases ... priests ...\nvenomous lizards ...\"\n\"You don't say so?\"\nThey got away at last. Bernard dashed to the telephone.\nQuick, quick; but it took him nearly three minutes to get\non to Helmholtz Watson. \"We might be among the savages\nalready,\"\nincompetence!\"\nhe\ncomplained.\n\"Damned\n\"Have a gramme,\" suggested Lenina.\nHe refused, preferring his anger. And at last, thank Ford,\nhe was through and, yes, it was Helmholtz; Helmholtz, to\nwhom he explained what had happened, and who\npromised to go round at once, at once, and turn off the\ntap, yes, at once, but took this opportunity to tell him\nwhat the D.H.C. had said, in public, yesterday evening ...\n\"What? He's looking out for some one to take my place?\"\nBernard's voice was agonized. \"So it's actually decided?\nDid he mention Iceland? You say he did? Ford! Iceland\n...\" He hung up the receiver and turned back to Lenina.\nHis face was pale, his expression utterly dejected.\n\"What's the matter?\" she asked.\n\"The matter?\" He dropped heavily into a chair. \"I'm going\nto be sent to Iceland.\"\nOften in the past he had wondered what it would be like\nto be subjected (soma-less and with nothing but his own\ninward resources to rely on) to some great trial, some\npain, some persecution; he had even longed for affliction.\nAs recently as a week ago, in the Director's office, he had\nimagined himself courageously resisting, stoically\naccepting suffering without a word. The Director's threats\nhad actually elated him, made him feel larger than life.\nBut that, as he now realized, was because he had not\ntaken the threats quite seriously,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he had not believed\nthat, when it came to the point, the D.H.C. would ever do\nanything. Now that it looked as though the threats were\nreally to be fulfilled, Bernard was appalled. Of that\nimagined stoicism, that theoretical courage, not a trace\nwas left. He raged against himselfâwhat a fool!âagainst the\nDirectorâhow unfair not to give him that other chance,\nthat other chance which, he now had no doubt at all, he\nhad always intended to take. And Iceland, Iceland ...\nLenina shook her head. \"Was and will make me ill,\" she\nquoted, \"I take a gramme and only am.\"\nIn the end she persuaded him to swallow four tablets of\nsoma. Five minutes later roots and fruits were abolished;\nthe flower of the present rosily blossomed. A message\nfrom the porter announced that, at the Warden's orders,\na Reservation Guard had come round with a plane and\nwas waiting on the roof of the hotel. They went up at\nonce. An octoroon in Gamma-green uniform saluted and\nproceeded to recite the morning's programme.\nA bird's-eye view of ten or a dozen of the principal\npueblos, then a landing for lunch in the valley of Malpais.\nThe rest-house was comfortable there, and up at the\npueblo the savages would probably be celebrating their\nsummer festival. It would be the best place to spend the\nnight.\nThey took their seats in the plane and set off. Ten\nminutes later they were crossing the frontier that\nseparated civilization from savagery. Uphill and down,\nacross the deserts of salt or sand, through forests, into\nthe violet depth of canyons, over crag and peak and\ntable-topped mesa, the fence marched on and on,\nirresistibly the straight line, the geometrical symbol of\ntriumphant human purpose. And at its foot, here and\nthere, a mosaic of white bones, a still unrotted carcase\ndark on the tawny ground marked the place where deer\nor steer, puma or porcupine or coyote, or the greedy\nturkey buzzards drawn down by the whiff of carrion and\nfulminated as though by a poetic justice, had come too\nclose to the destroying w
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ires. \"They never learn,\" said the green-uniformed pilot,\npointing down at the skeletons on the ground below\nthem. \"And they never will learn,\" he added and laughed,\nas though he had somehow scored a personal triumph\nover the electrocuted animals.\nBernard also laughed; after two grammes of soma the\njoke seemed, for some reason, good. Laughed and then,\nalmost immediately, dropped off to sleep, and sleeping\nwas carried over Taos and Tesuque; over Nambe and\nPicuris and Pojoaque, over Sia and Cochiti, over Laguna\nand Acoma and the Enchanted Mesa, over ZuÃ±i and\nCibola and Ojo Caliente, and woke at last to find the\nmachine standing on the ground, Lenina carrying the\nsuit-cases into a small square house, and the Gamma-\ngreen octoroon talking incomprehensibly with a young\nIndian.\n\"Malpais,\" explained the pilot, as Bernard stepped out.\n\"This is the rest-house. And there's a dance this\nafternoon at the pueblo. He'll take you there.\" He pointed\nto the sullen young savage. \"Funny, I expect.\" He\ngrinned. \"Everything they do is funny.\" And with that he\nclimbed into the plane and started up the engines. \"Back\nto-morrow. And remember,\" he added reassuringly to\nLenina, \"they're perfectly tame; savages won't do you\nany harm. They've got enough experience of gas bombs\nto know that they mustn't play any tricks.\" Still laughing,\nhe threw the helicopter screws into gear, accelerated,\nand was gone. Chapter Seven\nT HE\nMESA was like a ship becalmed in a strait of lion-\ncoloured dust. The channel wound between precipitous\nbanks, and slanting from one wall to the other across the\nvalley ran a streak of green-the river and its fields. On\nthe prow of that stone ship in the centre of the strait, and\nseemingly a part of it, a shaped and geometrical outcrop\nof the naked rock, stood the pueblo of Malpais. Block\nabove block, each story smaller than the one below, the\ntall houses rose like stepped and amputated pyramids\ninto the blue sky. At their feet lay a straggle of low\nbuildings, a criss
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: -cross of walls; and on three sides the\nprecipices fell sheer into the plain. A few columns of\nsmoke mounted perpendicularly into the windless air and\nwere lost.\n\"Queer,\" said Lenina. \"Very queer.\" It was her ordinary\nword of condemnation. \"I don't like it. And I don't like\nthat man.\" She pointed to the Indian guide who had been\nappointed to take them up to the pueblo. Her feeling was\nevidently reciprocated; the very back of the man, as he\nwalked along before them, was hostile, sullenly\ncontemptuous.\n\"Besides,\" she lowered her voice, \"he smells.\"\nBernard did not attempt to deny it. They walked on.\nSuddenly it was as though the whole air had come alive\nand were pulsing, pulsing with the indefatigable\nmovement of blood. Up there, in Malpais, the drums were\nbeing beaten. Their feet fell in with the rhythm of that\nmysterious heart; they quickened their pace. Their path\nled them to the foot of the precipice. The sides of the\ngreat mesa ship towered over them, three hundred feet\nto the gunwale. \"I wish we could have brought the plane,\" said Lenina,\nlooking up resentfully at the blank impending rock-face.\n\"I hate walking. And you feel so small when you're on the\nground at the bottom of a hill.\"\nThey walked along for some way in the shadow of the\nmesa, rounded a projection, and there, in a water-worn\nravine, was the way up the companion ladder. They\nclimbed. It was a very steep path that zigzagged from\nside to side of the gully. Sometimes the pulsing of the\ndrums was all but inaudible, at others they seemed to be\nbeating only just round the corner.\nWhen they were half-way up, an eagle flew past so close\nto them that the wind of his wings blew chill on their\nfaces. In a crevice of the rock lay a pile of bones. It was\nall oppressively queer, and the Indian smelt stronger and\nstronger. They emerged at last from the ravine into the\nfull sunlight. The top of the mesa was a flat deck of\nstone.\n\"Like the Charing-T Tower,\" was Lenina's comment. But\nshe was not allowed to enj
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: oy her discovery of this\nreassuring resemblance for long. A padding of soft feet\nmade them turn round. Naked from throat to navel, their\ndark brown bodies painted with white lines (\"like asphalt\ntennis courts,\" Lenina was later to explain), their faces\ninhuman with daubings of scarlet, black and ochre, two\nIndians came running along the path. Their black hair\nwas braided with fox fur and red flannel. Cloaks of turkey\nfeathers fluttered from their shoulders; huge feather\ndiadems exploded gaudily round their heads. With every\nstep they took came the clink and rattle of their silver\nbracelets, their heavy necklaces of bone and turquoise\nbeads. They came on without a word, running quietly in\ntheir deerskin moccasins. One of them was holding a\nfeather brush; the other carried, in either hand, what\nlooked at a distance like three or four pieces of thick rope. One of the ropes writhed uneasily, and suddenly\nLenina saw that they were snakes.\nThe men came nearer and nearer; their dark eyes looked\nat her, but without giving any sign of recognition, any\nsmallest sign that they had seen her or were aware of her\nexistence. The writhing snake hung limp again with the\nrest. The men passed.\n\"I don't like it,\" said Lenina. \"I don't like it.\"\nShe liked even less what awaited her at the entrance to\nthe pueblo, where their guide had left them while he\nwent inside for instructions. The dirt, to start with, the\npiles of rubbish, the dust, the dogs, the flies. Her face\nwrinkled up into a grimace of disgust. She held her\nhandkerchief to her nose.\n\"But how can they live like this?\" she broke out in a voice\nof indignant incredulity. (It wasn't possible.)\nBernard\nshrugged\nhis\nshoulders\nphilosophically.\n\"Anyhow,\" he said, \"they've been doing it for the last five\nor six thousand years. So I suppose they must be used to\nit by now.\"\n\"But cleanliness is next to fordliness,\" she insisted.\n\"Yes, and civilization is sterilization,\" Bernard went on,\nconcluding on a tone of irony the second hy
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: pnopÃ¦dic\nlesson in elementary hygiene. \"But these people have\nnever heard of Our Ford, and they aren't civilized. So\nthere's no point in ...\"\n\"Oh!\" She gripped his arm. \"Look.\"\nAn almost naked Indian was very slowly climbing down\nthe ladder from the first-floor terrace of a neighboring\nhouseârung after rung, with the tremulous caution of extreme old age. His face was profoundly wrinkled and\nblack, like a mask of obsidian. The toothless mouth had\nfallen in. At the corners of the lips, and on each side of\nthe chin, a few long bristles gleamed almost white\nagainst the dark skin. The long unbraided hair hung down\nin grey wisps round his face. His body was bent and\nemaciated to the bone, almost fleshless. Very slowly he\ncame down, pausing at each rung before he ventured\nanother step.\n\"What's the matter with him?\" whispered Lenina. Her\neyes were wide with horror and amazement.\n\"He's old, that's all,\" Bernard answered as carelessly as\nhe could. He too was startled; but he made an effort to\nseem unmoved.\n\"Old?\" she repeated. \"But the Director's old; lots of\npeople are old; they're not like that.\"\n\"That's because we don't allow them to be like that. We\npreserve them from diseases. We keep their internal\nsecretions artificially balanced at a youthful equilibrium.\nWe don't permit their magnesium-calcium ratio to fall\nbelow what it was at thirty. We give them transfusion of\nyoung blood. We keep their metabolism permanently\nstimulated. So, of course, they don't look like that.\nPartly,\" he added, \"because most of them die long before\nthey reach this old creature's age. Youth almost\nunimpaired till sixty, and then, crack! the end.\"\nBut Lenina was not listening. She was watching the old\nman. Slowly, slowly he came down. His feet touched the\nground. He turned. In their deep-sunken orbits his eyes\nwere still extraordinarily bright. They looked at her for a\nlong moment expressionlessly, without surprise, as\nthough she had not been there at all. Then slowly, with\nbent back
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the old man hobbled past them and was gone. \"But it's terrible,\" Lenina whispered. \"It's awful. We ought\nnot to have come here.\" She felt in her pocket for her\nsomaâonly to discover that, by some unprecedented\noversight, she had left the bottle down at the rest-house.\nBernard's pockets were also empty.\nLenina was left to face the horrors of Malpais unaided.\nThey came crowding in on her thick and fast. The\nspectacle of two young women giving breast to their\nbabies made her blush and turn away her face. She had\nnever seen anything so indecent in her life. And what\nmade it worse was that, instead of tactfully ignoring it,\nBernard proceeded to make open comments on this\nrevoltingly viviparous scene. Ashamed, now that the\neffects of the soma had worn off, of the weakness he had\ndisplayed that morning in the hotel, he went out of his\nway to show himself strong and unorthodox.\n\"What a wonderfully intimate relationship,\" he said,\ndeliberately outrageous. \"And what an intensity of feeling\nit must generate! I often think one may have missed\nsomething in not having had a mother. And perhaps\nyou've missed something in not being a mother, Lenina.\nImagine yourself sitting there with a little baby of your\nown. ...\"\n\"Bernard! How can you?\" The passage of an old woman\nwith ophthalmia and a disease of the skin distracted her\nfrom her indignation.\n\"Let's go away,\" she begged. \"I don't like it.\"\nBut at this moment their guide came back and, beckoning\nthem to follow, led the way down the narrow street\nbetween the houses. They rounded a corner. A dead dog\nwas lying on a rubbish heap; a woman with a goitre was\nlooking for lice in the hair of a small girl. Their guide\nhalted at the foot of a ladder, raised his hand perpendicularly, then darted it horizontally forward. They\ndid what he mutely commandedâclimbed the ladder and\nwalked through the doorway, to which it gave access,\ninto a long narrow room, rather dark and smelling of\nsmoke and cooked grease and long-worn, long-unwashed\ncl
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: othes. At the further end of the room was another\ndoorway, through which came a shaft of sundight and the\nnoise, very loud and close, of the drums.\nThey stepped across the threshold and found themselves\non a wide terrace. Below them, shut in by the tall houses,\nwas the village square, crowded with Indians. Bright\nblankets, and feathers in black hair, and the glint of\nturquoise, and dark skins shining with heat. Lenina put\nher handkerchief to her nose again. In the open space at\nthe centre of the square were two circular platforms of\nmasonry and trampled clayâthe roofs, it was evident, of\nunderground chambers; for in the centre of each platform\nwas an open hatchway, with a ladder emerging from the\nlower darkness. A sound of subterranean flute playing\ncame up and was almost lost in the steady remorseless\npersistence of the drums.\nLenina liked the drums. Shutting her eyes she abandoned\nherself to their soft repeated thunder, allowed it to invade\nher consciousness more and more completely, till at last\nthere was nothing left in the world but that one deep\npulse of sound. It reminded her reassuringly of the\nsynthetic noises made at Solidarity Services and Ford's\nDay celebrations. \"Orgy-porgy,\" she whispered to herself.\nThese drums beat out just the same rhythms.\nThere was a sudden startling burst of singingâhundreds\nof male voices crying out fiercely in harsh metallic unison.\nA few long notes and silence, the thunderous silence of\nthe drums; then shrill, in a neighing treble, the women's\nanswer. Then again the drums; and once more the men's\ndeep savage affirmation of their manhood. Queerâyes. The place was queer, so was the music, so\nwere the clothes and the goitres and the skin diseases\nand the old people. But the performance itselfâthere\nseemed to be nothing specially queer about that.\n\"It reminds me of a lower-caste Community Sing,\" she\ntold Bernard.\nBut a little later it was reminding her a good deal less of\nthat innocuous function. For suddenly there had swarmed\nup
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: from those round chambers underground a ghastly\ntroop of monsters. Hideously masked or painted out of all\nsemblance of humanity, they had tramped out a strange\nlimping dance round the square; round and again round,\nsinging as they went, round and roundâeach time a little\nfaster; and the drums had changed and quickened their\nrhythm, so that it became like the pulsing of fever in the\nears; and the crowd had begun to sing with the dancers,\nlouder and louder; and first one woman had shrieked,\nand then another and another, as though they were\nbeing killed; and then suddenly the leader of the dancers\nbroke out of the line, ran to a big wooden chest which\nwas standing at one end of the square, raised the lid and\npulled out a pair of black snakes. A great yell went up\nfrom the crowd, and all the other dancers ran towards\nhim with out-stretched hands. He tossed the snakes to\nthe first-comers, then dipped back into the chest for\nmore. More and more, black snakes and brown and\nmottled-he flung them out. And then the dance began\nagain on a different rhythm. Round and round they went\nwith their snakes, snakily, with a soft undulating\nmovement at the knees and hips. Round and round. Then\nthe leader gave a signal, and one after another, all the\nsnakes were flung down in the middle of the square; an\nold man came up from underground and sprinkled them\nwith corn meal, and from the other hatchway came a\nwoman and sprinkled them with water from a black jar.\nThen the old man lifted his hand and, startlingly, terrifyingly, there was absolute silence. The drums\nstopped beating, life seemed to have come to an end.\nThe old man pointed towards the two hatchways that\ngave entrance to the lower world. And slowly, raised by\ninvisible hands from below, there emerged from the one\na painted image of an eagle, from the other that of a\nman, naked, and nailed to a cross. They hung there,\nseemingly self-sustained, as though watching. The old\nman clapped his hands. Naked but for a white cotton\nbreech-cloth, a b
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: oy of about eighteen stepped out of the\ncrowd and stood before him, his hands crossed over his\nchest, his head bowed. The old man made the sign of the\ncross over him and turned away. Slowly, the boy began\nto walk round the writhing heap of snakes. He had\ncompleted the first circuit and was half-way through the\nsecond when, from among the dancers, a tall man\nwearing the mask of a coyote and holding in his hand a\nwhip of plaited leather, advanced towards him. The boy\nmoved on as though unaware of the other's existence.\nThe coyote-man raised his whip, there was a long\nmoment of expectancy, then a swift movement, the\nwhistle of the lash and its loud flat-sounding impact on\nthe flesh. The boy's body quivered; but he made no\nsound, he walked on at the same slow, steady pace. The\ncoyote struck again, again; and at every blow at first a\ngasp, and then a deep groan went up from the crowd.\nThe boy walked. Twice, thrice, four times round he went.\nThe blood was streaming. Five times round, six times\nround. Suddenly Lenina covered her face shish her hands\nand began to sob. \"Oh, stop them, stop them!\" she\nimplored. But the whip fell and fell inexorably. Seven\ntimes round. Then all at once the boy staggered and, still\nwithout a sound, pitched forward on to his face. Bending\nover him, the old man touched his back with a long white\nfeather, held it up for a moment, crimson, for the people\nto see then shook it thrice over the snakes. A few drops\nfell, and suddenly the drums broke out again into a panic\nof hurrying notes; there was a great shout. The dancers rushed forward, picked up the snakes and ran out of the\nsquare. Men, women, children, all the crowd ran after\nthem. A minute later the square was empty, only the boy\nremained, prone where he had fallen, quite still. Three\nold women came out of one of the houses, and with some\ndifficulty lifted him and carried him in. The eagle and the\nman on the cross kept guard for a little while over the\nempty pueblo; then, as though they had seen enough,\
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nsank slowly down through their hatchways, out of sight,\ninto the nether world.\nLenina was still sobbing. \"Too awful,\" she kept repeating,\nand all Bernard's consolations were in vain. \"Too awful!\nThat blood!\" She shuddered. \"Oh, I wish I had my soma.\"\nThere was the sound of feet in the inner room.\nLenina did not move, but sat with her face in her hands,\nunseeing, apart. Only Bernard turned round.\nThe dress of the young man who now stepped out on to\nthe terrace was Indian; but his plaited hair was straw-\ncoloured, his eyes a pale blue, and his skin a white skin,\nbronzed.\n\"Hullo. Good-morrow,\" said the stranger, in faultless but\npeculiar English. \"You're civilized, aren't you? You come\nfrom the Other Place, outside the Reservation?\"\n\"Who on earth ... ?\" Bernard began in astonishment.\nThe young man sighed and shook his head. \"A most\nunhappy gentleman.\" And, pointing to the bloodstains in\nthe centre of the square, \"Do you see that damned spot?\"\nhe asked in a voice that trembled with emotion.\n\"A gramme is better than a damn,\" said Lenina\nmechanically from behind her hands. \"I wish I had my\nsoma!\" \"I ought to have been there,\" the young man went on.\n\"Why wouldn't they let me be the sacrifice? I'd have gone\nround ten timesâtwelve, fifteen. Palowhtiwa only got as\nfar as seven. They could have had twice as much blood\nfrom me. The multitudinous seas incarnadine.\" He flung\nout his arms in a lavish gesture; then, despairingly, let\nthem fall again. \"But they wouldn't let me. They disliked\nme for my complexion. It's always been like that.\nAlways.\" Tears stood in the young man's eyes; he was\nashamed and turned away.\nAstonishment made Lenina forget the deprivation of\nsoma. She uncovered her face and, for the first time,\nlooked at the stranger. \"Do you mean to say that you\nwanted to be hit with that whip?\"\nStill averted from her, the young man made a sign of\naffirmation. \"For the sake of the puebloâto make the rain\ncome and the corn grow. And to please Pookong
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and\nJesus. And then to show that I can bear pain without\ncrying out. Yes,\" and his voice suddenly took on a new\nresonance, he turned with a proud squaring of the\nshoulders, a proud, defiant lifting of the chin \"to show\nthat I'm a man ... Oh!\" He gave a gasp and was silent,\ngaping. He had seen, for the first time in his life, the face\nof a girl whose cheeks were not the colour of chocolate or\ndogskin, whose hair was auburn and permanently waved,\nand whose expression (amazing novelty!) was one of\nbenevolent interest. Lenina was smiling at him; such a\nnice-looking boy, she was thinking, and a really beautiful\nbody. The blood rushed up into the young man's face; he\ndropped his eyes, raised them again for a moment only\nto find her still smiling at him, and was so much\novercome that he had to turn away and pretend to be\nlooking very hard at something on the other side of the\nsquare. Bernard's questions made a diversion. Who? How? When?\nFrom where? Keeping his eyes fixed on Bernard's face\n(for so passionately did he long to see Lenina smiling that\nhe simply dared not look at her), the young man tried to\nexplain himself. Linda and heâLinda was his mother (the\nword made Lenina look uncomfortable)âwere strangers in\nthe Reservation. Linda had come from the Other Place\nlong ago, before he was born, with a man who was his\nfather. (Bernard pricked up his ears.) She had gone\nwalking alone in those mountains over there to the North,\nhad fallen down a steep place and hurt her head. (\"Go\non, go on,\" said Bernard excitedly.) Some hunters from\nMalpais had found her and brought her to the pueblo. As\nfor the man who was his father, Linda had never seen\nhim again. His name was Tomakin. (Yes, \"Thomas\" was\nthe D.H.C.'s first name.) He must have flown away, back\nto the Other Place, away without herâa bad, unkind,\nunnatural man.\n\"And so I was born in Malpais,\" he concluded. \"In\nMalpais.\" And he shook his head.\nThe squalor of that little house on the outskirts of the\npueblo!\nA space o
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: f dust and rubbish separated it from the village.\nTwo famine-stricken dogs were nosing obscenely in the\ngarbage at its door. Inside, when they entered, the\ntwilight stank and was loud with flies.\n\"Linda!\" the young man called.\nFrom the inner room a rather hoarse female voice said,\n\"Coming.\"\nThey waited. In bowls on the floor were the remains of a\nmeal, perhaps of several meals. The door opened. A very stout blonde squaw stepped\nacross the threshold and stood looking at the strangers\nstaring incredulously, her mouth open. Lenina noticed\nwith disgust that two of the front teeth were missing. And\nthe colour of the ones that remained ... She shuddered.\nIt was worse than the old man. So fat. And all the lines in\nher face, the flabbiness, the wrinkles. And the sagging\ncheeks, with those purplish blotches. And the red veins\non her nose, the bloodshot eyes. And that neckâthat\nneck; and the blanket she wore over her headâragged\nand filthy. And under the brown sack-shaped tunic those\nenormous breasts, the bulge of the stomach, the hips.\nOh, much worse than the old man, much worse! And\nsuddenly the creature burst out in a torrent of speech,\nrushed at her with outstretched arms andâFord! Ford! it\nwas too revolting, in another moment she'd be sickâ\npressed her against the bulge, the bosom, and began to\nkiss her. Ford! to kiss, slobberingly, and smelt too\nhorrible, obviously never had a bath, and simply reeked\nof that beastly stuff that was put into Delta and Epsilon\nbottles (no, it wasn't true about Bernard), positively\nstank of alcohol. She broke away as quickly as she could.\nA blubbered and distorted face confronted her; the\ncreature was crying.\n\"Oh, my dear, my dear.\" The torrent of words flowed\nsobbingly. \"If you knew how gladâafter all these years! A\ncivilized face. Yes, and civilized clothes. Because I\nthought I should never see a piece of real acetate silk\nagain.\" She fingered the sleeve of Lenina's shirt. The\nnails were black. \"And those adorable viscose velvetee
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n\nshorts! Do you know, dear, I've still got my old clothes,\nthe ones I came in, put away in a box. I'll show them you\nafterwards. Though, of course, the acetate has all gone\ninto holes. But such a lovely white bandolierâthough I\nmust say your green morocco is even lovelier. Not that it\ndid me much good, that bandolier.\" Her tears began to flow again. \"I suppose John told you. What I had to\nsufferâand not a gramme of soma to be had. Only a drink\nof mescal every now and then, when PopÃ© used to bring\nit. PopÃ© is a boy I used to know. But it makes you feel so\nbad afterwards. the mescal does, and you're sick with the\npeyotl; besides it always made that awful feeling of being\nashamed much worse the next day. And I was so\nashamed. Just think of it: me, a Betaâhaving a baby: put\nyourself in my place.\" (The mere suggestion made Lenina\nshudder.) \"Though it wasn't my fault, I swear; because I\nstill don't know how it happened, seeing that I did all the\nMalthusian Drillâyou know, by numbers, One, two, three,\nfour, always, I swear it; but all the same it happened,\nand of course there wasn't anything like an Abortion\nCentre here. Is it still down in Chelsea, by the way?\" she\nasked. Lenina nodded. \"And still floodlighted on Tuesdays\nand Fridays?\" Lenina nodded again. \"That lovely pink\nglass tower!\" Poor Linda lifted her face and with closed\neyes ecstatically contemplated the bright remembered\nimage. \"And the river at night,\" she whispered. Great\ntears oozed slowly out from behind her tight-shut eyelids.\n\"And flying back in the evening from Stoke Poges. And\nthen a hot bath and vibro-vacuum massage ... But\nthere.\" She drew a deep breath, shook her head, opened\nher eyes again, sniffed once or twice, then blew her nose\non her fingers and wiped them on the skirt of her tunic.\n\"Oh, I'm so sorry,\" she said in response to Lenina's\ninvoluntary grimace of disgust. \"I oughtn't to have done\nthat. I'm sorry. But what are you to do when there aren't\nany handkerchiefs? I remember how
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: it used to upset me,\nall that dirt, and nothing being aseptic. I had an awful cut\non my head when they first brought me here. You can't\nimagine what they used to put on it. Filth, just filth.\n'Civilization is Sterilization,' I used to say t them. And\n'Streptocock-Gee to Banbury-T, to see a fine bathroom\nand W.C.' as though they were children. But of course\nthey didn't understand. How should they? And in the end\nI suppose I got used to it. And anyhow, how can you keep things clean when there isn't hot water laid on? And\nlook at these clothes. This beastly wool isn't like acetate.\nIt lasts and lasts. And you're supposed to mend it if it\ngets torn. But I'm a Beta; I worked in the Fertilizing\nRoom; nobody ever taught me to do anything like that. It\nwasn't my business. Besides, it never used to be right to\nmend clothes. Throw them away when they've got holes\nin them and buy new. 'The more stitches, the less riches.'\nIsn't that right? Mending's anti-social. But it's all different\nhere. It's like living with lunatics. Everything they do is\nmad.\" She looked round; saw John and Bernard had left\nthem and were walking up and down in the dust and\ngarbage outside the house; but, none the less\nconfidentially lowering her voice, and leaning, while\nLenina stiffened and shrank, so close that the blown reek\nof embryo-poison stirred the hair on her cheek. \"For\ninstance,\" she hoarsely whispered, \"take the way they\nhave one another here. Mad, I tell you, absolutely mad.\nEverybody belongs to every one elseâdon't they? don't\nthey?\" she insisted, tugging at Lenina's sleeve. Lenina\nnodded her averted head, let out the breath she had\nbeen holding and managed to draw another one,\nrelatively untainted. \"Well, here,\" the other went on,\n\"nobody's supposed to belong to more than one person.\nAnd if you have people in the ordinary way, the others\nthink you're wicked and anti-social. They hate and\ndespise you. Once a lot of women came and made a\nscene because their men came to see me. Well, why not?\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: And then they rushed at me ... No, it was too awful. I\ncan't tell you about it.\" Linda covered her face with her\nhands and shuddered. \"They're so hateful, the women\nhere. Mad, mad and cruel. And of course they don't know\nanything about Malthusian Drill, or bottles, or decanting,\nor anything of that sort. So they're having children all the\ntimeâlike dogs. It's too revolting. And to think that I ...\nOh, Ford, Ford, Ford! And yet John was a great comfort\nto me. I don't know what I should have done without\nhim. Even though he did get so upset whenever a man ... Quite as a tiny boy, even. Once (but that was when he\nwas bigger) he tried to kill poor Waihusiwaâor was it\nPopÃ©?âjust because I used to have them sometimes.\nBecause I never could make him understand that that\nwas what civilized people ought to do. Being mad's\ninfectious I believe. Anyhow, John seems to have caught\nit from the Indians. Because, of course, he was with them\na lot. Even though they always were so beastly to him\nand wouldn't let him do all the things the other boys did.\nWhich was a good thing in a way, because it made it\neasier for me to condition him a little. Though you've no\nidea how difficult that is. There's so much one doesn't\nknow; it wasn't my business to know. I mean, when a\nchild asks you how a helicopter works or who made the\nworldâwell, what are you to answer if you're a Beta and\nhave always worked in the Fertilizing Room? What are\nyou to answer?\" Chapter Eight\nO UTSIDE,\nin the dust and among the garbage (there\nwere four dogs now), Bernard and John were walking\nslowly up and down.\n\"So hard for me to realize,\" Bernard was saying, \"to\nreconstruct. As though we were living on different\nplanets, in different centuries. A mother, and all this dirt,\nand gods, and old age, and disease ...\" He shook his\nhead. \"It's almost inconceivable. I shall never\nunderstand, unless you explain.\"\n\"Explain what?\"\n\"This.\" He indicated the pueblo. \"That.\" And it was the\nlittle house outside the vill
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: age. \"Everything. All your life.\"\n\"But what is there to say?\"\n\"From the beginning. As far back as you can remember.\"\n\"As far back as I can remember.\" John frowned. There\nwas a long silence.\nIt was very hot. They had eaten a lot of tortillas and\nsweet corn. Linda said, \"Come and lie down, Baby.\" They\nlay down together in the big bed. \"Sing,\" and Linda sang.\nSang \"Streptocock-Gee to Banbury-T\" and \"Bye Baby\nBanting, soon you'll need decanting.\" Her voice got\nfainter and fainter ...\nThere was a loud noise, and he woke with a start. A man\nwas saying something to Linda, and Linda was laughing.\nShe had pulled the blanket up to her chin, but the man\npulled it down again. His hair was like two black ropes,\nand round his arm was a lovely silver bracelet with blue\nstones in it. He liked the bracelet; but all the same, he was frightened; he hid his face against Linda's body.\nLinda put her hand on him and he felt safer. In those\nother words he did not understand so well, she said to\nthe man, \"Not with John here.\" The man looked at him,\nthen again at Linda, and said a few words in a soft voice.\nLinda said, \"No.\" But the man bent over the bed towards\nhim and his face was huge, terrible; the black ropes of\nhair touched the blanket. \"No,\" Linda said again, and he\nfelt her hand squeezing him more tightly. \"No, no!\" But\nthe man took hold of one of his arms, and it hurt. He\nscreamed. The man put up his other hand and lifted him\nup. Linda was still holding him, still saying, \"No, no.\" The\nman said something short and angry, and suddenly her\nhands were gone. \"Linda, Linda.\" He kicked and wriggled;\nbut the man carried him across to the door, opened it,\nput him down on the floor in the middle of the other\nroom, and went away, shutting the door behind him. He\ngot up, he ran to the door. Standing on tiptoe he could\njust reach the big wooden latch. He lifted it and pushed;\nbut the door wouldn't open. \"Linda,\" he shouted. She\ndidn't answer.\nHe remembered a huge room, rather
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: dark; and there\nwere big wooden things with strings fastened to them,\nand lots of women standing round themâmaking\nblankets, Linda said. Linda told him to sit in the corner\nwith the other children, while she went and helped the\nwomen. He played with the little boys for a long time.\nSuddenly people started talking very loud, and there\nwere the women pushing Linda away, and Linda was\ncrying. She went to the door and he ran after her. He\nasked her why they were angry. \"Because I broke\nsomething,\" she said. And then she got angry too. \"How\nshould I know how to do their beastly weaving?\" she\nsaid. \"Beastly savages.\" He asked her what savages\nwere. When they got back to their house, PopÃ© was\nwaiting at the door, and he came in with them. He had a\nbig gourd full of stuff that looked like water; only it wasn't water, but something with a bad smell that burnt\nyour mouth and made you cough. Linda drank some and\nPopÃ© drank some, and then Linda laughed a lot and\ntalked very loud; and then she and PopÃ© went into the\nother room. When PopÃ© went away, he went into the\nroom. Linda was in bed and so fast asleep that he\ncouldn't wake her.\nPopÃ© used to come often. He said the stuff in the gourd\nwas called mescal; but Linda said it ought to be called\nsoma; only it made you feel ill afterwards. He hated\nPopÃ©. He hated them allâall the men who came to see\nLinda. One afternoon, when he had been playing with the\nother childrenâit was cold, he remembered, and there\nwas snow on the mountainsâhe came back to the house\nand heard angry voices in the bedroom. They were\nwomen's voices, and they said words he didn't\nunderstand, but he knew they were dreadful words. Then\nsuddenly, crash! something was upset; he heard people\nmoving about quickly, and there was another crash and\nthen a noise like hitting a mule, only not so bony; then\nLinda screamed. \"Oh, don't, don't, don't!\" she said. He\nran in. There were three women in dark blankets. Linda\nwas on the bed. One of the women was holding h
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: er\nwrists. Another was lying across her legs, so that she\ncouldn't kick. The third was hitting her with a whip. Once,\ntwice, three times; and each time Linda screamed.\nCrying, he tugged at the fringe of the woman's blanket.\n\"Please, please.\" With her free hand she held him away.\nThe whip came down again, and again Linda screamed.\nHe caught hold of the woman's enormous brown hand\nbetween his own and bit it with all his might. She cried\nout, wrenched her hand free, and gave him such a push\nthat he fell down. While he was lying on the ground she\nhit him three times with the whip. It hurt more than\nanything he had ever feltâlike fire. The whip whistled\nagain, fell. But this time it was Linda who screamed. \"But why did they want to hurt you, Linda?'' he asked\nthat night. He was crying, because the red marks of the\nwhip on his back still hurt so terribly. But he was also\ncrying because people were so beastly and unfair, and\nbecause he was only a little boy and couldn't do anything\nagainst them. Linda was crying too. She was grown up,\nbut she wasn't big enough to fight against three of them.\nIt wasn't fair for her either. \"Why did they want to hurt\nyou, Linda?\"\n\"I don't know. How should I know?\" It was difficult to\nhear what she said, because she was lying on her\nstomach and her face was in the pillow. \"They say those\nmen are their men,\" she went on; and she did not seem\nto be talking to him at all; she seemed to be talking with\nsome one inside herself. A long talk which she didn't\nunderstand; and in the end she started crying louder\nthan ever.\n\"Oh, don't cry, Linda. Don't cry.\"\nHe pressed himself against her. He put his arm round her\nneck. Linda cried out. \"Oh, be careful. My shoulder! Oh!\"\nand she pushed him away, hard. His head banged against\nthe wall. \"Little idiot!\" she shouted; and then, suddenly,\nshe began to slap him. Slap, slap ...\n\"Linda,\" he cried out. \"Oh, mother, don't!\"\n\"I'm not your mother. I won't be your mother.\"\n\"But, Linda ... Oh!\" She sla
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: pped him on the cheek.\n\"Turned into a savage,\" she shouted. \"Having young ones\nlike an animal ... If it hadn't been for you, I might have\ngone to the Inspector, I might have got away. But not\nwith a baby. That would have been too shameful.\" He saw that she was going to hit him again, and lifted his\narm to guard his face. \"Oh, don't, Linda, please don't.\"\n\"Little beast!\" She pulled down his arm; his face was\nuncovered.\n\"Don't, Linda.\" He shut his eyes, expecting the blow.\nBut she didn't hit him. After a little time, he opened his\neyes again and saw that she was looking at him. He tried\nto smile at her. Suddenly she put her arms round him\nand kissed him again and again.\nSometimes, for several days, Linda didn't get up at all.\nShe lay in bed and was sad. Or else she drank the stuff\nthat PopÃ© brought and laughed a great deal and went to\nsleep. Sometimes she was sick. Often she forgot to wash\nhim, and there was nothing to eat except cold tortillas.\nHe remembered the first time she found those little\nanimals in his hair, how she screamed and screamed.\nThe happiest times were when she told him about the\nOther Place. \"And you really can go flying, whenever you\nlike?\"\n\"Whenever you like.\" And she would tell him about the\nlovely music that came out of a box, and all the nice\ngames you could play, and the delicious things to eat and\ndrink, and the light that came when you pressed a little\nthing in the wall, and the pictures that you could hear\nand feel and smell, as well as see, and another box for\nmaking nice smells, and the pink and green and blue and\nsilver houses as high as mountains, and everybody happy\nand no one ever sad or angry, and every one belonging\nto every one else, and the boxes where you could see\nand hear what was happening at the other side of the\nworld, and babies in lovely clean bottlesâeverything so\nclean, and no nasty smells, no dirt at allâand people\nnever lonely, but living together and being so jolly and happy, like the summer dances here in Mal
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: pais, but much\nhappier, and the happiness being there every day, every\nday. ... He listened by the hour. And sometimes, when he\nand the other children were tired with too much playing,\none of the old men of the pueblo would talk to them, in\nthose other words, of the great Transformer of the World,\nand of the long fight between Right Hand and Left Hand,\nbetween Wet and Dry; of Awonawilona, who made a\ngreat fog by thinking in the night, and then made the\nwhole world out of the fog; of Earth Mother and Sky\nFather; of Ahaiyuta and Marsailema, the twins of War and\nChance; of Jesus and Pookong; of Mary and Etsanatlehi,\nthe woman who makes herself young again; of the Black\nStone at Laguna and the Great Eagle and Our Lady of\nAcoma. Strange stories, all the more wonderful to him for\nbeing told in the other words and so not fully understood.\nLying in bed, he would think of Heaven and London and\nOur Lady of Acoma and the rows and rows of babies in\nclean bottles and Jesus flying up and Linda flying up and\nthe great Director of World Hatcheries and Awonawilona.\nLots of men came to see Linda. The boys began to point\ntheir fingers at him. In the strange other words they said\nthat Linda was bad; they called her names he did not\nunderstand, but that he knew were bad names. One day\nthey sang a song about her, again and again. He threw\nstones at them. They threw back; a sharp stone cut his\ncheek. The blood wouldn't stop; he was covered with\nblood.\nLinda taught him to read. With a piece of charcoal she\ndrew pictures on the wallâan animal sitting down, a baby\ninside a bottle; then she wrote letters. THE CAT IS ON\nTHE MAT. THE TOT IS IN THE POT. He learned quickly\nand easily. When he knew how to read all the words she\nwrote on the wall, Linda opened her big wooden box and\npulled out from under those funny little red trousers she\nnever wore a thin little book. He had often seen it before. \"When you're bigger,\" she had said, \"you can read it.\"\nWell, now he was big enough. He was proud. \"I'm afr
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: aid\nyou won't find it very exciting,\" she said. \"But it's the\nonly thing I have.\" She sighed. \"If only you could see the\nlovely reading machines we used to have in London!\" He\nbegan reading. The Chemical and Bacteriological\nConditioning of the Embryo. Practical Instructions for\nBeta Embryo-Store Workers. It took him a quarter of an\nhour to read the title alone. He threw the book on the\nfloor. \"Beastly, beastly book!\" he said, and began to cry.\nThe boys still sang their horrible song about Linda.\nSometimes, too, they laughed at him for being so ragged.\nWhen he tore his clothes, Linda did not know how to\nmend them. In the Other Place, she told him, people\nthrew away clothes with holes in them and got new ones.\n\"Rags, rags!\" the boys used to shout at him. \"But I can\nread,\" he said to himself, \"and they can't. They don't\neven know what reading is.\" It was fairly easy, if he\nthought hard enough about the reading, to pretend that\nhe didn't mind when they made fun of him. He asked\nLinda to give him the book again.\nThe more the boys pointed and sang, the harder he read.\nSoon he could read all the words quite well. Even the\nlongest. But what did they mean? He asked Linda; but\neven when she could answer it didn't seem to make it\nvery clear, And generally she couldn't answer at all.\n\"What are chemicals?\" he would ask.\n\"Oh, stuff like magnesium salts, and alcohol for keeping\nthe Deltas and Epsilons small and backward, and calcium\ncarbonate for bones, and all that sort of thing.\"\n\"But how do you make chemicals, Linda? Where do they\ncome from?\" \"Well, I don't know. You get them out of bottles. And\nwhen the bottles are empty, you send up to the Chemical\nStore for more. It's the Chemical Store people who make\nthem, I suppose. Or else they send to the factory for\nthem. I don't know. I never did any chemistry. My job\nwas always with the embryos. It was the same with\neverything else he asked about. Linda never seemed to\nknow. The old men of the pueblo had much more definite\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: answers.\n\"The seed of men and all creatures, the seed of the sun\nand the seed of earth and the seed of the skyâ\nAwonawilona made them all out of the Fog of Increase.\nNow the world has four wombs; and he laid the seeds in\nthe lowest of the four wombs. And gradually the seeds\nbegan to grow ...\"\nOne day (John calculated later that it must have been\nsoon after his twelfth birthday) he came home and found\na book that he had never seen before lying on the floor in\nthe bedroom. It was a thick book and looked very old.\nThe binding had been eaten by mice; some of its pages\nwere loose and crumpled. He picked it up, looked at the\ntitle-page: the book was called The Complete Works of\nWilliam Shakespeare.\nLinda was lying on the bed, sipping that horrible stinking\nmescal out of a cup. \"PopÃ© brought it,\" she said. Her\nvoice was thick and hoarse like somebody else's voice. \"It\nwas lying in one of the chests of the Antelope Kiva. It's\nsupposed to have been there for hundreds of years. I\nexpect it's true, because I looked at it, and it seemed to\nbe full of nonsense. Uncivilized. Still, it'll be good enough\nfor you to practice your reading on.\" She took a last sip,\nset the cup down on the floor beside the bed, turned over\non her side, hiccoughed once or twice and went to sleep.\nHe opened the book at random. Nay, but to live\nIn the rank sweat of an enseamed bed,\nStew'd in corruption, honeying and making love\nOver the nasty sty ...\nThe strange words rolled through his mind; rumbled, like\ntalking thunder; like the drums at the summer dances, if\nthe drums could have spoken; like the men singing the\nCorn Song, beautiful, beautiful, so that you cried; like old\nMitsima saying magic over his feathers and his carved\nsticks and his bits of bone and stoneâkiathla tsilu silokwe\nsilokwe silokwe. Kiai silu silu, tsithlâbut better than\nMitsima's magic, because it meant more, because it\ntalked to him, talked wonderfully and only half-\nunderstandably, a terrible beautiful magic, about Linda;\nabout
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Linda lying there snoring, with the empty cup on\nthe floor beside the bed; about Linda and PopÃ©, Linda and\nPopÃ©.\nHe hated PopÃ© more and more. A man can smile and\nsmile and be a villain. Remorseless, treacherous,\nlecherous, kindless villain. What did the words exactly\nmean? He only half knew. But their magic was strong and\nwent on rumbling in his head, and somehow it was as\nthough he had never really hated PopÃ© before; never\nreally hated him because he had never been able to say\nhow much he hated him. But now he had these words,\nthese words like drums and singing and magic. These\nwords and the strange, strange story out of which they\nwere taken (he couldn't make head or tail of it, but it was\nwonderful, wonderful all the same)âthey gave him a\nreason for hating PopÃ©; and they made his hatred more\nreal; they even made PopÃ© himself more real.\nOne day, when he came in from playing, the door of the\ninner room was open, and he saw them lying together on the bed, asleepâwhite Linda and PopÃ© almost black\nbeside her, with one arm under her shoulders and the\nother dark hand on her breast, and one of the plaits of\nhis long hair lying across her throat, like a black snake\ntrying to strangle her. PopÃ©'s gourd and a cup were\nstanding on the floor near the bed. Linda was snoring.\nHis heart seemed to have disappeared and left a hole. He\nwas empty. Empty, and cold, and rather sick, and giddy.\nHe leaned against the wall to steady himself.\nRemorseless, treacherous, lecherous ... Like drums, like\nthe men singing for the corn, like magic, the words\nrepeated and repeated themselves in his head. From\nbeing cold he was suddenly hot. His cheeks burnt with\nthe rush of blood, the room swam and darkened before\nhis eyes. He ground his teeth. \"I'll kill him, I'll kill him, I'll\nkill him,\" he kept saying. And suddenly there were more\nwords.\nWhen he is drunk asleep, or in his rage\nOr in the incestuous pleasure of his bed ...\nThe magic was on his side, the magic explained and gave\norders. He st
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: epped back in the outer room. \"When he is\ndrunk asleep ...\" The knife for the meat was lying on the\nfloor near the fireplace. He picked it up and tiptoed to the\ndoor again. \"When he is drunk asleep, drunk asleep ...\"\nHe ran across the room and stabbedâoh, the blood!â\nstabbed again, as PopÃ© heaved out of his sleep, lifted his\nhand to stab once more, but found his wrist caught, held\nandâoh, oh!âtwisted. He couldn't move, he was trapped,\nand there were PopÃ©'s small black eyes, very close,\nstaring into his own. He looked away. There were two\ncuts on PopÃ©'s left shoulder. \"Oh, look at the blood!\"\nLinda was crying. \"Look at the blood!\" She had never\nbeen able to bear the sight of blood. PopÃ© lifted his other\nhandâto strike him, he thought. He stiffened to receive the blow. But the hand only took him under the chin and\nturned his face, so that he had to look again into PopÃ©'s\neyes. For a long time, for hours and hours. And\nsuddenlyâhe couldn't help itâhe began to cry. PopÃ© burst\nout laughing. \"Go,\" he said, in the other Indian words.\n\"Go, my brave Ahaiyuta.\" He ran out into the other room\nto hide his tears.\n\"You are fifteen,\" said old Mitsima, in the Indian words.\n\"Now I may teach you to work the clay.\"\nSquatting by the river, they worked together.\n\"First of all,\" said Mitsima, taking a lump of the wetted\nclay between his hands, \"we make a little moon.\" The old\nman squeezed the lump into a disk, then bent up the\nedges, the moon became a shallow cup.\nSlowly and unskilfully he imitated the old man's delicate\ngestures.\n\"A moon, a cup, and now a snake.\" Mitsima rolled out\nanother piece of clay into a long flexible cylinder, trooped\nit into a circle and pressed it on to the rim of the cup.\n\"Then another snake. And another. And another.\" Round\nby round, Mitsima built up the sides of the pot; it was\nnarrow, it bulged, it narrowed again towards the neck.\nMitsima squeezed and patted, stroked and scraped; and\nthere at last it stood, in shape the famil
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: iar water pot of\nMalpais, but creamy white instead of black, and still soft\nto the touch. The crooked parody of Mitsima's, his own\nstood beside it. Looking at the two pots, he had to laugh.\n\"But the next one will be better,\" he said, and began to\nmoisten another piece of clay. To fashion, to give form, to feel his fingers gaining in skill\nand powerâthis gave him an extraordinary pleasure. \"A,\nB, C, Vitamin D,\" he sang to himself as he worked. \"The\nfat's in the liver, the cod's in the sea.\" And Mitsima also\nsangâa song about killing a bear. They worked all day,\nand all day he was filled with an intense, absorbing\nhappiness.\n\"Next winter,\" said old Mitsima, \"I will teach you to make\nthe bow.\"\nHe stood for a long time outside the house, and at last\nthe ceremonies within were finished. The door opened;\nthey came out. Kothlu came first, his right hand out-\nstretched and tightly closed, as though over some\nprecious jewel. Her clenched hand similarly outstretched,\nKiakimÃ© followed. They walked in silence, and in silence,\nbehind them, came the brothers and sisters and cousins\nand all the troop of old people.\nThey walked out of the pueblo, across the mesa. At the\nedge of the cliff they halted, facing the early morning\nsun. Kothlu opened his hand. A pinch of corn meal lay\nwhite on the palm; he breathed on it, murmured a few\nwords, then threw it, a handful of white dust, towards the\nsun. KiakimÃ© did the same. Then KhakimÃ©'s father\nstepped forward, and holding up a feathered prayer stick,\nmade a long prayer, then threw the stick after the corn\nmeal.\n\"It is finished,\" said old Mitsima in a loud voice. \"They are\nmarried.\"\n\"Well,\" said Linda, as they turned away, \"all I can say is,\nit does seem a lot of fuss to make about so little. In\ncivilized countries, when a boy wants to have a girl, he\njust ... But where are you going, John?\" He paid no attention to her calling, but ran on, away,\naway, anywhere to be by himself.\nIt is finished Old Mitsima's words repeated them
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: selves in\nhis mind. Finished, finished ... In silence and from a long\nway off, but violently, desperately, hopelessly, he had\nloved KiakimÃ©. And now it was finished. He was sixteen.\nAt the full moon, in the Antelope Kiva, secrets would be\ntold, secrets would be done and borne. They would go\ndown, boys, into the kiva and come out again, men. The\nboys were all afraid and at the same time impatient. And\nat last it was the day. The sun went down, the moon\nrose. He went with the others. Men were standing, dark,\nat the entrance to the kiva; the ladder went down into\nthe red lighted depths. Already the leading boys had\nbegun to climb down. Suddenly, one of the men stepped\nforward, caught him by the arm, and pulled him out of\nthe ranks. He broke free and dodged back into his place\namong the others. This time the man struck him, pulled\nhis hair. \"Not for you, white-hair!\" \"Not for the son of the\nshe-dog,\" said one of the other men. The boys laughed.\n\"Go!\" And as he still hovered on the fringes of the group,\n\"Go!\" the men shouted again. One of them bent down,\ntook a stone, threw it. \"Go, go, go!\" There was a shower\nof stones. Bleeding, he ran away into the darkness. From\nthe red-lit kiva came the noise of singing. The last of the\nboys had climbed down the ladder. He was all alone.\nAll alone, outside the pueblo, on the bare plain of the\nmesa. The rock was like bleached bones in the moonlight.\nDown in the valley, the coyotes were howling at the\nmoon. The bruises hurt him, the cuts were still bleeding;\nbut it was not for pain that he sobbed; it was because he\nwas all alone, because he had been driven out, alone,\ninto this skeleton world of rocks and moonlight. At the\nedge of the precipice he sat down. The moon was behind\nhim; he looked down into the black shadow of the mesa, into the black shadow of death. He had only to take one\nstep, one little jump. ... He held out his right hand in the\nmoonlight. From the cut on his wrist the blood was still\noozing. Every few seconds a drop fe
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ll, dark, almost\ncolourless in the dead light. Drop, drop, drop. To-morrow\nand to-morrow and to-morrow ...\nHe had discovered Time and Death and God.\n\"Alone, always alone,\" the young man was saying.\nThe words awoke a plaintive echo in Bernard's mind.\nAlone, alone ... \"So am I,\" he said, on a gush of\nconfidingness. \"Terribly alone.\"\n\"Are you?\" John looked surprised. \"I thought that in the\nOther Place ... I mean, Linda always said that nobody\nwas ever alone there.\"\nBernard blushed uncomfortably. \"You see,\" he said,\nmumbling and with averted eyes, \"I'm rather different\nfrom most people, I suppose. If one happens to be\ndecanted different ...\"\n\"Yes, that's just it.\" The young man nodded. \"If one's\ndifferent, one's bound to be lonely. They're beastly to\none. Do you know, they shut me out of absolutely\neverything? When the other boys were sent out to spend\nthe night on the mountainsâyou know, when you have to\ndream which your sacred animal isâthey wouldn't let me\ngo with the others; they wouldn't tell me any of the\nsecrets. I did it by myself, though,\" he added. \"Didn't eat\nanything for five days and then went out one night alone\ninto those mountains there.\" He pointed.\nPatronizingly, Bernard smiled. \"And did you dream of\nanything?\" he asked. The other nodded. \"But I mustn't tell you what.\" He was\nsilent for a little; then, in a low voice, \"Once,\" he went\non, \"I did something that none of the others did: I stood\nagainst a rock in the middle of the day, in summer, with\nmy arms out, like Jesus on the Cross.\"\n\"What on earth for?\"\n\"I wanted to know what it was like being crucified.\nHanging there in the sun ...\"\n\"But why?\"\n\"Why? Well ...\" He hesitated. \"Because I felt I ought to. If\nJesus could stand it. And then, if one has done something\nwrong ... Besides, I was unhappy; that was another\nreason.\"\n\"It seems a funny way of curing your unhappiness,\" said\nBernard. But on second thoughts he decided that there\nwas, after all, some sense in it. Be
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tter than taking soma\n...\n\"I fainted after a time,\" said the young man. \"Fell down\non my face. Do you see the mark where I cut myself?\" He\nlifted the thick yellow hair from his forehead. The scar\nshowed, pale and puckered, on his right temple.\nBernard looked, and then quickly, with a little shudder,\naverted his eyes. His conditioning had made him not so\nmuch pitiful as profoundly squeamish. The mere\nsuggestion of illness or wounds was to him not only\nhorrifying, but even repulsive and rather disgusting. Like\ndirt, or deformity, or old age. Hastily he changed the\nsubject.\n\"I wonder if you'd like to come back to London with us?\"\nhe asked, making the first move in a campaign whose\nstrategy he had been secretly elaborating ever since, in the little house, he had realized who the \"father\" of this\nyoung savage must be. \"Would you like that?\"\nThe young man's face lit up. \"Do you really mean it?\"\n\"Of course; if I can get permission, that is.\"\n\"Linda too?\"\n\"Well ...\" He hesitated doubtfully. That revolting creature!\nNo, it was impossible. Unless, unless ... It suddenly\noccurred to Bernard that her very revoltingness might\nprove an enormous asset. \"But of course!\" he cried,\nmaking up for his first hesitations with an excess of noisy\ncordiality.\nThe young man drew a deep breath. \"To think it should\nbe coming trueâwhat I've dreamt of all my life. Do you\nremember what Miranda says?\"\n\"Who's Miranda?\"\nBut the young man had evidently not heard the question.\n\"O wonder!\" he was saying; and his eyes shone, his face\nwas brightly flushed. \"How many goodly creatures are\nthere here! How beauteous mankind is!\" The flush\nsuddenly deepened; he was thinking of Lenina, of an\nangel in bottle-green viscose, lustrous with youth and\nskin food, plump, benevolently smiling. His voice faltered.\n\"O brave new world,\" he began, then-suddenly\ninterrupted himself; the blood had left his cheeks; he was\nas pale as paper.\n\"Are you married to her?\" he asked.\n\"Am I what?\"\n\"Marrie
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d. You knowâfor ever. They say 'for ever' in the\nIndian words; it can't be broken.\" \"Ford, no!\" Bernard couldn't help laughing.\nJohn also laughed, but for another reasonâlaughed for\npure joy.\n\"O brave new world,\" he repeated. \"O brave new world\nthat has such people in it. Let's start at once.\"\n\"You have a most peculiar way of talking sometimes,\"\nsaid Bernard, staring at the young man in perplexed\nastonishment. \"And, anyhow, hadn't you better wait till\nyou actually see the new world?\" Chapter Nine\nL ENINA\nfelt herself entitled, after this day of queerness\nand horror, to a complete and absolute holiday. As soon\nas they got back to the rest-house, she swallowed six\nhalf-gramme tablets of soma, lay down on her bed, and\nwithin ten minutes had embarked for lunar eternity. It\nwould be eighteen hours at the least before she was in\ntime again.\nBernard meanwhile lay pensive and wide-eyed in the\ndark. It was long after midnight before he fell asleep.\nLong after midnight; but his insomnia had not been\nfruitless; he had a plan.\nPunctually, on the following morning, at ten o'clock, the\ngreen-uniformed octoroon stepped out of his helicopter.\nBernard was waiting for him among the agaves.\n\"Miss Crowne's gone on soma-holiday,\" he explained.\n\"Can hardly be back before five. Which leaves us seven\nhours.\"\nHe could fly to Santa FÃ©, do all the business he had to do,\nand be in Malpais again long before she woke up.\n\"She'll be quite safe here by herself?\"\n\"Safe as helicopters,\" the octoroon assured him.\nThey climbed into the machine and started off at once. At\nten thirty-four they landed on the roof of the Santa FÃ©\nPost Office; at ten thirty-seven Bernard had got through\nto the World Controller's Office in Whitehall; at ten thirty-\nseven he was speaking to his fordship's fourth personal\nsecretary; at ten forty-four he was repeating his story to\nthe first secretary, and at ten forty-seven and a half it was the deep, resonant voice of Mustapha Mond himself\nthat sounded in his
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ears.\n\"I ventured to think,\" stammered Bernard, \"that your\nfordship might find the matter of sufficient scientific\ninterest ...\"\n\"Yes, I do find it of sufficient scientific interest,\" said the\ndeep voice. \"Bring these two individuals back to London\nwith you.\"\n\"Your fordship is aware that I shall need a special permit\n...\"\n\"The necessary orders,\" said Mustapha Mond, \"are being\nsent to the Warden of the Reservation at this moment.\nYou will proceed at once to the Warden's Office. Good-\nmorning, Mr. Marx.\"\nThere was silence. Bernard hung up the receiver and\nhurried up to the roof.\n\"Warden's Office,\" he said to the Gamma-green octoroon.\nAt ten fifty-four Bernard was shaking hands with the\nWarden.\n\"Delighted, Mr. Marx, delighted.\" His boom was\ndeferential. \"We have just received special orders ...\"\n\"I know,\" said Bernard, interrupting him. \"I was talking to\nhis fordship on the phone a moment ago.\" His bored tone\nimplied that he was in the habit of talking to his fordship\nevery day of the week. He dropped into a chair. \"If you'll\nkindly take all the necessary steps as soon as possible.\nAs soon as possible,\" he emphatically repeated. He was\nthoroughly enjoying himself. At eleven three he had all the necessary papers in his\npocket.\n\"So long,\" he said patronizingly to the Warden, who had\naccompanied him as far as the lift gates. \"So long.\"\nHe walked across to the hotel, had a bath, a vibro-vac\nmassage, and an electrolytic shave, listened in to the\nmorning's news, looked in for half an hour on the\ntelevisor, ate a leisured luncheon, and at half-past two\nflew back with the octoroon to Malpais.\nThe young man stood outside the rest-house.\n\"Bernard,\" he called. \"Bernard!\" There was no answer.\nNoiseless on his deerksin moccasins, he ran up the steps\nand tried the door. The door was locked.\nThey were gone! Gone! It was the most terrible thing that\nhad ever happened to him. She had asked him to come\nand see them, and now they were gone. He sat down on\nthe
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: steps and cried.\nHalf an hour later it occurred to him to look through the\nwindow. The first thing he saw was a green suit-case,\nwith the initials L.C. painted on the lid. Joy flared up like\nfire within him. He picked up a stone. The smashed glass\ntinkled on the floor. A moment later he was inside the\nroom. He opened the green suit-case; and all at once he\nwas breathing Lenina's perfume, filling his lungs with her\nessential being. His heart beat wildly; for a moment he\nwas almost faint. Then, bending over the precious box,\nhe touched, he lifted into the light, he examined. The\nzippers on Lenina's spare pair of viscose velveteen shorts\nwere at first a puzzle, then solved, a delight. Zip, and\nthen zip; zip, and then zip; he was enchanted. Her green\nslippers were the most beautiful things he had ever seen.\nHe unfolded a pair of zippicamiknicks, blushed, put them hastily away again; but kissed a perfumed acetate\nhandkerchief and wound a scarf round his neck. Opening\na box, he spilt a cloud of scented powder. His hands were\nfloury with the stuff. He wiped them on his chest, on his\nshoulders, on his bare arms. Delicious perfume! He shut\nhis eyes; he rubbed his cheek against his own powdered\narm. Touch of smooth skin against his face, scent in his\nnostrils of musky dustâher real presence. \"Lenina,\" he\nwhispered. \"Lenina!\"\nA noise made him start, made him guiltily turn. He\ncrammed up his thieveries into the suit-case and shut the\nlid; then listened again, looked. Not a sign of life, not a\nsound. And yet he had certainly heard somethingâ\nsomething like a sigh, something like the creak of a\nboard. He tiptoed to the door and, cautiously opening it,\nfound himself looking on to a broad landing. On the\nopposite side of the landing was another door, ajar. He\nstepped out, pushed, peeped.\nThere, on a low bed, the sheet flung back, dressed in a\npair of pink one-piece zippyjamas, lay Lenina, fast asleep\nand so beautiful in the midst of her curls, so touchingly\nchildish with her pink toes
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and her grave sleeping face,\nso trustful in the helplessness of her limp hands and\nmelted limbs, that the tears came to his eyes.\nWith an infinity of quite unnecessary precautionsâfor\nnothing short of a pistol shot could have called Lenina\nback from her soma-holiday before the appointed timeâ\nhe entered the room, he knelt on the floor beside the\nbed. He gazed, he clasped his hands, his lips moved. \"Her\neyes,\" he murmured,\n\"Her eyes, her hair, her cheek, her gait, her voice;\nHandlest in thy discourse O! that her hand,\nIn\nwhose\ncomparison\nall\nwhites\nare\nink Writing their own reproach; to whose soft seizure\nThe cygnet's down is harsh ...\"\nA fly buzzed round her; he waved it away. \"Flies,\" he\nremembered,\n\"On the white wonder of dear Juliet's hand, may seize\nAnd\nsteal\nimmortal\nblessing\nfrom\nher\nlips,\nWho,\neven\nin\npure\nand\nvestal\nmodesty,\nStill blush, as thinking their own kisses sin.\"\nVery slowly, with the hesitating gesture of one who\nreaches forward to stroke a shy and possibly rather\ndangerous bird, he put out his hand. It hung there\ntrembling, within an inch of those limp fingers, on the\nverge of contact. Did he dare? Dare to profane with his\nunworthiest hand that ... No, he didn't. The bird was too\ndangerous. His hand dropped back. How beautiful she\nwas! How beautiful!\nThen suddenly he found himself reflecting that he had\nonly to take hold of the zipper at her neck and give one\nlong, strong pull ... He shut his eyes, he shook his head\nwith the gesture of a dog shaking its ears as it emerges\nfrom the water. Detestable thought! He was ashamed of\nhimself. Pure and vestal modesty ...\nThere was a humming in the air. Another fly trying to\nsteal immortal blessings? A wasp? He looked, saw\nnothing. The humming grew louder and louder, localized\nitself as being outside the shuttered windows. The plane!\nIn a panic, he scrambled to his feet and ran into the\nother room, vaulted through the open window, and\nhurrying along the path between the tall agaves was i
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n\ntime to receive Bernard Marx as he climbed out of the\nhelicopter. Chapter Ten\nT HE\nHANDS of all the four thousand electric clocks in all\nthe Bloomsbury Centre's four thousand rooms marked\ntwenty-seven minutes past two. \"This hive of industry,\"\nas the Director was fond of calling it, was in the full buzz\nof work. Every one was busy, everything in ordered\nmotion. Under the microscopes, their long tails furiously\nlashing, spermatozoa were burrowing head first into\neggs; and, fertilized, the eggs were expanding, dividing,\nor if bokanovskified, budding and breaking up into whole\npopulations of separate embryos. From the Social\nPredestination Room the escalators went rumbling down\ninto the basement, and there, in the crimson darkness,\nstewingly warm on their cushion of peritoneum and\ngorged with blood-surrogate and hormones, the foetuses\ngrew and grew or, poisoned, languished into a stunted\nEpsilonhood. With a faint hum and rattle the moving\nracks crawled imperceptibly through the weeks and the\nrecapitulated aeons to where, in the Decanting Room, the\nnewly-unbottled babes uttered their first yell of horror\nand amazement.\nThe dynamos purred in the sub-basement, the lifts\nrushed up and down. On all the eleven floors of Nurseries\nit was feeding time. From eighteen hundred bottles\neighteen hundred carefully labelled infants were\nsimultaneously sucking down their pint of pasteurized\nexternal secretion.\nAbove them, in ten successive layers of dormitory, the\nlittle boys and girls who were still young enough to need\nan afternoon sleep were as busy as every one else,\nthough they did not know it, listening unconsciously to\nhypnopÃ¦dic lessons in hygiene and sociability, in class-\nconsciousness and the toddler's love-life. Above these\nagain were the playrooms where, the weather having turned to rain, nine hundred older children were amusing\nthemselves with bricks and clay modelling, hunt-the-\nzipper, and erotic play.\nBuzz, buzz! the hive was humming, busily, joyfully. Blithe\nwas the sin
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ging of the young girls over their test-tubes,\nthe Predestinators whistled as they worked, and in the\nDecanting Room what glorious jokes were cracked above\nthe empty bottles! But the Director's face, as he entered\nthe Fertilizing Room with Henry Foster, was grave,\nwooden with severity.\n\"A public example,\" he was saying. \"In this room,\nbecause it contains more high-caste workers than any\nother in the Centre. I have told him to meet me here at\nhalf-past two.\"\n\"He does his work very well,\" put in Henry, with\nhypocritical generosity.\n\"I know. But that's all the more reason for severity. His\nintellectual eminence carries with it corresponding moral\nresponsibilities. The greater a man's talents, the greater\nhis power to lead astray. It is better that one should\nsuffer than that many should be corrupted. Consider the\nmatter dispassionately, Mr. Foster, and you will see that\nno offence is so heinous as unorthodoxy of behaviour.\nMurder kills only the individualâand, after all, what is an\nindividual?\" With a sweeping gesture he indicated the\nrows of microscopes, the test-tubes, the incubators. \"We\ncan make a new one with the greatest easeâas many as\nwe like. Unorthodoxy threatens more than the life of a\nmere individual; it strikes at Society itself. Yes, at Society\nitself,\" he repeated. \"Ah, but here he comes.\"\nBernard had entered the room and was advancing\nbetween the rows of fertilizers towards them. A veneer of\njaunty self-confidence thinly concealed his nervousness. The voice in which he said, \"Good-morning, Director,\"\nwas absurdly too loud; that in which, correcting his\nmistake, he said, \"You asked me to come and speak to\nyou here,\" ridiculously soft, a squeak.\n\"Yes, Mr. Marx,\" said the Director portentously. \"I did ask\nyou to come to me here. You returned from your holiday\nlast night, I understand.\"\n\"Yes,\" Bernard answered.\n\"Yes-s,\" repeated the Director, lingering, a serpent, on\nthe \"s.\" Then, suddenly raising his voice, \"Ladies and\ngentlemen,\" he
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: trumpeted, \"ladies and gentlemen.\"\nThe singing of the girls over their test-tubes, the\npreoccupied whistling of the Microscopists, suddenly\nceased. There was a profound silence; every one looked\nround.\n\"Ladies and gentlemen,\" the Director repeated once\nmore, \"excuse me for thus interrupting your labours. A\npainful duty constrains me. The security and stability of\nSociety are in danger. Yes, in danger, ladies and\ngentlemen. This man,\" he pointed accusingly at Bernard,\n\"this man who stands before you here, this Alpha-Plus to\nwhom so much has been given, and from whom, in\nconsequence, so much must be expected, this colleague\nof yoursâor should I anticipate and say this ex-\ncolleague?âhas grossly betrayed the trust imposed in\nhim. By his heretical views on sport and soma, by the\nscandalous unorthodoxy of his sex-life, by his refusal to\nobey the teachings of Our Ford and behave out of office\nhours, 'even as a little infant,'\" (here the Director made\nthe sign of the T), \"he has proved himself an enemy of\nSociety, a subverter, ladies and gentlemen, of all Order\nand Stability, a conspirator against Civilization itself. For\nthis reason I propose to dismiss him, to dismiss him with ignominy from the post he has held in this Centre; I\npropose forthwith to apply for his transference to a\nSubcentre of the lowest order and, that his punishment\nmay serve the best interest of Society, as far as possible\nremoved from any important Centre of population. In\nIceland he will have small opportunity to lead others\nastray by his unfordly example.\" The Director paused;\nthen, folding his arms, he turned impressively to Bernard.\n\"Marx,\" he said, \"can you show any reason why I should\nnot now execute the judgment passed upon you?\"\n\"Yes, I can,\" Bernard answered in a very loud voice.\nSomewhat taken aback, but still majestically, \"Then show\nit,\" said the Director.\n\"Certainly. But it's in the passage. One moment.\" Bernard\nhurried to the door and threw it open. \"Come in,\" he\ncommand
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ed, and the reason came in and showed itself.\nThere was a gasp, a murmur of astonishment and horror;\na young girl screamed; standing on a chair to get a better\nview some one upset two test-tubes full of spermatozoa.\nBloated, sagging, and among those firm youthful bodies,\nthose undistorted faces, a strange and terrifying monster\nof middle-agedness, Linda advanced into the room,\ncoquettishly smiling her broken and discoloured smile,\nand rolling as she walked, with what was meant to be a\nvoluptuous undulation, her enormous haunches. Bernard\nwalked beside her.\n\"There he is,\" he said, pointing at the Director.\n\"Did you think I didn't recognize him?\" Linda asked\nindignantly; then, turning to the Director, \"Of course I\nknew you; Tomakin, I should have known you anywhere,\namong a thousand. But perhaps you've forgotten me.\nDon't you remember? Don't you remember, Tomakin?\nYour Linda.\" She stood looking at him, her head on one side, still smiling, but with a smile that became\nprogressively, in face of the Director's expression of\npetrified disgust, less and less self-confident, that\nwavered and finally went out. \"Don't you remember,\nTomakin?\" she repeated in a voice that trembled. Her\neyes were anxious, agonized. The blotched and sagging\nface twisted grotesquely into the grimace of extreme\ngrief. \"Tomakin!\" She held out her arms. Some one\nbegan to titter.\n\"What's the meaning,\" began the Director, \"of this\nmonstrous ...\"\n\"Tomakin!\" She ran forward, her blanket trailing behind\nher, threw her arms round his neck, hid her face on his\nchest.\nA howl of laughter went up irrepressibly.\n\"... this monstrous practical joke,\" the Director shouted.\nRed in the face, he tried to disengage himself from her\nembrace. Desperately she clung. \"But I'm Linda, I'm\nLinda.\"' The laughter drowned her voice. \"You made me\nhave a baby,\" she screamed above the uproar. There was\na sudden and appalling hush; eyes floated uncomfortably,\nnot knowing where to look. The Director went suddenly\npale,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: stopped struggling and stood, his hands on her\nwrists, staring down at her, horrified. \"Yes, a babyâand I\nwas its mother.\" She flung the obscenity like a challenge\ninto the outraged silence; then, suddenly breaking away\nfrom him, ashamed, ashamed, covered her face with her\nhands, sobbing. \"It wasn't my fault, Tomakin. Because I\nalways did my drill, didn't I? Didn't I? Always ... I don't\nknow how ... If you knew how awful, Tomakin ... But he\nwas a comfort to me, all the same.\" Turning towards the\ndoor, \"John!\" she called. \"John!\" He came in at once, paused for a moment just inside the\ndoor, looked round, then soft on his moccasined feet\nstrode quickly across the room, fell on his knees in front\nof the Director, and said in a clear voice: \"My father!\"\nThe word (for \"father\" was not so much obscene asâwith\nits connotation of something at one remove from the\nloathsomeness and moral obliquity of child-bearingâ\nmerely gross, a scatological rather than a pornographic\nimpropriety); the comically smutty word relieved what\nhad become a quite intolerable tension. Laughter broke\nout, enormous, almost hysterical, peal after peal, as\nthough it would never stop. My fatherâand it was the\nDirector! My father! Oh Ford, oh Ford! That was really too\ngood. The whooping and the roaring renewed\nthemselves, faces seemed on the point of disintegration,\ntears were streaming. Six more test-tubes of\nspermatozoa were upset. My father!\nPale, wild-eyed, the Director glared about him in an\nagony of bewildered humiliation.\nMy father! The laughter, which had shown signs of dying\naway, broke out again more loudly than ever. He put his\nhands over his ears and rushed out of the room. Chapter Eleven\nA FTER\nthe scene in the Fertilizing Room, all upper-caste\nLondon was wild to see this delicious creature who had\nfallen on his knees before the Director of Hatcheries and\nConditioningâor rather the ex-Director, for the poor man\nhad resigned immediately afterwards and never set foot\ninside the Cent
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: re againâhad flopped down and called him\n(the joke was almost too good to be true!) \"my father.\"\nLinda, on the contrary, cut no ice; nobody had the\nsmallest desire to see Linda. To say one was a motherâ\nthat was past a joke: it was an obscenity. Moreover, she\nwasn't a real savage, had been hatched out of a bottle\nand conditioned like any one else: so couldn't have really\nquaint ideas. Finallyâand this was by far the strongest\nreason for people's not wanting to see poor Lindaâthere\nwas her appearance. Fat; having lost her youth; with bad\nteeth, and a blotched complexion, and that figure\n(Ford!)âyou simply couldn't look at her without feeling\nsick, yes, positively sick. So the best people were quite\ndetermined not to see Linda. And Linda, for her part, had\nno desire to see them. The return to civilization was for\nher the return to soma, was the possibility of lying in bed\nand taking holiday after holiday, without ever having to\ncome back to a headache or a fit of vomiting, without\never being made to feel as you always felt after peyotl,\nas though you'd done something so shamefully anti-social\nthat you could never hold up your head again. Soma\nplayed none of these unpleasant tricks. The holiday it\ngave was perfect and, if the morning after was\ndisagreeable, it was so, not intrinsically, but only by\ncomparison with the joys of the holiday. The remedy was\nto make the holiday continuous. Greedily she clamoured\nfor ever larger, ever more frequent doses. Dr. Shaw at\nfirst demurred; then let her have what she wanted. She\ntook as much as twenty grammes a day. \"Which will finish her off in a month or two,\" the doctor\nconfided to Bernard. \"One day the respiratory centre will\nbe paralyzed. No more breathing. Finished. And a good\nthing too. If we could rejuvenate, of course it would be\ndifferent. But we can't.\"\nSurprisingly, as every one thought (for on soma-holiday\nLinda was most conveniently out of the way), John raised\nobjections.\n\"But aren't you shortening her life by gi
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ving her so\nmuch?\"\n\"In one sense, yes,\" Dr. Shaw admitted. \"But in another\nwe're actually lengthening it.\" The young man stared,\nuncomprehending. \"Soma may make you lose a few\nyears in time,\" the doctor went on. \"But think of the\nenormous, immeasurable durations it can give you out of\ntime. Every soma-holiday is a bit of what our ancestors\nused to call eternity.\"\nJohn began to understand. \"Eternity was in our lips and\neyes,\" he murmured.\n\"Eh?\"\n\"Nothing.\"\n\"Of course,\" Dr. Shaw went on, \"you can't allow people to\ngo popping off into eternity if they've got any serious\nwork to do. But as she hasn't got any serious work ...\"\n\"All the same,\" John persisted, \"I don't believe it's right.\"\nThe doctor shrugged his shoulders. \"Well, of course, if\nyou prefer to have her screaming mad all the time ...\"\nIn the end John was forced to give in. Linda got her\nsoma. Thenceforward she remained in her little room on the thirty-seventh floor of Bernard's apartment house, in\nbed, with the radio and television always on, and the\npatchouli tap just dripping, and the soma tablets within\nreach of her handâthere she remained; and yet wasn't\nthere at all, was all the time away, infinitely far away, on\nholiday; on holiday in some other world, where the music\nof the radio was a labyrinth of sonorous colours, a sliding,\npalpitating labyrinth, that led (by what beautifully\ninevitable windings) to a bright centre of absolute\nconviction; where the dancing images of the television\nbox were the performers in some indescribably delicious\nall-singing feely; where the dripping patchouli was more\nthan scentâwas the sun, was a million saxophones, was\nPopÃ© making love, only much more so, incomparably\nmore, and without end.\n\"No, we can't rejuvenate. But I'm very glad,\" Dr. Shaw\nhad concluded, \"to have had this opportunity to see an\nexample of senility in a human being. Thank you so much\nfor calling me in.\" He shook Bernard warmly by the hand.\nIt was John, then, they were all after. A
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nd as it was only\nthrough Bernard, his accredited guardian, that John could\nbe seen, Bernard now found himself, for the first time in\nhis life, treated not merely normally, but as a person of\noutstanding importance. There was no more talk of the\nalcohol in his blood-surrogate, no gibes at his personal\nappearance. Henry Foster went out of his way to be\nfriendly; Benito Hoover made him a present of six\npackets of sex-hormone chewing-gum; the Assistant\nPredestinator came out and cadged almost abjectly for an\ninvitation to one of Bernard's evening parties. As for the\nwomen, Bernard had only to hint at the possibility of an\ninvitation, and he could have whichever of them he liked.\n\"Bernard's asked me to meet the Savage\nWednesday,\" Fanny announced triumphantly.\nnext \"I'm so glad,\" said Lenina. \"And now you must admit that\nyou were wrong about Bernard. Don't you think he's\nreally rather sweet?\"\nFanny nodded. \"And I must say,\" she said, \"I was quite\nagreeably surprised.\"\nThe Chief Bottler, the Director of Predestination, three\nDeputy Assistant Fertilizer-Generals, the Professor of\nFeelies in the College of Emotional Engineering, the Dean\nof the Westminster Community Singery, the Supervisor of\nBokanovskificationâthe list of Bernard's notabilities was\ninterminable.\n\"And I had six girls last week,\" he confided to Helmholtz\nWatson. \"One on Monday, two on Tuesday, two more on\nFriday, and one on Saturday. And if I'd had the time or\nthe inclination, there were at least a dozen more who\nwere only too anxious ...\"\nHelmholtz listened to his boastings in a silence so\ngloomily disapproving that Bernard was offended.\n\"You're envious,\" he said.\nHelmholtz shook his head. \"I'm rather sad, that's all,\" he\nanswered.\nBernard went off in a huff. Never, he told himself, never\nwould he speak to Helmholtz again.\nThe days passed. Success went fizzily to Bernard's head,\nand in the process completely reconciled him (as any\ngood intoxicant should do) to a world which, up till then,\nhe ha
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d found very unsatisfactory. In so far as it\nrecognized him as important, the order of things was\ngood. But, reconciled by his success, he yet refused to\nforego the privilege of criticizing this order. For the act of\ncriticizing heightened his sense of importance, made him feel larger. Moreover, he did genuinely believe that there\nwere things to criticize. (At the same time, he genuinely\nliked being a success and having all the girls he wanted.)\nBefore those who now, for the sake of the Savage, paid\ntheir court to him, Bernard would parade a carping\nunorthodoxy. He was politely listened to. But behind his\nback people shook their heads. \"That young man will\ncome to a bad end,\" they said, prophesying the more\nconfidently in that they themselves would in due course\npersonally see to it that the end was bad. \"He won't find\nanother Savage to help him out a second time,\" they\nsaid. Meanwhile, however, there was the first Savage;\nthey were polite. And because they were polite, Bernard\nfelt positively giganticâgigantic and at the same time light\nwith elation, lighter than air.\n\"Lighter than air,\" said Bernard, pointing upwards.\nLike a pearl in the sky, high, high above them, the\nWeather Department's captive balloon shone rosily in the\nsunshine.\n\"... the said Savage,\" so ran Bernard's instructions, \"to\nbe shown civilized life in all its aspects. ...\"\nHe was being shown a bird's-eye view of it at present, a\nbird's-eye view from the platform of the Charing-T Tower.\nThe Station Master and the Resident Meteorologist were\nacting as guides. But it was Bernard who did most of the\ntalking. Intoxicated, he was behaving as though, at the\nvery least, he were a visiting World Controller. Lighter\nthan air.\nThe Bombay Green Rocket dropped out of the sky. The\npassengers alighted. Eight identical Dravidian twins in\nkhaki looked out of the eight portholes of the cabinâthe\nstewards. \"Twelve hundred and fifty kilometres an hour,\" said the\nStation Master impressively. \"What do you think of
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: that,\nMr. Savage?\"\nJohn thought it very nice. \"Still,\" he said, \"Ariel could put\na girdle round the earth in forty minutes.\"\n\"The Savage,\" wrote Bernard in his report to Mustapha\nMond, \"shows surprisingly little astonishment at, or awe\nof, civilized inventions. This is partly due, no doubt, to\nthe fact that he has heard them talked about by the\nwoman Linda, his mâââ.\"\n(Mustapha Mond frowned. \"Does the fool think I'm too\nsqueamish to see the word written out at full length?\")\n\"Partly on his interest being focussed on what he calls\n'the soul,' which he persists in regarding as an entity\nindependent of the physical environment, whereas, as I\ntried to point out to him ...\"\nThe Controller skipped the next sentences and was just\nabout to turn the page in search of something more\ninterestingly concrete, when his eye was caught by a\nseries of quite extraordinary phrases. \" ... though I must\nadmit,\" he read, \"that I agree with the Savage in finding\ncivilized infantility too easy or, as he puts it, not\nexpensive enough; and I would like to take this\nopportunity of drawing your fordship's attention to ...\"\nMustapha Mond's anger gave place almost at once to\nmirth. The idea of this creature solemnly lecturing himâ\nhim-about the social order was really too grotesque. The\nman must have gone mad. \"I ought to give him a\nlesson,\" he said to himself; then threw back his head and\nlaughed aloud. For the moment, at any rate, the lesson\nwould not be given. It was a small factory of lighting-sets for helicopters, a\nbranch of the Electrical Equipment Corporation. They\nwere met on the roof itself (for that circular letter of\nrecommendation from the Controller was magical in its\neffects) by the Chief Technician and the Human Element\nManager. They walked downstairs into the factory.\n\"Each process,\" explained the Human Element Manager,\n\"is carried out, so far as possible, by a single Bokanovsky\nGroup.\"\nAnd, in effect, eighty-three almost noseless black\nbrachycephalic Delt
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: as were cold-pressing. The fifty-six\nfour-spindle chucking and turning machines were being\nmanipulated by fifty-six aquiline and ginger Gammas.\nOne hundred and seven heat-conditioned Epsilon\nSenegalese were working in the foundry. Thirty-three\nDelta females, long-headed, sandy, with narrow pelvises,\nand all within 20 millimetres of 1 metre 69 centimetres\ntall, were cutting screws. In the assembling room, the\ndynamos were being put together by two sets of Gamma-\nPlus dwarfs. The two low work-tables faced one another;\nbetween them crawled the conveyor with its load of\nseparate parts; forty-seven blonde heads were\nconfronted by forty-seven brown ones. Forty-seven snubs\nby forty-seven hooks; forty-seven receding by forty-\nseven prognathous chins. The completed mechanisms\nwere inspected by eighteen identical curly auburn girls in\nGamma green, packed in crates by thirty-four short-\nlegged, left-handed male Delta-Minuses, and loaded into\nthe waiting trucks and lorries by sixty-three blue-eyed,\nflaxen and freckled Epsilon Semi-Morons.\n\"O brave new world ...\" By some malice of his memory\nthe Savage found himself repeating Miranda's words. \"O\nbrave new world that has such people in it.\" \"And I assure you,\" the Human Element Manager\nconcluded, as they left the factory, \"we hardly ever have\nany trouble with our workers. We always find ...\"\nBut the Savage had suddenly broken away from his\ncompanions and was violently retching, behind a clump of\nlaurels, as though the solid earth had been a helicopter in\nan air pocket.\n\"The Savage,\" wrote Bernard, \"refuses to take soma, and\nseems much distressed because of the woman Linda, his\nmâââ, remains permanently on holiday. It is worthy of\nnote that, in spite of his mâââ's senility and the extreme\nrepulsiveness of her appearance, the Savage frequently\ngoes to see her and appears to be much attached to herâ\nan interesting example of the way in which early\nconditioning can be made to modify and even run counter\nto natural impul
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ses (in this case, the impulse to recoil\nfrom an unpleasant object).\"\nAt Eton they alighted on the roof of Upper School. On the\nopposite side of School Yard, the fifty-two stories of\nLupton's Tower gleamed white in the sunshine. College\non their left and, on their right, the School Community\nSingery reared their venerable piles of ferro-concrete and\nvita-glass. In the centre of the quadrangle stood the\nquaint old chrome-steel statue of Our Ford.\nDr. Gaffney, the Provost, and Miss Keate, the Head\nMistress, received them as they stepped out of the plane.\n\"Do you have many twins here?\" the Savage asked rather\napprehensively, as they set out on their tour of\ninspection.\n\"Oh, no,\" the Provost answered. \"Eton is reserved\nexclusively for upper-caste boys and girls. One egg, one\nadult. It makes education more difficult of course. But as\nthey'll be called upon to take responsibilities and deal with unexpected emergencies, it can't be helped.\" He\nsighed.\nBernard, meanwhile, had taken a strong fancy to Miss\nKeate. \"If you're free any Monday, Wednesday, or Friday\nevening,\" he was saying. Jerking his thumb towards the\nSavage, \"He's curious, you know,\" Bernard added.\n\"Quaint.\"\nMiss Keate smiled (and her smile was really charming, he\nthought); said Thank you; would be delighted to come to\none of his parties. The Provost opened a door.\nFive minutes in that Alpha Double Plus classroom left\nJohn a trifle bewildered.\n\"What is elementary relativity?\" he whispered to Bernard.\nBernard tried to explain, then thought better of it and\nsuggested that they should go to some other classroom.\nFrom behind a door in the corridor leading to the Beta-\nMinus geography room, a ringing soprano voice called,\n\"One, two, three, four,\" and then, with a weary\nimpatience, \"As you were.\"\n\"Malthusian Drill,\" explained the Head Mistress. \"Most of\nour girls are freemartins, of course. I'm a freemartin\nmyself.\" She smiled at Bernard. \"But we have about eight\nhundred unsterilized ones who need cons
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tant drilling.\"\nIn the Beta-Minus geography room John learnt that \"a\nsavage reservation is a place which, owing to\nunfavourable climatic or geological conditions, or poverty\nof natural resources, has not been worth the expense of\ncivilizing.\" A click; the room was darkened; and suddenly,\non the screen above the Master's head, there were the\nPenitentes of Acoma prostrating themselves before Our\nLady, and wailing as John had heard them wail,\nconfessing their sins before Jesus on the Cross, before the eagle image of Pookong. The young Etonians fairly\nshouted with laughter. Still wailing, the Penitentes rose to\ntheir feet, stripped off their upper garments and, with\nknotted whips, began to beat themselves, blow after\nblow. Redoubled, the laughter drowned even the\namplified record of their groans.\n\"But why do they laugh?\" asked the Savage in a pained\nbewilderment.\n\"Why?\" The Provost turned towards him a still broadly\ngrinning face. \"Why? But because it's so extraordinarily\nfunny.\"\nIn the cinematographic twilight, Bernard risked a gesture\nwhich, in the past, even total darkness would hardly have\nemboldened him to make. Strong in his new importance,\nhe put his arm around the Head Mistress's waist. It\nyielded, willowily. He was just about to snatch a kiss or\ntwo and perhaps a gentle pinch, when the shutters\nclicked open again.\n\"Perhaps we had better go on,\" said Miss Keate, and\nmoved towards the door.\n\"And this,\" said the Provost\nHypnopÃ¦dic Control Room.\"\na\nmoment\nlater,\n\"is\nHundreds of synthetic music boxes, one for each\ndormitory, stood ranged in shelves round three sides of\nthe room; pigeon-holed on the fourth were the paper\nsound-track rolls on which the various hypnopÃ¦dic\nlessons were printed.\n\"You slip the roll in here,\" explained Bernard, interrupting\nDr. Gaffney, \"press down this switch ...\"\n\"No, that one,\" corrected the Provost, annoyed. \"That one, then. The roll unwinds. The selenium cells\ntransform the light impulses into sound waves, and ...\"
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \n\"And there you are,\" Dr. Gaffney concluded.\n\"Do they read Shakespeare?\" asked the Savage as they\nwalked, on their way to the Bio-chemical Laboratories,\npast the School Library.\n\"Certainly not,\" said the Head Mistress, blushing.\n\"Our library,\" said Dr. Gaffney, \"contains only books of\nreference. If our young people need distraction, they can\nget it at the feelies. We don't encourage them to indulge\nin any solitary amusements.\"\nFive bus-loads of boys and girls, singing or in a silent\nembracement, rolled past them over the vitrified\nhighway.\n\"Just returned,\" explained Dr. Gaffney, while Bernard,\nwhispering, made an appointment with the Head Mistress\nfor that very evening, \"from the Slough Crematorium.\nDeath conditioning begins at eighteen months. Every tot\nspends two mornings a week in a Hospital for the Dying.\nAll the best toys are kept there, and they get chocolate\ncream on death days. They learn to take dying as a\nmatter of course.\"\n\"Like any other physiological process,\" put in the Head\nMistress professionally.\nEight o'clock at the Savoy. It was all arranged.\nOn their way back to London they stopped at the\nTelevision Corporation's factory at Brentford.\n\"Do you mind waiting here a moment while I go and\ntelephone?\" asked Bernard. The Savage waited and watched. The Main Day-Shift was\njust going off duty. Crowds of lower-caste workers were\nqueued up in front of the monorail station-seven or eight\nhundred Gamma, Delta and Epsilon men and women,\nwith not more than a dozen faces and statures between\nthem. To each of them, with his or her ticket, the booking\nclerk pushed over a little cardboard pillbox. The long\ncaterpillar of men and women moved slowly forward.\n\"What's in those\" (remembering The Merchant of Venice)\n\"those caskets?\" the Savage enquired when Bernard had\nrejoined him.\n\"The day's soma ration,\" Bernard answered rather\nindistinctly; for he was masticating a piece of Benito\nHoover's chewing-gum. \"They get it after their work's\nover. Four half-
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: gramme tablets. Six on Saturdays.\"\nHe took John's arm affectionately and they walked back\ntowards the helicopter.\nLenina came singing into the Changing Room.\n\"You seem very pleased with yourself,\" said Fanny.\n\"I am pleased,\" she answered. Zip! \"Bernard rang up half\nan hour ago.\" Zip, zip! She stepped out of her shorts. \"He\nhas an unexpected engagement.\" Zip! \"Asked me if I'd\ntake the Savage to the feelies this evening. I must fly.\"\nShe hurried away towards the bathroom.\n\"She's a lucky girl,\" Fanny said to herself as she watched\nLenina go.\nThere was no envy in the comment; good-natured Fanny\nwas merely stating a fact. Lenina was lucky; lucky in\nhaving shared with Bernard a generous portion of the\nSavage's immense celebrity, lucky in reflecting from her\ninsignificant person the moment's supremely fashionable glory. Had not the Secretary of the Young Women's\nFordian Association asked her to give a lecture about her\nexperiences? Had she not been invited to the Annual\nDinner of the Aphroditeum Club? Had she not already\nappeared in the Feelytone Newsâvisibly, audibly and\ntactually appeared to countless millions all over the\nplanet?\nHardly less flattering had been the attentions paid her by\nconspicuous individuals. The Resident World Controller's\nSecond Secretary had asked her to dinner and breakfast.\nShe had spent one week-end with the Ford Chief-Justice,\nand another with the Arch-Community-Songster of\nCanterbury. The President of the Internal and External\nSecretions Corporation was perpetually on the phone,\nand she had been to Deauville with the Deputy-Governor\nof the Bank of Europe.\n\"It's wonderful, of course. And yet in a way,\" she had\nconfessed to Fanny, \"I feel as though I were getting\nsomething on false pretences. Because, of course, the\nfirst thing they all want to know is what it's like to make\nlove to a Savage. And I have to say I don't know.\" She\nshook her head. \"Most of the men don't believe me, of\ncourse. But it's true. I wish it weren't,\" she added
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sadly\nand sighed. \"He's terribly good-looking; don't you think\nso?\"\n\"But doesn't he like you?\" asked Fanny.\n\"Sometimes I think he does and sometimes I think he\ndoesn't. He always does his best to avoid me; goes out of\nthe room when I come in; won't touch me; won't even\nlook at me. But sometimes if I turn round suddenly, I\ncatch him staring; and thenâwell, you know how men\nlook when they like you.\"\nYes, Fanny knew. \"I can't make it out,\" said Lenina.\nShe couldn't make it out; and not only was bewildered;\nwas also rather upset.\n\"Because, you see, Fanny, I like him.\"\nLiked him more and more. Well, now there'd be a real\nchance, she thought, as she scented herself after her\nbath. Dab, dab, dabâa real chance. Her high spirits\noverflowed in a song.\n''Hug me till you drug me, honey;\nKiss me till I'm in a coma;\nHug me, honey, snuggly bunny;\nLove's as good as soma.\"\nThe scent organ was playing a delightfully refreshing\nHerbal Capriccioârippling arpeggios of thyme and\nlavender, of rosemary, basil, myrtle, tarragon; a series of\ndaring modulations through the spice keys into\nambergris; and a slow return through sandalwood,\ncamphor, cedar and newmown hay (with occasional\nsubtle touches of discordâa whiff of kidney pudding, the\nfaintest suspicion of pig's dung) back to the simple\naromatics with which the piece began. The final blast of\nthyme died away; there was a round of applause; the\nlights went up. In the synthetic music machine the\nsound-track roll began to unwind. It was a trio for hyper-\nviolin, super-cello and oboe-surrogate that now filled the\nair with its agreeable languor. Thirty or forty barsâand\nthen, against this instrumental background, a much more\nthan human voice began to warble; now throaty, now\nfrom the head, now hollow as a flute, now charged with\nyearning harmonics, it effortlessly passed from Gaspard's\nForster's low record on the very frontiers of musical tone to a trilled bat-note high above the highest C to which (in\n1770, at the Ducal opera
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of Parma, and to the\nastonishment of Mozart) Lucrezia Ajugari, alone of all the\nsingers in history, once piercingly gave utterance.\nSunk in their pneumatic stalls, Lenina and the Savage\nsniffed and listened. It was now the turn also for eyes\nand skin.\nThe house lights went down; fiery letters stood out solid\nand as though self-supported in the darkness. THREE\nWEEKS IN A HELICOPTER . AN ALL-SUPER-SINGING,\nSYNTHETIC-TALK1NG,\nCOLOURED,\nSTEREOSCOPIC\nFEELY.\nWITH\nSYNCHRONIZED\nSCENT-ORGAN\nACCOMPANIMENT.\n\"Take hold of those metal knobs on the arms of your\nchair,\" whispered Lenina. \"Otherwise you won't get any of\nthe feely effects.\"\nThe Savage did as he was told.\nThose fiery letters, meanwhile, had disappeared; there\nwere ten seconds of complete darkness; then suddenly,\ndazzling and incomparably more solid-looking than they\nwould have seemed in actual flesh and blood, far more\nreal than reality, there stood the stereoscopic images,\nlocked in one another's arms, of a gigantic negro and a\ngolden-haired young brachycephalic Beta-Plus female.\nThe Savage started. That sensation on his lips! He lifted a\nhand to his mouth; the titillation ceased; let his hand fall\nback on the metal knob; it began again. The scent organ,\nmeanwhile, breathed pure musk. Expiringly, a sound-\ntrack super-dove cooed \"Oo-ooh\"; and vibrating only\nthirty-two times a second, a deeper than African bass\nmade answer: \"Aa-aah.\" \"Ooh-ah! Ooh-ah!\" the\nstereoscopic lips came together again, and once more the\nfacial erogenous zones of the six thousand spectators in the Alhambra tingled with almost intolerable galvanic\npleasure. \"Ooh ...\"\nThe plot of the film was extremely simple. A few minutes\nafter the first Oohs and Aahs (a duet having been sung\nand a little love made on that famous bearskin, every\nhair of whichâthe Assistant Predestinator was perfectly\nrightâcould be separately and distinctly felt), the negro\nhad a helicopter accident, fell on his head. Thump! what\na twinge through the forehead! A cho
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rus of ow's and aie's\nwent up from the audience.\nThe concussion knocked all the negro's conditioning into\na cocked hat. He developed for the Beta blonde an\nexclusive and maniacal passion. She protested. He\npersisted. There were struggles, pursuits, an assault on a\nrival, finally a sensational kidnapping. The Beta blond was\nravished away into the sky and kept there, hovering, for\nthree weeks in a wildly anti-social tÃªte-Ã -tÃªte with the\nblack madman. Finally, after a whole series of adventures\nand much aerial acrobacy three handsome young Alphas\nsucceeded in rescuing her. The negro was packed off to\nan Adult Re-conditioning Centre and the film ended\nhappily and decorously, with the Beta blonde becoming\nthe mistress of all her three rescuers. They interrupted\nthemselves for a moment to sing a synthetic quartet,\nwith full super-orchestral accompaniment and gardenias\non the scent organ. Then the bearskin made a final\nappearance and, amid a blare of saxophones, the last\nstereoscopic kiss faded into darkness, the last electric\ntitillation died on the lips like a dying moth that quivers,\nquivers, ever more feebly, ever more faintly, and at last\nis quiet, quite still.\nBut for Lenina the moth did not completely die. Even\nafter the lights had gone up, while they were shuffling\nslowly along with the crowd towards the lifts, its ghost\nstill fluttered against her lips, still traced fine shuddering roads of anxiety and pleasure across her skin. Her cheeks\nwere flushed. She caught hold of the Savage's arm and\npressed it, limp, against her side. He looked down at her\nfor a moment, pale, pained, desiring, and ashamed of his\ndesire. He was not worthy, not ... Their eyes for a\nmoment met. What treasures hers promised! A queen's\nransom of temperament. Hastily he looked away,\ndisengaged his imprisoned arm. He was obscurely\nterrified lest she should cease to be something he could\nfeel himself unworthy of.\n\"I don't think you ought to see things like that,\" he said,\nmaking haste to transfer from
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Lenina herself to the\nsurrounding circumstances the blame for any past or\npossible future lapse from perfection.\n\"Things like what, John?\"\n\"Like this horrible film.\"\n\"Horrible?\" Lenina was genuinely astonished. \"But I\nthought it was lovely.\"\n\"It was base,\" he said indignantly, \"it was ignoble.\"\nShe shook her head. \"I don't know what you mean.\" Why\nwas he so queer? Why did he go out of his way to spoil\nthings?\nIn the taxicopter he hardly even looked at her. Bound by\nstrong vows that had never been pronounced, obedient\nto laws that had long since ceased to run, he sat averted\nand in silence. Sometimes, as though a finger had\nplucked at some taut, almost breaking string, his whole\nbody would shake with a sudden nervous start.\nThe taxicopter landed on the roof of Lenina's apartment\nhouse. \"At last,\" she thought exultantly as she stepped\nout of the cab. At lastâeven though he had been so queer just now. Standing under a lamp, she peered into her\nhand mirror. At last. Yes, her nose was a bit shiny. She\nshook the loose powder from her puff. While he was\npaying off the taxiâthere would just be time. She rubbed\nat the shininess, thinking: \"He's terribly good-looking. No\nneed for him to be shy like Bernard. And yet ... Any other\nman would have done it long ago. Well, now at last.\"\nThat fragment of a face in the little round mirror suddenly\nsmiled at her.\n\"Good-night,\" said a strangled voice behind her. Lenina\nwheeled round. He was standing in the doorway of the\ncab, his eyes fixed, staring; had evidently been staring all\nthis time while she was powdering her nose, waitingâbut\nwhat for? or hesitating, trying to make up his mind, and\nall the time thinking, thinkingâshe could not imagine\nwhat extraordinary thoughts. \"Good-night, Lenina,\" he\nrepeated, and made a strange grimacing attempt to\nsmile.\n\"But, John ... I thought you were ... I mean, aren't you?\n...\"\nHe shut the door and bent forward to say something to\nthe driver. The cab shot up into the air.\nL
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ooking down through the window in the floor, the\nSavage could see Lenina's upturned face, pale in the\nbluish light of the lamps. The mouth was open, she was\ncalling. Her foreshortened figure rushed away from him;\nthe diminishing square of the roof seemed to be falling\nthrough the darkness.\nFive minutes later he was back in his room. From its\nhiding-place he took out his mouse-nibbled volume,\nturned with religious care its stained and crumbled pages,\nand began to read Othello. Othello, he remembered, was\nlike the hero of Three Weeks in a Helicopterâa black man. Drying her eyes, Lenina walked across the roof to the lift.\nOn her way down to the twenty-seventh floor she pulled\nout her soma bottle. One gramme, she decided, would\nnot be enough; hers had been more than a one-gramme\naffliction. But if she took two grammes, she ran the risk\nof not waking up in time to-morrow morning. She\ncompromised and, into her cupped left palm, shook out\nthree half-gramme tablets. Chapter Twelve\nB ERNARD\nhad to shout through the locked door; the\nSavage would not open.\n\"But everybody's there, waiting for you.\"\n\"Let them wait,\" came back the muffled voice through the\ndoor.\n\"But you know quite well, John\" (how difficult it is to\nsound persuasive at the top of one's voice!) \"I asked\nthem on purpose to meet you.\"\n\"You ought to have asked me first whether I wanted to\nmeet them.\"\n\"But you always came before, John.\"\n\"That's precisely why I don't want to come again.\"\n\"Just to please me,\" Bernard bellowingly wheedled.\n\"Won't you come to please me?\"\n\"No.\"\n\"Do you seriously mean it?\"\n\"Yes.\"\nDespairingly, \"But what shall I do?\" Bernard wailed.\n\"Go to hell!\" bawled the exasperated voice from within.\n\"But the Arch-Community-Songster of Canterbury is\nthere to-night.\" Bernard was almost in tears.\n\"Ai yaa tÃ¡kwa!\" It was only in ZuÃ±i that the Savage could\nadequately express what he felt about the Arch- Community-Songster. \"HÃ¡ni!\" he added as an after-\nthought; and then (with
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: what derisive ferocity!): \"Sons\nÃ©so tse-nÃ¡.\" And he spat on the ground, as PopÃ© might\nhave done.\nIn the end Bernard had to slink back, diminished, to his\nrooms and inform the impatient assembly that the\nSavage would not be appearing that evening. The news\nwas received with indignation. The men were furious at\nhaving been tricked into behaving politely to this\ninsignificant fellow with the unsavoury reputation and the\nheretical opinions. The higher their position in the\nhierarchy, the deeper their resentment.\n\"To play such a joke on me,\" the Arch-Songster kept\nrepeating, \"on me!\"\nAs for the women, they indignantly felt that they had\nbeen had on false pretencesâhad by a wretched little man\nwho had had alcohol poured into his bottle by mistakeâby\na creature with a Gamma-Minus physique. It was an\noutrage, and they said so, more and more loudly. The\nHead Mistress of Eton was particularly scathing.\nLenina alone said nothing. Pale, her blue eyes clouded\nwith an unwonted melancholy, she sat in a corner, cut off\nfrom those who surrounded her by an emotion which\nthey did not share. She had come to the party filled with\na strange feeling of anxious exultation. \"In a few\nminutes,\" she had said to herself, as she entered the\nroom, \"I shall be seeing him, talking to him, telling him\"\n(for she had come with her mind made up) \"that I like\nhimâmore than anybody I've ever known. And then\nperhaps he'll say ...\"\nWhat would he say? The blood had rushed to her cheeks. \"Why was he so strange the other night, after the feelies?\nSo queer. And yet I'm absolutely sure he really does\nrather like me. I'm sure ...\"\nIt was at this moment that Bernard had made his\nannouncement; the Savage wasn't coming to the party.\nLenina suddenly felt all the sensations normally\nexperienced at the beginning of a Violent Passion\nSurrogate treatmentâa sense of dreadful emptiness, a\nbreathless apprehension, a nausea. Her heart seemed to\nstop beating.\n\"Perhaps it's because he doesn't like me,\" she
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: said to\nherself. And at once this possibility became an\nestablished certainty: John had refused to come because\nhe didn't like her. He didn't like her. ...\n\"It really is a bit too thick,\" the Head Mistress of Eton was\nsaying to the Director of Crematoria and Phosphorus\nReclamation. \"When I think that I actually ...\"\n\"Yes,\" came the voice of Fanny Crowne, \"it's absolutely\ntrue about the alcohol. Some one I know knew some one\nwho was working in the Embryo Store at the time. She\nsaid to my friend, and my friend said to me ...\"\n\"Too bad, too bad,\" said Henry Foster, sympathizing with\nthe Arch-Community-Songster. \"It may interest you to\nknow that our ex-Director was on the point of\ntransferring him to Iceland.\"\nPierced by every word that was spoken, the tight balloon\nof Bernard's happy self-confidence was leaking from a\nthousand wounds. Pale, distraught, abject and agitated,\nhe moved among his guests, stammering incoherent\napologies, assuring them that next time the Savage\nwould certainly be there, begging them to sit down and\ntake a carotene sandwich, a slice of vitamin A pÃ¢tÃ©, a glass of champagne-surrogate. They duly ate, but\nignored him; drank and were either rude to his face or\ntalked to one another about him, loudly and offensively,\nas though he had not been there.\n\"And now, my friends,\" said the Arch-Community-\nSongster of Canterbury, in that beautiful ringing voice\nwith which he led the proceedings at Ford's Day\nCelebrations, \"Now, my friends, I think perhaps the time\nhas come ...\" He rose, put down his glass, brushed from\nhis purple viscose waistcoat the crumbs of a considerable\ncollation, and walked towards the door.\nBernard darted forward to intercept him.\n\"Must you really, Arch-Songster? ... It's very early still.\nI'd hoped you would ...\"\nYes, what hadn't he hoped, when Lenina confidentially\ntold him that the Arch-Community-Songster would accept\nan invitation if it were sent. \"He's really rather sweet, you\nknow.\" And she had shown Bernard the lit
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tle golden\nzipper-fastening in the form of a T which the Arch-\nSongster had given her as a memento of the week-end\nshe had spent at Lambeth. To meet the Arch-Community-\nSongster of Canterbury and Mr. Savage. Bernard had\nproclaimed his triumph on every invitation card. But the\nSavage had chosen this evening of all evenings to lock\nhimself up in his room, to shout \"HÃ¡ni!\" and even (it was\nlucky that Bernard didn't understand ZuÃ±i) \"Sons Ã©so tse-\nnÃ¡!\" What should have been the crowning moment of\nBernard's whole career had turned out to be the moment\nof his greatest humiliation.\n\"I'd so much hoped ...\" he stammeringly repeated,\nlooking up at the great dignitary with pleading and\ndistracted eyes. \"My young friend,\" said the Arch-Community-Songster in\na tone of loud and solemn severity; there was a general\nsilence. \"Let me give you a word of advice.\" He wagged\nhis finger at Bernard. \"Before it's too late. A word of good\nadvice.\" (His voice became sepulchral.) \"Mend your ways,\nmy young friend, mend your ways.\" He made the sign of\nthe T over him and turned away. \"Lenina, my dear,\" he\ncalled in another tone. \"Come with me.\"\nObediently, but unsmiling and (wholly insensible of the\nhonour done to her) without elation, Lenina walked after\nhim, out of the room. The other guests followed at a\nrespectful interval. The last of them slammed the door.\nBernard was all alone.\nPunctured, utterly deflated, he dropped into a chair and,\ncovering his face with his hands, began to weep. A few\nminutes later, however, he thought better of it and took\nfour tablets of soma.\nUpstairs in his room the Savage was reading Romeo and\nJuliet.\nLenina and the Arch-Community-Songster stepped out on\nto the roof of Lambeth Palace. \"Hurry up, my young\nfriendâI mean, Lenina,\" called the Arch-Songster\nimpatiently from the lift gates. Lenina, who had lingered\nfor a moment to look at the moon, dropped her eyes and\ncame hurrying across the roof to rejoin him.\n\"A New Theory of Biology\" was the tit
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: le of the paper\nwhich Mustapha Mond had just finished reading. He sat\nfor some time, meditatively frowning, then picked up his\npen and wrote across the title-page: \"The author's\nmathematical treatment of the conception of purpose is\nnovel and highly ingenious, but heretical and, so far as\nthe present social order is concerned, dangerous and\npotentially subversive. Not to be published.\" He underlined the words. \"The author will be kept under\nsupervision. His transference to the Marine Biological\nStation of St. Helena may become necessary.\" A pity, he\nthought, as he signed his name. It was a masterly piece\nof work. But once you began admitting explanations in\nterms of purposeâwell, you didn't know what the result\nmight be. It was the sort of idea that might easily\ndecondition the more unsettled minds among the higher\ncastesâmake them lose their faith in happiness as the\nSovereign Good and take to believing, instead, that the\ngoal was somewhere beyond, somewhere outside the\npresent human sphere, that the purpose of life was not\nthe maintenance of well-being, but some intensification\nand refining of consciousness, some enlargement of\nknowledge. Which was, the Controller reflected, quite\npossibly true. But not, in the present circumstance,\nadmissible. He picked up his pen again, and under the\nwords \"Not to be published\" drew a second line, thicker\nand blacker than the first; then sighed, \"What fun it\nwould be,\" he thought, \"if one didn't have to think about\nhappiness!\"\nWith closed eyes, his face shining with rapture, John was\nsoftly declaiming to vacancy:\n\"Oh! she doth teach the torches to burn bright.\nIt seems she hangs upon the cheek of night,\nLike a rich jewel in an Ethiop's ear;\nBeauty too rich for use, for earth too dear ...\"\nThe golden T lay shining on Lenina's bosom. Sportively,\nthe Arch-Community-Songster caught hold of it,\nsportively he pulled, pulled. \"I think,\" said Lenina\nsuddenly, breaking a long silence, \"I'd better take a\ncouple of grammes of soma
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: .\" Bernard, by this time, was fast asleep and smiling at the\nprivate paradise of his dreams. Smiling, smiling. But\ninexorably, every thirty seconds, the minute hand of the\nelectric clock above his bed jumped forward with an\nalmost imperceptible click. Click, click, click, click ... And\nit was morning. Bernard was back among the miseries of\nspace and time. It was in the lowest spirits that he taxied\nacross to his work at the Conditioning Centre. The\nintoxication of success had evaporated; he was soberly\nhis old self; and by contrast with the temporary balloon\nof these last weeks, the old self seemed unprecedentedly\nheavier than the surrounding atmosphere.\nTo this deflated Bernard the Savage showed himself\nunexpectedly sympathetic.\n\"You're more like what you were at Malpais,\" he said,\nwhen Bernard had told him his plaintive story. \"Do you\nremember when we first talked together? Outside the\nlittle house. You're like what you were then.\"\n\"Because I'm unhappy again; that's why.\"\n\"Well, I'd rather be unhappy than have the sort of false,\nlying happiness you were having here.\"\n\"I like that,\" said Bernard bitterly. \"When it's you who\nwere the cause of it all. Refusing to come to my party\nand so turning them all against me!\" He knew that what\nhe was saying was absurd in its injustice; he admitted\ninwardly, and at last even aloud, the truth of all that the\nSavage now said about the worthlessness of friends who\ncould be turned upon so slight a provocation into\npersecuting enemies. But in spite of this knowledge and\nthese admissions, in spite of the fact that his friend's\nsupport and sympathy were now his only comfort,\nBernard continued perversely to nourish, along with his\nquite genuine affection, a secret grievance against the Savage, to mediate a campaign of small revenges to be\nwreaked upon him. Nourishing a grievance against the\nArch-Community-Songster was useless; there was no\npossibility of being revenged on the Chief Bottler or the\nAssistant Predestinator. As a victim,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the Savage\npossessed, for Bernard, this enormous superiority over\nthe others: that he was accessible. One of the principal\nfunctions of a friend is to suffer (in a milder and symbolic\nform) the punishments that we should like, but are\nunable, to inflict upon our enemies.\nBernard's other victim-friend was Helmholtz. When,\ndiscomfited, he came and asked once more for the\nfriendship which, in his prosperity, he had not thought it\nworth his while to preserve. Helmholtz gave it; and gave\nit without a reproach, without a comment, as though he\nhad forgotten that there had ever been a quarrel.\nTouched, Bernard felt himself at the same time\nhumiliated by this magnanimityâa magnanimity the more\nextraordinary and therefore the more humiliating in that\nit owed nothing to soma and everything to Helmholtz's\ncharacter. It was the Helmholtz of daily life who forgot\nand forgave, not the Helmholtz of a half-gramme holiday.\nBernard was duly grateful (it was an enormous comfort to\nhave his friend again) and also duly resentful (it would be\npleasure to take some revenge on Helmholtz for his\ngenerosity).\nAt their first meeting after the estrangement, Bernard\npoured out the tale of his miseries and accepted\nconsolation. It was not till some days later that he\nlearned, to his surprise and with a twinge of shame, that\nhe was not the only one who had been in trouble.\nHelmholtz had also come into conflict with Authority.\n\"It was over some rhymes,\" he explained. \"I was giving\nmy usual course of Advanced Emotional Engineering for\nThird Year Students. Twelve lectures, of which the seventh is about rhymes. 'On the Use of Rhymes in Moral\nPropaganda and Advertisement,' to be precise. I always\nillustrate my lecture with a lot of technical examples. This\ntime I thought I'd give them one I'd just written myself.\nPure madness, of course; but I couldn't resist it.\" He\nlaughed. \"I was curious to see what their reactions would\nbe. Besides,\" he added more gravely, \"I wanted to do a\nbit of propaganda; I was t
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rying to engineer them into\nfeeling as I'd felt when I wrote the rhymes. Ford!\" He\nlaughed again. \"What an outcry there was! The Principal\nhad me up and threatened to hand me the immediate\nsack. l'm a marked man.\"\n\"But what were your rhymes?\" Bernard asked.\n\"They were about being alone.\"\nBernard's eyebrows went up.\n\"I'll recite them to you, if you like.\" And Helmholtz\nbegan:\n\"Yesterday's committee,\nSticks, but a broken drum,\nMidnight in the City,\nFlutes in a vacuum,\nShut lips, sleeping faces,\nEvery stopped machine,\nThe dumb and littered places\nWhere crowds have been: ...\nAll silences rejoice, Weep (loudly or low),\nSpeakâbut with the voice\nOf whom, I do not know.\nAbsence, say, of Susan's,\nAbsence of Egeria's\nArms and respective bosoms,\nLips and, ah, posteriors,\nSlowly form a presence;\nWhose? and, I ask, of what\nSo absurd an essence,\nThat something, which is not,\nNevertheless should populate\nEmpty night more solidly\nThan that with which we copulate,\nWhy should it seem so squalidly?\nWell, I gave them that as an example, and they reported\nme to the Principal.\"\n\"I'm not surprised,\" said Bernard. \"It's flatly against all\ntheir sleep-teaching. Remember, they've had at least a\nquarter of a million warnings against solitude.\"\n\"I know. But I thought I'd like to see what the effect\nwould be.\"\n\"Well, you've seen now.\" Helmholtz only laughed. \"I feel,\" he said, after a silence,\nas though I were just beginning to have something to\nwrite about. As though I were beginning to be able to use\nthat power I feel I've got inside meâthat extra, latent\npower. Something seems to be coming to me.\" In spite of\nall his troubles, he seemed, Bernard thought, profoundly\nhappy.\nHelmholtz and the Savage took to one another at once.\nSo cordially indeed that Bernard felt a sharp pang of\njealousy. In all these weeks he had never come to so\nclose an intimacy with the Savage as Helmholtz\nimmediately achieved. Watching them, listening to their\ntalk, he found himself sometime
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s resentfully wishing that\nhe had never brought them together. He was ashamed of\nhis jealousy and alternately made efforts of will and took\nsoma to keep himself from feeling it. But the efforts were\nnot very successful; and between the soma-holidays\nthere were, of necessity, intervals. The odious sentiment\nkept on returning.\nAt his third meeting with the Savage, Helmholtz recited\nhis rhymes on Solitude.\n\"What do you think of them?\" he asked when he had\ndone.\nThe Savage shook his head. \"Listen to this,\" was his\nanswer; and unlocking the drawer in which he kept his\nmouse-eaten book, he opened and read:\n\"Let the bird of loudest lay\nOn the sole Arabian tree,\nHerald sad and trumpet be ...\"\nHelmholtz listened with a growing excitement. At \"sole\nArabian tree\" he started; at \"thou shrieking harbinger\" he smiled with sudden pleasure; at \"every fowl of tyrant\nwing\" the blood rushed up into his cheeks; but at\n\"defunctive music\" he turned pale and trembled with an\nunprecedented emotion. The Savage read on:\n\"Property was thus appall'd,\nThat the self was not the same;\nSingle nature's double name\nNeither two nor one was call'd\nReason in itself confounded\nSaw division grow together ...\"\n\"Orgy-porgy!\" said Bernard, interrupting the reading with\na loud, unpleasant laugh. \"It's just a Solidarity Service\nhymn.\" He was revenging himself on his two friends for\nliking one another more than they liked him.\nIn the course of their next two or three meetings he\nfrequently repeated this little act of vengeance. It was\nsimple and, since both Helmholtz and the Savage were\ndreadfully pained by the shattering and defilement of a\nfavourite poetic crystal, extremely effective. In the end,\nHelmholtz threatened to kick him out of the room if he\ndared to interrupt again. And yet, strangely enough, the\nnext interruption, the most disgraceful of all, came from\nHelmholtz himself.\nThe Savage was reading Romeo and Juliet aloudâreading\n(for all the time he was seeing himself as Romeo and\nLen
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ina as Juliet) with an intense and quivering passion.\nHelmholtz had listened to the scene of the lovers' first\nmeeting with a puzzled interest. The scene in the orchard\nhad delighted him with its poetry; but the sentiments\nexpressed had made him smile. Getting into such a state about having a girlâit seemed rather ridiculous. But,\ntaken detail by verbal detail, what a superb piece of\nemotional engineering! \"That old fellow,\" he said, \"he\nmakes our best propaganda technicians look absolutely\nsilly.\" The Savage smiled triumphantly and resumed his\nreading. All went tolerably well until, in the last scene of\nthe third act, Capulet and Lady Capulet began to bully\nJuliet to marry Paris. Helmholtz had been restless\nthroughout the entire scene; but when, pathetically\nmimed by the Savage, Juliet cried out:\n\"Is there no pity sitting in the clouds,\nThat sees into the bottom of my grief?\nO sweet my mother, cast me not away:\nDelay this marriage for a month, a week;\nOr, if you do not, make the bridal bed\nIn that dim monument where Tybalt lies ...\"\nwhen Juliet said this, Helmholtz broke out in an explosion\nof uncontrollable guffawing.\nThe mother and father (grotesque obscenity) forcing the\ndaughter to have some one she didn't want! And the\nidiotic girl not saying that she was having some one else\nwhom (for the moment, at any rate) she preferred! In its\nsmutty absurdity the situation was irresistibly comical. He\nhad managed, with a heroic effort, to hold down the\nmounting pressure of his hilarity; but \"sweet mother\" (in\nthe Savage's tremulous tone of anguish) and the\nreference to Tybalt lying dead, but evidently uncremated\nand wasting his phosphorus on a dim monument, were\ntoo much for him. He laughed and laughed till the tears\nstreamed down his faceâquenchlessly laughed while, pale\nwith a sense of outrage, the Savage looked at him over the top of his book and then, as the laughter still\ncontinued, closed it indignantly, got up and, with the\ngesture of one who removes his pearl fro
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: m before swine,\nlocked it away in its drawer.\n\"And yet,\" said Helmholtz when, having recovered breath\nenough to apologize, he had mollified the Savage into\nlistening to his explanations, \"I know quite well that one\nneeds ridiculous, mad situations like that; one can't write\nreally well about anything else. Why was that old fellow\nsuch a marvellous propaganda technician? Because he\nhad so many insane, excruciating things to get excited\nabout. You've got to be hurt and upset; otherwise you\ncan't think of the really good, penetrating, X-rayish\nphrases. But fathers and mothers!\" He shook his head.\n\"You can't expect me to keep a straight face about\nfathers and mothers. And who's going to get excited\nabout a boy having a girl or not having her?\" (The\nSavage winced; but Helmholtz, who was staring pensively\nat the floor, saw nothing.) \"No.\" he concluded, with a\nsigh, \"it won't do. We need some other kind of madness\nand violence. But what? What? Where can one find it?\"\nHe was silent; then, shaking his head, \"I don't know,\" he\nsaid at last, \"I don't know.\" Chapter Thirteen\nH ENRY\nFOSTER loomed up through the twilight of the\nEmbryo Store.\n\"Like to come to a feely this evening?\"\nLenina shook her head without speaking.\n\"Going out with some one else?\" It interested him to\nknow which of his friends was being had by which other.\n\"Is it Benito?\" he questioned.\nShe shook her head again.\nHenry detected the weariness in those purple eyes, the\npallor beneath that glaze of lupus, the sadness at the\ncorners of the unsmiling crimson mouth. \"You're not\nfeeling ill, are you?\" he asked, a trifle anxiously, afraid\nthat she might be suffering from one of the few\nremaining infectious diseases.\nYet once more Lenina shook her head.\n\"Anyhow, you ought to go and see the doctor,\" said\nHenry. \"A doctor a day keeps the jim-jams away,\" he\nadded heartily, driving home his hypnopÃ¦dic adage with\na clap on the shoulder. \"Perhaps you need a Pregnancy\nSubstitute,\" he suggested. \"Or else
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: an extra-strong\nV.P.S. treatment. Sometimes, you know, the standard\npassion surrogate isn't quite ...\"\n\"Oh, for Ford's sake,\" said Lenina, breaking her stubborn\nsilence, \"shut up!\" And she turned back to her neglected\nembryos.\nA V.P.S. treatment indeed! She would have laughed, if\nshe hadn't been on the point of crying. As though she hadn't got enough V. P. of her own! She sighed\nprofoundly as she refilled her syringe. \"John,\" she\nmurmured to herself, \"John ...\" Then \"My Ford,\" she\nwondered, \"have I given this one its sleeping sickness\ninjection, or haven't I?\" She simply couldn't remember.\nIn the end, she decided not to run the risk of letting it\nhave a second dose, and moved down the line to the next\nbottle.\nTwenty-two years, eight months, and four days from that\nmoment, a promising young Alpha-Minus administrator at\nMwanza-Mwanza was to die of trypanosomiasisâthe first\ncase for over half a century. Sighing, Lenina went on with\nher work.\nAn hour later, in the Changing Room, Fanny was\nenergetically protesting. \"But it's absurd to let yourself\nget into a state like this. Simply absurd,\" she repeated.\n\"And what about? A manâone man.\"\n\"But he's the one I want.\"\n\"As though there weren't millions of other men in the\nworld.\"\n\"But I don't want them.\"\n\"How can you know till you've tried?\"\n\"I have tried.\"\n\"But how many?\" asked Fanny, shrugging her shoulders\ncontemptuously. \"One, two?\"\n\"Dozens. But,\" shaking her head, \"it wasn't any good,\"\nshe added.\n\"Well, you must persevere,\" said Fanny sententiously.\nBut it was obvious that her confidence in her own prescriptions had been shaken. \"Nothing can be achieved\nwithout perseverance.\"\n\"But meanwhile ...\"\n\"Don't think of him.\"\n\"I can't help it.\"\n\"Take soma, then.\"\n\"I do.\"\n\"Well, go on.\"\n\"But in the intervals I still like him. I shall always like\nhim.\"\n\"Well, if that's the case,\" said Fanny, with decision, \"why\ndon't you just go and take him. Whether he wants it or\nno.\"\n\
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: "But if you knew how terribly queer he was!\"\n\"All the more reason for taking a firm line.\"\n\"It's all very well to say that.\"\n\"Don't stand any nonsense. Act.\" Fanny's voice was a\ntrumpet; she might have been a Y.W.F.A. lecturer giving\nan evening talk to adolescent Beta-Minuses. \"Yes, actâat\nonce. Do it now.\"\n\"I'd be scared,\" said Lenina\n\"Well, you've only got to take half a gramme of soma\nfirst. And now I'm going to have my bath.\" She marched\noff, trailing her towel. The bell rang, and the Savage, who was impatiently\nhoping that Helmholtz would come that afternoon (for\nhaving at last made up his mind to talk to Helmholtz\nabout Lenina, he could not bear to postpone his\nconfidences a moment longer), jumped up and ran to the\ndoor.\n\"I had a premonition it was you, Helmholtz,\" he shouted\nas he opened.\nOn the threshold, in a white acetate-satin sailor suit, and\nwith a round white cap rakishly tilted over her left ear,\nstood Lenina.\n\"Oh!\" said the Savage, as though some one had struck\nhim a heavy blow.\nHalf a gramme had been enough to make Lenina forget\nher fears and her embarrassments. \"Hullo, John,\" she\nsaid, smiling, and walked past him into the room.\nAutomatically he closed the door and followed her. Lenina\nsat down. There was a long silence.\n\"You don't seem very glad to see me, John,\" she said at\nlast.\n\"Not glad?\" The Savage looked at her reproachfully; then\nsuddenly fell on his knees before her and, taking Lenina's\nhand, reverently kissed it. \"Not glad? Oh, if you only\nknew,\" he whispered and, venturing to raise his eyes to\nher face, \"Admired Lenina,\" he went on, \"indeed the top\nof admiration, worth what's dearest in the world.\" She\nsmiled at him with a luscious tenderness. \"Oh, you so\nperfect\" (she was leaning towards him with parted lips),\n\"so perfect and so peerless are created\" (nearer and\nnearer) \"of every creature's best.\" Still nearer. The\nSavage suddenly scrambled to his feet. \"That's why,\" he\nsaid speaking with averted face, \"
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: I wanted to do\nsomething first ... I mean, to show I was worthy of you. Not that I could ever really be that. But at any rate to\nshow I wasn't absolutely un-worthy. I wanted to do\nsomething.\"\n\"Why should you think it necessary ...\" Lenina began, but\nleft the sentence unfinished. There was a note of\nirritation in her voice. When one has leant forward,\nnearer and nearer, with parted lipsâonly to find oneself,\nquite suddenly, as a clumsy oaf scrambles to his feet,\nleaning towards nothing at allâwell, there is a reason,\neven with half a gramme of soma circulating in one's\nblood-stream, a genuine reason for annoyance.\n\"At Malpais,\" the Savage was incoherently mumbling,\n\"you had to bring her the skin of a mountain lionâI mean,\nwhen you wanted to marry some one. Or else a wolf.\"\n\"There aren't any lions in England,\" Lenina almost\nsnapped.\n\"And even if there were,\" the Savage added, with sudden\ncontemptuous resentment, \"people would kill them out of\nhelicopters, I suppose, with poison gas or something. I\nwouldn't do that, Lenina.\" He squared his shoulders, he\nventured to look at her and was met with a stare of\nannoyed incomprehension. Confused, \"I'll do anything,\"\nhe went on, more and more incoherently. \"Anything you\ntell me. There be some sports are painfulâyou know. But\ntheir labour delight in them sets off. That's what I feel. I\nmean I'd sweep the floor if you wanted.\"\n\"But we've got vacuum cleaners here,\" said Lenina in\nbewilderment. \"It isn't necessary.\"\n\"No, of course it isn't necessary. But some kinds of\nbaseness are nobly undergone. I'd like to undergo\nsomething nobly. Don't you see?\"\n\"But if there are vacuum cleaners ...\" \"That's not the point.\"\n\"And Epsilon Semi-Morons to work them,\" she went on,\n\"well, really, why?\"\n\"Why? But for you, for you. Just to show that I ...\"\n\"And what on earth vacuum cleaners have got to do with\nlions ...\"\n\"To show how much ...\"\n\"Or lions with being glad to see me ...\" She was getting\nmore and more
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: exasperated.\n\"How much I love you, Lenina,\" he brought out almost\ndesperately.\nAn emblem of the inner tide of startled elation, the blood\nrushed up into Lenina's cheeks. \"Do you mean it, John?\"\n\"But I hadn't meant to say so,\" cried the Savage, clasping\nhis hands in a kind of agony. \"Not until ... Listen, Lenina;\nin Malpais people get married.\"\n\"Get what?\" The irritation had begun to creep back into\nher voice. What was he talking about now?\n\"For always. They make a promise to live together for\nalways.\"\n\"What a horrible idea!\" Lenina was genuinely shocked.\n\"Outliving beauty's outward with a mind that cloth renew\nswifter than blood decays.\"\n\"What?\" \"It's like that in Shakespeare too. 'If thou cost break her\nvirgin knot before all sanctimonious ceremonies may with\nfull and holy rite ...'\"\n\"For Ford's sake, John, talk sense. I can't understand a\nword you say. First it's vacuum cleaners; then it's knots.\nYou're driving me crazy.\" She jumped up and, as though\nafraid that he might run away from her physically, as well\nas with his mind, caught him by the wrist. \"Answer me\nthis question: do you really like me, or don't you?\"\nThere was a moment's silence; then, in a very low voice,\n\"I love you more than anything in the world,\" he said.\n\"Then why on earth didn't you say so?\" she cried, and so\nintense was her exasperation that she drove her sharp\nnails into the skin of his wrist. \"Instead of drivelling away\nabout knots and vacuum cleaners and lions, and making\nme miserable for weeks and weeks.\"\nShe released his hand and flung it angrily away from her.\n\"If I didn't like you so much,\" she said, \"I'd be furious\nwith you.\"\nAnd suddenly her arms were round his neck; he felt her\nlips soft against his own. So deliciously soft, so warm and\nelectric that inevitably he found himself thinking of the\nembraces in Three Weeks in a Helicopter. Ooh! ooh! the\nstereoscopic blonde and anh! the more than real\nblackamoor. Horror, horror, horror ... he fired to\ndisengage him
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: self; but Lenina tightened her embrace.\n\"Why didn't you say so?\" she whispered, drawing back\nher face to look at him. Her eyes were tenderly\nreproachful.\n\"The murkiest den, the most opportune place\" (the voice\nof conscience thundered poetically), \"the strongest suggestion our worser genius can, shall never melt mine\nhonour into lust. Never, never!\" he resolved.\n\"You silly boy!\" she was saying. \"I wanted you so much.\nAnd if you wanted me too, why didn't you? ...\"\n\"But, Lenina ...\" he began protesting; and as she\nimmediately untwined her arms, as she stepped away\nfrom him, he thought, for a moment, that she had taken\nhis unspoken hint. But when she unbuckled her white\npatent cartridge belt and hung it carefully over the back\nof a chair, he began to suspect that he had been\nmistaken.\n\"Lenina!\" he repeated apprehensively.\nShe put her hand to her neck and gave a long vertical\npull; her white sailor's blouse was ripped to the hem;\nsuspicion condensed into a too, too solid certainty.\n\"Lenina, what are you doing?\"\nZip, zip! Her answer was wordless. She stepped out of\nher bell-bottomed trousers. Her zippicamiknicks were a\npale shell pink. The Arch-Community-Songster's golden T\ndangled at her breast.\n\"For those milk paps that through the window bars bore\nat men's eyes....\" The singing, thundering, magical words\nmade her seem doubly dangerous, doubly alluring. Soft,\nsoft, but how piercing! boring and drilling into reason,\ntunnelling through resolution. \"The strongest oaths are\nstraw to the fire i' the blood. Be more abstemious, or else\n...\"\nZip! The rounded pinkness fell apart like a neatly divided\napple. A wriggle of the arms, a lifting first of the right\nfoot, then the left: the zippicamiknicks were lying lifeless\nand as though deflated on the floor. Still wearing her shoes and socks, and her rakishly tilted\nround white cap, she advanced towards him. \"Darling.\nDarling! If only you'd said so before!\" She held out her\narms.\nBut instead of also saying \"Darling!\"
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and holding out his\narms, the Savage retreated in terror, flapping his hands\nat her as though he were trying to scare away some\nintruding and dangerous animal. Four backwards steps,\nand he was brought to bay against the wall.\n\"Sweet!\" said Lenina and, laying her hands on his\nshoulders, pressed herself against him. \"Put your arms\nround me,\" she commanded. \"Hug me till you drug me,\nhoney.\" She too had poetry at her command, knew words\nthat sang and were spells and beat drums. \"Kiss me\";\nshe closed her eyes, she let her voice sink to a sleepy\nmurmur, \"Kiss me till I'm in a coma. Hug me, honey,\nsnuggly ...\"\nThe Savage caught her by the wrists, tore her hands\nfrom his shoulders, thrust her roughly away at arm's\nlength.\n\"Ow, you're hurting me, you're ... oh!\" She was suddenly\nsilent. Terror had made her forget the pain. Opening her\neyes, she had seen his faceâno, not his face, a ferocious\nstranger's, pale, distorted, twitching with some insane,\ninexplicable fury. Aghast, \"But what is it, John?\" she\nwhispered. He did not answer, but only stared into her\nface with those mad eyes. The hands that held her wrists\nwere trembling. He breathed deeply and irregularly. Faint\nalmost to imperceptibility, but appalling, she suddenly\nheard the grinding of his teeth. \"What is it?\" she almost\nscreamed. And as though awakened by her cry he caught her by the\nshoulders and shook her. \"Whore!\" he shouted \"Whore!\nImpudent strumpet!\"\n\"Oh, don't, do-on't,\" she protested in a voice made\ngrotesquely tremulous by his shaking.\n\"Whore!\"\n\"Plea-ease.\"\n\"Damned whore!\"\n\"A gra-amme is be-etter ...\" she began.\nThe Savage pushed her away with such force that she\nstaggered and fell. \"Go,\" he shouted, standing over her\nmenacingly, \"get out of my sight or I'll kill you.\" He\nclenched his fists.\nLenina raised her arm to cover her face. \"No, please\ndon't, John ...\"\n\"Hurry up. Quick!\"\nOne arm still raised, and following his every movement\nwith a terrified eye, she scrambled to h
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: er feet and still\ncrouching, still covering her head, made a dash for the\nbathroom.\nThe noise of that prodigious slap by which her departure\nwas accelerated was like a pistol shot.\n\"Ow!\" Lenina bounded forward.\nSafely locked into the bathroom, she had leisure to take\nstock of her injuries. Standing with her back to the\nmirror, she twisted her head. Looking over her left\nshoulder she could see the imprint of an open hand standing out distinct and crimson on the pearly flesh.\nGingerly she rubbed the wounded spot.\nOutside, in the other room, the Savage was striding up\nand down, marching, marching to the drums and music\nof magical words. \"The wren goes to't and the small\ngilded fly does lecher in my sight.\" Maddeningly they\nrumbled in his ears. \"The fitchew nor the soiled horse\ngoes to't with a more riotous appetite. Down from the\nwaist they are Centaurs, though women all above. But to\nthe girdle do the gods inherit. Beneath is all the fiend's.\nThere's hell, there's darkness, there is the sulphurous pit,\nburning scalding, stench, consumption; fie, fie, fie, pain,\npain! Give me an ounce of civet, good apothecary, to\nsweeten my imagination.\"\n\"John!\" ventured a small ingratiating voice from the\nbathroom. \"John!\"\n\"O thou weed, who are so lovely fair and smell'st so\nsweet that the sense aches at thee. Was this most goodly\nbook made to write 'whore' upon? Heaven stops the nose\nat it ...\"\nBut her perfume still hung about him, his jacket was\nwhite with the powder that had scented her velvety body.\n\"Impudent strumpet, impudent strumpet, impudent\nstrumpet.\" The inexorable rhythm beat itself out.\n\"Impudent ...\"\n\"John, do you think I might have my clothes?\"\nHe picked up the bell-bottomed trousers, the blouse, the\nzippicamiknicks.\n\"Open!\" he ordered, kicking the door.\n\"No, I won't.\" The voice was frightened and defiant. \"Well, how do you expect me to give them to you?\"\n\"Push them through the ventilator over the door.\"\nHe did what she suggested and returned to his u
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: neasy\npacing of the room. \"Impudent strumpet, impudent\nstrumpet. The devil Luxury with his fat rump and potato\nfinger ...\"\n\"John.\"\nHe would not answer. \"Fat rump and potato finger.\"\n\"John.\"\n\"What is it?\" he asked gruffly.\n\"I wonder if you'd mind giving me my Malthusian belt.\"\nLenina sat, listening to the footsteps in the other room,\nwondering, as she listened, how long he was likely to go\ntramping up and down like that; whether she would have\nto wait until he left the flat; or if it would be safe, after\nallowing his madness a reasonable time to subside, to\nopen the bathroom door and make a dash for it.\nShe was interrupted in the midst of these uneasy\nspeculations by the sound of the telephone bell ringing in\nthe other room. Abruptly the tramping ceased. She heard\nthe voice of the Savage parleying with silence.\n\"Hullo.\"\n. . . . .\n\"Yes.\"\n. . . . .\n\"If I do not usurp myself, I am.\" . . . . .\n\"Yes, didn't you hear me say so? Mr. Savage speaking.\"\n. . . . .\n\"What? Who's ill? Of course it interests me.\"\n. . . . .\n\"But is it serious? Is she really bad? I'll go at once ...\"\n. . . . .\n\"Not in her rooms any more? Where has she been\ntaken?\"\n. . . . .\n\"Oh, my God! What's the address?\"\n. . . . .\n\"Three Park Laneâis that it? Three? Thanks.\"\nLenina heard the click of the replaced receiver, then\nhurrying steps. A door slammed. There was silence. Was\nhe really gone?\nWith an infinity of precautions she opened the door a\nquarter of an inch; peeped through the crack; was\nencouraged by the view of emptiness; opened a little\nfurther, and put her whole head out; finally tiptoed into\nthe room; stood for a few seconds with strongly beating\nheart, listening, listening; then darted to the front door,\nopened, slipped through, slammed, ran. It was not till\nshe was in the lift and actually dropping down the well\nthat she began to feel herself secure. Chapter Fourteen\nT HE\nPark Lane Hospital for the Dying was a sixty-story\ntower of primrose tiles. As the Savage s
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tepped out of his\ntaxicopter a convoy of gaily-coloured aerial hearses rose\nwhirring from the roof and darted away across the Park,\nwestwards, bound for the Slough Crematorium. At the lift\ngates the presiding porter gave him the information he\nrequired, and he dropped down to Ward 81 (a Galloping\nSenility ward, the porter explained) on the seventeenth\nfloor.\nIt was a large room bright with sunshine and yellow\npaint, and containing twenty beds, all occupied. Linda\nwas dying in companyâin company and with all the\nmodern conveniences. The air was continuously alive with\ngay synthetic melodies. At the foot of every bed,\nconfronting its moribund occupant, was a television box.\nTelevision was left on, a running tap, from morning till\nnight. Every quarter of an hour the prevailing perfume of\nthe room was automatically changed. \"We try,\" explained\nthe nurse, who had taken charge of the Savage at the\ndoor, \"we try to create a thoroughly pleasant atmosphere\nhereâsomething between a first-class hotel and a feely-\npalace, if you take my meaning.\"\n\"Where is she?\" asked the Savage, ignoring these polite\nexplanations.\nThe nurse was offended. \"You are in a hurry,\" she said.\n\"Is there any hope?\" he asked.\n\"You mean, of her not dying?\" (He nodded.) \"No, of\ncourse there isn't. When somebody's sent here, there's\nno ...\" Startled by the expression of distress on his pale\nface, she suddenly broke off. \"Why, whatever is the matter?\" she asked. She was not accustomed to this kind\nof thing in visitors. (Not that there were many visitors\nanyhow: or any reason why there should be many\nvisitors.) \"You're not feeling ill, are you?\"\nHe shook his head. \"She's my mother,\" he said in a\nscarcely audible voice.\nThe nurse glanced at him with startled, horrified eyes;\nthen quickly looked away. From throat to temple she was\nall one hot blush.\n\"Take me to her,\" said the Savage, making an effort to\nspeak in an ordinary tone.\nStill blushing, she led the way down the ward. Faces still\nfres
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: h and unwithered (for senility galloped so hard that it\nhad no time to age the cheeksâonly the heart and brain)\nturned as they passed. Their progress was followed by\nthe blank, incurious eyes of second infancy. The Savage\nshuddered as he looked.\nLinda was lying in the last of the long row of beds, next\nto the wall. Propped up on pillows, she was watching the\nSemi-finals of the South American Riemann-Surface\nTennis Championship, which were being played in silent\nand diminished reproduction on the screen of the\ntelevision box at the foot of the bed. Hither and thither\nacross their square of illuminated glass the little figures\nnoiselessly darted, like fish in an aquariumâthe silent but\nagitated inhabitants of another world.\nLinda looked on, vaguely and uncomprehendingly smiling.\nHer pale, bloated face wore an expression of imbecile\nhappiness. Every now and then her eyelids closed, and\nfor a few seconds she seemed to be dozing. Then with a\nlittle start she would wake up againâwake up to the\naquarium antics of the Tennis Champions, to the Super-\nVox-Wurlitzeriana rendering of \"Hug me till you drug me, honey,\" to the warm draught of verbena that came\nblowing through the ventilator above her headâwould\nwake to these things, or rather to a dream of which these\nthings, transformed and embellished by the soma in her\nblood, were the marvellous constituents, and smile once\nmore her broken and discoloured smile of infantile\ncontentment.\n\"Well, I must go,\" said the nurse. \"I've got my batch of\nchildren coming. Besides, there's Number 3.\" She pointed\nup the ward. \"Might go off any minute now. Well, make\nyourself comfortable.\" She walked briskly away.\nThe Savage sat down beside the bed.\n\"Linda,\" he whispered, taking her hand.\nAt the sound of her name, she turned. Her vague eyes\nbrightened with recognition. She squeezed his hand, she\nsmiled, her lips moved; then quite suddenly her head fell\nforward. She was asleep. He sat watching herâseeking\nthrough the tired flesh, seeki
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ng and finding that young,\nbright face which had stooped over his childhood in\nMalpais, remembering (and he closed his eyes) her voice,\nher movements, all the events of their life together.\n\"Streptocock-Gee to Banbury T ...\" How beautiful her\nsinging had been! And those childish rhymes, how\nmagically strange and mysterious!\nA, B, C, vitamin D:\nThe fat's in the liver, the cod's in the sea.\nHe felt the hot tears welling up behind his eyelids as he\nrecalled the words and Linda's voice as she repeated\nthem. And then the reading lessons: The tot is in the pot,\nthe cat is on the mat; and the Elementary Instructions for\nBeta Workers in the Embryo Store. And long evenings by\nthe fire or, in summertime, on the roof of the little house, when she told him those stories about the Other Place,\noutside the Reservation: that beautiful, beautiful Other\nPlace, whose memory, as of a heaven, a paradise of\ngoodness and loveliness, he still kept whole and intact,\nundefiled by contact with the reality of this real London,\nthese actual civilized men and women.\nA sudden noise of shrill voices made him open his eyes\nand, after hastily brushing away the tears, look round.\nWhat seemed an interminable stream of identical eight-\nyear-old male twins was pouring into the room. Twin\nafter twin, twin after twin, they cameâa nightmare. Their\nfaces, their repeated faceâfor there was only one\nbetween the lot of themâpuggishly stared, all nostrils and\npale goggling eyes. Their uniform was khaki. All their\nmouths hung open. Squealing and chattering they\nentered. In a moment, it seemed, the ward was maggoty\nwith them. They swarmed between the beds, clambered\nover, crawled under, peeped into the television boxes,\nmade faces at the patients.\nLinda astonished and rather alarmed them. A group stood\nclustered at the foot of her bed, staring with the\nfrightened and stupid curiosity of animals suddenly\nconfronted by the unknown.\n\"Oh, look, look!\" They spoke in low, scared voices.\n\"Whatever is the matter with h
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: er? Why is she so fat?\"\nThey had never seen a face like hers beforeâhad never\nseen a face that was not youthful and taut-skinned, a\nbody that had ceased to be slim and upright. All these\nmoribund sexagenarians had the appearance of childish\ngirls. At forty-four, Linda seemed, by contrast, a monster\nof flaccid and distorted senility.\n\"Isn't she awful?\" came the whispered comments. \"Look\nat her teeth!\" Suddenly from under the bed a pug-faced twin popped up\nbetween John's chair and the wall, and began peering\ninto Linda's sleeping face.\n\"I say ...\" he began; but the sentence ended prematurely\nin a squeal. The Savage had seized him by the collar,\nlifted him clear over the chair and, with a smart box on\nthe ears, sent him howling away.\nHis yells brought the Head Nurse hurrying to the rescue.\n\"What have you been doing to him?\" she demanded\nfiercely. \"I won't have you striking the children.\"\n\"Well then, keep them away from this bed.\" The Savage's\nvoice was trembling with indignation. \"What are these\nfilthy little brats doing here at all? It's disgraceful!\"\n\"Disgraceful? But what do you mean? They're being\ndeath-conditioned. And I tell you,\" she warned him\ntruculently, \"if I have any more of your interference with\ntheir conditioning, I'll send for the porters and have you\nthrown out.\"\nThe Savage rose to his feet and took a couple of steps\ntowards her. His movements and the expression on his\nface were so menacing that the nurse fell back in terror.\nWith a great effort he checked himself and, without\nspeaking, turned away and sat down again by the bed.\nReassured, but with a dignity that was a trifle shrill and\nuncertain, \"I've warned you,\" said the nurse, \"I've\nwarned you,\" said the nurse, \"so mind.\" Still, she led the\ntoo inquisitive twins away and made them join in the\ngame of hunt-the-zipper, which had been organized by\none of her colleagues at the other end of the room.\n\"Run along now and have your cup of caffeine solution,\ndear,\" she said to the other
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nurse. The exercise of authority restored her confidence, made her feel better.\n\"Now children!\" she called.\nLinda had stirred uneasily, had opened her eyes for a\nmoment, looked vaguely around, and then once more\ndropped off to sleep. Sitting beside her, the Savage tried\nhard to recapture his mood of a few minutes before. \"A,\nB, C, vitamin D,\" he repeated to himself, as though the\nwords were a spell that would restore the dead past to\nlife. But the spell was ineffective. Obstinately the\nbeautiful memories refused to rise; there was only a\nhateful resurrection of jealousies and uglinesses and\nmiseries. PopÃ© with the blood trickling down from his cut\nshoulder; and Linda hideously asleep, and the flies\nbuzzing round the spilt mescal on the floor beside the\nbed; and the boys calling those names as she passed. ...\nAh, no, no! He shut his eyes, he shook his head in\nstrenuous denial of these memories. \"A, B, C, vitamin D\n...\" He tried to think of those times when he sat on her\nknees and she put her arms about him and sang, over\nand over again, rocking him, rocking him to sleep. \"A, B,\nC, vitamin D, vitamin D, vitamin D ...\"\nThe Super-Vox-Wurlitzeriana had risen to a sobbing\ncrescendo; and suddenly the verbena gave place, in the\nscent-circulating system, to an intense patchouli. Linda\nstirred, woke up, stared for a few seconds bewilderly at\nthe Semi-finalists, then, lifting her face, sniffed once or\ntwice at the newly perfumed air and suddenly smiledâa\nsmile of childish ecstasy.\n\"PopÃ©!\" she murmured, and closed her eyes. \"Oh, I do so\nlike it, I do ...\" She sighed and let herself sink back into\nthe pillows.\n\"But, Linda!\" The Savage spoke imploringly, \"Don't you\nknow me?\" He had tried so hard, had done his very best;\nwhy wouldn't she allow him to forget? He squeezed her limp hand almost with violence, as though he would force\nher to come back from this dream of ignoble pleasures,\nfrom these base and hateful memoriesâback into the\npresent, back into reality: the appal
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ling present, the\nawful realityâbut sublime, but significant, but desperately\nimportant precisely because of the imminence of that\nwhich made them so fearful. \"Don't you know me,\nLinda?\"\nHe felt the faint answering pressure of her hand. The\ntears started into his eyes. He bent over her and kissed\nher.\nHer lips moved. \"PopÃ©!\" she whispered again, and it was\nas though he had had a pailful of ordure thrown in his\nface.\nAnger suddenly boiled up in him. Balked for the second\ntime, the passion of his grief had found another outlet,\nwas transformed into a passion of agonized rage.\n\"But I'm John!\" he shouted. \"I'm John!\" And in his furious\nmisery he actually caught her by the shoulder and shook\nher.\nLinda's eyes fluttered open; she saw him, knew himâ\n\"John!\"âbut situated the real face, the real and violent\nhands, in an imaginary worldâamong the inward and\nprivate equivalents of patchouli and the Super-Wurlitzer,\namong the transfigured memories and the strangely\ntransposed sensations that constituted the universe of\nher dream. She knew him for John, her son, but fancied\nhim an intruder into that paradisal Malpais where she had\nbeen spending her soma-holiday with PopÃ©. He was angry\nbecause she liked PopÃ©, he was shaking her because\nPopÃ© was there in the bedâas though there were\nsomething wrong, as though all civilized people didn't do\nthe same. \"Every one belongs to every ...\" Her voice suddenly died into an almost inaudible breathless\ncroaking. Her mouth fell open: she made a desperate\neffort to fill her lungs with air. But it was as though she\nhad forgotten how to breathe. She tried to cry outâbut no\nsound came; only the terror of her staring eyes revealed\nwhat she was suffering. Her hands went to her throat,\nthen clawed at the airâthe air she could no longer\nbreathe, the air that, for her, had ceased to exist.\nThe Savage was on his feet, bent over her. \"What is it,\nLinda? What is it?\" His voice was imploring; it was as\nthough he were begging to be re
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: assured.\nThe look she gave him was charged with an unspeakable\nterrorâwith terror and, it seemed to him, reproach.\nShe tried to raise herself in bed, but fell back on to the\npillows. Her face was horribly distorted, her lips blue.\nThe Savage turned and ran up the ward.\n\"Quick, quick!\" he shouted. \"Quick!\"\nStanding in the centre of a ring of zipper-hunting twins,\nthe Head Nurse looked round. The first moment's\nastonishment gave place almost instantly to disapproval.\n\"Don't shout! Think of the little ones,\" she said, frowning.\n\"You might decondition ... But what are you doing?\" He\nhad broken through the ring. \"Be careful!\" A child was\nyelling.\n\"Quick, quick!\" He caught her by the sleeve, dragged her\nafter him. \"Quick! Something's happened. I've killed her.\"\nBy the time they were back at the end of the ward Linda\nwas dead. The Savage stood for a moment in frozen silence, then\nfell on his knees beside the bed and, covering his face\nwith his hands, sobbed uncontrollably.\nThe nurse stood irresolute, looking now at the kneeling\nfigure by the bed (the scandalous exhibition!) and now\n(poor children!) at the twins who had stopped their\nhunting of the zipper and were staring from the other end\nof the ward, staring with all their eyes and nostrils at the\nshocking scene that was being enacted round Bed 20.\nShould she speak to him? try to bring him back to a\nsense of decency? remind him of where he was? of what\nfatal mischief he might do to these poor innocents?\nUndoing all their wholesome death-conditioning with this\ndisgusting outcryâas though death were something\nterrible, as though any one mattered as much as all that!\nIt might give them the most disastrous ideas about the\nsubject, might upset them into reacting in the entirely\nwrong, the utterly anti-social way.\nShe stepped forward, she touched him on the shoulder.\n\"Can't you behave?\" she said in a low, angry voice. But,\nlooking around, she saw that half a dozen twins were\nalready on their feet and advancing down t
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: he ward. The\ncircle was disintegrating. In another moment ... No, the\nrisk was too great; the whole Group might be put back\nsix or seven months in its conditioning. She hurried back\ntowards her menaced charges.\n\"Now, who wants a chocolate Ã©clair?\" she asked in a loud,\ncheerful tone.\n\"Me!\" yelled the entire Bokanovsky Group in chorus. Bed\n20 was completely forgotten.\n\"Oh, God, God, God ...\" the Savage kept repeating to\nhimself. In the chaos of grief and remorse that filled his mind it was the one articulate word. \"God!\" he whispered\nit aloud. \"God ...\"\n\"Whatever is he saying?\" said a voice, very near, distinct\nand shrill through the warblings of the Super-Wurlitzer.\nThe Savage violently started and, uncovering his face,\nlooked round. Five khaki twins, each with the stump of a\nlong Ã©clair in his right hand, and their identical faces\nvariously smeared with liquid chocolate, were standing in\na row, puggily goggling at him.\nThey met his eyes and simultaneously grinned. One of\nthem pointed with his Ã©clair butt.\n\"Is she dead?\" he asked.\nThe Savage stared at them for a moment in silence. Then\nin silence he rose to his feet, in silence slowly walked\ntowards the door.\n\"Is she dead?\" repeated the inquisitive twin trotting at his\nside.\nThe Savage looked down at him and still without\nspeaking pushed him away. The twin fell on the floor and\nat once began to howl. The Savage did not even look\nround. Chapter Fifteen\nT HE\nmenial staff of the Park Lane Hospital for the Dying\nconsisted of one hundred and sixty-two Deltas divided\ninto two Bokanovsky Groups of eighty-four red headed\nfemale and seventy-eight dark dolychocephalic male\ntwins, respectively. At six, when their working day was\nover, the two Groups assembled in the vestibule of the\nHospital and were served by the Deputy Sub-Bursar with\ntheir soma ration.\nFrom the lift the Savage stepped out into the midst of\nthem. But his mind was elsewhereâwith death, with his\ngrief,\nand\nhis\nremorse;\nmechanicaly,\nwithout\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: consciousness of what he was doing, he began to\nshoulder his way through the crowd.\n\"Who are you pushing? Where do you think you're\ngoing?\"\nHigh, low, from a multitude of separate throats, only two\nvoices squeaked or growled. Repeated indefinitely, as\nthough by a train of mirrors, two faces, one a hairless\nand freckled moon haloed in orange, the other a thin,\nbeaked bird-mask, stubbly with two days' beard, turned\nangrily towards him. Their words and, in his ribs, the\nsharp nudging of elbows, broke through his unawareness.\nHe woke once more to external reality, looked round him,\nknew what he sawâknew it, with a sinking sense of horror\nand disgust, for the recurrent delirium of his days and\nnights, the nightmare of swarming indistinguishable\nsameness. Twins, twins. ... Like maggots they had\nswarmed defilingly over the mystery of Linda's death.\nMaggots again, but larger, full grown, they now crawled\nacross his grief and his repentance. He halted and, with\nbewildered and horrified eyes, stared round him at the\nkhaki mob, in the midst of which, overtopping it by a full head, he stood. \"How many goodly creatures are there\nhere!\" The singing words mocked him derisively. \"How\nbeauteous mankind is! O brave new world ...\"\n\"Soma distribution!\" shouted a loud voice. \"In good\norder, please. Hurry up there.\"\nA door had been opened, a table and chair carried into\nthe vestibule. The voice was that of a jaunty young\nAlpha, who had entered carrying a black iron cash-box. A\nmurmur of satisfaction went up from the expectant twins.\nThey forgot all about the Savage. Their attention was\nnow focused on the black cash-box, which the young man\nhad placed on the table, and was now in process of\nunlocking. The lid was lifted.\n\"Oo-oh!\"\nsaid\nall\nthe\nhundred\nand\nsixty-two\nsimultaneously, as though they were looking at fireworks.\nThe young man took out a handful of tiny pill-boxes.\n\"Now,\" he said peremptorily, \"step forward, please. One\nat a time, and no shoving.\"\nOne at a time, with
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: no shoving, the twins stepped\nforward. First two males, then a female, then another\nmale, then three females, then ...\nThe Savage stood looking on. \"O brave new world, O\nbrave new world ...\" In his mind the singing words\nseemed to change their tone. They had mocked him\nthrough his misery and remorse, mocked him with how\nhideous a note of cynical derision! Fiendishly laughing,\nthey had insisted on the low squalor, the nauseous\nugliness of the nightmare. Now, suddenly, they\ntrumpeted a call to arms. \"O brave new world!\" Miranda\nwas proclaiming the possibility of loveliness, the\npossibility of transforming even the nightmare into\nsomething fine and noble. \"O brave new world!\" It was a\nchallenge, a command. \"No shoving there now!\" shouted the Deputy Sub-Bursar\nin a fury. He slammed down he lid of his cash-box. \"I\nshall stop the distribution unless I have good behaviour.\"\nThe Deltas muttered, jostled one another a little, and\nthen were still. The threat had been effective. Deprivation\nof somaâappalling thought!\n\"That's better,\" said the young man, and reopened his\ncash-box.\nLinda had been a slave, Linda had died; others should\nlive in freedom, and the world be made beautiful. A\nreparation, a duty. And suddenly it was luminously clear\nto the Savage what he must do; it was as though a\nshutter had been opened, a curtain drawn back.\n\"Now,\" said the Deputy Sub-Bursar.\nAnother khaki female stepped forward.\n\"Stop!\" called the Savage in a loud and ringing voice.\n\"Stop!\"\nHe pushed his way to the table; the Deltas stared at him\nwith astonishment.\n\"Ford!\" said the Deputy Sub-Bursar, below his breath.\n\"It's the Savage.\" He felt scared.\n\"Listen, I beg of you,\" cried the Savage earnestly. \"Lend\nme your ears ...\" He had never spoken in public before,\nand found it very difficult to express what he wanted to\nsay. \"Don't take that horrible stuff. It's poison, it's\npoison.\"\n\"I say, Mr. Savage,\" said the Deputy Sub-Bursar, smiling\npropitiatingly. \"Would you mind l
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: etting me ...\"\n\"Poison to soul as well as body.\" \"Yes, but let me get on with my distribution, won't you?\nThere's a good fellow.\" With the cautious tenderness of\none who strokes a notoriously vicious animal, he patted\nthe Savage's arm. \"Just let me ...\"\n\"Never!\" cried the Savage.\n\"But look here, old man ...\"\n\"Throw it all away, that horrible poison.\"\nThe words \"Throw it all away\" pierced through the\nenfolding layers of incomprehension to the quick of the\nDelta's consciousness. An angry murmur went up from\nthe crowd.\n\"I come to bring you freedom,\" said the Savage, turning\nback towards the twins. \"I come ...\"\nThe Deputy Sub-Bursar heard no more; he had slipped\nout of the vestibule and was looking up a number in the\ntelephone book.\n\"Not in his own rooms,\" Bernard summed up. \"Not in\nmine, not in yours. Not at the Aphroditaum; not at the\nCentre or the College. Where can he have got to?\"\nHelmholtz shrugged his shoulders. They had come back\nfrom their work expecting to find the Savage waiting for\nthem at one or other of the usual meeting-places, and\nthere was no sign of the fellow. Which was annoying, as\nthey had meant to nip across to Biarritz in Helmholtz's\nfour-seater sporticopter. They'd be late for dinner if he\ndidn't come soon.\n\"We'll give him five more minutes,\" said Helmholtz. \"If he\ndoesn't turn up by then, we'll ...\" The ringing of the telephone bell interrupted him. He\npicked up the receiver. \"Hullo. Speaking.\" Then, after a\nlong interval of listening, \"Ford in Flivver!\" he swore. \"I'll\ncome at once.\"\n\"What is it?\" Bernard asked.\n\"A fellow I know at the Park Lane Hospital,\" said\nHelmholtz. \"The Savage is there. Seems to have gone\nmad. Anyhow, it's urgent. Will you come with me?\"\nTogether they hurried along the corridor to the lifts.\n\"But do you like being slaves?\" the Savage was saying as\nthey entered the Hospital. His face was flushed, his eyes\nbright with ardour and indignation. \"Do you like being\nbabies? Yes, babies. Mewling
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and puking,\" he added,\nexasperated by their bestial stupidity into throwing\ninsults at those he had come to save. The insults bounced\noff their carapace of thick stupidity; they stared at him\nwith a blank expression of dull and sullen resentment in\ntheir eyes. \"Yes, puking!\" he fairly shouted. Grief and\nremorse, compassion and dutyâall were forgotten now\nand, as it were, absorbed into an intense overpowering\nhatred of these less than human monsters. \"Don't you\nwant to be free and men? Don't you even understand\nwhat manhood and freedom are?\" Rage was making him\nfluent; the words came easily, in a rush. \"Don't you?\" he\nrepeated, but got no answer to his question. \"Very well\nthen,\" he went on grimly. \"I'll teach you; I'll make you be\nfree whether you want to or not.\" And pushing open a\nwindow that looked on to the inner court of the Hospital,\nhe began to throw the little pill-boxes of soma tablets in\nhandfuls out into the area.\nFor a moment the khaki mob was silent, petrified, at the\nspectacle of this wanton sacrilege, with amazement and\nhorror. \"He's mad,\" whispered Bernard, staring with wide open\neyes. \"They'll kill him. They'll ...\" A great shout suddenly\nwent up from the mob; a wave of movement drove it\nmenacingly towards the Savage. \"Ford help him!\" said\nBernard, and averted his eyes.\n\"Ford helps those who help themselves.\" And with a\nlaugh, actually a laugh of exultation, Helmholtz Watson\npushed his way through the crowd.\n\"Free, free!\" the Savage shouted, and with one hand\ncontinued to throw the soma into the area while, with the\nother, he punched the indistinguishable faces of his\nassailants. \"Free!\" And suddenly there was Helmholtz at\nhis sideâ\"Good old Helmholtz!\"âalso punchingâ\"Men at\nlast!\"âand in the interval also throwing the poison out by\nhandfuls through the open window. \"Yes, men! men!\" and\nthere was no more poison left. He picked up the cash-box\nand showed them its black emptiness. \"You're free!\"\nHowling, the Deltas charge
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d with a redoubled fury.\nHesitant on the fringes of the battle. \"They're done for,\"\nsaid Bernard and, urged by a sudden impulse, ran\nforward to help them; then thought better of it and\nhalted; then, ashamed, stepped forward again; then\nagain thought better of it, and was standing in an agony\nof humiliated indecisionâthinking that they might be\nkilled if he didn't help them, and that he might be killed if\nhe didâwhen (Ford be praised!), goggle-eyed and swine-\nsnouted in their gas-masks, in ran the police.\nBernard dashed to meet them. He waved his arms; and it\nwas action, he was doing something. He shouted \"Help!\"\nseveral times, more and more loudly so as to give himself\nthe illusion of helping. \"Help! Help! HELP!\"\nThe policemen pushed him out of the way and got on\nwith their work. Three men with spraying machines buckled to their shoulders pumped thick clouds of soma\nvapour into the air. Two more were busy round the\nportable Synthetic Music Box. Carrying water pistols\ncharged with a powerful anÃ¦sthetic, four others had\npushed their way into the crowd and were methodically\nlaying out, squirt by squirt, the more ferocious of the\nfighters.\n\"Quick, quick!\" yelled Bernard. \"They'll be killed if you\ndon't hurry. They'll ... Oh!\" Annoyed by his chatter, one\nof the policemen had given him a shot from his water\npistol. Bernard stood for a second or two wambling\nunsteadily on legs that seemed to have lost their bones,\ntheir tendons, their muscles, to have become mere sticks\nof jelly, and at last not even jelly-water: he tumbled in a\nheap on the floor.\nSuddenly, from out of the Synthetic Music Box a Voice\nbegan to speak. The Voice of Reason, the Voice of Good\nFeeling. The sound-track roll was unwinding itself in\nSynthetic Anti-Riot Speech Number Two (Medium\nStrength). Straight from the depths of a non-existent\nheart, \"My friends, my friends!\" said the Voice so\npathetically, with a note of such infinitely tender reproach\nthat, behind their gas masks, even the policemen's e
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: yes\nwere momentarily dimmed with tears, \"what is the\nmeaning of this? Why aren't you all being happy and\ngood together? Happy and good,\" the Voice repeated. \"At\npeace, at peace.\" It trembled, sank into a whisper and\nmomentarily expired. \"Oh, I do want you to be happy,\" it\nbegan, with a yearning earnestness. \"I do so want you to\nbe good! Please, please be good and ...\"\nTwo minutes later the Voice and the soma vapour had\nproduced their effect. In tears, the Deltas were kissing\nand hugging one anotherâhalf a dozen twins at a time in\na comprehensive embrace. Even Helmholtz and the\nSavage were almost crying. A fresh supply of pill-boxes was brought in from the Bursary; a new distribution was\nhastily made and, to the sound of the Voice's richly\naffectionate, baritone valedictions, the twins dispersed,\nblubbering as though their hearts would break. \"Good-\nbye, my dearest, dearest friends, Ford keep you! Good-\nbye, my dearest, dearest friends, Ford keep you. Good-\nbye my dearest, dearest ...\"\nWhen the last of the Deltas had gone the policeman\nswitched off the current. The angelic Voice fell silent.\n\"Will you come quietly?\" asked the Sergeant, \"or must we\nanÃ¦sthetize?\" He pointed his water pistol menacingly.\n\"Oh, we'll come quietly,\" the Savage answered, dabbing\nalternately a cut lip, a scratched neck, and a bitten left\nhand.\nStill keeping his handkerchief to his bleeding nose\nHelmholtz nodded in confirmation.\nAwake and having recovered the use of his legs, Bernard\nhad chosen this moment to move as inconspicuously as\nhe could towards the door.\n\"Hi, you there,\" called the Sergeant, and a swine-masked\npoliceman hurried across the room and laid a hand on the\nyoung man's shoulder.\nBernard turned with an expression of indignant\ninnocence. Escaping? He hadn't dreamed of such a thing.\n\"Though what on earth you want me for,\" he said to the\nSergeant, \"I really can't imagine.\"\n\"You're a friend of the prisoner's, aren't you?\"\n\"Well ...\" said Bernard, and hesitated.
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: No, he really\ncouldn't deny it. \"Why shouldn't I be?\" he asked. \"Come on then,\" said the Sergeant, and led the way\ntowards the door and the waiting police car. Chapter Sixteen\nT HE\nROOM into which the three were ushered was the\nController's study.\n\"His fordship will be down in a moment.\" The Gamma\nbutler left them to themselves.\nHelmholtz laughed aloud.\n\"It's more like a caffeine-solution party than a trial,\" he\nsaid, and let himself fall into the most luxurious of the\npneumatic arm-chairs. \"Cheer up, Bernard,\" he added,\ncatching sight of his friend's green unhappy face. But\nBernard would not be cheered; without answering,\nwithout even looking at Helmholtz, he went and sat down\non the most uncomfortable chair in the room, carefully\nchosen in the obscure hope of somehow deprecating the\nwrath of the higher powers.\nThe Savage meanwhile wandered restlessly round the\nroom, peering with a vague superficial inquisitiveness at\nthe books in the shelves, at the sound-track rolls and\nreading machine bobbins in their numbered pigeon-holes.\nOn the table under the window lay a massive volume\nbound in limp black leather-surrogate, and stamped with\nlarge golden T's. He picked it up and opened it. MY LIFE\nAND WORK, BY OUR FORD. The book had been published\nat Detroit by the Society for the Propagation of Fordian\nKnowledge. Idly he turned the pages, read a sentence\nhere, a paragraph there, and had just come to the\nconclusion that the book didn't interest him, when the\ndoor opened, and the Resident World Controller for\nWestern Europe walked briskly into the room. Mustapha Mond shook hands with all three of them; but it\nwas to the Savage that he addressed himself. \"So you\ndon't much like civilization, Mr. Savage,\" he said.\nThe Savage looked at him. He had been prepared to lie,\nto bluster, to remain sullenly unresponsive; but,\nreassured by the good-humoured intelligence of the\nController's face, he decided to tell the truth,\nstraightforwardly. \"No.\" He shook his head.\nBernard starte
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d and looked horrified. What would the\nController think? To be labelled as the friend of a man\nwho said that he didn't like civilizationâsaid it openly and,\nof all people, to the Controllerâit was terrible. \"But,\nJohn,\" he began. A look from Mustapha Mond reduced\nhim to an abject silence.\n\"Of course,\" the Savage went on to admit, \"there are\nsome very nice things. All that music in the air, for\ninstance ...\"\n\"Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments will hum\nabout my ears and sometimes voices.\"\nThe Savage's face lit up with a sudden pleasure. \"Have\nyou read it too?\" he asked. \"I thought nobody knew\nabout that book here, in England.\"\n\"Almost nobody. I'm one of the very few. It's prohibited,\nyou see. But as I make the laws here, I can also break\nthem. With impunity, Mr. Marx,\" he added, turning to\nBernard. \"Which I'm afraid you can't do.\"\nBernard sank into a yet more hopeless misery.\n\"But why is it prohibited?\" asked the Savage. In the\nexcitement of meeting a man who had read Shakespeare\nhe had momentarily forgotten everything else. The Controller shrugged his shoulders. \"Because it's old;\nthat's the chief reason. We haven't any use for old things\nhere.\"\n\"Even when they're beautiful?\"\n\"Particularly when they're beautiful. Beauty's attractive,\nand we don't want people to be attracted by old things.\nWe want them to like the new ones.\"\n\"But the new ones are so stupid and horrible. Those\nplays, where there's nothing but helicopters flying about\nand you feel the people kissing.\" He made a grimace.\n\"Goats and monkeys!\" Only in Othello's word could he\nfind an adequate vehicle for his contempt and hatred.\n\"Nice tame animals, anyhow,\" the Controller murmured\nparenthetically.\n\"Why don't you let them see Othello instead?\"\n\"I've told you; it's old. Besides, they couldn't understand\nit.\"\nYes, that was true. He remembered how Helmholtz had\nlaughed at Romeo and Juliet. \"Well then,\" he said, after a\npause, \"something new that's like Othello, and that
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: they\ncould understand.\"\n\"That's what we've all been wanting to write,\" said\nHelmholtz, breaking a long silence.\n\"And it's what you never will write,\" said the Controller.\n\"Because, if it were really like Othello nobody could\nunderstand it, however new it might be. And if were new,\nit couldn't possibly be like Othello.\"\n\"Why not?\" \"Yes, why not?\" Helmholtz repeated. He too was\nforgetting the unpleasant realities of the situation. Green\nwith\nanxiety\nand\napprehension,\nonly\nBernard\nremembered them; the others ignored him. \"Why not?\"\n\"Because our world is not the same as Othello's world.\nYou can't make flivvers without steelâand you can't make\ntragedies without social instability. The world's stable\nnow. People are happy; they get what they want, and\nthey never want what they can't get. They're well off;\nthey're safe; they're never ill; they're not afraid of death;\nthey're blissfully ignorant of passion and old age; they're\nplagued with no mothers or fathers; they've got no\nwives, or children, or lovers to feel strongly about;\nthey're so conditioned that they practically can't help\nbehaving as they ought to behave. And if anything should\ngo wrong, there's soma. Which you go and chuck out of\nthe window in the name of liberty, Mr. Savage. Liberty!\"\nHe laughed. \"Expecting Deltas to know what liberty is!\nAnd now expecting them to understand Othello! My good\nboy!\"\nThe Savage was silent for a little. \"All the same,\" he\ninsisted obstinately, \"Othello's good, Othello's better than\nthose feelies.\"\n\"Of course it is,\" the Controller agreed. \"But that's the\nprice we have to pay for stability. You've got to choose\nbetween happiness and what people used to call high art.\nWe've sacrificed the high art. We have the feelies and the\nscent organ instead.\"\n\"But they don't mean anything.\"\n\"They mean themselves; they mean a lot of agreeable\nsensations to the audience.\"\n\"But they're ... they're told by an idiot.\" The Controller laughed. \"You're not being very pol
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ite to\nyour friend, Mr. Watson. One of our most distinguished\nEmotional Engineers ...\"\n\"But he's right,\" said Helmholtz gloomily. \"Because it is\nidiotic. Writing when there's nothing to say ...\"\n\"Precisely. But that require the most enormous ingenuity.\nYou're making flivvers out of the absolute minimum of\nsteelâworks of art out of practically nothing but pure\nsensation.\"\nThe Savage shook his head. \"It all seems to me quite\nhorrible.\"\n\"Of course it does. Actual happiness always looks pretty\nsqualid in comparison with the over-compensations for\nmisery. And, of course, stability isn't nearly so\nspectacular as instability. And being contented has none\nof the glamour of a good fight against misfortune, none\nof the picturesqueness of a struggle with temptation, or a\nfatal overthrow by passion or doubt. Happiness is never\ngrand.\"\n\"I suppose not,\" said the Savage after a silence. \"But\nneed it be quite so bad as those twins?\" He passed his\nhand over his eyes as though he were trying to wipe\naway the remembered image of those long rows of\nidentical midgets at the assembling tables, those queued-\nup twin-herds at the entrance to the Brentford monorail\nstation, those human maggots swarming round Linda's\nbed of death, the endlessly repeated face of his\nassailants. He looked at his bandaged left hand and\nshuddered. \"Horrible!\"\n\"But how useful! I see you don't like our Bokanovsky\nGroups; but, I assure you, they're the foundation on\nwhich everything else is built. They're the gyroscope that\nstabilizes the rocket plane of state on its unswerving course.\" The deep voice thrillingly vibrated; the\ngesticulating hand implied all space and the onrush of the\nirresistible machine. Mustapha Mond's oratory was almost\nup to synthetic standards.\n\"I was wondering,\" said the Savage, \"why you had them\nat allâseeing that you can get whatever you want out of\nthose bottles. Why don't you make everybody an Alpha\nDouble Plus while you're about it?\"\nMustapha Mond laughed. \"Because w
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e have no wish to\nhave our throats cut,\" he answered. \"We believe in\nhappiness and stability. A society of Alphas couldn't fail to\nbe unstable and miserable. Imagine a factory staffed by\nAlphasâthat is to say by separate and unrelated\nindividuals of good heredity and conditioned so as to be\ncapable (within limits) of making a free choice and\nassuming responsibilities. Imagine it!\" he repeated.\nThe Savage tried to imagine it, not very successfully.\n\"It's an absurdity. An Alpha-decanted, Alpha-conditioned\nman would go mad if he had to do Epsilon Semi-Moron\nworkâgo mad, or start smashing things up. Alphas can be\ncompletely socializedâbut only on condition that you\nmake them do Alpha work. Only an Epsilon can be\nexpected to make Epsilon sacrifices, for the good reason\nthat for him they aren't sacrifices; they're the line of least\nresistance. His conditioning has laid down rails along\nwhich he's got to run. He can't help himself; he's\nforedoomed. Even after decanting, he's still inside a\nbottleâan invisible bottle of infantile and embryonic\nfixations. Each one of us, of course,\" the Controller\nmeditatively continued, \"goes through life inside a bottle.\nBut if we happen to be Alphas, our bottles are, relatively\nspeaking, enormous. We should suffer acutely if we were\nconfined in a narrower space. You cannot pour upper-\ncaste champagne-surrogate into lower-caste bottles. It's obvious theoretically. But it has also been proved in\nactual practice. The result of the Cyprus experiment was\nconvincing.\"\n\"What was that?\" asked the Savage.\nMustapha Mond smiled. \"Well, you can call it an\nexperiment in rebottling if you like. It began in A.F. 473.\nThe Controllers had the island of Cyprus cleared of all its\nexisting inhabitants and re-colonized with a specially\nprepared batch of twenty-two thousand Alphas. All\nagricultural and industrial equipment was handed over to\nthem and they were left to manage their own affairs. The\nresult exactly fulfilled all the theoretical predictions.
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: The\nland wasn't properly worked; there were strikes in all the\nfactories; the laws were set at naught, orders disobeyed;\nall the people detailed for a spell of low-grade work were\nperpetually intriguing for high-grade jobs, and all the\npeople with high-grade jobs were counter-intriguing at all\ncosts to stay where they were. Within six years they were\nhaving a first-class civil war. When nineteen out of the\ntwenty-two thousand had been killed, the survivors\nunanimously petitioned the World Controllers to resume\nthe government of the island. Which they did. And that\nwas the end of the only society of Alphas that the world\nhas ever seen.\"\nThe Savage sighed, profoundly.\n\"The optimum population,\" said Mustapha Mond, \"is\nmodelled on the icebergâeight-ninths below the water\nline, one-ninth above.\"\n\"And they're happy below the water line?\"\n\"Happier than above it. Happier than your friend here, for\nexample.\" He pointed.\n\"In spite of that awful work?\" \"Awful? They don't find it so. On the contrary, they like it.\nIt's light, it's childishly simple. No strain on the mind or\nthe muscles. Seven and a half hours of mild,\nunexhausting labour, and then the soma ration and\ngames and unrestricted copulation and the feelies. What\nmore can they ask for? True,\" he added, \"they might ask\nfor shorter hours. And of course we could give them\nshorter hours. Technically, it would be perfectly simple to\nreduce all lower-caste working hours to three or four a\nday. But would they be any the happier for that? No, they\nwouldn't. The experiment was tried, more than a century\nand a half ago. The whole of Ireland was put on to the\nfour-hour day. What was the result? Unrest and a large\nincrease in the consumption of soma; that was all. Those\nthree and a half hours of extra leisure were so far from\nbeing a source of happiness, that people felt constrained\nto take a holiday from them. The Inventions Office is\nstuffed with plans for labour-saving processes. Thousands\nof them.\" Mustapha Mond made a
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lavish gesture. \"And\nwhy don't we put them into execution? For the sake of\nthe labourers; it would be sheer cruelty to afflict them\nwith excessive leisure. It's the same with agriculture. We\ncould synthesize every morsel of food, if we wanted to.\nBut we don't. We prefer to keep a third of the population\non the land. For their own sakesâbecause it takes longer\nto get food out of the land than out of a factory. Besides,\nwe have our stability to think of. We don't want to\nchange. Every change is a menace to stability. That's\nanother reason why we're so chary of applying new\ninventions. Every discovery in pure science is potentially\nsubversive; even science must sometimes be treated as a\npossible enemy. Yes, even science.\"\nScience? The Savage frowned. He knew the word. But\nwhat it exactly signified he could not say. Shakespeare\nand the old men of the pueblo had never mentioned\nscience, and from Linda he had only gathered the\nvaguest hints: science was something you made helicopters with, some thing that caused you to laugh at\nthe Corn Dances, something that prevented you from\nbeing wrinkled and losing your teeth. He made a\ndesperate effort to take the Controller's meaning.\n\"Yes,\" Mustapha Mond was saying, \"that's another item in\nthe cost of stability. It isn't only art that's incompatible\nwith happiness; it's also science. Science is dangerous;\nwe have to keep it most carefully chained and muzzled.\"\n\"What?\" said Helmholtz, in astonishment. \"But we're\nalways saying that science is everything. It's a\nhypnopÃ¦dic platitude.\"\n\"Three times a week between thirteen and seventeen,\"\nput in Bernard.\n\"And all the science propaganda we do at the College ...\"\n\"Yes; but what sort of science?\" asked Mustapha Mond\nsarcastically. \"You've had no scientific training, so you\ncan't judge. I was a pretty good physicist in my time. Too\ngoodâgood enough to realize that all our science is just a\ncookery book, with an orthodox theory of cooking that\nnobody's allowed to question, and a
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: list of recipes that\nmustn't be added to except by special permission from\nthe head cook. I'm the head cook now. But I was an\ninquisitive young scullion once. I started doing a bit of\ncooking on my own. Unorthodox cooking, illicit cooking. A\nbit of real science, in fact.\" He was silent.\n\"What happened?\" asked Helmholtz Watson.\nThe Controller sighed. \"Very nearly what's going to\nhappen to you young men. I was on the point of being\nsent to an island.\"\nThe words galvanized Bernard into violent and unseemly\nactivity. \"Send me to an island?\" He jumped up, ran across the room, and stood gesticulating in front of the\nController. \"You can't send me. I haven't done anything.\nlt was the others. I swear it was the others.\" He pointed\naccusingly to Helmholtz and the Savage. \"Oh, please\ndon't send me to Iceland. I promise I'll do what I ought\nto do. Give me another chance. Please give me another\nchance.\" The tears began to flow. \"I tell you, it's their\nfault,\" he sobbed. \"And not to Iceland. Oh please, your\nfordship, please ...\" And in a paroxysm of abjection he\nthrew himself on his knees before the Controller.\nMustapha Mond tried to make him get up; but Bernard\npersisted in his grovelling; the stream of words poured\nout inexhaustibly. In the end the Controller had to ring\nfor his fourth secretary.\n\"Bring three men,\" he ordered, \"and take Mr. Marx into a\nbedroom. Give him a good soma vaporization and then\nput him to bed and leave him.\"\nThe fourth secretary went out and returned with three\ngreen-uniformed twin footmen. Still shouting and\nsobbing. Bernard was carried out.\n\"One would think he was going to have his throat cut,\"\nsaid the Controller, as the door closed. \"Whereas, if he\nhad the smallest sense, he'd understand that his\npunishment is really a reward. He's being sent to an\nisland. That's to say, he's being sent to a place where\nhe'll meet the most interesting set of men and women to\nbe found anywhere in the world. All the people who, for\none reason or another
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: , have got too self-consciously\nindividual to fit into community-life. All the people who\naren't satisfied with orthodoxy, who've got independent\nideas of their own. Every one, in a word, who's any one. I\nalmost envy you, Mr. Watson.\"\nHelmholtz laughed. \"Then why aren't you on an island\nyourself?\" \"Because, finally, I preferred this,\" the Controller\nanswered. \"I was given the choice: to be sent to an\nisland, where I could have got on with my pure science,\nor to be taken on to the Controllers' Council with the\nprospect of succeeding in due course to an actual\nControllership. I chose this and let the science go.\" After\na little silence, \"Sometimes,\" he added, \"I rather regret\nthe science. Happiness is a hard masterâparticularly\nother people's happiness. A much harder master, if one\nisn't conditioned to accept it unquestioningly, than truth.\"\nHe sighed, fell silent again, then continued in a brisker\ntone, \"Well, duty's duty. One can't consult one's own\npreference. I'm interested in truth, I like science. But\ntruth's a menace, science is a public danger. As\ndangerous as it's been beneficent. It has given us the\nstablest equilibrium in history. China's was hopelessly\ninsecure by comparison; even the primitive matriarchies\nweren't steadier than we are. Thanks, l repeat, to\nscience. But we can't allow science to undo its own good\nwork. That's why we so carefully limit the scope of its\nresearchesâthat's why I almost got sent to an island. We\ndon't allow it to deal with any but the most immediate\nproblems of the moment. All other enquiries are most\nsedulously discouraged. It's curious,\" he went on after a\nlittle pause, \"to read what people in the time of Our Ford\nused to write about scientific progress. They seemed to\nhave imagined that it could be allowed to go on\nindefinitely, regardless of everything else. Knowledge was\nthe highest good, truth the supreme value; all the rest\nwas secondary and subordinate. True, ideas were\nbeginning to change even then. Our Ford hims
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: elf did a\ngreat deal to shift the emphasis from truth and beauty to\ncomfort and happiness. Mass production demanded the\nshift. Universal happiness keeps the wheels steadily\nturning; truth and beauty can't. And, of course, whenever\nthe masses seized political power, then it was happiness\nrather than truth and beauty that mattered. Still, in spite\nof everytung, unrestricted scientific research was still permitted. People still went on talking about truth and\nbeauty as though they were the sovereign goods. Right\nup to the time of the Nine Years' War. That made them\nchange their tune all right. What's the point of truth or\nbeauty or knowledge when the anthrax bombs are\npopping all around you? That was when science first\nbegan to be controlledâafter the Nine Years' War. People\nwere ready to have even their appetites controlled then.\nAnything for a quiet life. We've gone on controlling ever\nsince. It hasn't been very good for truth, of course. But\nit's been very good for happiness. One can't have\nsomething for nothing. Happiness has got to be paid for.\nYou're paying for it, Mr. Watsonâpaying because you\nhappen to be too much interested in beauty. I was too\nmuch interested in truth; I paid too.\"\n\"But you didn't go to an island,\" said the Savage,\nbreaking a long silence.\nThe Controller smiled. \"That's how I paid. By choosing to\nserve happiness. Other people'sânot mine. It's lucky,\" he\nadded, after a pause, \"that there are such a lot of islands\nin the world. I don't know what we should do without\nthem. Put you all in the lethal chamber, I suppose. By the\nway, Mr. Watson, would you like a tropical climate? The\nMarquesas, for example; or Samoa? Or something rather\nmore bracing?\"\nHelmholtz rose from his pneumatic chair. \"I should like a\nthoroughly bad climate,\" he answered. \"I believe one\nwould write better if the climate were bad. If there were\na lot of wind and storms, for example ...\"\nThe Controller nodded his approbation. \"I like your spirit,\nMr. Watson. I like it ve
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ry much indeed. As much as I\nofficially disapprove of it.\" He smiled. \"What about the\nFalkland Islands?\" \"Yes, I think that will do,\" Helmholtz answered. \"And\nnow, if you don't mind, I'll go and see how poor Bernard's\ngetting on.\" Chapter Seventeen\nA RT, SCIENCEâyou seem to have paid a fairly high price\nfor your happiness,\" said the Savage, when they were\nalone. \"Anything else?\"\n\"Well, religion, of course,\" replied the Controller. \"There\nused to be something called Godâbefore the Nine Years'\nWar. But I was forgetting; you know all about God, I\nsuppose.\"\n\"Well ...\" The Savage hesitated. He would have liked to\nsay something about solitude, about night, about the\nmesa lying pale under the moon, about the precipice, the\nplunge into shadowy darkness, about death. He would\nhave liked to speak; but there were no words. Not even\nin Shakespeare.\nThe Controller, meanwhile, had crossed to the other side\nof the room and was unlocking a large safe set into the\nwall between the bookshelves. The heavy door swung\nopen. Rummaging in the darkness within, \"It's a subject,\"\nhe said, \"that has always had a great interest for me.\" He\npulled out a thick black volume. \"You've never read this,\nfor example.\"\nThe Savage took it. \"The Holy Bible, containing the Old\nand New Testaments,\" he read aloud from the title-page.\n\"Nor this.\" It was a small book and had lost its cover.\n\"The Imitation of Christ.\"\n\"Nor this.\" He handed out another volume.\n\"The Varieties\nJames.\"\nof\nReligious\nExperience.\nBy\nWilliam \"And I've got plenty more,\" Mustapha Mond continued,\nresuming his seat. \"A whole collection of pornographic old\nbooks. God in the safe and Ford on the shelves.\" He\npointed with a laugh to his avowed libraryâto the shelves\nof books, the rack full of reading-machine bobbins and\nsound-track rolls.\n\"But if you know about God, why don't you tell them?\"\nasked the Savage indignantly. \"Why don't you give them\nthese books about God?\"\n\"For the same reason as we do
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n't give them Othello:\nthey're old; they're about God hundreds of years ago.\nNot about God now.\"\n\"But God doesn't change.\"\n\"Men do, though.\"\n\"What difference does that make?\"\n\"All the difference in the world,\" said Mustapha Mond. He\ngot up again and walked to the safe. \"There was a man\ncalled Cardinal Newman,\" he said. \"A cardinal,\" he\nexclaimed parenthetically, \"was a kind of Arch-\nCommunity-Songster.\"\n\"'I Pandulph, of fair Milan, cardinal.' I've read about them\nin Shakespeare.\"\n\"Of course you have. Well, as I was saying, there was a\nman called Cardinal Newman. Ah, here's the book.\" He\npulled it out. \"And while I'm about it I'll take this one too.\nIt's by a man called Maine de Biran. He was a\nphilosopher, if you know what that was.\"\n\"A man who dreams of fewer things than there are in\nheaven and earth,\" said the Savage promptly. \"Quite so. I'll read you one of the things he did dream of\nin a moment. Meanwhile, listen to what this old Arch-\nCommunity-Songster said.\" He opened the book at the\nplace marked by a slip of paper and began to read. \"'We\nare not our own any more than what we possess is our\nown. We did not make ourselves, we cannot be supreme\nover ourselves. We are not our own masters. We are\nGod's property. Is it not our happiness thus to view the\nmatter? Is it any happiness or any comfort, to consider\nthat we are our own? It may be thought so by the young\nand prosperous. These may think it a great thing to have\neverything, as they suppose, their own wayâto depend\non no oneâto have to think of nothing out of sight, to be\nwithout the irksomeness of continual acknowledgment,\ncontinual prayer, continual reference of what they do to\nthe will of another. But as time goes on, they, as all men,\nwill find that independence was not made for manâthat it\nis an unnatural stateâwill do for a while, but will not carry\nus on safely to the end ...'\" Mustapha Mond paused, put\ndown the first book and, picking up the other, turned\nover the pages. \"Ta
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ke this, for example,\" he said, and in\nhis deep voice once more began to read: \"'A man grows\nold; he feels in himself that radical sense of weakness, of\nlistlessness, of discomfort, which accompanies the\nadvance of age; and, feeling thus, imagines himself\nmerely sick, lulling his fears with the notion that this\ndistressing condition is due to some particular cause,\nfrom which, as from an illness, he hopes to recover. Vain\nimaginings! That sickness is old age; and a horrible\ndisease it is. They say that it is the fear of death and of\nwhat comes after death that makes men turn to religion\nas they advance in years. But my own experience has\ngiven me the conviction that, quite apart from any such\nterrors or imaginings, the religious sentiment tends to\ndevelop as we grow older; to develop because, as the\npassions grow calm, as the fancy and sensibilities are less\nexcited and less excitable, our reason becomes less\ntroubled in its working, less obscured by the images, desires and distractions, in which it used to be absorbed;\nwhereupon God emerges as from behind a cloud; our\nsoul feels, sees, turns towards the source of all light;\nturns naturally and inevitably; for now that all that gave\nto the world of sensations its life and charms has begun\nto leak away from us, now that phenomenal existence is\nno more bolstered up by impressions from within or from\nwithout, we feel the need to lean on something that\nabides, something that will never play us falseâa reality,\nan absolute and everlasting truth. Yes, we inevitably turn\nto God; for this religious sentiment is of its nature so\npure, so delightful to the soul that experiences it, that it\nmakes up to us for all our other losses.'\" Mustapha Mond\nshut the book and leaned back in his chair. \"One of the\nnumerous things in heaven and earth that these\nphilosophers didn't dream about was this\" (he waved his\nhand), \"us, the modern world. 'You can only be\nindependent of God while you've got youth and\nprosperity; independence won't take yo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: u safely to the\nend.' Well, we've now got youth and prosperity right up\nto the end. What follows? Evidently, that we can be\nindependent of God. 'The religious sentiment will\ncompensate us for all our losses.' But there aren't any\nlosses for us to compensate; religious sentiment is\nsuperfluous. And why should we go hunting for a\nsubstitute for youthful desires, when youthful desires\nnever fail? A substitute for distractions, when we go on\nenjoying all the old fooleries to the very last? What need\nhave we of repose when our minds and bodies continue\nto delight in activity? of consolation, when we have\nsoma? of something immovable, when there is the social\norder?\"\n\"Then you think there is no God?\"\n\"No, I think there quite probably is one.\"\n\"Then why? ...\" Mustapha Mond checked him. \"But he manifests himself\nin different ways to different men. In premodern times he\nmanifested himself as the being that's described in these\nbooks. Now ...\"\n\"How does he manifest himself now?\" asked the Savage.\n\"Well, he manifests himself as an absence; as though he\nweren't there at all.\"\n\"That's your fault.\"\n\"Call it the fault of civilization. God isn't compatible with\nmachinery and scientific medicine and universal\nhappiness. You must make your choice. Our civilization\nhas chosen machinery and medicine and happiness.\nThat's why I have to keep these books locked up in the\nsafe. They're smut. People would be shocked it ...\"\nThe Savage interrupted him. \"But isn't it natural to feel\nthere's a God?\"\n\"You might as well ask if it's natural to do up one's\ntrousers with zippers,\" said the Controller sarcastically.\n\"You remind me of another of those old fellows called\nBradley. He defined philosophy as the finding of bad\nreason for what one believes by instinct. As if one\nbelieved anything by instinct! One believes things\nbecause one has been conditioned to believe them.\nFinding bad reasons for what one believes for other bad\nreasonsâthat's philosophy. People believe in God because\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: they've been conditioned to.\n\"But all the same,\" insisted the Savage, \"it is natural to\nbelieve in God when you're aloneâquite alone, in the\nnight, thinking about death ...\" \"But people never are alone now,\" said Mustapha Mond.\n\"We make them hate solitude; and we arrange their lives\nso that it's almost impossible for them ever to have it.\"\nThe Savage nodded gloomily. At Malpais he had suffered\nbecause they had shut him out from the communal\nactivities of the pueblo, in civilized London he was\nsuffering because he could never escape from those\ncommunal activities, never be quietly alone.\n\"Do you remember that bit in King Lear?\" said the\nSavage at last. \"'The gods are just and of our pleasant\nvices make instruments to plague us; the dark and\nvicious place where thee he got cost him his eyes,' and\nEdmund answersâyou remember, he's wounded, he's\ndyingâ'Thou hast spoken right; 'tis true. The wheel has\ncome full circle; I am here.' What about that now?\nDoesn't there seem to be a God managing things,\npunishing, rewarding?\"\n\"Well, does there?\" questioned the Controller in his turn.\n\"You can indulge in any number of pleasant vices with a\nfreemartin and run no risks of having your eyes put out\nby your son's mistress. 'The wheel has come full circle; I\nam here.' But where would Edmund be nowadays? Sitting\nin a pneumatic chair, with his arm round a girl's waist,\nsucking away at his sex-hormone chewing-gum and\nlooking at the feelies. The gods are just. No doubt. But\ntheir code of law is dictated, in the last resort, by the\npeople who organize society; Providence takes its cue\nfrom men.\"\n\"Are you sure?\" asked the Savage. \"Are you quite sure\nthat the Edmund in that pneumatic chair hasn't been just\nas heavily punished as the Edmund who's wounded and\nbleeding to death? The gods are just. Haven't they used\nhis pleasant vices as an instrument to degrade him?\" \"Degrade him from what position? As a happy, hard-\nworking, goods-consuming citizen he's perfect. Of course,\nif
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: you choose some other standard than ours, then\nperhaps you might say he was degraded. But you've got\nto stick to one set of postulates. You can't play Electro-\nmagnetic Golf according to the rules of Centrifugal\nBumble-puppy.\"\n\"But value dwells not in particular will,\" said the Savage.\n\"It holds his estimate and dignity as well wherein 'tis\nprecious of itself as in the prizer.\"\n\"Come, come,\" protested Mustapha Mond, \"that's going\nrather far, isn't it?\"\n\"If you allowed yourselves to think of God, you wouldn't\nallow yourselves to be degraded by pleasant vices. You'd\nhave a reason for bearing things patiently, for doing\nthings with courage. I've seen it with the Indians.\"\n\"l'm sure you have,\" said Mustapha Mond. \"But then we\naren't Indians. There isn't any need for a civilized man to\nbear anything that's seriously unpleasant. And as for\ndoing thingsâFord forbid that he should get the idea into\nhis head. It would upset the whole social order if men\nstarted doing things on their own.\"\n\"What about self-denial, then? If you had a God, you'd\nhave a reason for self-denial.\"\n\"But industrial civilization is only possible when there's no\nself-denial. Self-indulgence up to the very limits imposed\nby hygiene and economics. Otherwise the wheels stop\nturning.\"\n\"You'd have a reason for chastity!\" said the Savage,\nblushing a little as he spoke the words. \"But\nchastity\nmeans\npassion,\nchastity\nmeans\nneurasthenia. And passion and neurasthenia mean\ninstability. And instability means the end of civilization.\nYou can't have a lasting civilization without plenty of\npleasant vices.\"\n\"But God's the reason for everything noble and fine and\nheroic. If you had a God ...\"\n\"My dear young friend,\" said Mustapha Mond, \"civilization\nhas absolutely no need of nobility or heroism. These\nthings are symptoms of political inefficiency. In a\nproperly organized society like ours, nobody has any\nopportunities for being noble or heroic. Conditions have\ngot to be thoroughly unstable
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: before the occasion can\narise. Where there are wars, where there are divided\nallegiances, where there are temptations to be resisted,\nobjects of love to be fought for or defendedâthere,\nobviously, nobility and heroism have some sense. But\nthere aren't any wars nowadays. The greatest care is\ntaken to prevent you from loving any one too much.\nThere's no such thing as a divided allegiance; you're so\nconditioned that you can't help doing what you ought to\ndo. And what you ought to do is on the whole so\npleasant, so many of the natural impulses are allowed\nfree play, that there really aren't any temptations to\nresist. And if ever, by some unlucky chance, anything\nunpleasant should somehow happen, why, there's always\nsoma to give you a holiday from the facts. And there's\nalways soma to calm your anger, to reconcile you to your\nenemies, to make you patient and long-suffering. In the\npast you could only accomplish these things by making a\ngreat effort and after years of hard moral training. Now,\nyou swallow two or three half-gramme tablets, and there\nyou are. Anybody can be virtuous now. You can carry at\nleast half your mortality about in a bottle. Christianity\nwithout tearsâthat's what soma is.\" \"But the tears are necessary. Don't you remember what\nOthello said? 'If after every tempest came such calms,\nmay the winds blow till they have wakened death.'\nThere's a story one of the old Indians used to tell us,\nabout the Girl of MÃ¡taski. The young men who wanted to\nmarry her had to do a morning's hoeing in her garden. It\nseemed easy; but there were flies and mosquitoes, magic\nones. Most of the young men simply couldn't stand the\nbiting and stinging. But the one that couldâhe got the\ngirl.\"\n\"Charming! But in civilized countries,\" said the Controller,\n\"you can have girls without hoeing for them, and there\naren't any flies or mosquitoes to sting you. We got rid of\nthem all centuries ago.\"\nThe Savage nodded, frowning. \"You got rid of them. Yes,\nthat's just like you. Getting rid
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of everything unpleasant\ninstead of learning to put up with it. Whether 'tis better in\nthe mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous\nfortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles and by\nopposing end them ... But you don't do either. Neither\nsuffer nor oppose. You just abolish the slings and arrows.\nIt's too easy.\"\nHe was suddenly silent, thinking of his mother. In her\nroom on the thirty-seventh floor, Linda had floated in a\nsea of singing lights and perfumed caressesâfloated\naway, out of space, out of time, out of the prison of her\nmemories, her habits, her aged and bloated body. And\nTomakin, ex-Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning,\nTomakin was still on holidayâon holiday from humiliation\nand pain, in a world where he could not hear those\nwords, that derisive laughter, could not see that hideous\nface, feel those moist and flabby arms round his neck, in\na beautiful world ... \"What you need,\" the Savage went on, \"is something\nwith tears for a change. Nothing costs enough here.\"\n(\"Twelve and a half million dollars,\" Henry Foster had\nprotested when the Savage told him that. \"Twelve and a\nhalf millionâthat's what the new Conditioning Centre cost.\nNot a cent less.\")\n\"Exposing what is mortal and unsure to all that fortune,\ndeath and danger dare, even for an eggshell. Isn't there\nsomething in that?\" he asked, looking up at Mustapha\nMond. \"Quite apart from Godâthough of course God\nwould be a reason for it. Isn't there something in living\ndangerously?\"\n\"There's a great deal in it,\" the Controller replied. \"Men\nand women must have their adrenals stimulated from\ntime to time.\"\n\"What?\" questioned the Savage, uncomprehending.\n\"It's one of the conditions of perfect health. That's why\nwe've made the V.P.S. treatments compulsory.\"\n\"V.P.S.?\"\n\"Violent Passion Surrogate. Regularly once a month. We\nflood the whole system with adrenin. It's the complete\nphysiological equivalent of fear and rage. All the tonic\neffects of murdering Desdemona and bei
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ng murdered by\nOthello, without any of the inconveniences.\"\n\"But I like the inconveniences.\"\n\"We don't,\" said the Controller. \"We prefer to do things\ncomfortably.\" \"But I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I\nwant real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I\nwant sin.\"\n\"In fact,\" said Mustapha Mond, \"you're claiming the right\nto be unhappy.\"\n\"All right then,\" said the Savage defiantly, \"I'm claiming\nthe right to be unhappy.\"\n\"Not to mention the right to grow old and ugly and\nimpotent; the right to have syphilis and cancer; the right\nto have too little to eat; the right to be lousy; the right to\nlive in constant apprehension of what may happen to-\nmorrow; the right to catch typhoid; the right to be\ntortured by unspeakable pains of every kind.\" There was\na long silence.\n\"I claim them all,\" said the Savage at last.\nMustapha Mond shrugged\nwelcome,\" he said.\nhis\nshoulders.\n\"You're Chapter Eighteen\nT HE DOOR was ajar; they entered.\n\"John!\"\nFrom\nthe bathroom\ncharacteristic sound.\ncame\nan\nunpleasant\nand\n\"Is there anything the matter?\" Helmholtz called.\nThere was no answer. The unpleasant sound was\nrepeated, twice; there was silence. Then, with a click the\nbathroom door opened and, very pale, the Savage\nemerged.\n\"I say,\" Helmholtz exclaimed solicitously, \"you do look ill,\nJohn!\"\n\"Did you eat something that didn't agree with you?\"\nasked Bernard.\nThe Savage nodded. \"I ate civilization.\"\n\"What?\"\n\"It poisoned me; I was defiled. And then,\" he added, in a\nlower tone, \"I ate my own wickedness.\"\n\"Yes, but what exactly? ... I mean, just now you were ...\"\n\"Now I am purified,\" said the Savage. \"I drank some\nmustard and warm water.\"\nThe others stared at him in astonishment. \"Do you mean\nto say that you were doing it on purpose?\" asked\nBernard. \"That's how the Indians always purify themselves.\" He\nsat down and, sighing, passed his hand across his\nforehead. \"I shall rest for a few minutes,\" he said. \"I'm\nrather tire
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d.\"\n\"Well, I'm not surprised,\" said Helmholtz. After a silence,\n\"We've come to say good-bye,\" he went on in another\ntone. \"We're off to-morrow morning.\"\n\"Yes, we're off to-morrow,\" said Bernard on whose face\nthe Savage remarked a new expression of determined\nresignation. \"And by the way, John,\" he continued,\nleaning forward in his chair and laying a hand on the\nSavage's knee, \"I want to say how sorry I am about\neverything that happened yesterday.\" He blushed. \"How\nashamed,\" he went on, in spite of the unsteadiness of his\nvoice, \"how really ...\"\nThe Savage cut him short\naffectionately pressed it.\nand,\ntaking\nhis\nhand,\n\"Helmholtz was wonderful to me,\" Bernard resumed,\nafter a little pause. \"If it hadn't been for him, I should ...\"\n\"Now, now,\" Helmholtz protested.\nThere was a silence. In spite of their sadnessâbecause of\nit, even; for their sadness was the symptom of their love\nfor one anotherâthe three young men were happy.\n\"I went to see the Controller this morning,\" said the\nSavage at last.\n\"What for?\"\n\"To ask if I mightn't go to the islands with you.\"\n\"And what did he say?\" asked Helmholtz eagerly.\nThe Savage shook his head. \"He wouldn't let me.\" \"Why not?\"\n\"He said he wanted to go on with the experiment. But I'm\ndamned,\" the Savage added, with sudden fury, \"I'm\ndamned if I'll go on being experimented with. Not for all\nthe Controllers in the world. l shall go away to-morrow\ntoo.\"\n\"But where?\" the others asked in unison.\nThe Savage shrugged his shoulders. \"Anywhere. I don't\ncare. So long as I can be alone.\"\nFrom Guildford the down-line followed the Wey valley to\nGodalming, then, over Milford and Witley, proceeded to\nHaslemere\nand\non\nthrough\nPetersfield\ntowards\nPortsmouth. Roughly parallel to it, the upline passed over\nWorplesden,\nTongham,\nPuttenham,\nElstead\nand\nGrayshott. Between the Hog's Back and Hindhead there\nwere points where the two lines were not more than six\nor seven kilometres apart. The distance was too
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: small for\ncareless flyersâparticularly at night and when they had\ntaken half a gramme too much. There had been\naccidents. Serious ones. It had been decided to deflect\nthe upline a few kilometres to the west. Between\nGrayshott and Tongham four abandoned air-lighthouses\nmarked the course of the old Portsmouth-to-London road.\nThe skies above them were silent and deserted. It was\nover Selborne, Bordon and Farnham that the helicopters\nnow ceaselessly hummed and roared.\nThe Savage had chosen as his hermitage the old light-\nhouse which stood on the crest of the hill between\nPuttenham and Elstead. The building was of ferro-\nconcrete\nand\nin\nexcellent\nconditionâalmost\ntoo\ncomfortable the Savage had thought when he first\nexplored the place, almost too civilizedly luxurious. He\npacified his conscience by promising himself a compensatingly harder self-discipline, purifications the\nmore complete and thorough. His first night in the\nhermitage was, deliberately, a sleepless one. He spent\nthe hours on his knees praying, now to that Heaven from\nwhich the guilty Claudius had begged forgiveness, now in\nZuÃ±i to Awonawilona, now to Jesus and Pookong, now to\nhis own guardian animal, the eagle. From time to time he\nstretched out his arms as though he were on the Cross,\nand held them thus through long minutes of an ache that\ngradually increased till it became a tremulous and\nexcruciating agony; held them, in voluntary crucifixion,\nwhile he repeated, through clenched teeth (the sweat,\nmeanwhile, pouring down his face), \"Oh, forgive me! Oh,\nmake me pure! Oh, help me to be good!\" again and\nagain, till he was on the point of fainting from the pain.\nWhen morning came, he felt he had earned the right to\ninhabit the lighthouse; yet, even though there still was\nglass in most of the windows, even though the view from\nthe platform was so fine. For the very reason why he had\nchosen the lighthouse had become almost instantly a\nreason for going somewhere else. He had decided to live\nthere because the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: view was so beautiful, because, from\nhis vantage point, he seemed to be looking out on to the\nincarnation of a divine being. But who was he to be\npampered with the daily and hourly sight of loveliness?\nWho was he to be living in the visible presence of God?\nAll he deserved to live in was some filthy sty, some blind\nhole in the ground. Stiff and still aching after his long\nnight of pain, but for that very reason inwardly\nreassured, he climbed up to the platform of his tower, he\nlooked out over the bright sunrise world which he had\nregained the right to inhabit. On the north the view was\nbounded by the long chalk ridge of the Hog's Back, from\nbehind whose eastern extremity rose the towers of the\nseven skyscrapers which constituted Guildford. Seeing\nthem, the Savage made a grimace; but he was to\nbecome reconciled to them in course of time; for at night they twinkled gaily with geometrical constellations, or\nelse, flood-lighted, pointed their luminous fingers (with a\ngesture whose significance nobody in England but the\nSavage now understood) solemnly towards the plumbless\nmysteries of heaven.\nIn the valley which separated the Hog's Back from the\nsandy hill on which the lighthouse stood, Puttenham was\na modest little village nine stories high, with silos, a\npoultry farm, and a small vitamin-D factory. On the other\nside of the lighthouse, towards the South, the ground fell\naway in long slopes of heather to a chain of ponds.\nBeyond them, above the intervening woods, rose the\nfourteen-story tower of Elstead. Dim in the hazy English\nair, Hindhead and Selborne invited the eye into a blue\nromantic distance. But it was not alone the distance that\nhad attracted the Savage to his lighthouse; the near was\nas seductive as the far. The woods, the open stretches of\nheather and yellow gorse, the clumps of Scotch firs, the\nshining ponds with their overhanging birch trees, their\nwater lilies, their beds of rushesâthese were beautiful\nand, to an eye accustomed to the aridities of the\nAmerican dese
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rt, astonishing. And then the solitude!\nWhole days passed during which he never saw a human\nbeing. The lighthouse was only a quarter of an hour's\nflight from the Charing-T Tower; but the hills of Malpais\nwere hardly more deserted than this Surrey heath. The\ncrowds that daily left London, left it only to play Electro-\nmagnetic Golf or Tennis. Puttenham possessed no links;\nthe nearest Riemann-surfaces were at Guildford. Flowers\nand a landscape were the only attractions here. And so,\nas there was no good reason for coming, nobody came.\nDuring the first days the Savage lived alone and\nundisturbed.\nOf the money which, on his first arrival, John had\nreceived for his personal expenses, most had been spent on his equipment. Before leaving London he had bought\nfour viscose-woollen blankets, rope and string, nails,\nglue, a few tools, matches (though he intended in due\ncourse to make a fire drill), some pots and pans, two\ndozen packets of seeds, and ten kilogrammes of wheat\nflour. \"No, not synthetic starch and cotton-waste flour-\nsubstitute,\" he had insisted. \"Even though it is more\nnourishing.\" But when it came to pan-glandular biscuits\nand vitaminized beef-surrogate, he had not been able to\nresist the shopman's persuasion. Looking at the tins now,\nhe bitterly reproached himself for his weakness.\nLoathesome civilized stuff! He had made up his mind that\nhe would never eat it, even if he were starving. \"That'll\nteach them,\" he thought vindictively. It would also teach\nhim.\nHe counted his money. The little that remained would be\nenough, he hoped, to tide him over the winter. By next\nspring, his garden would be producing enough to make\nhim independent of the outside world. Meanwhile, there\nwould always be game. He had seen plenty of rabbits,\nand there were waterfowl on the ponds. He set to work at\nonce to make a bow and arrows.\nThere were ash trees near the lighthouse and, for arrow\nshafts, a whole copse full of beautifully straight hazel\nsaplings. He began by felling a young ash, cut
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: out six feet\nof unbranched stem, stripped off the bark and, paring by\nparing, shaved away the white wood, as old Mitsima had\ntaught him, until he had a stave of his own height, stiff at\nthe thickened centre, lively and quick at the slender tips.\nThe work gave him an intense pleasure. After those\nweeks of idleness in London, with nothing to do,\nwhenever he wanted anything, but to press a switch or\nturn a handle, it was pure delight to be doing something\nthat demanded skill and patience. He had almost finished whittling the stave into shape,\nwhen he realized with a start that he was singing-singing!\nIt was as though, stumbling upon himself from the\noutside, he had suddenly caught himself out, taken\nhimself flagrantly at fault. Guiltily he blushed. After all, it\nwas not to sing and enjoy himself that he had come here.\nIt was to escape further contamination by the filth of\ncivilized life; it was to be purified and made good; it was\nactively to make amends. He realized to his dismay that,\nabsorbed in the whittling of his bow, he had forgotten\nwhat he had sworn to himself he would constantly\nrememberâpoor Linda, and his own murderous\nunkindness to her, and those loathsome twins, swarming\nlike lice across the mystery of her death, insulting, with\ntheir presence, not merely his own grief and repentance,\nbut the very gods themselves. He had sworn to\nremember, he had sworn unceasingly to make amends.\nAnd there was he, sitting happily over his bow-stave,\nsinging, actually singing. ...\nHe went indoors, opened the box of mustard, and put\nsome water to boil on the fire.\nHalf an hour later, three Delta-Minus landworkers from\none of the Puttenham Bokanovsky Groups happened to\nbe driving to Elstead and, at the top of the hill, were\nastonished to see a young man standing 0utside the\nabandoned lighthouse stripped to the waist and hitting\nhimself with a whip of knotted cords. His back was\nhorizontally streaked with crimson, and from weal to weal\nran thin trickles of blood. The driver of the lo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rry pulled up\nat the side of the road and, with his two companions,\nstared open-mouthed at the extraordinary spectacle.\nOne, two threeâthey counted the strokes. After the\neighth, the young man interrupted his self-punishment to\nrun to the wood's edge and there be violently sick. When\nhe had finished, he picked up the whip and began hitting\nhimself again. Nine, ten, eleven, twelve ... \"Ford!\" whispered the driver. And his twins were of the\nsame opinion.\n\"Fordey!\" they said.\nThree days later, like turkey buzzards settling on a\ncorpse, the reporters came.\nDried and hardened over a slow fire of green wood, the\nbow was ready. The Savage was busy on his arrows.\nThirty hazel sticks had been whittled and dried, tipped\nwith sharp nails, carefully nocked. He had made a raid\none night on the Puttenham poultry farm, and now had\nfeathers enough to equip a whole armoury. It was at\nwork upon the feathering of his shafts that the first of the\nreporters found him. Noiseless on his pneumatic shoes,\nthe man came up behind him.\n\"Good-morning, Mr. Savage,\" he\nrepresentative of The Hourly Radio.\"\nsaid.\n\"I\nam\nthe\nStartled as though by the bite of a snake, the Savage\nsprang to his feet, scattering arrows, feathers, glue-pot\nand brush in all directions.\n\"I beg your pardon,\" said the reporter, with genuine\ncompunction. \"I had no intention ...\" He touched his hatâ\nthe aluminum stove-pipe hat in which he carried his\nwireless receiver and transmitter. \"Excuse my not taking\nit off,\" he said. \"It's a bit heavy. Well, as I was saying, I\nam the representative of The Hourly ...\"\n\"What do you want?\" asked the Savage, scowling. The\nreporter returned his most ingratiating smile.\n\"Well, of course, our readers would be profoundly\ninterested ...\" He put his head on one side, his smile\nbecame almost coquettish. \"Just a few words from you,\nMr. Savage.\" And rapidly, with a series of ritual gestures, he uncoiled two wires connected to the portable battery\nbuckled round his waist; plugged t
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hem simultaneously\ninto the sides of his aluminum hat; touched a spring on\nthe crownâand antennÃ¦ shot up into the air; touched\nanother spring on the peak of the brimâand, like a jack-\nin-the-box, out jumped a microphone and hung there,\nquivering, six inches in front of his nose; pulled down a\npair of receivers over his ears; pressed a switch on the\nleft side of the hat-and from within came a faint waspy\nbuzzing; turned a knob on the rightâand the buzzing was\ninterrupted by a stethoscopic wheeze and cackle, by\nhiccoughs and sudden squeaks. \"Hullo,\" he said to the\nmicrophone, \"hullo, hullo ...\" A bell suddenly rang inside\nhis hat. \"Is that you, Edzel? Primo Mellon speaking. Yes,\nI've got hold of him. Mr. Savage will now take the\nmicrophone and say a few words. Won't you, Mr.\nSavage?\" He looked up at the Savage with another of\nthose winning smiles of his. \"Just tell our readers why\nyou came here. What made you leave London (hold on,\nEdzel!) so very suddenly. And, of course, that whip.\" (The\nSavage started. How did they know about the whip?)\n\"We're all crazy to know about the whip. And then\nsomething about Civilization. You know the sort of stuff.\n'What I think of the Civilized Girl.' Just a few words, a\nvery few ...\"\nThe Savage obeyed with a disconcerting literalness. Five\nwords he uttered and no more-five words, the same as\nthose he had said to Bernard about the Arch-Community-\nSongster of Canterbury. \"HÃ¡ni! Sons Ã©so tse-nÃ¡!\" And\nseizing the reporter by the shoulder, he spun him round\n(the young man revealed himself invitingly well-covered),\naimed and, with all the force and accuracy of a champion\nfoot-and-mouth-baller, delivered a most prodigious kick.\nEight minutes later, a new edition of The Hourly Radio\nwas on sale in the streets of London. \"HOURLY RADIO\nREPORTER HAS COCCYX KICKED BY MYSTERY SAVAGE,\" ran the headlines on the front page. \"SENSATION IN\nSURREY.\"\n\"Sensation even in London,\" thought the reporter when,\non his return, he read the words.
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: And a very painful\nsensation, what was more. He sat down gingerly to his\nluncheon.\nUndeterred by that cautionary bruise on their colleague's\ncoccyx, four other reporters, representing the New York\nTimes, the Frankfurt Four-Dimensional Continuum, The\nFordian Science Monitor, and The Delta Mirror, called that\nafternoon at the lighthouse and met with receptions of\nprogressively increasing violence.\nFrom a safe distance and still rubbing his buttocks,\n\"Benighted fool!\" shouted the man from The Fordian\nScience Monitor, \"why don't you take soma?\"\n\"Get away!\" The Savage shook his fist.\nThe other retreated a few steps then turned round again.\n\"Evil's an unreality if you take a couple of grammes.\"\n\"Kohakwa\nderisive.\niyathtokyai!\"\nThe\ntone\nwas\nmenacingly\n\"Pain's a delusion.\"\n\"Oh, is it?\" said the Savage and, picking up a thick hazel\nswitch, strode forward.\nThe man from The Fordian Science Monitor made a dash\nfor his helicopter.\nAfter that the Savage was left for a time in peace. A few\nhelicopters came and hovered inquisitively round the\ntower. He shot an arrow into the importunately nearest of\nthem. It pierced the aluminum floor of the cabin; there was a shrill yell, and the machine went rocketing up into\nthe air with all the acceleration that its super-charger\ncould give it. The others, in future, kept their distance\nrespectfully. Ignoring their tiresome humming (he likened\nhimself in his imagination to one of the suitors of the\nMaiden of MÃ¡tsaki, unmoved and persistent among the\nwinged vermin), the Savage dug at what was to be his\ngarden. After a time the vermin evidently became bored\nand flew away; for hours at a stretch the sky above his\nhead was empty and, but for the larks, silent.\nThe weather was breathlessly hot, there was thunder in\nthe air. He had dug all the morning and was resting,\nstretched out along the floor. And suddenly the thought\nof Lenina was a real presence, naked and tangible, saying\n\"Sweet!\" and \"Put your arms round me!\"âin shoes and\ns
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ocks, perfumed. Impudent strumpet! But oh, oh, her\narms round his neck, the lifting of her breasts, her\nmouth! Eternity was in our lips and eyes. Lenina ... No,\nno, no, no! He sprang to his feet and, half naked as he\nwas, ran out of the house. At the edge of the heath stood\na clump of hoary juniper bushes. He flung himself against\nthem, he embraced, not the smooth body of his desires,\nbut an armful of green spikes. Sharp, with a thousand\npoints, they pricked him. He tried to think of poor Linda,\nbreathless and dumb, with her clutching hands and the\nunutterable terror in her eyes. Poor Linda whom he had\nsworn to remember. But it was still the presence of\nLenina that haunted him. Lenina whom he had promised\nto forget. Even through the stab and sting of the juniper\nneedles, his wincing flesh was aware of her, unescapably\nreal. \"Sweet, sweet ... And if you wanted me too, why\ndidn't you ...\"\nThe whip was hanging on a nail by the door, ready to\nhand against the arrival of reporters. In a frenzy the\nSavage ran back to the house, seized it, whirled it. The\nknotted cords bit into his flesh. \"Strumpet! Strumpet!\" he shouted at every blow as\nthough it were Lenina (and how frantically, without\nknowing it, he wished it were), white, warm, scented,\ninfamous Lenina that he was dogging thus. \"Strumpet!\"\nAnd then, in a voice of despair, \"Oh, Linda, forgive me.\nForgive me, God. I'm bad. I'm wicked. I'm ... No, no, you\nstrumpet, you strumpet!\"\nFrom his carefully constructed hide in the wood three\nhundred metres away, Darwin Bonaparte, the Feely\nCorporation's most expert big game photographer had\nwatched the whole proceedings. Patience and skill had\nbeen rewarded. He had spent three days sitting inside the\nbole of an artificial oak tree, three nights crawling on his\nbelly through the heather, hiding microphones in gorse\nbushes, burying wires in the soft grey sand. Seventy-two\nhours of profound discomfort. But now me great moment\nhad comeâthe greatest, Darwin Bonaparte had time to\nreflec
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t, as he moved among his instruments, the greatest\nsince his taking of the famous all-howling stereoscopic\nfeely of the gorillas' wedding. \"Splendid,\" he said to\nhimself, as the Savage started his astonishing\nperformance. \"Splendid!\" He kept his telescopic cameras\ncarefully aimedâglued to their moving objective; clapped\non a higher power to get a close-up of the frantic and\ndistorted face (admirable!); switched over, for half a\nminute, to slow motion (an exquisitely comical effect, he\npromised himself); listened in, meanwhile, to the blows,\nthe groans, the wild and raving words that were being\nrecorded on the sound-track at the edge of his film, tried\nthe effect of a little amplification (yes, that was decidedly\nbetter); was delighted to hear, in a momentary lull, the\nshrill singing of a lark; wished the Savage would turn\nround so that he could get a good close-up of the blood\non his backâand almost instantly (what astonishing luck!)\nthe accommodating fellow did turn round, and he was\nable to take a perfect close-up. \"Well, that was grand!\" he said to himself when it was all\nover. \"Really grand!\" He mopped his face. When they had\nput in the feely effects at the studio, it would be a\nwonderful film. Almost as good, thought Darwin\nBonaparte, as the Sperm Whale's Love-Lifeâand that, by\nFord, was saying a good deal!\nTwelve days later The Savage of Surrey had been\nreleased and could be seen, heard and felt in every first-\nclass feely-palace in Western Europe.\nThe effect of Darwin Bonaparte's film was immediate and\nenormous. On the afternoon which followed the evening\nof its release John's rustic solitude was suddenly broken\nby the arrival overhead of a great swarm of helicopters.\nHe was digging in his gardenâdigging, too, in his own\nmind, laboriously turning up the substance of his\nthought. Deathâand he drove in his spade once, and\nagain, and yet again. And all our yesterdays have lighted\nfools the way to dusty death. A convincing thunder\nrumbled through the words.
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: He lifted another spadeful of\nearth. Why had Linda died? Why had she been allowed to\nbecome gradually less than human and at last ... He\nshuddered. A good kissing carrion. He planted his foot on\nhis spade and stamped it fiercely into the tough ground.\nAs flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; they kill us\nfor their sport. Thunder again; words that proclaimed\nthemselves trueâtruer somehow than truth itself. And yet\nthat same Gloucester had called them ever-gentle gods.\nBesides, thy best of rest is sleep and that thou oft\nprovok'st; yet grossly fear'st thy death which is no more.\nNo more than sleep. Sleep. Perchance to dream. His\nspade struck against a stone; he stooped to pick it up.\nFor in that sleep of death, what dreams? ...\nA humming overhead had become a roar; and suddenly\nhe was in shadow, there was something between the sun and him. He looked up, startled, from his digging, from\nhis thoughts; looked up in a dazzled bewilderment, his\nmind still wandering in that other world of truer-than-\ntruth, still focused on the immensities of death and deity;\nlooked up and saw, close above him, the swarm of\nhovering machines. Like locusts they came, hung poised,\ndescended all around him on the heather. And from out\nof the bellies of these giant grasshoppers stepped men in\nwhite viscose-flannels, women (for the weather was hot)\nin acetate-shantung pyjamas or velveteen shorts and\nsleeveless, half-unzippered singletsâone couple from\neach. In a few minutes there were dozens of them,\nstanding in a wide circle round the lighthouse, staring,\nlaughing, clicking their cameras, throwing (as to an ape)\npeanuts, packets of sex-hormone chewing-gum, pan-\nglandular petite beurres. And every momentâfor across\nthe Hog's Back the stream of traffic now flowed\nunceasinglyâtheir numbers increased. As in a nightmare,\nthe dozens became scores, the scores hundreds.\nThe Savage had retreated towards cover, and now, in the\nposture of an animal at bay, stood with his back to the\nwall of the lighthouse
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: , staring from face to face in\nspeechless horror, like a man out of his senses.\nFrom this stupor he was aroused to a more immediate\nsense of reality by the impact on his cheek of a well-\naimed packet of chewing-gum. A shock of startling painâ\nand he was broad awake, awake and fiercely angry.\n\"Go away!\" he shouted.\nThe ape had spoken; there was a burst of laughter and\nhand-clapping. \"Good old Savage! Hurrah, hurrah!\" And\nthrough the babel he heard cries of: \"Whip, whip, the\nwhip!\" Acting on the word's suggestion, he seized the bunch of\nknotted cords from its nail behind the door and shook it\nat his tormentors.\nThere was a yell of ironical applause.\nMenacingly he advanced towards them. A woman cried\nout in fear. The line wavered at its most immediately\nthreatened point, then stiffened again, stood firm. The\nconsciousness of being in overwhelming force had given\nthese sightseers a courage which the Savage had not\nexpected of them. Taken aback, he halted and looked\nround.\n\"Why don't you leave me alone?\" There was an almost\nplaintive note in his anger.\n\"Have a few magnesium-salted almonds!\" said the man\nwho, if the Savage were to advance, would be the first to\nbe attacked. He held out a packet. \"They're really very\ngood, you know,\" he added, with a rather nervous smile\nof propitiation. \"And the magnesium salts will help to\nkeep you young.\"\nThe Savage ignored his offer. \"What do you want with\nme?\" he asked, turning from one grinning face to\nanother. \"What do you want with me?\"\n\"The whip,\" answered a hundred voices confusedly. \"Do\nthe whipping stunt. Let's see the whipping stunt.\"\nThen, in unison and on a slow, heavy rhythm, \"We-want-\nthe whip,\" shouted a group at the end of the line. \"Weâ\nwantâthe whip.\"\nOthers at once took up the cry, and the phrase was\nrepeated, parrot-fashion, again and again, with an ever-\ngrowing volume of sound, until, by the seventh or eighth reiteration, no other word was being spoken. \"Weâwantâ\nthe whip.\"\nThey were
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: all crying together; and, intoxicated by the\nnoise, the unanimity, the sense of rhythmical atonement,\nthey might, it seemed, have gone on for hours-almost\nindefinitely. But at about the twenty-fifth repetition the\nproceedings were startlingly interrupted. Yet another\nhelicopter had arrived from across the Hog's Back, hung\npoised above the crowd, then dropped within a few yards\nof where the Savage was standing, in the open space\nbetween the line of sightseers and the lighthouse. The\nroar of the air screws momentarily drowned the shouting;\nthen, as the machine touched the ground and the engines\nwere turned off: \"Weâwantâthe whip; weâwantâthe\nwhip,\" broke out again in the same loud, insistent\nmonotone.\nThe door of the helicopter opened, and out stepped, first\na fair and ruddy-faced young man, then, in green\nvelveteen shorts, white shirt, and jockey cap, a young\nwoman.\nAt the sight of the young woman, the Savage started,\nrecoiled, turned pale.\nThe young woman stood, smiling at himâan uncertain,\nimploring, almost abject smile. The seconds passed. Her\nlips moved, she was saying something; but the sound of\nher voice was covered by the loud reiterated refrain of\nthe sightseers.\n\"Weâwantâthe whip! Weâwantâthe whip!\"\nThe young woman pressed both hands to her left side,\nand on that peach-bright, doll-beautiful face of hers\nappeared a strangely incongruous expression of yearning\ndistress. Her blue eyes seemed to grow larger, brighter;\nand suddenly two tears rolled down her cheeks. Inaudibly, she spoke again; then, with a quick,\nimpassioned gesture stretched out her arms towards the\nSavage, stepped forward.\n\"Weâwantâthe whip! Weâwant ...\"\nAnd all of a sudden they had what they wanted.\n\"Strumpet!\" The Savage had rushed at her like a\nmadman. \"Fitchew!\" Like a madman, he was slashing at\nher with his whip of small cords.\nTerrified, she had turned to flee, had tripped and fallen in\nthe heather. \"Henry, Henry!\" she shouted. But her ruddy-\nfaced companion ha
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d bolted out of harm's way behind\nthe helicopter.\nWith a whoop of delighted excitement the line broke;\nthere was a convergent stampede towards that magnetic\ncentre of attraction. Pain was a fascinating horror.\n\"Fry, lechery, fry!\" Frenzied, the Savage slashed again.\nHungrily they gathered round, pushing and scrambling\nlike swine about the trough.\n\"Oh, the flesh!\" The Savage ground his teeth. This time it\nwas on his shoulders that the whip descended. \"Kill it, kill\nit!\"\nDrawn by the fascination of the horror of pain and, from\nwithin, impelled by that habit of cooperation, that desire\nfor unanimity and atonement, which their conditioning\nhad so ineradicably implanted in them, they began to\nmime the frenzy of his gestures, striking at one another\nas the Savage struck at his own rebellious flesh, or at\nthat plump incarnation of turpitude writhing in the\nheather at his feet. \"Kill it, kill it, kill it ...\" The Savage went on shouting.\nThen suddenly somebody started singing \"Orgy-porgy\"\nand, in a moment, they had all caught up the refrain and,\nsinging, had begun to dance. Orgy-porgy, round and\nround and round, beating one another in six-eight time.\nOrgy-porgy ...\nIt was after midnight when the last of the helicopters\ntook its flight. Stupefied by soma, and exhausted by a\nlong-drawn frenzy of sensuality, the Savage lay sleeping\nin the heather. The sun was already high when he awoke.\nHe lay for a moment, blinking in owlish incomprehension\nat the light; then suddenly rememberedâeverything.\n\"Oh, my God, my God!\" He covered his eyes with his\nhand.\nThat evening the swarm of helicopters that came buzzing\nacross the Hog's Back was a dark cloud ten kilometres\nlong. The description of last night's orgy of atonement\nhad been in all the papers.\n\"Savage!\" called the first arrivals, as they alighted from\ntheir machine. \"Mr. Savage!\"\nThere was no answer.\nThe door of the lighthouse was ajar. They pushed it open\nand walked into a shuttered twilight. Through an archway\non the fu
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rther side of the room they could see the bottom\nof the staircase that led up to the higher floors. Just\nunder the crown of the arch dangled a pair of feet.\n\"Mr. Savage!\"\nSlowly, very slowly, like two unhurried compass needles,\nthe feet turned towards the right; north, north-east, east,\nsouth-east, south, south-south-west; then paused, and, after a few seconds, turned as unhurriedly back towards\nthe left. South-south-west, south, south-east, east. ...\nEND " .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 44, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:0b9f96a6-65e7-3621-7e2b-2724a810b109' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '102092', new value: 'urn:uuid:7f9ca0d2-7429-ec01-7512-24cd8d6baaa2')
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:0b9f96a6-65e7-3621-7e2b-2724a810b109> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:0b9f96a6-65e7-3621-7e2b-2724a810b109> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "ThinkPadï½® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Lenovo"] ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:contentCreated "2008-02-12T15:02:42Z" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: dc:format "application/pdf" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:description "" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 242 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "Â®\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nHardware Maintenance Manual\nThis manual supports:\nThinkPad X60\n(MT 1706, 1707, 1708, 1709, 2509, and 2510)\nThinkPad X60s\n(MT 1702, 1703, 1704, 1705, 2507, 2508, 2533, and 2534)\nThinkPad X61\n(MT 7673, 7674, 7675, 7676, 7678, and 7679)\nThinkPad X61s\n(MT 7666, 7667, 7668, 7669, 7670, and 7671) Â®\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nHardware Maintenance Manual Note\nBefore using this information and the product it supports, be sure to read the general information under âNoticesâ on page\n234.\nFifth Edition (February 2008)\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008. All rights reserved.\nLENOVO products, data, computer software, and services have been developed exclusively at private expense and\nare sold to governmental entities as commercial items as defined by 48 C.F.R. 2.101 with limited and restricted\nrights to use, reproduction and disclosure.\nLIMITED AND RESTRICTED RIGHTS NOTICE: If products, data, computer software, or services are delivered\npursuant a General Services Administration â³GSAâ³ contract, use, reproduction, or disclosure is subject to restrictions\nset forth in Contract No. GS-35F-05925. Contents\nAbout this manual . . . . . . . . . . 1\nIntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3\nImportant service information . . . . . . . . 3\nStrategy for replacing FRUs . . . . . . . . . 3\nStrategy for replacing a hard disk drive . . . . 4\nImportant notice for replacing a system board . . 4\nHow to use error messages . . . . . . . . 4\nStrategy for replacing FRUs for CTO, CMV, and GAV 4\nProduct definition . . . . . . . . . . . 4\nFRU identification for CTO, CMV, and GAV\nproducts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5\nImportant information about replacing RoHS\ncompliant FRUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6\nDiskette compatibility matrix . . . . . . . . . 7\nSafety notices: multilingual translations . . . . . 8\nSafety information . . . . . . . . . . . . 16\nGeneral safety . . . . . . . . . . . . 16\nElectrical safety . . . . . . . . . . . . 16\nSafe
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ty inspection guide . . . . . . . . . 18\nHandling devices that are sensitive to\nelectrostatic discharge . . . . . . . . . . 19\nGrounding requirements . . . . . . . . . 19\nLaser compliance statement . . . . . . . . . 20\nGeneral descriptions . . . . . . . . . 23\nRead this first . . . . . . . . . . . .\nWhat to do first . . . . . . . . . . .\nRelated service information . . . . . . . .\nService Web site . . . . . . . . . . .\nRestoring the factory contents by using Product\nRecovery discs . . . . . . . . . . .\nPasswords . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nPower management . . . . . . . . .\nCheckout guide . . . . . . . . . . . .\nTesting the computer . . . . . . . . .\nDetecting system information with PC-Doctor .\nPower system checkout . . . . . . . .\n.\n.\n.\n. 23\n23\n25\n25\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n. 25\n26\n28\n31\n31\n33\n34\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s . . 37\nProduct overview . . . . . . .\nSpecifications . . . . . . . .\nStatus indicators for X60, X60s, X61,\nFRU tests . . . . . . . . .\nFn key combinations . . . . .\nSymptom-to-FRU index . . . . .\nNumeric error codes . . . . .\nError messages . . . . . . .\nBeep symptoms . . . . . . .\nNo-beep symptoms . . . . . .\nLCD-related symptoms . . . .\nIntermittent problems . . . . .\nUndetermined problems . . . .\nFRU replacement notices . . . . .\nScrew notices . . . . . . . .\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n. . . .\n. . . .\nand X61s .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n38\n38\n41\n43\n45\n47\n47\n51\n53\n53\n54\n55\n55\n56\n56\nRetaining serial numbers . . . . . . . . . 56\nRemoving and replacing a FRU . . . . . . . . 59\n1010 Battery pack . . . . . . . . . . . 60\n1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber\nrails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61\n1030 DIMM cover . . . . . . . . . . . 63\n1040 DIMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64\n1050 Keyboard . . . . . . . . . . . . 65\n1060 Upper case . . . . . . . . . . . . 69\n1070 Fingerprint reader
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: . . . . . . . . . 72\n1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch) . . . . . . . . . 73\n1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch) . . . . . . 74\n1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini card . . . 75\n1110 Intel Turbo Memory card . . . . . . . 77\n1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini card . . . 78\n1130 MDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81\n1140 Backup battery . . . . . . . . . . 82\n1150 Second Fan . . . . . . . . . . . . 83\n1160 Speaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84\n1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectors . . . . . . 85\n1180 LCD assembly . . . . . . . . . . . 86\n1190 Hard disk sub-card . . . . . . . . . 92\n1200 System board and lower case assembly with\nlabel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93\n1210 Fansink . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96\n2010 LCD bezel . . . . . . . . . . . . 97\n2020 Inverter card . . . . . . . . . . . 100\n2030 Bluetooth daughter card . . . . . . . 101\n2040 LCD . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102\n2050 Wireless WAN retractable antenna . . . 105\n2060 Wireless WAN antenna cable (SPWG) . . 106\n2070 Wireless LAN antenna cables (SPWG) . . 107\n2080 Hinges . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109\n2090 Wireless LAN antenna cables (TMD) . . . 113\n2100 Wireless WAN antenna cable (TMD) . . . 115\n2110 LCD panel and LCD cable . . . . . . 117\nLocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119\nFront view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119\nRear view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120\nBottom view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121\nRear View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase . . . . 122\nBottom View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase . . . 122\nParts list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123\nOverall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123\nLCD FRUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196\nKeyboard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216\nRecovery discs . . . . . . . . . . . . 218\nMiscellaneous parts . . . . . . . . . . 230\nAC adapters . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231\nCommon parts list . . . . . . . . . . . 232\nNotices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234\nTrademarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 35\niii iv\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s About this manual\nThis manual contains service and reference information for ThinkPad X60 (MT\n1706, 1707, 1708, 1709, 2509, and 2510), ThinkPad X60s (MT 1702, 1703, 1704, 1705,\n2507, 2508, 2533, and 2534), ThinkPad X61 (MT 7673, 7674, 7675, 7676, 7678, and\n7679), and ThinkPad X61s (MT 7666, 7667, 7668, 7669, 7670, and 7671) product. Use\nthis manual along with the advanced diagnostic tests to troubleshoot problems.\nThe manual is divided into sections as follows:\nv The common sections provide general information, guidelines, and safety\ninformation required in servicing computers.\nv The product-specific section includes service, reference, and product-specific\nparts information.\nImportant\nThis manual is intended for trained service personnel who are familiar with\nThinkPad products. Use this manual along with the advanced diagnostic tests\nto troubleshoot problems effectively.\nBefore servicing a ThinkPad product, be sure to review the safety information\nunder âSafety notices: multilingual translationsâ on page 8, âSafety\ninformationâ on page 16, and âLaser compliance statementâ on page 20.\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n1 2\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Introduction\nImportant service information\nImportant\nBIOS and device driver fixes are customer-installable. The BIOS and device\ndrivers are posted on the customer support site http://www.lenovo.com/\nsupport\nAdvise customers to contact the Customer Support Center at 800-426-7378 if\nthey need assistance in obtaining or installing any software fixes, drivers, and\nBIOS downloads.\nCustomers in Canada should call the Customer Support Center at\n800-565-3344 for assistance or download information.\nStrategy for replacing FRUs\nBefore replacing parts\nMake sure that all software fixes, drivers, and BIOS downloads are installed\nbefore replacing any FRUs listed in this manual.\nAfter a system board is replaced, ensure that the latest BIOS is loaded to the\nsystem board before comple
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ting the service action.\nTo download software fixes, drivers, and BIOS, do as follows:\n1. Go to http://www.lenovo.com/support\n2. Enter the product number of the computer or press Auto-detect button on\nthe screen.\n3. Select Downloads and drivers.\n4. Follow the directions on the screen and install the necessary software.\nUse the following strategy to prevent unnecessary expense for replacing and\nservicing FRUs:\nv If you are instructed to replace a FRU but the replacement does not correct the\nproblem, reinstall the original FRU before you continue.\nv Some computers have both a processor board and a system board. If you are\ninstructed to replace either the processor board or the system board, and\nreplacing one of them does not correct the problem, reinstall that board, and\nthen replace the other one.\nv If an adapter or a device consists of more than one FRU, any of the FRUs may\nbe the cause of the error. Before replacing the adapter or device, remove the\nFRUs, one by one, to see if the symptoms change. Replace only the FRU that\nchanged the symptoms.\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n3 Important service information\nAttention: The setup configuration on the computer you are servicing may have\nbeen customized. Running Automatic Configuration may alter the settings. Note\nthe current configuration settings (using the View Configuration option); then,\nwhen service has been completed, verify that those settings remain in effect.\nStrategy for replacing a hard disk drive\nAlways try to run a low-level format before replacing a hard disk drive. This will\ncause all customer data on the hard disk to be lost. Be sure that the customer has a\ncurrent backup of the data before doing this task.\nAttention: The drive startup sequence in the computer you are servicing may\nhave been changed. Be extremely careful during write operations such as copying,\nsaving, or formatting. If you select an incorrect drive, data or programs can be\noverwritten.\nImportant notice for replacing a system board\nSome components mo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: unted on a system board are very sensitive. Improper\nhandling of a system board can cause damage to those components, and may\ncause a system malfunction.\nAttention: When handling a system board:\nv Do not drop a system board or apply any excessive force to it.\nv Avoid rough handling of any kind.\nv Avoid bending a system board and hard pushing to prevent cracking at each\nBGA (Ball Grid Array) chipset.\nHow to use error messages\nUse the error codes displayed on the screen to diagnose failures. If more than one\nerror code is displayed, begin the diagnosis with the first error code. Whatever\ncauses the first error code may also cause false error codes. If no error code is\ndisplayed, see whether the error symptom is listed in the Symptom-to-FRU Index\nfor the computer you are servicing.\nStrategy for replacing FRUs for CTO, CMV, and GAV\nProduct definition\nDynamic Configure To Order (CTO)\nThis provides the ability for a customer to configure an IBM Â® or a Lenovo TM\nsolution from an eSite, and have this configuration sent to fulfillment, where it is\nbuilt and shipped directly to the customer. The machine label, Product Entitlement\nWarehouse (PEW), eSupport, and the HMM will load these products as the 4-digit\nMT and 3-digit model, where model = âCTOâ (Example: 1829-CTO).\nCustom Model Variant (CMV)\nThis is a unique configuration that has been negotiated between IBM or Lenovo\nand the customer. A unique 4-digit MT and 3-digit model is provided to the\ncustomer to place orders (Example: 1829-W15). A CMV is a special bid offering.\nTherefore, it is NOT generally announced.\nv The MTM portion of the machine label is the 4-digit MT and 3-digit model,\nwhere model = âCTOâ (Example: 1829-CTO). The PRODUCT ID portion of the\nmachine label is the 4-digit MT and 3-digit CMV model (Example: 1829-W15).\n4\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Important service information\nv The PEW record is the 4-digit MT and 3-digit model, where model = âCTOâ\n(Example: 1829-CTO).\nv eSupport will show both the CTO
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and CMV machine type models (Example:\n1829-CTO and 1829-W15 will be found on the eSupport site.)\nv The HMM will have the 4-digit MT and 3-digit CTO model only (Example:\n1829-CTO). Again, CMVs are custom models and are not found in the HMM.\nGeneral Announce Variant (GAV)\nThis is a standard model (fixed configuration). GAVs are announced and offered to\nall customers. The MTM portion of the machine label is a 4-digit MT and 3-digit\nmodel, where model = a âfixed part numberâ, not âCTOâ (Example: 1829-F1U).\nAlso, PEW, eSupport, and the HMM will list these products under the same fixed\nmodel number.\nFRU identification for CTO, CMV, and GAV products\nThere are three information resources to identify which FRUs are used to support\nCTO, CMV, and GAV products. These sources are PEW, eSupport, and the HMM.\nUsing PEW\nv PEW is the primary source for identifying FRU part numbers and FRU\ndescriptions for the key commodities for CTO, CMV and GAV products at a MT\n- serial number level. An example of key commodities are hard disk drives,\nsystem boards, microprocessors, Liquid Crystal Displays (LCDs), and memory.\nv Remember, all CTO and CMV products are loaded in PEW under the 4-digit MT\nand 3-digit model, where model = âCTOâ (Example: 1829-CTO). GAVs are\nloaded in PEW under the 4-digit MT and 3-digit model, where model = a âfixed\npart numberâ, not âCTOâ (Example: 1829-F1U).\nv PEW can be accessed at the following Web site:\nhttp://w3-3.ibm.com/pc/entitle\nCustomers can also access PEW via\nhttp://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/product.do?template=/warranty/\nwarranty.vm&sitestyle=lenovo\nSelect Warranty lookup. Input the MT and the Serial number and the list of key\ncommodities will be returned in the PEW record under COMPONENT\nINFORMATION.\nv Business Partners using Eclaim will access PEW when performing Entitlement\nLookup. Business Partners will enter Loc ID, MT and Serial, and the key\ncommodities will be returned in the Eclaim record under SYSTEM DETAILS.\nv Authorized IBM Busines
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s Partners can access Eclaim at the following Web site:\nhttps://wca.eclaim.com\nUsing eSupport\nFor Key Commodities (Examples - hard disk drive, system board,\nmicroprocessor, LCD, and memory)\nv eSupport can be used to view the list of key commodities built in a particular\nmachine serial (this is the same record found in PEW).\nv eSupport can be accessed at the following Web site: http://www.lenovo.com/\nsupport\nv To view the key commodities, click on PARTS INFORMATION, then PARTS\nLOOKUP. Type in the model type and serial number. The key commodities will\nbe returned in the eSupport record under PARTS SHIPPED WITH YOUR\nSYSTEM.\nIntroduction\n5 Important service information\nFor the Remaining FRUs (the complete list of FRUs at the MT Model level)\nv eSupport can be used to view the complete list of FRUs for a machine type and\nmodel.\nv To view the complete list of FRUs, type in the machine type and model\n(Example: 1829-CTO) under QUICK PATH. Under âView by Document Typeâ\nselect PARTS INFORMATION. Under âFilter by Categoryâ select SERVICE\nPARTS. Under âParts Information by Dateâ select SYSTEM SERVICE PARTS. The\nlist of service parts by description, with applicable machine type model and FRU\nwill be displayed.\nUsing the HMM\nUse the HMM as a back-up to PEW and eSupport to view the complete list of\nFRUs at the MT Model level.\nImportant information about replacing RoHS compliant FRUs\nRoHS, The Restriction of Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic\nEquipment Directive (2002/95/EC) is a European Union legal requirement\naffecting the global electronics industry. RoHS requirements must be\nimplemented on Lenovo products placed on the market and sold in the\nEuropean Union after June 2006. Products on the market before June 2006 are\nnot required to have RoHS compliant parts. If the original FRU parts are non\ncompliant, replacement parts can also be non compliant. In all cases if the\noriginal FRU parts are RoHS compliant the replacement part must also be RoHS\ncompliant.\nNote: RoH
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: S and non-RoHS FRU part numbers with the same fit and function are\nidentified with unique FRU part numbers.\nLenovo plans to transition to RoHS compliance well before the implementation\ndate and expects its suppliers to be ready to support Lenovo's requirements and\nschedule in the EU. Products sold in 2005 and 2006, will contain some RoHS\ncompliant FRUs. The following statement pertains to these products and any\nproduct Lenovo produces containing RoHS compliant FRUs.\nRoHS compliant FRUs have unique FRU part numbers. Before or after the RoHS\nimplementation date, failed RoHS compliant parts must always be replaced using\nRoHS compliant FRUs, so only the FRUs identified as compliant in the system\nHMM or direct substitutions for those FRUs may be used.\nProducts marketed before June 2006 Products marketed after June 2006\nCurrent or original\npart Replacement FRU Current or original\npart Replacement FRU\nNon-RoHS Can be Non-RoHS Must be RoHS Must be RoHS\nNon-RoHS Can be RoHS Non-RoHS Can sub to RoHS RoHS Must be RoHS\nNote: A direct substitution is a part with a different FRU part number that is\nautomatically shipped by the distribution center at the time of the order.\n6\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Diskette compatibility matrix\nDiskette compatibility matrix\nThe compatibility of each of the drives with the diskettes for it is as follows:\nDiskette\ndrive Diskette\ncapacity Compatibility\n3.5-inch 1.0 MB Read and write\n2.0 MB Read and write\n4.0 MB Not compatible\nIntroduction\n7 Safety notices\nSafety notices: multilingual translations\nIn this manual, safety notices appear in English with a page number reference to\nthe appropriate multilingual, translated safety notice found in this section.\nThe following safety notices are provided in English, French, German, Hebrew,\nItalian, Japanese, and Spanish.\nSafety notice 1\nBefore the computer is powered on after FRU replacement, make sure all screws, springs,\nand other small parts are in place and are not left loose inside the computer. Verify
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: this\nby shaking the computer and listening for rattling sounds. Metallic parts or metal flakes\ncan cause electrical shorts.\nAvant de remettre lâordinateur sous tension aprÃ¨s remplacement dâune unitÃ© en clientÃ¨le,\nvÃ©rifiez que tous les ressorts, vis et autres piÃ¨ces sont bien en place et bien fixÃ©es. Pour\nce faire, secouez lâunitÃ© et assurez-vous quâaucun bruit suspect ne se produit. Des piÃ¨ces\nmÃ©talliques ou des copeaux de mÃ©tal pourraient causer un court-circuit.\nBevor nach einem FRU-Austausch der Computer wieder angeschlossen wird, muÃ\nsichergestellt werden, daÃ keine Schrauben, Federn oder andere Kleinteile fehlen oder im\nGehÃ¤use vergessen wurden. Der Computer muÃ geschÃ¼ttelt und auf KlappergerÃ¤usche\ngeprÃ¼ft werden. Metallteile oder-splitter kÃ¶nnen KurzschlÃ¼sse erzeugen.\nPrima di accendere lâelaboratore dopo che Ã© stata effettuata la sostituzione di una FRU,\naccertarsi che tutte le viti, le molle e tutte le altri parti di piccole dimensioni siano nella\ncorretta posizione e non siano sparse allâinterno dellâelaboratore. Verificare ciÃ² scuotendo\nlâelaboratore e prestando attenzione ad eventuali rumori; eventuali parti o pezzetti\nmetallici possono provocare cortocircuiti pericolosi.\nAntes de encender el sistema despues de sustituir una FRU, compruebe que todos los\ntornillos, muelles y demÃ¡s piezas pequeÃ±as se encuentran en su sitio y no se encuentran\nsueltas dentro del sistema. CompruÃ©belo agitando el sistema y escuchando los posibles\nruidos que provocarÃan. Las piezas metÃ¡licas pueden causar cortocircuitos elÃ©ctricos.\n8\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety notices\nSafety notice 2\nDANGER\nSome standby batteries contain a small amount of nickel and cadmium. Do not\ndisassemble a standby battery, recharge it, throw it into fire or water, or short-circuit it.\nDispose of the battery as required by local ordinances or regulations. Use only the\nbattery in the appropriate parts listing. Use of an incorrect battery can result in\nignition or explo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sion of the battery.\nCertaines batteries de secours contiennent du nickel et du cadmium. Ne les dÃ©montez\npas, ne les rechargez pas, ne les exposez ni au feu ni Ã  lâeau. Ne les mettez pas en\ncourt-circuit. Pour les mettre au rebut, conformez-vous Ã  la rÃ©glementation en vigueur.\nLorsque vous remplacez la pile de sauvegarde ou celle de lâhorloge temps rÃ©el, veillez\nÃ  nâutiliser que les modÃ¨les citÃ©s dans la liste de piÃ¨ces dÃ©tachÃ©es adÃ©quate. Une\nbatterie ou une pile inappropriÃ©e risque de prendre feu ou dâexploser.\nDie Bereitschaftsbatterie, die sich unter dem Diskettenlaufwerk befindet, kann\ngeringe Mengen Nickel und Cadmium enthalten. Sie darf nur durch die Verkaufsstelle\noder den IBM Kundendienst ausgetauscht werden. Sie darf nicht zerlegt,\nwiederaufgeladen, kurzgeschlossen, oder Feuer oder Wasser ausgesetzt werden. Die\nBatterie kann schwere Verbrennungen oder VerÃ¤tzungen verursachen. Bei der\nEntsorgung die Ã¶rtlichen Bestimmungen fÃ¼r SondermÃ¼ll beachten. Beim Ersetzen der\nBereitschafts-oder Systembatterie nur Batterien des Typs verwenden, der in der\nErsatzteilliste aufgefÃ¼hrt ist. Der Einsatz falscher Batterien kann zu EntzÃ¼ndung oder\nExplosion fÃ¼hren.\nAlcune batterie di riserva contengono una piccola quantitÃ  di nichel e cadmio. Non\nsmontarle, ricaricarle, gettarle nel fuoco o nellâacqua nÃ© cortocircuitarle. Smaltirle\nsecondo la normativa in vigore (DPR 915/82, successive disposizioni e disposizioni\nlocali). Quando si sostituisce la batteria dellâRTC (real time clock) o la batteria di\nsupporto, utilizzare soltanto i tipi inseriti nellâappropriato Catalogo parti. Lâimpiego di\nuna batteria non adatta potrebbe determinare lâincendio o lâesplosione della batteria\nstessa.\nAlgunas baterÃas de reserva contienen una pequeÃ±a cantidad de nÃquel y cadmio. No\nlas desmonte, ni recargue, ni las eche al fuego o al agua ni las cortocircuite.\nDesÃ©chelas tal como dispone la normativa local. Utilice sÃ³lo baterÃas que se\nencuentren en la lista de piezas. La
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: utilizaciÃ³n de una baterÃa no apropiada puede\nprovocar la igniciÃ³n o explosiÃ³n de la misma.\nIntroduction\n9 Safety notices\nSafety notice 3\nDANGER\nThe battery pack contains small amounts of nickel. Do not disassemble it, throw it\ninto fire or water, or short-circuit it. Dispose of the battery pack as required by local\nordinances or regulations. Use only the battery in the appropriate parts listing when\nreplacing the battery pack. Use of an incorrect battery can result in ignition or\nexplosion of the battery.\nLa batterie contient du nickel. Ne la dÃ©montez pas, ne lâexposez ni au feu ni Ã  lâeau.\nNe la mettez pas en court-circuit. Pour la mettre au rebut, conformez-vous Ã  la\nrÃ©glementation en vigueur. Lorsque vous remplacez la batterie, veillez Ã  nâutiliser que\nles modÃ¨les citÃ©s dans la liste de piÃ¨ces dÃ©tachÃ©es adÃ©quate. En effet, une batterie\ninappropriÃ©e risque de prendre feu ou dâexploser.\nAkkus enthalten geringe Mengen von Nickel. Sie dÃ¼rfen nicht zerlegt,\nwiederaufgeladen, kurzgeschlossen, oder Feuer oder Wasser ausgesetzt werden. Bei\nder Entsorgung die Ã¶rtlichen Bestimmungen fÃ¼r SondermÃ¼ll beachten. Beim Ersetzen\nder Batterie nur Batterien des Typs verwenden, der in der Ersatzteilliste aufgefÃ¼hrt ist.\nDer Einsatz falscher Batterien kann zu EntzÃ¼ndung oder Explosion fÃ¼hren.\nLa batteria contiene piccole quantitÃ  di nichel. Non smontarla, gettarla nel fuoco o\nnellâacqua nÃ© cortocircuitarla. Smaltirla secondo la normativa in vigore (DPR 915/82,\nsuccessive disposizioni e disposizioni locali). Quando si sostituisce la batteria,\nutilizzare soltanto i tipi inseriti nellâappropriato Catalogo parti. Lâimpiego di una\nbatteria non adatta potrebbe determinare lâincendio o lâesplosione della batteria stessa.\nLas baterÃas contienen pequeÃ±as cantidades de nÃquel. No las desmonte, ni recargue,\nni las eche al fuego o al agua ni las cortocircuite. DesÃ©chelas tal como dispone la\nnormativa local. Utilice sÃ³lo baterÃas que se encuentren en la lista de pieza
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s al\nsustituir la baterÃa. La utilizaciÃ³n de una baterÃa no apropiada puede provocar la\nigniciÃ³n o explosiÃ³n de la misma.\n10\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety notices\nSafety notice 4\nDANGER\nThe lithium battery can cause a fire, an explosion, or a severe burn. Do not recharge it,\nremove its polarized connector, disassemble it, heat it above 100Â°C (212Â°F), incinerate\nit, or expose its cell contents to water. Dispose of the battery as required by local\nordinances or regulations. Use only the battery in the appropriate parts listing. Use of\nan incorrect battery can result in ignition or explosion of the battery.\nLa pile de sauvegarde contient du lithium. Elle prÃ©sente des risques dâincendie,\ndâexplosion ou de brÃ»lures graves. Ne la rechargez pas, ne retirez pas son connecteur\npolarisÃ© et ne la dÃ©montez pas. Ne lâexposez pas Ã  une temperature supÃ©rieure Ã  100Â°C,\nne la faites pas brÃ»ler et nâen exposez pas le contenu Ã  lâeau. Mettez la pile au rebut\nconformÃ©ment Ã  la rÃ©glementation en vigueur. Une pile inappropriÃ©e risque de\nprendre feu ou dâexploser.\nDie Systembatterie ist eine Lithiumbatterie. Sie kann sich entzÃ¼nden, explodieren\noder schwere Verbrennungen hervorrufen. Batterien dieses Typs dÃ¼rfen nicht\naufgeladen, zerlegt, Ã¼ber 100 C erhitzt oder verbrannt werden. Auch darf ihr Inhalt\nnicht mit Wasser in Verbindung gebracht oder der zur richtigen Polung angebrachte\nVerbindungsstecker entfernt werden. Bei der Entsorgung die Ã¶rtlichen Bestimmungen\nfÃ¼r SondermÃ¼ll beachten. Beim Ersetzen der Batterie nur Batterien des Typs\nverwenden, der in der Ersatzteilliste aufgefÃ¼hrt ist. Der Einsatz falscher Batterien\nkann zu EntzÃ¼ndung oder Explosion fÃ¼hren.\nLa batteria di supporto e una batteria al litio e puo incendiarsi, esplodere o procurare\ngravi ustioni. Evitare di ricaricarla, smontarne il connettore polarizzato, smontarla,\nriscaldarla ad una temperatura superiore ai 100 gradi centigradi, incendiarla o gettarla\nin acqua. Smaltirla secondo la no
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rmativa in vigore (DPR 915/82, successive\ndisposizioni e disposizioni locali). Lâimpiego di una batteria non adatta potrebbe\ndeterminare lâincendio o lâesplosione della batteria stessa.\nLa baterÃa de repuesto es una baterÃa de litio y puede provocar incendios, explosiones\no quemaduras graves. No la recargue, ni quite el conector polarizado, ni la desmonte,\nni caliente por encima de los 100Â°C (212Â°F), ni la incinere ni exponga el contenido de\nsus celdas al agua. DesÃ©chela tal como dispone la normativa local.\nIntroduction\n11 Safety notices\nSafety notice 5\nIf the LCD breaks and the fluid from inside the LCD gets into your eyes or on your\nhands, immediately wash the affected areas with water for at least 15 minutes. Seek\nmedical care if any symptoms from the fluid are present after washing.\nSi le panneau dâaffichage Ã  cristaux liquides se brise et que vous recevez dans les yeux\nou sur les mains une partie du fluide, rincez-les abondamment pendant au moins quinze\nminutes. Consultez un mÃ©decin si des symptÃ´mes persistent aprÃ¨s le lavage.\nDie LeuchtstoffrÃ¶hre im LCD-Bildschirm enthÃ¤lt Quecksilber. Bei der Entsorgung die\nÃ¶rtlichen Bestimmungen fÃ¼r SondermÃ¼ll beachten. Der LCD-Bildschirm besteht aus Glas\nund kann zerbrechen, wenn er unsachgemÃ¤Ã behandelt wird oder der Computer auf den\nBoden fÃ¤llt. Wenn der Bildschirm beschÃ¤digt ist und die darin befindliche FlÃ¼ssigkeit in\nKontakt mit Haut und Augen gerÃ¤t, sollten die betroffenen Stellen mindestens 15\nMinuten mit Wasser abgespÃ¼lt und bei Beschwerden anschlieÃend ein Arzt aufgesucht\nwerden.\nNel caso che caso lâLCD si dovesse rompere ed il liquido in esso contenuto entrasse in\ncontatto con gli occhi o le mani, lavare immediatamente le parti interessate con acqua\ncorrente per almeno 15 minuti; poi consultare un medico se i sintomi dovessero\npermanere.\nSi la LCD se rompe y el fluido de su interior entra en contacto con sus ojos o sus manos,\nlave inmediatamente las Ã¡reas afectadas con agua durante 15 minutos como mÃn
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: imo.\nObtenga atenciÃ³n medica si se presenta algÃºn sÃntoma del fluido despues de lavarse.\n12\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety notices\nSafety notice 6\nDANGER\nTo avoid shock, do not remove the plastic cover that protects the lower part of the\ninverter card.\nAfin dâÃ©viter tout risque de choc Ã©lectrique, ne retirez pas le cache en plastique\nprotÃ©geant la partie infÃ©rieure de la carte dâalimentation.\nAus SicherheitsgrÃ¼nden die Kunststoffabdeckung, die den unteren Teil der\nSpannungswandlerplatine umgibt, nicht entfernen.\nPer evitare scosse elettriche, non rimuovere la copertura in plastica che avvolge la\nparte inferiore della scheda invertitore.\nPara evitar descargas, no quite la cubierta de plÃ¡stico que rodea la parte baja de la\ntarjeta invertida.\nIntroduction\n13 Safety notices\nSafety notice 7\nDANGER\nThough the main batteries have low voltage, a shorted or grounded battery can\nproduce enough current to burn personnel or combustible materials.\nBien que le voltage des batteries principales soit peu Ã©levÃ©, le court-circuit ou la mise\nÃ  la masse dâune batterie peut produire suffisamment de courant pour brÃ»ler des\nmatÃ©riaux combustibles ou causer des brÃ»lures corporelles graves.\nObwohl Hauptbatterien eine niedrige Spannung haben, kÃ¶nnen sie doch bei\nKurzschluÃ oder Erdung genug Strom abgeben, um brennbare Materialien zu\nentzÃ¼nden oder Verletzungen bei Personen hervorzurufen.\nSebbene le batterie di alimentazione siano a basso voltaggio, una batteria in corto\ncircuito o a massa puÃ² fornire corrente sufficiente da bruciare materiali combustibili o\nprovocare ustioni ai tecnici di manutenzione.\nAunque las baterÃas principales tienen un voltaje bajo, una baterÃa cortocircuitada o\ncon contacto a tierra puede producir la corriente suficiente como para quemar material\ncombustible o provocar quemaduras en el personal.\n14\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety notices\nSafety notice 8\nDANGER\nBefore removing any FRU, power off the computer, unplug all power
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: cords from\nelectrical outlets, remove the battery pack, and then disconnect any interconnecting\ncables.\nAvant de retirer une unitÃ© remplaÃ§able en clientÃ¨le, mettez le systÃ¨me hors tension,\ndÃ©branchez tous les cordons dâalimentation des socles de prise de courant, retirez la\nbatterie et dÃ©connectez tous les cordons dâinterface.\nDie Stromzufuhr muÃ abgeschaltet, alle Stromkabel aus der Steckdose gezogen, der\nAkku entfernt und alle Verbindungskabel abgenommen sein, bevor eine FRU entfernt\nwird.\nPrima di rimuovere qualsiasi FRU, spegnere il sistema, scollegare dalle prese elettriche\ntutti i cavi di alimentazione, rimuovere la batteria e poi scollegare i cavi di\ninterconnessione.\nAntes de quitar una FRU, apague el sistema, desenchufe todos los cables de las tomas\nde corriente elÃ©ctrica, quite la baterÃa y, a continuaciÃ³n, desconecte cualquier cable de\nconexiÃ³n entre dispositivos.\nIntroduction\n15 Safety information\nSafety information\nThe following section presents safety information with which you need to be\nfamiliar before you service a ThinkPad computer.\nGeneral safety\nFollow these rules to ensure general safety:\nv Observe good housekeeping in the area of the machines during and after\nmaintenance.\nv When lifting any heavy object:\n1. Make sure that you can stand safely without slipping.\n2. Distribute the weight of the object equally between your feet.\n3. Use a slow lifting force. Never move suddenly or twist when you attempt to\nlift.\n4. Lift by standing or by pushing up with your leg muscles; this action removes\nthe strain from the muscles in your back. Do not attempt to lift any object that\nweighs more than 16 kg (35 lb) or that you think is too heavy for you.\nv Do not perform any action that causes hazards to the customer, or that makes\nthe equipment unsafe.\nv Before you start the machine, make sure that other service representatives and\nthe customerâs personnel are not in a hazardous position.\nv Place removed covers and other parts in a safe place, away from all
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: personnel,\nwhile you are servicing the machine.\nv Keep your toolcase away from walk areas so that other people will not trip over\nit.\nv Do not wear loose clothing that can be trapped in the moving parts of a\nmachine. Make sure that your sleeves are fastened or rolled up above your\nelbows. If your hair is long, fasten it.\nv Insert the ends of your necktie or scarf inside clothing or fasten it with a\nnonconductive clip, about 8 centimeters (3 inches) from the end.\nv Do not wear jewelry, chains, metal-frame eyeglasses, or metal fasteners for your\nclothing.\nAttention: Metal objects are good electrical conductors.\nv Wear safety glasses when you are hammering, drilling, soldering, cutting wire,\nattaching springs, using solvents, or working in any other conditions that might\nbe hazardous to your eyes.\nv After service, reinstall all safety shields, guards, labels, and ground wires.\nReplace any safety device that is worn or defective.\nv Reinstall all covers correctly before returning the machine to the customer.\nv Fan louvers on the machine help to prevent overheating of internal components.\nDo not obstruct fan louvers or cover them with labels or stickers.\nElectrical safety\nObserve the following rules when working on electrical equipment.\n16\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety information\nImportant\nUse only approved tools and test equipment. Some hand tools have handles\ncovered with a soft material that does not insulate you when working with\nlive electrical currents.\nMany customers have, near their equipment, rubber floor mats that contain\nsmall conductive fibers to decrease electrostatic discharges. Do not use this\ntype of mat to protect yourself from electrical shock.\nv Find the room emergency power-off (EPO) switch, disconnecting switch, or\nelectrical outlet. If an electrical accident occurs, you can then operate the switch\nor unplug the power cord quickly.\nv Do not work alone under hazardous conditions or near equipment that has\nhazardous voltages.\nv Disconnect all power
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: before:\nâ Performing a mechanical inspection\nâ Working near power supplies\nâ Removing or installing Field Replaceable Units (FRUs)\nv Before you start to work on the machine, unplug the power cord. If you cannot\nunplug it, ask the customer to power-off the wall box that supplies power to the\nmachine, and to lock the wall box in the off position.\nv If you need to work on a machine that has exposed electrical circuits, observe the\nfollowing precautions:\nâ Ensure that another person, familiar with the power-off controls, is near you.\nAttention: Another person must be there to switch off the power, if\nnecessary.\nâ Use only one hand when working with powered-on electrical equipment;\nkeep the other hand in your pocket or behind your back.\nAttention: An electrical shock can occur only when there is a complete\ncircuit. By observing the above rule, you may prevent a current from passing\nthrough your body.\nâ When using testers, set the controls correctly and use the approved probe\nleads and accessories for that tester.\nâ Stand on suitable rubber mats (obtained locally, if necessary) to insulate you\nfrom grounds such as metal floor strips and machine frames.\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nObserve the special safety precautions when you work with very high voltages;\nInstructions for these precautions are in the safety sections of maintenance\ninformation. Use extreme care when measuring high voltages.\nRegularly inspect and maintain your electrical hand tools for safe operational\ncondition.\nDo not use worn or broken tools and testers.\nNever assume that power has been disconnected from a circuit. First, check that it\nhas been powered off.\nAlways look carefully for possible hazards in your work area. Examples of these\nhazards are moist floors, nongrounded power extension cables, power surges,\nand missing safety grounds.\nDo not touch live electrical circuits with the reflective surface of a plastic dental\nmirror. The surface is conductive; such touching can cause personal injury and\nmachine damage.\
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nIntroduction\n17 Safety information\nv Do not service the following parts with the power on when they are removed\nfrom their normal operating places in a machine:\nâ Power supply units\nâ Pumps\nâ Blowers and fans\nâ Motor generators\nand similar units. (This practice ensures correct grounding of the units.)\nv If an electrical accident occurs:\nâ Use caution; do not become a victim yourself.\nâ Switch off power.\nâ Send another person to get medical aid.\nSafety inspection guide\nThe purpose of this inspection guide is to assist you in identifying potentially\nunsafe conditions. As each machine was designed and built, required safety items\nwere installed to protect users and service personnel from injury. This guide\naddresses only those items. You should use good judgment to identify potential\nsafety hazards due to attachment of non-ThinkPad features or options not covered\nby this inspection guide.\nIf any unsafe conditions are present, you must determine how serious the apparent\nhazard could be and whether you can continue without first correcting the\nproblem.\nConsider these conditions and the safety hazards they present:\nv Electrical hazards, especially primary power (primary voltage on the frame can\ncause serious or fatal electrical shock)\nv Explosive hazards, such as a damaged CRT face or a bulging capacitor\nv Mechanical hazards, such as loose or missing hardware\nTo determine whether there are any potentially unsafe conditions, use the\nfollowing checklist at the beginning of every service task. Begin the checks with\nthe power off, and the power cord disconnected.\nChecklist:\n1. Check exterior covers for damage (loose, broken, or sharp edges).\n2. Power off the computer. Disconnect the power cord.\n3. Check the power cord for:\na. A third-wire ground connector in good condition. Use a meter to measure\nthird-wire ground continuity for 0.1 ohm or less between the external\nground pin and the frame ground.\nb. The power cord should be the type specified in the parts list.\nc. Insu
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lation must not be frayed or worn.\n4. Check for cracked or bulging batteries.\n5. Remove the cover.\n6. Check for any obvious non-ThinkPad alterations. Use good judgment as to the\nsafety of any non-ThinkPad alterations.\n7. Check inside the unit for any obvious unsafe conditions, such as metal filings,\ncontamination, water or other liquids, or signs of fire or smoke damage.\n8. Check for worn, frayed, or pinched cables.\n18\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety information\n9. Check that the power-supply cover fasteners (screws or rivets) have not been\nremoved or tampered with.\nHandling devices that are sensitive to electrostatic discharge\nAny computer part containing transistors or integrated circuits (ICs) should be\nconsidered sensitive to electrostatic discharge (ESD.) ESD damage can occur when\nthere is a difference in charge between objects. Protect against ESD damage by\nequalizing the charge so that the machine, the part, the work mat, and the person\nhandling the part are all at the same charge.\nNotes\n1. Use product-specific ESD procedures when they exceed the requirements\nnoted here.\n2. Make sure that the ESD protective devices you use have been certified\n(ISO 9000) as fully effective.\nWhen handling ESD-sensitive parts:\nv Keep the parts in protective packages until they are inserted into the product.\nv Avoid contact with other people while handling the part.\nv Wear a grounded wrist strap against your skin to eliminate static on your body.\nv Prevent the part from touching your clothing. Most clothing is insulative and\nretains a charge even when you are wearing a wrist strap.\nv Use the black side of a grounded work mat to provide a static-free work surface.\nThe mat is especially useful when handling ESD-sensitive devices.\nv Select a grounding system, such as those listed below, to provide protection that\nmeets the specific service requirement.\nNote\nThe use of a grounding system to guard against ESD damage is desirable\nbut not necessary.\nâ Attach the ESD ground clip to any
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: frame ground, ground braid, or green-wire\nground.\nâ When working on a double-insulated or battery-operated system, use an ESD\ncommon ground or reference point. You can use coax or connector-outside\nshells on these systems.\nâ Use the round ground prong of the ac plug on ac-operated computers.\nGrounding requirements\nElectrical grounding of the computer is required for operator safety and correct\nsystem function. Proper grounding of the electrical outlet can be verified by a\ncertified electrician.\nIntroduction\n19 Laser compliance statement\nLaser compliance statement\nSome models of ThinkPad computer are equipped from the factory with an optical\nstorage device such as a CD-ROM drive or a DVD-ROM drive. Such devices are\nalso sold separately as options. If one of these drives is installed, it is certified in\nthe U.S. to conform to the requirements of the Department of Health and Human\nServices 21 Code of Federal Regulations (DHHS 21 CFR) Subchapter J for Class 1\nlaser products. Elsewhere, the drive is certified to conform to the requirements of\nthe International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 825 and CENELEC EN 60 825\nfor Class 1 laser products.\nIf a CD-ROM drive, a DVD-ROM drive, or another laser device is installed, note\nthe following:\nCAUTION:\nUse of controls or adjustments or performance of procedures other than those\nspecified herein might result in hazardous radiation exposure.\nO uso de controles, ajustes ou desempenho de procedimentos diferentes daqueles aqui\nespecificados pode resultar em perigosa exposiÃ§Ã£o Ã  radiaÃ§Ã£o.\nPour Ã©viter tout risque dâexposition au rayon laser, respectez les consignes de rÃ©glage\net dâutilisation des commandes, ainsi que les procÃ©dures dÃ©crites.\nWerden Steuer- und Einstellelemente anders als hier festgesetzt verwendet, kann\ngefÃ¤hrliche Laserstrahlung auftreten.\nLâutilizzo di controlli, regolazioni o lâesecuzione di procedure diverse da quelle\nspecificate possono provocare lâesposizione a.\nEl uso de controles o ajustes o la ej
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ecuciÃ³n de procedimientos distintos de los aquÃ\nespecificados puede provocar la exposiciÃ³n a radiaciones peligrosas.\nOpening the CD-ROM drive, the DVD-ROM drive, or any other optical storage\ndevice could result in exposure to hazardous laser radiation. There are no\nserviceable parts inside those drives. Do not open.\n20\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Laser compliance statement\nA CD-ROM drive, a DVD-ROM drive, or any other storage device installed may\ncontain an embedded Class 3A or Class 3B laser diode. Note the following:\nDANGER\nEmits visible and invisible laser radiation when open. Do not stare into the beam, do\nnot view directly with optical instruments, and avoid direct exposure to the beam.\nRadiaÃ§Ã£o por raio laser ao abrir. NÃ£o olhe fixo no feixe de luz, nÃ£o olhe diretamente\npor meio de instrumentos Ã³ticos e evite exposiÃ§Ã£o direta com o feixe de luz.\nRayonnement laser si carter ouvert. Ãvitez de fixer le faisceau, de le regarder\ndirectement avec des instruments optiques, ou de vous exposer au rayon.\nLaserstrahlung bei geÃ¶ffnetem GerÃ¤t. Nicht direkt oder Ã¼ber optische Instrumente in\nden Laserstrahl sehen und den Strahlungsbereich meiden.\nKinyitÃ¡skor lÃ©zersugÃ¡r ! Ne nÃ©zzen bele se szabad szemmel, se optikai eszkÃ¶zÃ¶kkel.\nKerÃ¼lje a sugÃ¡rnyalÃ¡bbal valÃ³ Ã©rintkezÃ©st !\nAprendo lâunitÃ  vengono emesse radiazioni laser. Non fissare il fascio, non guardarlo\ndirettamente con strumenti ottici e evitare lâesposizione diretta al fascio.\nRadiaciÃ³n lÃ¡ser al abrir. No mire fijamente ni examine con instrumental Ã³ptico el haz\nde luz. Evite la exposiciÃ³n directa al haz.\nIntroduction\n21 Laser compliance statement\n22\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s General descriptions\nThe descriptions in this chapter apply to any ThinkPad model that has the\nPC-Doctor Â® for DOS diagnostics program. Some descriptions might not apply to\nyour particular computer.\nRead this first\nBefore you go to the checkout guide, be sure to read this section.\nImportant notes\nv Only certi
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: fied trained personnel should service the computer.\nv Before replacing any FRU, read the entire page on removing and\nreplacing FRUs.\nv When you replace FRUs, use new nylon-coated screws.\nv Be extremely careful during such write operations as copying, saving, or\nformatting. Drives in the computer that you are servicing sequence might\nhave been altered. If you select an incorrect drive, data or programs might\nbe overwritten.\nv Replace a FRU only with another FRU of the correct model. When you\nreplace a FRU, make sure that the model of the machine and the FRU part\nnumber are correct by referring to the FRU parts list.\nv A FRU should not be replaced because of a single, unreproducible\nfailure. Single failures can occur for a variety of reasons that have nothing\nto do with a hardware defect, such as cosmic radiation, electrostatic\ndischarge, or software errors. Consider replacing a FRU only when a\nproblem recurs. If you suspect that a FRU is defective, clear the error log\nand run the test again. If the error does not recur, do not replace the FRU.\nv Be careful not to replace a nondefective FRU.\nWhat to do first\nWhen you do return a FRU, you must include the following information in the\nparts exchange form or parts return form that you attach to it:\n__ 1. Name and phone number of servicer\n__ 2. Date of service\n__ 3. Date on which the machine failed\n__ 4. Date of purchase\n__ 5. Failure symptoms, error codes appearing on the display, and beep\nsymptoms\n__ 6. Procedure index and page number in which the failing FRU was detected\n__ 7. Failing FRU name and part number\n__ 8. Machine type, model number, and serial number\n__ 9. Customerâs name and address\nNote for warranty:\nDuring the warranty period, the customer may be responsible for repair costs if the\ncomputer damage was caused by misuse, accident, modification, unsuitable\nphysical or operating environment, or improper maintenance by the customer.\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n23 Read this first\nFollowing is a list of some common ite
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ms that are not covered under warranty and\nsome symptoms that might indicate that the system was subjected to stress beyond\nnormal use.\nBefore checking problems with the computer, determine whether the damage is\ncovered under the warranty by referring to the following list:\nThe following are not covered under warranty:\nv LCD panel cracked from the application of excessive force or from being\ndropped\nv Scratched (cosmetic) parts\nv Distortion, deformation, or discoloration of the cosmetic parts\nv Plastic parts, latches, pins, or connectors that have been cracked or broken by\nexcessive force\nv Damage caused by liquid spilled into the system\nv Damage caused by the improper insertion of a PC Card or the installation of an\nincompatible card\nv Improper disc insertion or use of an optical drive\nv Diskette drive damage caused by pressure on the diskette drive cover, foreign\nmaterial in the drive, or the insertion of a diskette with multiple labels\nv Damaged or bent diskette eject button\nv Fuses blown by attachment of a nonsupported device\nv Forgotten computer password (making the computer unusable)\nv Sticky keys caused by spilling a liquid onto the keyboard\nv Use of an incorrect ac adapter on laptop products\nThe following symptoms might indicate damage caused by nonwarranted\nactivities:\nv Missing parts might be a symptom of unauthorized service or modification.\nv If the spindle of a hard disk drive becomes noisy, it may have been subjected to\nexcessive force, or dropped.\n24\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Related service information\nRelated service information\nThis section provides information about the following:\nv âService Web siteâ\nv âRestoring the factory contents by using Product Recovery discsâ\nv âPasswordsâ on page 26\nv âPower managementâ on page 28\nService Web site\nWhen the latest maintenance diskette and the system program service diskette\nbecome available, they will be posted on http://www.lenovo.com/spm\nRestoring the factory contents by using Product R
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ecovery\ndiscs\nWhen the hard disk drive is replaced because of a failure, no Product Recovery\nprogram is on the new hard disk. In this case, you must use the recovery discs for\nthe computer. Order the recovery discs and the hard disk drive at the same time so\nthat you can recover the new hard disk drive with the pre-installed software when\nthey arrive. For information on which discs to order, see âRecovery discsâ on page\n218.\nTo install the factory contents by using Product Recovery discs, do the following:\nNote\nRecovery takes several hours. The length of time depends on the method you\nuse. If you use recovery discs, recovery takes at least five hours.\n1. Insert the Rescue and Recovery â¢ Disk1 of 1 into the optical drive, then restart\nthe computer. This will take several minutes.\n2. When the âWelcome to Rescue and Recoveryâ screen is displayed, press\nContinue. In the Rescue and Recovery menu, select Restore Your System. A\nmessage giving a warning that USB devices used in recovery must be\nconnected when the computer is turned on appears. Click OK.\n3. âRestore Your Systemâ window appears. Select Restore my hard drive to the\noriginal factory state, and click Next. A warning appears, click Yes. Then next\nmenu appears. Select I do not want to save any files and click Next. Following\nmenu appears with a warning, select Next. A warning appears not to power\ndown the computer during the recovery process. Click OK. One more warning\nappears saying that recovery is intended only for unrecoverable system\nproblems. Click OK.\n4. The Terms and Conditions window appears, select I accept these terms and\nconditions and press OK. Previous menus may remain on the screen, but the\nPredesktop installer begins copying files. When this completes, the computer\nwill restart and a window will ask you to insert a Product Recovery\nSupplemental Disk, if you have one. Press No.\n5. You will then be prompted to insert Product Recovery Disk 1 into the optical\ndrive. Insert the Product Recovery Disk 1 into
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the optical drive, and press OK.\nIn similar fashion, you will be prompted to insert the remaining recovery discs\nuntil all the files are copied.\n6. After all the files are copied, the computer will restart and return to the\nâWelcome to Rescue and Recoveryâ screen where a window âRecovering your\nsystem, this may take several minutesâ appears and .IMZ files are processed.\nGeneral descriptions\n25 Related service information\nA total progress bar allows you to audit this process, which will take about 8\nminutes. The final recovery disc may be safely removed during this time, but\nmay also be left in the optical drive since it is not bootable.\n7. You will then be prompted to restart the computer. Select Yes. A warning\nwindow appears, giving you one last chance to stop the restart, but disappears\nautomatically after about 5 seconds. File processing continues in DOS full\nscreen mode for about two minutes and the computer restarts to the Windows Â®\ndesktop. No user intervention is required (and should be avoided) after this\npoint.\n8. Windows setup continues on the desktop and DOS window for IBM system\nsetup, with progress measured by a Factory Preinstallation window on the right\nside of the screen. The processes are updating installed softwares.\nA warning that antivirus software is not installed appears repeatedly in the\nsystem tray, but this should be ignored. The entire process at desktop takes\nabout 25 minutes.\n9. Then the computer restarts, does some more DOS full screen processing, and\nrestarts again to a Windows desktop where factory preinstallation continues for\nabout 12 more minutes, another restart to a DOS screen and then back to the\nWindows splash screen and back to the desktop for more preinstallation.\nThis lasts about 10 more minutes and the computer restarts to do NTFS\nconversion and then restarts to the OOBE (Out of Box Experience)\nenvironment.\nPasswords\nAs many as three passwords may be needed for any ThinkPad computer: the\npower-on password (POP), the hard-disk pass
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: word (HDP), and the supervisor\npassword (SVP).\nIf any of these passwords has been set, a prompt for it appears on the screen\nwhenever the computer is turned on. The computer does not start until the\npassword is entered.\nException: If only an SVP is installed, the password prompt does not appear when\nthe operating system is booted.\nPower-on password:\nA power-on password (POP) protects the system from being powered on by an\nunauthorized person. The password must be entered before an operating system\ncan be booted.\nHard-disk password:\nThere are two hard-disk passwords (HDPs):\nv User HDPâfor the user\nv Master HDPâfor the system administrator, who can use it to get access to the\nhard disk even if the user has changed the user HDP\nNote: There are two modes for the HDP: User only and Master + User. The\nMaster + User mode requires two HDPs; the system administrator enters\nboth in the same operation. The system administrator then provides the user\nHDP to the system user.\n26\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Related service information\nAttention: If the user HDP has been forgotten, check whether a master HDP has\nbeen set. If it has, it can be used for access to the hard disk drive. If no master\nHDP is available, neither Lenovo nor Lenovo authorized servicers provide any\nservices to reset either the user or the master HDP, or to recover data from the\nhard disk drive. The hard disk drive can be replaced for a scheduled fee.\nSupervisor password:\nA supervisor password (SVP) protects the system information stored in the BIOS\nSetup Utility. The user must enter the SVP in order to get access to the BIOS Setup\nUtility and change the system configuration.\nAttention: If the SVP has been forgotten and cannot be made available to the\nservicer, there is no service procedure to reset the password. The system board\nmust be replaced for a scheduled fee.\nHow to remove the power-on password\nTo remove a POP that you have forgotten, do the following:\n(A) If no SVP has been set:\n1. Turn off the compu
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ter.\n2. Remove the battery pack.\nFor how to remove the battery pack, see â1010 Battery packâ on page 60.\n3. Remove the backup battery.\nFor how to remove the backup battery, see â1140 Backup batteryâ on page 82.\n4. Turn on the computer and wait until the POST ends.\nAfter the POST ends, the password prompt does not appear. The POP has been\nremoved.\n5. Reinstall the backup battery and the battery pack.\n(B) If an SVP has been set and is known by the servicer:\n1. Turn on the computer; then, while the âTo interrupt normal startup, press the\nblue ThinkVantage buttonâ message is displayed at the lower-left of the screen,\npress the ThinkVantage Â® button. The Rescue and Recovery screen opens.\nFor models supporting the Passphrase function, press F1 while the POP icon is\nappearing on the screen; then enter the POP. For the other models, enter the\nPOP.\n2.\n3.\n4.\n5.\n6.\n7.\n8.\nNote: To check whether the ThinkPad computer supports the Passphrase\nfunction, enter the BIOS Setup Utility and go to Security --> Password.\nIf the Using Passphrase item is displayed in the menu, this function is\navailable on the ThinkPad computer.\nClick Access BIOS. The system Restart Required window is displayed.\nClick Yes. The computer restarts, and the BIOS Setup Utility screen opens.\nSelect Security, using the cursor directional keys to move down the menu.\nSelect Password.\nSelect Power-On Password.\nType the current SVP in the Enter Current Password field. then leave the Enter\nNew Password field blank, and press Enter twice.\nIn the Changes have been saved window, press Enter.\n9. Press F10; then, in the Setup confirmation window, select Yes .\nGeneral descriptions\n27 Related service information\nHow to remove the hard-disk password\nAttention: If User only mode is selected and the user HDP has been forgotten\nand cannot be made available to the servicer, neither Lenovo nor Lenovo\nauthorized servicers provide any services to reset the user HDPs or to recover data\nfrom the hard disk drive. The hard disk dr
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ive can be replaced for a scheduled fee.\nTo remove a user HDP that has been forgotten, when the SVP and the master HDP\nare known, do the following:\n1. Turn on the computer; then, while the âTo interrupt normal startup, press the\nblue ThinkVantage buttonâ message is displayed at the lower-left of the\nscreen, press the ThinkVantage button. The Rescue and Recovery screen\nopens.\nFor models supporting the Passphrase function, press F1 while HDP icon is\nappearing on the screen; then enter the master HDP. For the other models,\nenter the master HDP.\n2.\n3.\n4.\n5.\n6.\n7.\n8.\n9.\n10.\nNote: To check whether the ThinkPad computer supports the Passphrase\nfunction, enter the BIOS Setup Utility and go to Security --> Password.\nIf Using Passphrase item is displayed in the menu, this function is\navailable on the ThinkPad computer.\nClick Access BIOS. The system Restart Required window is displayed.\nClick Yes. The computer restarts, and the BIOS Setup Utility screen opens.\nSelect Security, using the cursor directional keys to move down the menu.\nSelect Password.\nSelect Hard-disk x password, where x is the letter of the hard disk drive. A\npop-up window opens.\nSelect Master HDP.\nType the current master HDP in the Enter Current Password field. then leave\nthe Enter New Password field blank, and press Enter twice.\nPress F10.\nSelect Yes in the Setup Configuration window.\nBoth user HDP and master HDP will have been removed.\nPower management\nTo reduce power consumption, the computer has three power management modes:\nscreen blank, standby, and hibernation.\nScreen blank mode\nScreen blank mode has three variants, as follows:\n1. If you press Fn+F3, or if the time set on the âLCD off timerâ in the BIOS Setup\nUtility expires,\nv The LCD backlight turns off.\nv The hard disk drive motor stops.\nv The speaker is muted.\n2. If you are using the Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI)\noperating system and you press Fn+F3,\nv The LCD backlight turns off.\nv The hard disk drive motor stops.\n3. If
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the time set on the âTurn off monitorâ timer in the operating system expires,\nv The LCD backlight turns off.\nTo end screen blank mode and resume normal operation, press any key.\n28\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Related service information\nStandby mode\nWhen the computer enters standby mode, the following events occur in addition to\nwhat occurs in screen blank mode:\nv The LCD is powered off.\nv The hard disk drive is powered off.\nv The CPU stops.\nTo enter standby mode, press Fn+F4.\nNote: If you are using the ACPI operating system, you can change the action of\nFn+F4.\nIn certain circumstances, the computer goes into standby mode automatically:\nv If a âsuspend timeâ has been set on the timer,\nand the user does not do any\nÂ®\noperation with the keyboard, the TrackPoint , the hard disk, the parallel\nconnector, or the diskette drive within that time.\nv If the battery indicator blinks orange, indicating that the battery power is low.\n(Alternatively, if Hibernate when battery becomes low has been selected in the\nâPower Management Propertiesâ window, the computer goes into hibernation\nmode.)\nTo cause the computer to return from standby mode and resume operation, do one\nof the following:\nv Press the Fn key.\nv Open the LCD cover.\nv Turn on the power switch.\nAlso, in either of the following events, the computer automatically returns from\nstandby mode and resumes operation:\nv The ring indicator (RI) is signaled by a serial device or a PC Card device.\n(Windows 2000 does not support the ring indicator (RI) resume by PC Card device.)\nv The time set on the resume timer elapses.\nNote: The computer does not accept any input immediately after it enters\nstandby mode. Wait a few seconds before taking any action to reenter\noperation mode.\nHibernation mode\nIn hibernation mode, the following occurs:\nv The system status, RAM, VRAM, and setup data are stored on the hard disk.\nv The system is powered off.\nNote: If the computer enters the hibernation mode while it is docked to the\ndoc
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: king station, do not undock it before resuming normal operation. If you\ndo undock it and then try to resume normal operation, you will get an error\nmessage, and you will have to restart the system.\nTo cause the computer to enter hibernation mode, do any of the following:\nv Press the Fn+F12 keys.\nv If you are using the ACPI operating system and have defined one of the\nfollowing actions as the event that causes the system to go into hibernation\nmode, perform that action.\nâ Closing the lid.\nâ Pressing the power button.\nGeneral descriptions\n29 Related service information\nâ Pressing Fn+F4 keys.\nAlso, the computer goes into hibernation mode automatically in either of the\nfollowing conditions:\nv If a âhibernation timeâ has been set on the timer, and if the user does not do\nany operation with the keyboard, the TrackPoint, the hard disk drive, the\nparallel connector, or the diskette drive within that time.\nv If the timer conditions are satisfied in suspend mode.\nWhen the power is turned on, the computer returns from hibernation mode and\nresumes operation. The hibernation file in the boot record on the hard disk drive is\nread, and system status is restored from the hard disk drive.\n30\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Checkout guide\nCheckout guide\nUse the following procedures as a guide in identifying and correcting problems\nwith the ThinkPad computer.\nNote: The diagnostic tests are intended to test only ThinkPad products. The use of\nnon-ThinkPad products, prototype cards, or modified options can lead to\nfalse indications of errors and invalid system responses.\n1. Identify the failing symptoms in as much detail as possible.\n2. Verify the symptoms. Try to re-create the failure by running the diagnostic test\nor by repeating the operation.\nTesting the computer\nThe ThinkPad computer has a test program called PC-Doctor Â® for DOS (hereafter\ncalled PC-Doctor). You can detect errors by running the diagnostics test included in\nPC-Doctor. This section is an overview of the procedure.
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: For details that depend\non model-unique functions, refer to âProduct overviewâ on page 38.\nFor some possible configurations of the computer, PC-Doctor might not run\ncorrectly. To avoid this problem, you need to initialize the computer setup by use\nof the BIOS Setup Utility before you run PC-Doctor. On the BIOS Setup Utility\nscreen, press F9, Enter, F10, and then Enter.\nNote: When you initialize the computer configuration, some devices are disabled,\nsuch as the serial port. If you test one of these devices, you will need to\nenable it by using PS2.EXE.\nPC-Doctor cannot be used to test a device that is in the docking station, even if the\ncomputer supports the docking station. To test a USB device, connect it to the USB\nconnector of the computer. To test the Ultrabay â¢ device, install it in the Ultrabay\nSlim slot of the computer.\nGeneral descriptions\n31 Checkout guide\nCreating the PC-Doctor diagnostics diskette\nIn X60, the PC-Doctor disk can be created by using the ThinkVantage Rescue\nand Recovery.\nTo create the PC-Doctor disk from the , do as follows:\n1. Enter the ThinkVantage Rescue and Recovery application by pressing the\nblue ThinkVantage button during POST.\n2. When the ThinkVantage Rescue and Recovery application finishes loading,\ndouble-click the âCreate diagnostic diskettesâ icon.\n3. It will take about 15 seconds to authenticate the digital signature, and\nthen the ThinkPad computer will reboot into PC-DOS.\n4. A batch file will automatically start up to prompt the user through\ncreating the boot diskettes. The user will be informed how many diskettes\nwill be needed.\na. The user will be prompted to insert each diskette in sequence.\nb. Typically, the user only needs to press the Enter key for the proper\nfloppy drive to format and create the diskette.\nc. Each diskette will be erased and formatted with the PC-Doctor for\nDOS boot image.\n5. Once all the diskettes have been created, the ThinkPad computer will\nreboot. The user is asked to remove all diskettes from the drive,
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: or to\ninsert the first diskette created if it is desired to run the diagnostics.\nTo run the test, do as follows:\nNote: In the following procedure, you can select an item not only with the arrow\nkeys, but also with the TrackPoint. Instead of pressing Enter, click the left\nbutton.\n1. Insert the PC-Doctor disk into the diskette drive; then power on the computer.\nIf the computer cannot be powered on, go to âPower system checkoutâ on page\n34, and check the power sources.\nIf an error code appears, go to âSymptom-to-FRU indexâ on page 47.\nOn the first screen, select the model and press Enter. Follow the instructions on\nthe screen.\n2. The main panel of PC-Doctor appears.\n3. Select Diagnostics with the arrow keys, and press Enter.\nA pull-down menu appears. (Its exact form depends on the model.)\nNote: PC-Doctor menu does not mean the formal support device list. Some\nunsupported device names may appear in the PC-Doctor menu.\nThe options on the test menu are as follows:\n32\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Checkout guide\nDiagnostics\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nInteractive Tests\nRun Normal Test\nRun Quick Test\nCPU/Coprocessor\nSystemboard\nVideo Adapter\nSerial Ports\nParallel Ports\nFixed Disks\nDiskette Drives\nOther Devices\nThinkPad Devices\nCommunication\nWireless LAN\nMemory Test â Full\nMemory Test â Quick\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nKeyboard\nVideo\nInternal Speaker\nMouse\nDiskette\nSystem Load\nOptical Drive Test\nIntel Wireless Radio\nNotes:\nv In the Keyboard test in Interactive Tests, the Fn key should be held down for at least 2\nseconds; otherwise, it cannot be sensed.\nv Video Adapter test supports only the LCD display on the ThinkPad computer. If you\nhave an external monitor attached to your computer, detach it before running PC-Doctor\nfor DOS.\nv To test Digital Signature Chip, the chip must be enabled.\nv To test Serial Ports or Parallel Ports, the ThinkPad computer must be attached to the\nThinkPad X6 UltraBase â¢ .\nDiagnostics\nI n t e r a c t i v e
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Te s t s\nHardware Info\nUtility\nQuit\nF1=Help\nRun Normal Test\nRun Quick Test\nCPU/Coprocessor\nSystemboard\nVideo Adapter\nSerial Ports\nParallel Ports\nFixed Disks\nDiskette Drives\nOther Devices\nZIP Drive\nCommunication\nMemory Test - Full\nMemory Test - Quick\nPC-DOCTOR 2.0 Copyright 2001 PC-Doctor, Inc. All Rights Reserved.\nUse the cursor keys and ESC to move in menus. Press ENTER to select.\n4. Run the applicable function test.\n5. Follow the instructions on the screen. If there is a problem, PC-Doctor shows\nmessages describing it.\n6. To exit the test, select Quit â Exit Diag.\nTo cancel the test, press Esc.\nNote: After executing PC-Doctor, check the system time/date and reset them if\nneeded.\nDetecting system information with PC-Doctor\nPC-Doctor can detect the following system information:\nHardware Info\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nSystem Configuration\nMemory Contents\nPhysical Disk Drives\nLogical Disk Drives\nVGA Information\nIDE Drive Info\nPCI Information\nGeneral descriptions\n33 Checkout guide\nv\nv\nv\nv\nPNPISA Info\nSMBIOS Info\nVESA LCD Info\nHardware Events Log\nUtility\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nRun External Tests\nSurface Scan Hard Disk\nBenchmark System\nDOS Shell\nTech Support Form\nBattery Rundown\nView Test Log\nPrint Log\nSave Log\nFull Erase Hard Drive\nQuick Erase Hard Drive\nPC-Doctor for Windows\nThis product is designed to help you troubleshoot and resolve problems related to\nyour computer. Select one of the categories listed below to display symptoms and\nsolutions:\nv CHECK SYSTEM HEALTH\nv SYSTEM AND DEVICE TESTS\nv LENOVO TROUBLESHOOTING\nv CENTER\nv SYSTEM REPORTS\nv UPDATES AND SUPPORT\nPower system checkout\nTo\n1.\n2.\n3.\n4.\n5.\n6.\n7.\nverify a symptom, do the following:\nPower off the computer.\nRemove the battery pack.\nConnect the ac adapter.\nCheck that power is supplied when you power on the computer.\nPower off the computer.\nDisconnect the ac adapter and install the charged battery pack.\nCheck that the battery pack supplies power when you power on th
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e computer.\nIf you suspect a power problem, see the appropriate one of the following power\nsupply checkouts:\nv âChecking the ac adapterâ\nv âChecking operational chargingâ on page 35\nv âChecking the battery packâ on page 35\nv âChecking the backup batteryâ on page 36\nChecking the ac adapter\nYou are here because the computer fails only when the ac adapter is used:\nv If the power problem occurs only when the port replicator is used, replace the\nport replicator.\nv If the power-on indicator does not turn on, check the power cord of the ac\nadapter for correct continuity and installation.\nv If the computer does not charge during operation, go to â³Checking operational\ncharging.â³\nTo check the ac adapter, do the following:\n34\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Checkout guide\n1. Unplug the ac adapter cable from the computer.\n2. Measure the output voltage at the plug of the ac adapter cable. See the\nfollowing figure:\nPin Voltage (V dc)\n1 Ground\n2 +19.5 to +21.0\n1\n2\n3. If the voltage is not correct, replace the ac adapter.\n4. If the voltage is acceptable, do the following:\nv Replace the system board.\nv If the problem persists, go to âProduct overviewâ on page 38.\nNote: Noise from the ac adapter does not always indicate a defect.\nChecking operational charging\nTo check whether the battery charges properly during operation, use a discharged\nbattery pack or a battery pack that has less than 50% of the total power remaining\nwhen installed in the computer.\nPerform operational charging. If the battery status indicator or icon does not turn\non, remove the battery pack and let it return to room temperature. Reinstall the\nbattery pack. If the charge indicator or icon still does not turn on, replace the\nbattery pack.\nIf the charge indicator still does not turn on, replace the system board. Then\nreinstall the battery pack. If it is still not charged, go to the next section.\nChecking the battery pack\nBattery charging does not start until the Power Meter shows that less tha
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n 95% of\nthe total power remains; under this condition the battery pack can charge to 100%\nof its capacity. This protects the battery pack from being overcharged or from\nhaving a shortened life.\nTo check the status of your battery, move your cursor to the Power Meter icon in\nthe icon tray of the Windows taskbar and wait for a moment (but do not click),\nand the percentage of battery power remaining is displayed. To get detailed\ninformation about the battery, double-click the Power Meter icon.\nNote: If the battery pack becomes hot, it may not be able to charge. Remove it\nfrom the computer and leave it at room temperature for a while. After it\ncools down, reinstall and recharge it.\nTo check the battery pack, do the following:\n1. Power off the computer.\n2. Remove the battery pack and measure the voltage between battery terminals 1\n(+) and 5 (â). See the following figure:\nGeneral descriptions\n35 Checkout guide\n7\n6\n5\n4\nTerminal Voltage (V dc)\n2 + 0 to + 14.4\n6 Ground (â)\n3\n2\n1\n3. If the voltage is less than +14.4 V dc, the battery pack has been discharged.\nNote: Recharging will take at least 3 hours, even if the indicator does not turn\non.\nIf the voltage is still less than +14.4 V dc after recharging, replace the battery.\n4. If the voltage is more than +14.4 V dc, measure the resistance between battery\nterminals 4 and 5. The resistance must be 4 to 30 K \u0002.\nIf the resistance is not correct, replace the battery pack. If the resistance is\ncorrect, replace the system board.\nChecking the backup battery\nDo the following:\n1. Power off the computer, and unplug the ac adapter from it.\n2. Turn the computer upside down.\n3. Remove the battery pack (see â1010 Battery packâ on page 60).\n4. Remove the backup battery (see â1140 Backup batteryâ on page 82).\n5. Measure the voltage of the backup battery. See the following figure.\nRed (+)\nBlack (-)\nWire Voltage (V dc)\nRed +2.5 to +3.2\nBlack Ground\nv If the voltage is correct, replace the system board.\nv If the voltage is not
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: correct, replace the backup battery.\nv If the backup battery discharges quickly after replacement, replace the system\nboard.\n36\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nProduct overview . . . . . . . . . . . .\nSpecifications . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nStatus indicators for X60, X60s, X61, and X61s . .\nFRU tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nFn key combinations . . . . . . . . . .\nSymptom-to-FRU index . . . . . . . . . .\nNumeric error codes . . . . . . . . . .\nError messages . . . . . . . . . . . .\nBeep symptoms . . . . . . . . . . . .\nNo-beep symptoms . . . . . . . . . . .\nLCD-related symptoms . . . . . . . . .\nIntermittent problems . . . . . . . . . .\nUndetermined problems . . . . . . . . .\nFRU replacement notices . . . . . . . . . .\nScrew notices . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nRetaining serial numbers . . . . . . . . .\nRestoring the serial number of the system unit\nRetaining the UUID . . . . . . . . .\nReading or writing the ECA information . .\nRemoving and replacing a FRU . . . . . . . .\n1010 Battery pack . . . . . . . . . . .\n1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber\nrails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1030 DIMM cover . . . . . . . . . . .\n1040 DIMM . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1050 Keyboard . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1060 Upper case . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1070 Fingerprint reader . . . . . . . . .\n1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch) . . . . . . . . .\n1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch) . . . . . .\n1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini card . . .\n1110 Intel Turbo Memory card . . . . . . .\n1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini card . . .\n1130 MDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1140 Backup battery . . . . . . . . . .\n1150 Second Fan . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1160 Speaker . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectors . . . . . .\n1180 LCD assembly . . . . . . . . . . .\n1190 Hard disk sub-card . . . . . . . . .\n1200 System board and lower case assembly with\nlabel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n38\n38\n41\n43\n45\n47\n47\n51
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \n53\n53\n54\n55\n55\n56\n56\n56\n57\n57\n57\n59\n60\n61\n63\n64\n65\n69\n72\n73\n74\n75\n77\n78\n81\n82\n83\n84\n85\n86\n92\n1210 Fansink . . . . . . . . . . . .\n2010 LCD bezel . . . . . . . . . . .\n2020 Inverter card . . . . . . . . . .\n2030 Bluetooth daughter card . . . . . .\n2040 LCD . . . . . . . . . . . .\n2050 Wireless WAN retractable antenna . .\n2060 Wireless WAN antenna cable (SPWG) .\n2070 Wireless LAN antenna cables (SPWG) .\n2080 Hinges . . . . . . . . . . . .\n2090 Wireless LAN antenna cables (TMD) . .\n2100 Wireless WAN antenna cable (TMD) . .\n2110 LCD panel and LCD cable . . . . .\nLocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nFront view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nRear view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nBottom view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nRear View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase . . .\nBottom View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase . .\nParts list . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nOverall . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nLCD FRUs . . . . . . . . . . . .\n12.1-in. XGA TFT . . . . . . . . .\nKeyboard . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nRecovery discs . . . . . . . . . . .\nFor Windows XP Professional SP2 CDs . .\nFor Windows XP Home Edition CDs . .\nFor Windows Vista Business (32 bit) DVDs\nFor Windows Vista Business (64 bit) DVDs\nFor Windows Vista Home Basic (32 bit)\nDVDs . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nFor Windows Vista Ultimate (32 bit) DVDs\nMiscellaneous parts . . . . . . . . .\nAC adapters . . . . . . . . . . . .\nCommon parts list . . . . . . . . . .\nTools . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nPower cords . . . . . . . . . . .\nNotices . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nTrademarks . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n. 96\n. 97\n. 100\n. 101\n. 102\n. 105\n. 106\n. 107\n. 109\n. 113\n. 115\n. 117\n. 119\n. 119\n. 120\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n121\n122\n122\n123\n123\n196\n196\n216\n218\n218\n223\n224\n227\n. 228\n229\n. 230\n. 231\n. 232\n. 232\n. 232\n. 234\n. 235\n93\n37 Product overview\nProduct overview\nThis section presen
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ts the following product-unique information:\nv âSpecificationsâ\nv âStatus indicators for X60, X60s, X61, and X61sâ on page 41\nv âFRU testsâ on page 43\nv âFn key combinationsâ on page 45\nSpecifications\nFeature Description\nProcessor v Intel Â® Core â¢ 2 Duo processor T8300, Standard Voltage (2.40\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 3 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T8100, Standard Voltage (2.10\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 3 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7500, Standard Voltage (2.20\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7300, Standard Voltage (2.00\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7250, Standard Voltage (2.00\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7100, Standard Voltage (1.80\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7200, Standard Voltage (2.00\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T5600, Standard Voltage (1.83\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T5500, Standard Voltage (1.66\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor T2500, Standard Voltage (2.00\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor T2400, Standard Voltage (1.83\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor T2300, Standard Voltage (1.66\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor T2300E, Standard Voltage (1.66\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Solo processor T1300, Standard Voltage (1.66\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor L7700, Low Voltage (1.80 GHz,\n800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor L7500, Low Voltage (1.60 GHz,\n800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor L7300, Low Voltage (1.40 GHz,\n800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor L7400, Low Voltage (1.50 GHz,\n667 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\n(continued)\n38\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Product overview\nFeature Description\nProcessor (continued) v Intel
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Core Duo processor L2400, Low Voltage (1.66 GHz, 667\nMHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor L2300, Low Voltage (1.50 GHz, 667\nMHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Solo processor U1400, Ultra Low Voltage (1.20\nGHz, 533 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Solo processor U1300, Ultra Low Voltage (1.06\nGHz, 533 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nMemory (standard and\noptional) v\nv\nv\nv\nv\nBus architecture v HUB link\nv PCI bus\nv LPC bus\nVideo v Graphics chip: Intel 945GM\nv Total video memory: UMA, 128MB max\nCMOS RAM v 242 bytes\nHard disk drive v\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nDisplay v 12.1-inch, 16M colors, super wide viewing angle XGA (1024\nÃ 768 resolution) TFT color LCD\nI/O port (system) v\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\n256-MB DDR2-667 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-5300) card\n512-MB DDR2-667 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-5300) card\n1-GB DDR2-667 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-5300) card\n2-GB DDR2-667 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-5300) card\n2-GB DDR2-533 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-4200) card\n30.0 GB, 1.8-inch, PATA interface\n40.0 GB, 1.8-inch, PATA interface\n60.0 GB, 1.8-inch, PATA interface\n40.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n60.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n80.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n100.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n120.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n160.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n200.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\nExternal monitor connector\nRJ11 connector\nRJ45 connector\nStereo headphone jack\nMonaural microphone jack\nUniversal serial bus (USB) connector Ã 3\nPCMCIA CardBus\nInfrared port\nNote: The infrared port is not available on the ThinkPad\nX61 and X61s computer.\nDocking connector\nDC-in\nIEEE 1394 connector\nBluetooth antenna (Bluetooth models only)\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n39 Product overview\nFeature Description\nI/O port (ThinkPad X6\nUltraBase) v\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nInternal modem v 56.6 Kbps\nAudio v Internal monaural speaker\nv Software control volume\nInfrared transfer v IrDA 1.1\nNote: The infrared port is not available on the ThinkPad\nX61 and X61s computer.\nPCI
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Express Mini Card v\nv\nv\nv\nPC card v One Type-II\nSD card v With I/O support\nUltrabay device UltraBay Slim (supported by ThinkPad X6 UltraBase)\nModem daughter card\n(MDC) v ThinkPad Modem (MDC-1.5)\nAC adapter v 65-watt type\nDiskette drive (external) v USB diskette drive\nBattery pack (main) v 1 parallel of 4 series of cells (1P4S) Li-Ion battery pack (2.0\nAH) (Prismatic)\nv 1 parallel of 4 series of cells (1P4S) Li-Ion battery pack (2.6\nAH) (Standard)\nv 2 parallel of 4 series of cells (2P4S) Li-Ion battery pack (5.2\nAH) (Hybrid)\nExternal monitor connector\nRJ11 connector\nRJ45 connector\nParallel connector\nSerial connector\nUniversal serial bus (USB) connector Ã 4\nDC-in\nStereo speakers\nMonaural microphone jack\nStereo headphone jack\n802.11a/b/g (Wireless LAN)\n802.11b/g (Wireless LAN)\nWireless WAN\n802.11n (Wireless LAN)\nNote: The prismatic battery is only for ThinkPad X60s and\nX61s computer. The standard and hybrid batteries require a\nspacer when used with ThinkPad X60s and X61s computer.\nPreinstalled operating\nsystem\n40\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nWindows\nWindows\nWindows\nWindows\nWindows\nWindows\nXP Professional\nXP Home Edition\nVista â¢ Business (32 bit)\nVista Business (64 bit)\nVista Home Basic (32 bit)\nVista Ultimate (32 bit) Product overview\nStatus indicators for X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nThe system status indicators show the status of the computer, as follows:\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n8\n6\n9\n7\n8\n9\n10\n10\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n41 Product overview\nIndicator Meaning\n\u00021\u0003 Wireless LAN\nstatus Green: Wireless is operational and radio on state. This indicator\nis on when the data is transmitted.\n\u00022\u0003 Bluetooth status Green: The Bluetooth is operational. This indicator is on when\nthe Bluetooth is on and not in suspend mode.\nR\n\u00023\u0003 Wireless WAN\nstatus Green: Wireless is operational and radio on state. This indicator\nis on when the data is transmitted.\n\u00024\u0003 Num lock Green: The numeric keypad on the
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: keyboard is enabled. To\nenable or disable the keypad, press and hold the Shift\nkey, and press the NumLk (ScrLk) key.\n\u00025\u0003 Caps lock Green: Caps Lock mode is enabled. To enable or disable Caps\nLock mode, press the Caps Lock key.\n\u00026\u0003 Drive in use Green: Data is being read from or written to the hard disk drive,\nor the drive in the Ultrabay device. When this indicator is\non, do not put the computer into standby mode or turn\noff the computer.\nNote: Do not move the system while the Green drive in use light\nis on. Sudden physical shock could cause drive errors.\n\u00027\u0003 Power on Green: The computer is on and ready to use. This indicator stays\nlit whenever the computer is on and is not in standby\nmode.\n\u00028\u0003 Battery status Green: The battery is in use and has enough power. The ac\nadapter has charged the battery completely.\nBlinking green:\nThe battery is being charged, but still has enough power\nto operate. (At regular intervals, the indicator light turns\noff briefly.)\nOrange:\nThe battery is being charged, but the battery power is still\nlow.\nBlinking orange:\nThe battery needs to be charged. When the indicator\nstarts blinking orange, the computer beeps three times.\n\u00029\u0003 AC power\nstatus Green: The ac adapter is connected and the computer is\noperating on ac power. If a battery is installed in the\ncomputer, it is charged when this indicator is green.\n\u000210\u0003 Standby status\n42\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nGreen: The computer is in standby mode.\nBlinking green:\nThe computer is entering standby mode or hibernation\nmode, or is resuming normal operation. Product overview\nFRU tests\nThe following table shows the test for each FRU.\nFRU Applicable test\nSystem board 1. Diagnostics --> CPU/Coprocessor\n2. Diagnostics --> Systemboard\n3. If the docking station or the port replicator is attached to the\nThinkPad computer, undock it. Place the computer on a\nhorizontal surface, and run Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices\n--> HDD Active Protectio
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n Test.\nNote: Do not apply any physical shock to the computer while the\ntest is running.\nPower Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices --> AC Adapter, Battery 1\n(Battery 2)\nLCD unit 1. Diagnostics --> Video Adapter\n2. Interactive Tests --> Video\nModem, MDC1.5 1. Make sure the modem is set up correctly.\n2. Replace the modem jack and the modem card in turn, and run\nthe following test in Diagnostics --> Communication:\na. Conexant Smart Modem Interrupt\nb. Conexant Smart Modem Dialtone\nAudio Enter the BIOS Setup Utility and change Serial ATA (SATA) setting\nto Compatibility, and run Diagnostics --> Other Devices -->\nAnalog Devices HDA CODEC Test\nSpeaker Interactive Tests --> Internal Speaker\nNote: (For X61/X61s only) Once Modem/Audio test is done, if no\nsound is heard in this test, turn the computer off and on. Then, run\nthis test again.\nPC Card slot Diagnostics --> Systemboard --> PCMCIA\nKeyboard 1. Diagnostics --> Systemboard --> Keyboard\n2. Interactive Tests --> Keyboard\nTrackPoint or pointing If the TrackPoint does not work, check the configuration as\ndevice\nspecified in the BIOS Setup Utility. If the TrackPoint is disabled,\nselect Enable to enable it.\nAfter you use the TrackPoint, the pointer may drift on the screen\nfor a short time. This drift can occur when a slight, steady pressure\nis applied to the TrackPointing Stick. This symptom is not a\nhardware problem. If the pointer stops after a short time, no\nservice action is necessary.\nIf enabling the TrackPoint does not correct the problem, continue\nwith the following:\nv Interactive Tests --> Mouse\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n43 Product overview\nFRU Applicable test\nHard disk drive Enter the BIOS Setup Utility and change Serial ATA (SATA) setting\nto Compatibility, then run Diagnostics --> Fixed Disks\nDiskette drive 1. Diagnostics --> Diskette Drives\n2. Interactive Tests --> Diskette\nCD-ROM or DVD\ndrive 1. Diagnostics --> Other Devices --> Optical Drive\n2. Interactive Tests --> Optical Drive Test\nMemory 1. If tw
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: o DIMMs are installed, remove one of them and run\nDiagnostics --> Memory Test - Quick.\n2. If the problem does not recur, return the DIMM to its place,\nremove the other one, and run the test again.\n3. If the test does not detect the error, run Diagnostics -->\nMemory Test - Full.\nNote: The maximum supported memory size is 3GB.\nFan\n44\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n1. Turn on the computer and check the air turbulence at the\nlouver near the power switch.\n2. Run Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices --> Fan. Product overview\nFn key combinations\nThe following table shows the function of each combination of Fn with a function\nkey.\nKey combination Description\nFn+F1 Reserved.\nFn+F2 Reserved.\nFn+F3 Standby mode\nTurn off the LCD display, leaving the screen blank. Hard disk drive\nspindown while CPU still works. To turn the LCD display on\nagain, press any key or the TrackPoint stick.\nFn+F4 Sleep mode\nThis function causes the system to enter a low power sleep state.\nThe unit may remain in the Sleep state for an extended time. For\nACPI systems the OS will determine which state the system will\nenter by user setting on the control panel.\nFn+F5 Wireless radio on/off switching\nEnable or disable the built-in wireless networking features (the\nIEEE 802.11 standard and wireless WAN if available), and the\nBluetooth features. If this combination of keys are pressed, a list of\nwireless features is displayed in the Wireless Radio Control\nwindow. The user can quickly change the power state of each\nfeature in the list.\nFn+F6 Reserved.\nFn+F7 Switch a display output location\nv External monitor (CRT display)\nv Computer display and external monitor (LCD + CRT display)\nv Computer display (LCD)\nNote: For any operating system other than Windows 2000 or\nWindows XP, no additional procedure is needed; just press Fn+F7.\nNote:\n1. This function does not work when different desktop images are\ndisplayed on the computer display and the external monitor\n(the Extend desktop function).\n2. This function does not wo
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rk while a DVD movie or a video clip\nis playing.\n3. For Windows 2000 or Windows XP, a hotkey application might\ntake over the switching function.\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n45 Product overview\nKey combination Description\nFn+F8 Mouse Property\nOpens the window for setting up mouse properties. Tabs for the\nfollowing choices are displayed:\nv Buttons: User can make decisions on button configuration,\ndouble-click speed, and click lock function.\nv Pointers: User is able to customize pointerâs graphic appearance.\nv Pointer Options: User can select pointerâs motion and visibility.\nv Hardware: User is able to view the hardware device property of\nthe mouse.\nv TrackPoint: User is able to select and set TrackPoint Stick speed,\nScrolling or Magnifying Glass function.\nNote: This function is supported only in Windows XP and\nWindows 2000.\nFn+F9\nIssue device ejection\nOpens the ThinkPad EasyEject Utility screen. Buttons for the\nfollowing choices are displayed:\nv Run EasyEject Actions: User can select, stop, and remove\nexternal devices connected to the ThinkPad computer.\nv Configure EasyEject Actions: User can open the ThinkPad\nEasyEject Utility main window.\nv Fn+F9 Settings: User can configure the settings for the Fn+F9\nfunction.\nNote: This function is supported only in Windows XP and\nWindows 2000.\n46\nFn+F10 Reserved.\nFn+F11 Reserved.\nFn+F12 Hibernation\nTurn hibernation mode on. To return to normal operation, press the\npower button for less than four seconds.\nNote: To use Fn+F12 for hibernation in Windows XP and Windows\n2000, the PM device driver must have been installed on the\ncomputer.\nFn+Home LCD brightness up\nThe LCD becomes brighter.\nFn+End LCD brightness down\nThe LCD becomes less bright.\nFn+Spacebar FullScreen magnifier\nEnable the FullScreen Magnifier function.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Symptom-to-FRU index\nSymptom-to-FRU index\nThe symptom-to-FRU index in this section lists symptoms and errors and their\npossible causes. The most likely cause i
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s listed first, in boldface type.\nNote: Do the FRU replacement or other actions in the sequence shown in the\ncolumn headed âFRU or action, in sequence.â If replacing a FRU does not\nsolve the problem, put the original part back in the computer. Do not\nreplace a nondefective FRU.\nThis index can also help you determine, during regular servicing, what FRUs are\nlikely to need to be replaced next.\nA numeric error is displayed for each error detected in POST or system operation.\nIn the displays, n can be any number.\nIf no numeric code is displayed, check the narrative descriptions of symptoms. If\nthe symptom is not described there, go to âIntermittent problemsâ on page 55.\nNote\nFor a device not supported by diagnostic codes in the ThinkPad notebook\ncomputers, see the manual for that device.\nNumeric error codes\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\n0175\nBad CRC1, stop POST taskâThe EEPROM\nchecksum is not correct. System board.\n0176\nSystem SecurityâThe system has been\ntampered with. 1. Run BIOS Setup Utility, and save the\ncurrent setting by pressing F10.\n2. System board.\n0177\nBad SVP data, stop POST taskâThe\nchecksum of the supervisor password in the\nEEPROM is not correct. System board.\n0182\n1. Run BIOS Setup Utility. Press F9, and\nBad CRC2. Enter BIOS Setup and load Setup\nEnter to load the default setting. Then\ndefaults.âThe checksum of the CRS2 setting\nsave the current setting by pressing F10.\nin the EEPROM is not correct.\n2. System board.\n0185\nBad startup sequence settings. Enter BIOS\nSetup and load Setup defaults. 1. Run BIOS Setup Utility. Press F9, and\nEnter to load the default setting. Then\nsave the current setting by pressing F10.\n0187\nEAIA data access errorâThe access to\nEEPROM is failed. System board.\n0188\nInvalid RFID Serialization Information Area. System board.\n0189\nSystem board.\nInvalid RFID configuration information\nareaâThe EEPROM checksum is not correct.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n47 Symptom-to-FRU index\n48\nSymptom or er
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ror FRU or action, in sequence\n0190\nCritical low-battery error 1. Charge the battery pack.\n2. Battery pack.\n0191\nSystem SecurityâInvalid Remote Change\nrequested. 1. Run BIOS Setup Utility, and then save\ncurrent setting by pressing F10.\n2. System board.\n0192\nSystem Securityâ Embedded Security\nhardware tamper detected. System board.\n0199\nSystem Securityâ Security password retry\ncount exceeded. 1. Run BIOS Setup Utility, and then save\nthe current setting by pressing F10.\n2. System board.\n01C8\nTwo or more modem devices are found.\nRemove all but one of them. Press <Esc> to\ncontinue. 1. Remove either a Mini-PCI Card or a\nmodem daughter card. Otherwise, press\nEsc to ignore the warning message.\n2. System board.\n01C9\nMore than one Ethernet devices are found.\nRemove one of them. Press <Esc> to\ncontinue. 1. Remove the Ethernet device that you\ninstalled; or press Esc to ignore the\nwarning message.\n2. System board.\n01CA\nMore than one Wireless LAN devices are\nfound. Remove one of them. 1. Remove the wireless LAN device that\nyou installed.\n2. System board.\n0200\nHard disk errorâThe hard disk is not\nworking. 1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\n2. Load Setup Defaults in BIOS Setup\nUtility.\n3. Hard disk drive.\n4. System board.\n021x\nKeyboard error. Run interactive tests of the keyboard and\nthe auxiliary input device.\n0220\nMonitor type errorâMonitor type does not\nmatch the one specified in CMOS. Load Setup Defaults in BIOS Setup Utility.\n0230\nShadow RAM errorâShadow RAM fails at\noffset nnnn. System board.\n0231\nSystem RAM errorâSystem RAM fails at\noffset nnnn. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n0232\nExtended RAM errorâ Extended RAM fails\nat offset nnnn. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n0250\nSystem battery errorâSystem battery is\ndead. 1. Charge the backup battery for more\nthan 8 hours by connecting the ac\nadapter.\n2. Replace the backup battery and run BIOS\nSetup Utility to reset the time and date.\n0251\nSystem CMOS checksum badâ Default\nconfiguration used. 1. Charge th
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e backup battery for more\nthan 8 hours by connecting the ac\nadapter.\n2. Replace the backup battery and run BIOS\nSetup Utility to reset the time and date.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Symptom-to-FRU index\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\n0252\nPassword checksum badâThe password is\ncleared. Reset the password by running BIOS Setup\nUtility.\n0260\nSystem timer error. 1. Charge the backup battery for more\nthan 8 hours by connecting the ac\nadapter.\n2. Replace the backup battery and run BIOS\nSetup Utility to reset the time and date.\n3. System board.\n0270\nReal-time clock error. 1. Charge the backup battery for more\nthan 8 hours by connecting the ac\nadapter.\n2. Replace the backup battery and run BIOS\nSetup Utility to reset the time and date.\n3. System board.\n0271\nDate and time errorâNeither the date nor\nthe time is set in the computer. Run BIOS Setup Utility to reset the time\nand date.\n0280\nPrevious boot incompleteâ Default\nconfiguration used. 1. Load âSetup Defaultâ in BIOS Setup\nUtility.\n2. DIMM.\n3. System board.\n02B2\nIncorrect drive A type. 1. Diskette drive.\n2. External FDD cable.\n3. I/O card.\n02F0\nCPU ID:xx Failed. 1. CPU.\n2. System board.\n02F4\nEISA CMOS not writable. 1. Load Setup Defaults in BIOS Setup\nUtility.\n2. Replace the backup battery.\n3. System board.\n02F5\nDMA test failed. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n02F6\nSoftware NMI failed 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n02F7\nFail-safe timer NMI failed 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n1801\nAttached docking station is not supported Shut down the computer and remove it\nfrom the docking station.\n1802\nUnauthorized network card is plugged\ninâTurn off and remove the miniPCI\nnetwork card. 1. Remove Mini PCI network card.\n2. System board.\n1803\nUnauthorized daughter card is plugged\ninâTurn off and remove the daughter card. 1. Remove the daughter card that you\ninstalled.\n2. System board.\n1804\nUnauthorized WAN card is plugged\ninâPower off and remove the WAN card. 1. Remove the WAN card that you\n
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: installed.\n2. System board.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n49 Symptom-to-FRU index\n50\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\n1805\nUnauthorized Wireless USB card is plugged\ninâPower off and remove the Wireless USB\ncard. 1. Remove the Wireless USB card that you\ninstalled.\n2. System board.\n1810\nHard disk partition layout error. 1. If the Access Predesktop Area has been\npreviously disabled, then go to the\nBIOS Setup Utility by pressing F1 to\nopen the BIOS Setup Utility. Select\nSecurity --> Predesktop Area --> Access\nPredesktop Area. Set this item to\nDisabled. Save and exit.\n2. If the Access Predesktop Area has not\nbeen previously disabled, press Enter to\nload Access Predesktop Area. Then run\nRECOVER TO FACTORY CONTENTS\nin Access Predesktop Area.\n3. If item 2 failed, press F3 in the Welcome\nscreen in RECOVER TO FACTORY\nCONTENTS. Run FDISK, and then\ndelete all partitions. Run RECOVER TO\nFACTORY CONTENTS in Access\nPredesktop Area again.\n4. If item 3 failed, select CD-ROM boot in\nStartup in Access Predesktop Area. Boot\nfrom the Recovery CD and perform full\nrecovery from it.\n5. If item 4 failed, replace the hard disk\ndrive.\n1820\nMore than one external fingerprint reader is\nattached. Power off and remove all but the\nreader that you set up within your main\noperating system. Remove all but the reader that you set up\nfor the authentication.\n1830\nInvalid memory configurationâPower off\nand install a memory module to Slot-0 or\nthe lower slot. Install DIMM in Slot-0, but not in Slot-1.\nNote: For the construction of the DIMM\nslot, seeâ1040 DIMMâ on page 64.\n2000\nHard Drive Active Protection sensor\ndiagnostics failed.\nPress <Esc> to continue.\nPress <F1> to enter SETUP 1. Undock docking station or port\nreplicator if it is attached to the\nThinkPad computer, and place the\ncomputer on a horizontal surface. Do not\napply any physical shock to the\ncomputer.\n2. Run Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices\n--> HDD Active Protection Test.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s Symptom-to-FRU index\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\n2010\nWarning: Your internal hard disk drive\n(HDD) may not function correctly on this\nsystem. Ensure that your HDD is supported\non this system and that the latest HDD\nfirmware is installed. Inform the following information to the\ncustomer:\nIf in the primary bay the customer is using a\nnon-IBM or non-Lenovo hard disk drive\n(HDD), or an old generation IBM HDD\nwhich is not supported by this system, with\nthe risk in mind, the customer can still use it\nby pressing ESC. If in the primary drive bay\nthe customer is using a supported\nIBM/Lenovo HDD with an old firmware,\nthe customer needs to update its firmware to\nthe latest. The latest version is available at\nhttp://www.lenovo.com/support\n2100\nInitialization error on HDD0 (Main hard\ndisk drive) 1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\n2. Main hard disk drive.\n3. System board.\n2102\nInitialization error on HDD1 (Ultrabay hard\ndisk drive) 1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\n2. Ultrabay hard disk drive.\n3. System board.\n2110\n1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\nRead error on HDD0 (Main hard disk drive) 2. Main hard disk drive.\n3. System board.\n2112\nRead error on HDD1 (Ultrabay hard disk\ndrive)\n1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\n2. Ultrabay hard disk drive.\n3. System board.\nError messages\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\nDevice address conflict. 1. Load âSetup Defaultsâ in the BIOS\nSetup Utility.\n2. Backup battery.\n3. System board.\nAllocation error for device. 1. Load âSetup Defaultsâ in the BIOS\nSetup Utility.\n2. Backup battery.\n3. System board.\nFailing bits: nnnn. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\nInvalid system configuration data. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\nI/O device IRQ conflict. 1. Load âSetup Defaultsâ in the BIOS\nSetup Utility.\n2. Backup battery.\n3. System board.\nHibernation error. 1. Restore the system configuration to\nwhat it was before the computer\nentered hibernation mode.\n2. If memory size has been changed,\nre-create the hibernation file.\nThinkPad
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n51 Symptom-to-FRU index\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\nFan error. 1. Fan.\n2. Thermal grease.\n3. System board.\nThermal sensing error. System board.\nCannot boot from any device. Check the status of device which you want\nto boot from.\nDevice not found.\n1. The device you want to boot from.\n2. System board.\nDevice Error.\n1. The device you want to boot from.\n2. System board.\nNo valid operating system.\n1. Check that the operating system has no\nfailure and is installed correctly.\n2. Reinstall the operation system.\nExcluded from boot order.\nv Enter the BIOS Setup Utility and add the\ndevice in boot order.\n52\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Symptom-to-FRU index\nBeep symptoms\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\nOne beep and a blank, unreadable, or\nflashing LCD. 1.\n2.\n3.\n4.\nOne long and two short beeps, and a blank\nor unreadable LCD. 1. System board.\n2. LCD assembly.\n3. DIMM.\nTwo short beeps with error codes. POST error. See âNumeric error codesâ on\npage 47.\nTwo short beeps and a blank screen. 1. System board.\n2. DIMM.\nThree short beeps, pause, three more short\nbeeps, and one short beep. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board\nReseat the LCD connector.\nLCD assembly.\nExternal CRT.\nSystem board.\nOne short beep, pause, three short beeps,\npause, three more short beeps, and one short\nbeep.\nOnly the cursor appears. Reinstall the operating system.\nFour cycles of four short beeps and a blank\nscreen. System board (security chip)\nFive short beeps and a blank screen. System board\nNo-beep symptoms\nSymptom or error\nFRU or action, in sequence\nNo beep, power-on indicator on, LCD blank, 1. Make sure that every connector is\nand no POST.\nconnected tightly and correctly.\n2. DIMM.\n3. System board.\nNo beep, power-on indicator on, and LCD\nblank during POST. 1. Reseat DIMM.\nThe power-on password prompt appears. A power-on password or a supervisor\npassword is set. Type the password and\npress Enter.\nThe hard-disk password prompt appears. A hard-
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: disk password is set. Type the\npassword and press Enter.\n2. System board.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n53 Symptom-to-FRU index\nLCD-related symptoms\nImportant: The TFT LCD for the notebook computer contains many thin-film\ntransistors (TFTs). The presence of a small number of dots that are\nmissing, discolored, or always lighted is characteristic of TFT LCD\ntechnology, but excessive pixel problems can cause viewing concerns.\nThe LCD should be replaced if the number of missing, discolored, or\nlighted dots in any background is as follows:\nMinimum quantity of defective pixels required for LCD replacement on June 2006 or later\nmanufactured ThinkPad\nLCD resolution\nBright dots\nDark dots\nBright and dark dots\nXGA, WXGA 5 6 6\nWXGA+, SXGA+,\nWSXGA+ 5 8 10\nUXGA, WUXGA,\nQXGA 5 13 13\nNotes:\n1. Lenovo will not provide replacement if the LCD is within specification as we\ncannot guarantee that any replacement LCD will have zero pixel defects.\n2. A bright dot means a pixel is always on (white or color.)\n3. A dark dot means a pixel is always off (black color.)\n4. One pixel consists of R, G, B sub-pixels.\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\nNo beep, power-on indicator on, and a\nblank LCD during POST. System board.\nv\nv\nv\nv LCD\nLCD\nLCD\nLCD\nbacklight not working.\ntoo dark.\nbrightness cannot be adjusted.\ncontrast cannot be adjusted.\nv\nv\nv\nv LCD screen unreadable.\nCharacters missing pixels.\nScreen abnormal.\nWrong color displayed.\nHorizontal or vertical lines displayed on\nLCD.\n54\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n1. Reseat the LCD connectors.\n2. LCD assembly.\n3. System board.\n1. See important note for âLCD-related\nsymptoms.â\n2. Reseat all LCD connectors.\n3. LCD assembly.\n4. System board.\nLCD assembly. Symptom-to-FRU index\nIntermittent problems\nIntermittent system hang problems can be due to a variety of causes that have\nnothing to do with a hardware defect, such as cosmic radiation, electrostatic\ndischarge, or software errors. FRU replacement should be cons
>Sep 28 18:39:21 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: idered only when a\nproblem recurs.\nWhen analyzing an intermittent problem, do the following:\n1. Run the diagnostic test for the system board in loop mode at least 10 times.\n2. If no error is detected, do not replace any FRUs.\n3. If any error is detected, replace the FRU shown by the FRU code. Rerun the\ntest to verify that no more errors exist.\nUndetermined problems\nIf the diagnostic tests did not identify the adapter or device that has failed, if\nwrong devices are installed, or if the system simply is not operating, follow these\nprocedures to isolate the failing FRU (do not isolate FRUs that have no defects).\nVerify that all attached devices are supported by the computer.\nVerify that the power supply being used at the time of the failure is operating\ncorrectly. (See âPower system checkoutâ on page 34.)\n1. Turn off the computer.\n2. Visually check each FRU for damage. Replace any damaged FRU.\n3. Remove or disconnect all of the following devices:\na. Non-ThinkPad devices\nb. Devices attached to the port replicator\nc. Printer, mouse, and other external devices\nd. Battery pack\ne. Hard disk drive\nf. External diskette drive or optical drive\ng. DIMM\nh. Optical disk or diskette in the internal drive\ni. PC Cards\n4. Turn on the computer.\n5. Determine whether the problem has been solved.\n6. If the problem does not recur, reconnect the removed devices one at a time\nuntil you find the failing FRU.\n7. If the problem remains, replace the following FRUs one at a time (do not\nreplace a nondefective FRU):\na. System board\nb. LCD assembly\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n55 FRU replacement notices\nFRU replacement notices\nThis section contains notices related to removing and replacing parts. Read this\nsection carefully before replacing any FRU.\nScrew notices\nLoose screws can cause a reliability problem. In the ThinkPad computer, this\nproblem is addressed with special nylon-coated screws that have the following\ncharacteristics:\nv They maintain tight connections.\nv They do not easily come l
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: oose, even with shock or vibration.\nv They are harder to tighten.\nv Each one should be used only once.\nDo the following when you service this machine:\nv Keep the screw kit (for the P/N, see âMiscellaneous partsâ on page 230) in your\ntool bag.\nv Always use new screws.\nv Use a torque screwdriver if you have one.\nTighten screws as follows:\nv Plastic to plastic\nTurn an additional 90 degrees after the screw head touches the surface of the\nplastic part:\n90 degrees more\n(Cross-section)\nv Logic card to plastic\nTurn an additional 180 degrees after the screw head touches the surface of the\nlogic card:\n180 degrees more\n(Cross-section)\nv Torque driver\nIf you have a torque driver, refer to the âTorqueâ column for each step.\nv Make sure that you use the correct screw. If you have a torque screwdriver,\ntighten all screws firmly to the torque shown in the table. Never use a screw\nthat you removed. Use a new one. Make sure that all of the screws are\ntightened firmly.\nv Ensure torque screwdrivers are calibrated correctly following country\nspecifications.\nRetaining serial numbers\nThis section includes the following descriptions:\nv âRestoring the serial number of the system unitâ on page 57\n56\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s FRU replacement notices\nv âRetaining the UUIDâ\nv âReading or writing the ECA informationâ\nRestoring the serial number of the system unit\nWhen the computer was manufactured, the EEPROM on the system board was\nloaded with the serial numbers of the system and all major components. These\nnumbers need to remain the same throughout the life of the computer.\nIf you replace the system board, you must restore the serial number of the system\nunit to its original value.\nBefore replacing the system board, save the original serial number by doing the\nfollowing:\n1. Install the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later, and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 1. Set System Identification.\n3. Select 2. Read S/N data from EEP
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ROM.\nThe serial number of each device in your computer is displayed; the serial number\nof the system unit is listed as follows:\nv 20: Serial number\nWrite down that number.\nNote: The serial number of the system unit is also written on the label attached to\nthe bottom of the computer.\nAfter you have replaced the system board, restore the serial number by doing the\nfollowing:\n1. Install the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 1. Set System Identification.\n3. Select 1. Add S/N data from EEPROM.\nFollow the instructions on the screen.\nRetaining the UUID\nThe Universally Unique Identifier (UUID) is a 128-bit number uniquely assigned to\nyour computer at production and stored in the EEPROM of your system board.\nThe algorithm that generates the number is designed to provide unique IDs until\nthe year A.D. 3400. No two computers in the world have the same number.\nWhen you replace the system board, you must set the UUID on the new system\nboard as follows:\n1. Install the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later, and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 4. Assign UUID.\nA new UUID is created and written. If a valid UUID already exists, it is not\noverwritten.\nReading or writing the ECA information\nInformation on Engineering Change Announcements (ECA) are stored in the\nEEPROM of the system board. The electronic storage of this information simplifies\nthe procedure to check if the ECA has been previously applied to a machine. The\nmachine does not need to be disassembled to check for the ECA application.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n57 FRU replacement notices\nTo check what ECAs have been previously applied to the machine, use the ECA\nInformation Read/Write function on the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette\nVersion 1.73 or later.\n1. Insert the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later, and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 6. Set ECA Infor
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: mation.\n3. To read ECA information, select 2. Read ECA/rework number from EEPROM\nand follow the instruction.\n4. To read box build date, select 5. Read box build date from EEPROM, and\nfollow the instruction on the screen.\nAfter an ECA has been applied to the machine, the EEPROM must be updated to\nreflect the ECA's application. Use the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette\nVersion 1.73 or later to update the EEPROM.\nNote: Only the ECA number is stored in the EEPROM. The machine type of the\nECA is assumed be the same as the machine type of the machine that had\nthe ECA applied to it.\n1. Insert the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later, and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 6. Set ECA Information.\n3. To write ECA information, select 1. Write ECA/rework number from EEPROM,\nand follow the instruction.\n4. To write box build date, select 4. Write box build date from EEPROM, and\nfollow the instruction on the screen.\nIf the system board is being replaced, try to read the ECA information from the old\nsystem board and transfer the information to the new system. If the system board\nis inoperable, this will not be possible.\n58\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nRemoving and replacing a FRU\nThis section presents directions and drawings for use in removing and replacing a\nFRU. Be sure to observe the following general rules:\n1. Do not try to service any computer unless you have been trained and certified.\nAn untrained person runs the risk of damaging parts.\n2. Before replacing any FRU, review âFRU replacement noticesâ on page 56.\n3. Begin by removing any FRUs that have to be removed before the failing FRU.\nAny such FRUs are listed at the top of the page. Remove them in the order in\nwhich they are listed.\n4. Follow the correct sequence in the steps for removing the FRU, as given in the\ndrawings by the numbers in square callouts.\n5. When turning a screw to replace a FRU, turn it in the direction as given by the\narrow in th
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e drawing.\n6. When removing the FRU, move it in the direction as given by the arrow in the\ndrawing.\n7. To put the new FRU in place, reverse the removal procedure and follow any\nnotes that pertain to replacement. For information about connecting and\narranging internal cables, see âLocationsâ on page 119.\n8. When replacing a FRU, use the correct screw as shown in the procedures.\nDANGER\nBefore removing any FRU, turn off the computer, unplug all power cords from\nelectrical outlets, remove the battery pack, and then disconnect any interconnecting\ncables.\nAttention: After replacing a FRU, do not turn on the computer until you have\nmade sure that all screws, springs, and other small parts are in place and none are\nloose inside the computer. Verify this by shaking the computer gently and listening\nfor rattling sounds. Metallic parts or metal flakes can cause electrical short circuits.\nAttention: The system board is sensitive to, and can be damaged by, electrostatic\ndischarge. Before touching it, establish personal grounding by touching a ground\npoint with one hand or by using an electrostatic discharge (ESD) strap (P/N\n6405959).\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n59 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1010 Battery pack\nDANGER\nUse only the battery specified in the parts list for your computer. Any other battery\ncould ignite or explode.\n2\n1\n3\n60\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber rails\nNote: This procedure is only for models with a 2.5-inch hard disk drive.\nAttention\nv Do not drop or apply any shock to the hard disk drive. The hard disk\ndrive is sensitive to physical shock. Incorrect handling can cause damage\nand permanent loss of data.\nv Before removing the drive, have the user make a backup copy of all the\ninformation on the drive if possible.\nv Never remove the drive while the system is operating or is in suspend\nmode.\nFor access, remove following FRU:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\n2\n1\nStep Screw
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00021\u0003 M3 Ã 3 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (1) Black 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n3\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n61 Removing and replacing a FRU\n4\n4\nWhen installing: Make sure that the hard disk is connected firmly.\n62\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1030 DIMM cover\nFor access, remove following FRU:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nNote: Loosen the screws \u00021\u0003, but do not remove them.\n1\n1\n2\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00021\u0003 M2 Ã 3 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Black 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n63 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1040 DIMM\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1030 DIMM coverâ on page 63\nb\na\n1\n2\n1\nNote: If only one DIMM is used on the computer you are servicing, the card must\nbe installed in SLOT-0 (\u0002a\u0003), but not in SLOT-1 (\u0002b\u0003).\n64\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1050 Keyboard\nFor access, remove following FRU:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nRemove 4 screws with keyboard icon to remove keyboard.\nNote: Place the system on a hard flat table when you remove or reinstall the\nscrews. When reinstalling the screw \u00021a\u0003, use a manual screwdriver. Do not\nsecure this screw too tightly.\n1\n1a\n1\n1\nStep\nIcon\n\u00021\u0003\u00021a\u0003\nScrew (quantity) Color Torque\nM2 Ã 6 mm, wafer-head,\nnylon-coated (4) Black 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n65 Removing and replacing a FRU\nGently push the keyboard forward, as shown in step \u00022\u0003. Then lift up the\nkeyboard slightly, as shown in step \u00023\u0003.\n2\n3\n3\n3\nDetach the keyboard connector \u00024\u0003 to remove the keyboard \u00025\u0003.\n4\n5\n66\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nWhen installing: Follow the steps below.\n1. Attach the connector.\n2. Make sure that the keyboard edges are under th
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e frame. Then press the keys to\nlatch the keyboard firmly in place.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n67 Removing and replacing a FRU\n3. To make sure that the front side of the keyboard is housed firmly, gently press\nthe keys with your thumbs and try to slide the keyboard toward you.\n4. Secure the keyboard by tightening the screws from the bottom side of the\ncomputer.\n68\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1060 Upper case\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00021\u0003 M2 Ã 6 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (6) Black 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\nNote: Place the system on a hard flat table when you remove or reinstall the\nscrews.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n69 Removing and replacing a FRU\nNote: For models with a fingerprint reader, detach the fingerprint cable \u00022\u0003.\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\n2\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n2\n(continued)\n70\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nNote: Open the LCD at least 150 degrees.\nPress down and gently lift upper case up, as shown in steps \u00023\u0003 and \u00024\u0003, to\nremove upper case.\n3\n4\n3\nWhen installing: Follow the steps below to make sure that the upper case is\ninstalled firmly.\n1\n2\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n71 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1070 Fingerprint reader\nNote: This procedure is only for models with a fingerprint reader.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\n4\n1\n2\n2\n3\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n4\n1\n1\n2\n3\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00022\u0003 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\nNote: For ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers with wireless WAN, copper and\naluminum shielding are present o
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n the upper case and the fingerprint reader\ncable.\n72\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch)\nNote: This procedure is only for models with a 1.8-inch hard disk drive.\nAttention\nv Do not drop or apply any shock to the hard disk drive. The hard disk\ndrive is sensitive to physical shock. Incorrect handling can cause damage\nand permanent loss of data.\nv Before removing the drive, have the user make a backup copy of all the\ninformation on the drive if possible.\nv Never remove the drive while the system is operating or is in suspend\nmode.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n1\n2\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n73 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch)\nNote: This procedure is only for models with a 1.8-inch hard disk drive.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch)â on page 73\n1\n2\n74\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00021\u0003 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini card\nNote: This procedure is only for models with wireless WAN feature. Step 2 is only\nfor models with the Sierra Wireless EV-DO Wireless WAN Mini PCI Express\nAdapter.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n1\n1\n2\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n75 Removing and replacing a FRU\n3\n4\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00023\u0003 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n76\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00023\u0003 M2 Ã 2.5 m
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: m, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1110 Intel Turbo Memory card\nNote: Either a wireless WAN PCI Express Mini Card or an Intel Turbo Memory\ncard can be installed in the system at one time, as they occupy the same\nslot.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n1\n2\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00021\u0003 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n77 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini card\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nFor systems with 802.11a/b/g or 802.11b/g antenna cable connection\n1\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\n3\n2\n78\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00022\u0003 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nWhen installing: If you are installing a 802.11n wireless LAN card, attach the grey\ncable to the left connector and the black cable to the right\nconnector. If you attach either cable to the center connector, the\nconnection speed will be lower.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n79 Removing and replacing a FRU\nFor systems with 802.11n wireless LAN 3rd antenna cable connection\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n2\n2\n3\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00022\u0003 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nWhen installing: If you are installing a 802.11a/b/g or 802.11b/g card, first insert\nthe connector end of the white cable into a plastic cable bag and\naffix the cable to the mainboard with tape. Then insert the card,\nand attach the grey cable t
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: o the left connector, and the black\ncable to the right connector on the card.\n80\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1130 MDC\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n2\n1\n3\n1\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00021\u0003 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n81 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1140 Backup battery\nDANGER\nUse only the battery specified in the parts list for your computer. Any other battery\ncould ignite or explode.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\n1\n2\nWhen installing: Make sure that the battery connector is attached firmly.\n82\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1150 Second Fan\nNote: This procedure is only for ThinkPad X61 and X61s models with wireless\nWAN.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n2\n3\n4\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00021\u0003 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\nWhen installing: Make sure that the second fan connector is attached firmly.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n83 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1160 Speaker\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1150 Second Fanâ on page 83\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\n2\n1\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n2\n1\nWhen installing: Make sure that the speaker connector is attached firmly.\n84\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectors\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n2\n2\n3\n1\n4\n1\n4\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00022\u0003 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\nWhen installing: Make sure that the DC-in and RJ-11 cables are routed properly\nand the connectors are attached firmly.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n85 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1180 LCD assembly\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nBefore removing LCD assembly, detach the connector \u00024\u0003. Then release the antenna\ncables in steps \u00026\u0003 to \u00029\u0003.\n1\n1\n2\n3\n4\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00021\u0003 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n(continued)\n86\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nNote: For ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers with wireless WAN, first peel up the\ncopper shielding \u00025\u0003 before removing the antenna cables.\n5\n6 6\n6\n6\n6\n6\n7\n8\n9\nNote: For 802.11n wireless models, there is an additional white cable from the left\nside of the LCD instead of one \u00027\u0003.\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n87 Removing and replacing a FRU\n10a\n10b\n10b\n11\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u000210a\u0003 M2 Ã 8 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (1) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n\u000210b\u0003 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n(continued)\n88\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n12\n12\n13\n13\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u000212\u0003 M2 Ã 6 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Black 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n\u000213\u0003 M2 Ã 6 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Black 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n14\n14\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n89 Removing and replacing a FRU\nWhen installing: W
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hen fitting the LCD hinge into the system, make sure the\nwireless antenna cables do not get pinched in by the hinge. Then\nroute the wireless antenna cables as shown below. For wireless\nWAN: red or black with red tag is main; blue is aux. For wireless\nLAN: gray is main; black is aux; white is MIMO (for 802.11n\nmodels). Remember to reattach the mylar and tapes.\n1\n2\n3\nNote: For ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers with wireless WAN, re-affix the\ncopper shielding to cover the antenna cables.\n(continued)\n90\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s " ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:tableOfContents "Contents About this manual Introduction Important service information Strategy for replacing FRUs Strategy for replacing a hard disk drive Important notice for replacing a system board How to use error messages Strategy for replacing FRUs for CTO, CMV, and GAV Product definition FRU identification for CTO, CMV, and GAV products Using PEW Using eSupport Using the HMM Important information about replacing RoHS compliant FRUs Diskette compatibility matrix Safety notices: multilingual translations Safety information General safety Electrical safety Safety inspection guide Handling devices that are sensitive to electrostatic discharge Grounding requirements Laser compliance statement General descriptions Read this first What to do first Related service information Service Web site Restoring the factory contents by using Product Recovery discs Passwords How to remove the power-on password How to remove the hard-disk password Power management Screen blank mode Standby mode Hibernation mode Checkout guide Testing the computer Detecting system information with PC-Doctor Hardware Info Utility PC-Doctor for Windows Power system checkout Checking the ac adapter Checking operational charging Checking the battery pack Checking the backup battery ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Product overview Specifications Status indicators for X60, X60s, X61, and X61s FRU tests Fn key combinations Symptom-to-FRU index Numeric error codes Error messages Beep symptoms No-beep symptoms LCD-related symptoms Intermittent problems Undetermined problems FRU replacement notices Screw notices Retaining serial numbers Restoring the serial number of the system unit Retaining the UUID Reading or writing the ECA information Removing and replacing a FRU 1010 Battery pack 1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber rails 1030 DIMM cover 1040 DIMM 1050 Keyboard 1060 Upper case 1070 Fingerprint reader 1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch) 1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch) 1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini card 1110 Intel Turbo Memory card 1
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini card 1130 MDC 1140 Backup battery 1150 Second Fan 1160 Speaker 1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectors 1180 LCD assembly 1190 Hard disk sub-card 1200 System board and lower case assembly with label 1210 Fansink 2010 LCD bezel 2020 Inverter card 2030 Bluetooth daughter card 2040 LCD 2050 Wireless WAN retractable antenna 2060 Wireless WAN antenna cable (SPWG) 2070 Wireless LAN antenna cables (SPWG) 2080 Hinges 2090 Wireless LAN antenna cables (TMD) 2100 Wireless WAN antenna cable (TMD) 2110 LCD panel and LCD cable Locations Front view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Rear view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Bottom view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Rear View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase Bottom View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase Parts list Overall LCD FRUs 12.1-in. XGA TFT Keyboard Recovery discs For Windows XP Professional SP2 CDs For Windows XP Home Edition CDs For Windows Vista Business (32 bit) DVDs For Windows Vista Business (64 bit) DVDs For Windows Vista Home Basic (32 bit) DVDs For Windows Vista Ultimate (32 bit) DVDs Miscellaneous parts AC adapters Common parts list Tools Power cords Notices Trademarks " .
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: }
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Task 45, error: Unable to insert multiple values for subject `urn:uuid:ab8a860d-3eb3-eabd-b9af-539c6712b84d' and single valued property `dc:creator' (old_value: '102092', new value: 'urn:uuid:7f9ca0d2-7429-ec01-7512-24cd8d6baaa2')
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: (tracker-extract:12297): Tracker-WARNING **: Sparql update was:
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: INSERT {
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: GRAPH <urn:uuid:472ed0cc-40ff-4e37-9c0c-062d78656540> {
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:ab8a860d-3eb3-eabd-b9af-539c6712b84d> nie:dataSource <http://www.tracker-project.org/ontologies/tracker#extractor-data-source> .
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: <urn:uuid:ab8a860d-3eb3-eabd-b9af-539c6712b84d> a nfo:PaginatedTextDocument ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:title "ThinkPadï½® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:creator [ a nco:Contact ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nco:fullname "Lenovo"] ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:contentCreated "2008-01-16T13:21:49Z" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: dc:format "application/pdf" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:description "" ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nfo:pageCount 242 ;
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nie:plainTextContent "Â®\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nHardware Maintenance Manual\nThis manual supports:\nThinkPad X60\n(MT 1706, 1707, 1708, 1709, 2509, and 2510)\nThinkPad X60s\n(MT 1702, 1703, 1704, 1705, 2507, 2508, 2533, and 2534)\nThinkPad X61\n(MT 7673, 7674, 7675, 7676, 7678, and 7679)\nThinkPad X61s\n(MT 7666, 7667, 7668, 7669, 7670, and 7671) Â®\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nHardware Maintenance Manual Note\nBefore using this information and the product it supports, be sure to read the general information under âNoticesâ on page\n234.\nFourth Edition (January 2008)\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008. All rights reserved.\nLENOVO products, data, computer software, and services have been developed exclusively at private expense and\nare sold to governmental entities as commercial items as defined by 48 C.F.R. 2.101 with limited and restricted\nrights to use, reproduction and disclosure.\nLIMITED AND RESTRICTED RIGHTS NOTICE: If products, data, computer software, or services are delivered\npursuant a General Services Administration â³GSAâ³ contract, use, reproduction, or disclosure is subject to restrictions\nset forth in Contract No. GS-35F-05925. Contents\nAbout this manual . . . . . . . . . . 1\nIntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3\nImportant service information . . . . . . . . 3\nStrategy for replacing FRUs . . . . . . . . . 3\nStrategy for replacing a hard disk drive . . . . 4\nImportant notice for replacing a system board . . 4\nHow to use error messages . . . . . . . . 4\nStrategy for replacing FRUs for CTO, CMV, and GAV 4\nProduct definition . . . . . . . . . . . 4\nFRU identification for CTO, CMV, and GAV\nproducts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5\nImportant information about replacing RoHS\ncompliant FRUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6\nDiskette compatibility matrix . . . . . . . . . 7\nSafety notices: multilingual translations . . . . . 7\nSafety information . . . . . . . . . . . . 16\nGeneral safety . . . . . . . . . . . . 16\nElectrical safety . . . . . . . . . . . . 16\nSafe
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ty inspection guide . . . . . . . . . 18\nHandling devices that are sensitive to\nelectrostatic discharge . . . . . . . . . . 19\nGrounding requirements . . . . . . . . . 19\nLaser compliance statement . . . . . . . . . 20\nGeneral descriptions . . . . . . . . . 23\nRead this first . . . . . . . . . . . .\nWhat to do first . . . . . . . . . . .\nRelated service information . . . . . . . .\nService Web site . . . . . . . . . . .\nRestoring the factory contents by using Product\nRecovery discs . . . . . . . . . . .\nPasswords . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nPower management . . . . . . . . .\nCheckout guide . . . . . . . . . . . .\nTesting the computer . . . . . . . . .\nDetecting system information with PC-Doctor .\nPower system checkout . . . . . . . .\n.\n.\n.\n. 23\n23\n25\n25\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n. 25\n26\n28\n31\n31\n33\n34\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s . . 37\nProduct overview . . . . . . .\nSpecifications . . . . . . . .\nStatus indicators for X60, X60s, X61,\nFRU tests . . . . . . . . .\nFn key combinations . . . . .\nSymptom-to-FRU index . . . . .\nNumeric error codes . . . . .\nError messages . . . . . . .\nBeep symptoms . . . . . . .\nNo-beep symptoms . . . . . .\nLCD-related symptoms . . . .\nIntermittent problems . . . . .\nUndetermined problems . . . .\nFRU replacement notices . . . . .\nScrew notices . . . . . . . .\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n. . . .\n. . . .\nand X61s .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n. . . .\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n38\n38\n41\n43\n45\n47\n47\n51\n53\n53\n54\n55\n55\n56\n56\nRetaining serial numbers . . . . . . . . . 56\nRemoving and replacing a FRU . . . . . . . . 59\n1010 Battery pack . . . . . . . . . . . 60\n1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber\nrails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61\n1030 DIMM cover . . . . . . . . . . . 63\n1040 DIMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64\n1050 Keyboard . . . . . . . . . . . . 65\n1060 Upper case . . . . . . . . . . . . 69\n1070 Fingerprint reader
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: . . . . . . . . . 72\n1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch) . . . . . . . . . 73\n1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch) . . . . . . 74\n1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini card . . . 75\n1110 Intel Turbo Memory card . . . . . . . 77\n1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini card . . . 78\n1130 MDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81\n1140 Backup battery . . . . . . . . . . 82\n1150 Second Fan . . . . . . . . . . . . 83\n1160 Speaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84\n1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectors . . . . . . 85\n1180 LCD assembly . . . . . . . . . . . 86\n1190 Hard disk sub-card . . . . . . . . . 92\n1200 System board and lower case assembly with\nlabel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93\n1210 Fansink . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96\n2010 LCD bezel . . . . . . . . . . . . 97\n2020 Inverter card . . . . . . . . . . . 100\n2030 Bluetooth daughter card . . . . . . . 101\n2040 LCD . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102\n2050 Wireless WAN retractable antenna . . . 105\n2060 Wireless WAN antenna cable (SPWG) . . 106\n2070 Wireless LAN antenna cables (SPWG) . . 107\n2080 Hinges . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109\n2090 Wireless LAN antenna cables (TMD) . . . 113\n2100 Wireless WAN antenna cable (TMD) . . . 115\n2110 LCD panel and LCD cable . . . . . . 117\nLocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119\nFront view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119\nRear view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120\nBottom view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121\nRear View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase . . . . 122\nBottom View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase . . . 122\nParts list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123\nOverall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123\nLCD FRUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196\nKeyboard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216\nRecovery discs . . . . . . . . . . . . 218\nMiscellaneous parts . . . . . . . . . . 230\nAC adapters . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231\nCommon parts list . . . . . . . . . . . 232\nNotices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234\nTrademarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 35\niii iv\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s About this manual\nThis manual contains service and reference information for ThinkPad X60 (MT\n1706, 1707, 1708, 1709, 2509, and 2510), ThinkPad X60s (MT 1702, 1703, 1704, 1705,\n2507, 2508, 2533, and 2534), ThinkPad X61 (MT 7673, 7674, 7675, 7676, 7678, and\n7679), and ThinkPad X61s (MT 7666, 7667, 7668, 7669, 7670, and 7671) product. Use\nthis manual along with the advanced diagnostic tests to troubleshoot problems.\nThe manual is divided into sections as follows:\nv The common sections provide general information, guidelines, and safety\ninformation required in servicing computers.\nv The product-specific section includes service, reference, and product-specific\nparts information.\nImportant\nThis manual is intended for trained service personnel who are familiar with\nThinkPad products. Use this manual along with the advanced diagnostic tests\nto troubleshoot problems effectively.\nBefore servicing a ThinkPad product, be sure to review the safety information\nunder âSafety notices: multilingual translationsâ on page 7, âSafety\ninformationâ on page 16, and âLaser compliance statementâ on page 20.\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n1 2\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Introduction\nImportant service information\nImportant\nBIOS and device driver fixes are customer-installable. The BIOS and device\ndrivers are posted on the customer support site http://www.lenovo.com/\nsupport\nAdvise customers to contact the Customer Support Center at 800-426-7378 if\nthey need assistance in obtaining or installing any software fixes, drivers, and\nBIOS downloads.\nCustomers in Canada should call the Customer Support Center at\n800-565-3344 for assistance or download information.\nStrategy for replacing FRUs\nBefore replacing parts\nMake sure that all software fixes, drivers, and BIOS downloads are installed\nbefore replacing any FRUs listed in this manual.\nAfter a system board is replaced, ensure that the latest BIOS is loaded to the\nsystem board before comple
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ting the service action.\nTo download software fixes, drivers, and BIOS, do as follows:\n1. Go to http://www.lenovo.com/support\n2. Enter the product number of the computer or press Auto-detect button on\nthe screen.\n3. Select Downloads and drivers.\n4. Follow the directions on the screen and install the necessary software.\nUse the following strategy to prevent unnecessary expense for replacing and\nservicing FRUs:\nv If you are instructed to replace a FRU but the replacement does not correct the\nproblem, reinstall the original FRU before you continue.\nv Some computers have both a processor board and a system board. If you are\ninstructed to replace either the processor board or the system board, and\nreplacing one of them does not correct the problem, reinstall that board, and\nthen replace the other one.\nv If an adapter or a device consists of more than one FRU, any of the FRUs may\nbe the cause of the error. Before replacing the adapter or device, remove the\nFRUs, one by one, to see if the symptoms change. Replace only the FRU that\nchanged the symptoms.\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n3 Important service information\nAttention: The setup configuration on the computer you are servicing may have\nbeen customized. Running Automatic Configuration may alter the settings. Note\nthe current configuration settings (using the View Configuration option); then,\nwhen service has been completed, verify that those settings remain in effect.\nStrategy for replacing a hard disk drive\nAlways try to run a low-level format before replacing a hard disk drive. This will\ncause all customer data on the hard disk to be lost. Be sure that the customer has a\ncurrent backup of the data before doing this task.\nAttention: The drive startup sequence in the computer you are servicing may\nhave been changed. Be extremely careful during write operations such as copying,\nsaving, or formatting. If you select an incorrect drive, data or programs can be\noverwritten.\nImportant notice for replacing a system board\nSome components mo
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: unted on a system board are very sensitive. Improper\nhandling of a system board can cause damage to those components, and may\ncause a system malfunction.\nAttention: When handling a system board:\nv Do not drop a system board or apply any excessive force to it.\nv Avoid rough handling of any kind.\nv Avoid bending a system board and hard pushing to prevent cracking at each\nBGA (Ball Grid Array) chipset.\nHow to use error messages\nUse the error codes displayed on the screen to diagnose failures. If more than one\nerror code is displayed, begin the diagnosis with the first error code. Whatever\ncauses the first error code may also cause false error codes. If no error code is\ndisplayed, see whether the error symptom is listed in the Symptom-to-FRU Index\nfor the computer you are servicing.\nStrategy for replacing FRUs for CTO, CMV, and GAV\nProduct definition\nDynamic Configure To Order (CTO)\nThis provides the ability for a customer to configure an IBM Â® or a Lenovo TM\nsolution from an eSite, and have this configuration sent to fulfillment, where it is\nbuilt and shipped directly to the customer. The machine label, Product Entitlement\nWarehouse (PEW), eSupport, and the HMM will load these products as the 4-digit\nMT and 3-digit model, where model = âCTOâ (Example: 1829-CTO).\nCustom Model Variant (CMV)\nThis is a unique configuration that has been negotiated between IBM or Lenovo\nand the customer. A unique 4-digit MT and 3-digit model is provided to the\ncustomer to place orders (Example: 1829-W15). A CMV is a special bid offering.\nTherefore, it is NOT generally announced.\nv The MTM portion of the machine label is the 4-digit MT and 3-digit model,\nwhere model = âCTOâ (Example: 1829-CTO). The PRODUCT ID portion of the\nmachine label is the 4-digit MT and 3-digit CMV model (Example: 1829-W15).\n4\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Important service information\nv The PEW record is the 4-digit MT and 3-digit model, where model = âCTOâ\n(Example: 1829-CTO).\nv eSupport will show both the CTO
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: and CMV machine type models (Example:\n1829-CTO and 1829-W15 will be found on the eSupport site.)\nv The HMM will have the 4-digit MT and 3-digit CTO model only (Example:\n1829-CTO). Again, CMVs are custom models and are not found in the HMM.\nGeneral Announce Variant (GAV)\nThis is a standard model (fixed configuration). GAVs are announced and offered to\nall customers. The MTM portion of the machine label is a 4-digit MT and 3-digit\nmodel, where model = a âfixed part numberâ, not âCTOâ (Example: 1829-F1U).\nAlso, PEW, eSupport, and the HMM will list these products under the same fixed\nmodel number.\nFRU identification for CTO, CMV, and GAV products\nThere are three information resources to identify which FRUs are used to support\nCTO, CMV, and GAV products. These sources are PEW, eSupport, and the HMM.\nUsing PEW\nv PEW is the primary source for identifying FRU part numbers and FRU\ndescriptions for the key commodities for CTO, CMV and GAV products at a MT\n- serial number level. An example of key commodities are hard disk drives,\nsystem boards, microprocessors, Liquid Crystal Displays (LCDs), and memory.\nv Remember, all CTO and CMV products are loaded in PEW under the 4-digit MT\nand 3-digit model, where model = âCTOâ (Example: 1829-CTO). GAVs are\nloaded in PEW under the 4-digit MT and 3-digit model, where model = a âfixed\npart numberâ, not âCTOâ (Example: 1829-F1U).\nv PEW can be accessed at the following Web site:\nhttp://w3-3.ibm.com/pc/entitle\nCustomers can also access PEW via\nhttp://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/product.do?template=/warranty/\nwarranty.vm&sitestyle=lenovo\nSelect Warranty lookup. Input the MT and the Serial number and the list of key\ncommodities will be returned in the PEW record under COMPONENT\nINFORMATION.\nv Business Partners using Eclaim will access PEW when performing Entitlement\nLookup. Business Partners will enter Loc ID, MT and Serial, and the key\ncommodities will be returned in the Eclaim record under SYSTEM DETAILS.\nv Authorized IBM Busines
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s Partners can access Eclaim at the following Web site:\nhttps://wca.eclaim.com\nUsing eSupport\nFor Key Commodities (Examples - hard disk drive, system board,\nmicroprocessor, LCD, and memory)\nv eSupport can be used to view the list of key commodities built in a particular\nmachine serial (this is the same record found in PEW).\nv eSupport can be accessed at the following Web site: http://www.lenovo.com/\nsupport\nv To view the key commodities, click on PARTS INFORMATION, then PARTS\nLOOKUP. Type in the model type and serial number. The key commodities will\nbe returned in the eSupport record under PARTS SHIPPED WITH YOUR\nSYSTEM.\nIntroduction\n5 Important service information\nFor the Remaining FRUs (the complete list of FRUs at the MT Model level)\nv eSupport can be used to view the complete list of FRUs for a machine type and\nmodel.\nv To view the complete list of FRUs, type in the machine type and model\n(Example: 1829-CTO) under QUICK PATH. Under âView by Document Typeâ\nselect PARTS INFORMATION. Under âFilter by Categoryâ select SERVICE\nPARTS. Under âParts Information by Dateâ select SYSTEM SERVICE PARTS. The\nlist of service parts by description, with applicable machine type model and FRU\nwill be displayed.\nUsing the HMM\nUse the HMM as a back-up to PEW and eSupport to view the complete list of\nFRUs at the MT Model level.\nImportant information about replacing RoHS compliant FRUs\nRoHS, The Restriction of Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic\nEquipment Directive (2002/95/EC) is a European Union legal requirement\naffecting the global electronics industry. RoHS requirements must be\nimplemented on Lenovo products placed on the market and sold in the\nEuropean Union after June 2006. Products on the market before June 2006 are\nnot required to have RoHS compliant parts. If the original FRU parts are non\ncompliant, replacement parts can also be non compliant. In all cases if the\noriginal FRU parts are RoHS compliant the replacement part must also be RoHS\ncompliant.\nNote: RoH
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: S and non-RoHS FRU part numbers with the same fit and function are\nidentified with unique FRU part numbers.\nLenovo plans to transition to RoHS compliance well before the implementation\ndate and expects its suppliers to be ready to support Lenovo's requirements and\nschedule in the EU. Products sold in 2005 and 2006, will contain some RoHS\ncompliant FRUs. The following statement pertains to these products and any\nproduct Lenovo produces containing RoHS compliant FRUs.\nRoHS compliant FRUs have unique FRU part numbers. Before or after the RoHS\nimplementation date, failed RoHS compliant parts must always be replaced using\nRoHS compliant FRUs, so only the FRUs identified as compliant in the system\nHMM or direct substitutions for those FRUs may be used.\nProducts marketed before June 2006 Products marketed after June 2006\nCurrent or original\npart Replacement FRU Current or original\npart Replacement FRU\nNon-RoHS Can be Non-RoHS Must be RoHS Must be RoHS\nNon-RoHS Can be RoHS Non-RoHS Can sub to RoHS RoHS Must be RoHS\nNote: A direct substitution is a part with a different FRU part number that is\nautomatically shipped by the distribution center at the time of the order.\n6\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Diskette compatibility matrix\nDiskette compatibility matrix\nThe compatibility of each of the drives with the diskettes for it is as follows:\nDiskette\ndrive Diskette\ncapacity Compatibility\n3.5-inch 1.0 MB Read and write\n2.0 MB Read and write\n4.0 MB Not compatible\nSafety notices: multilingual translations\nIn this manual, safety notices appear in English with a page number reference to\nthe appropriate multilingual, translated safety notice found in this section.\nThe following safety notices are provided in English, French, German, Hebrew,\nItalian, Japanese, and Spanish.\nSafety notice 1\nIntroduction\n7 Safety notices\nBefore the computer is powered on after FRU replacement, make sure all screws, springs,\nand other small parts are in place and are not left loose inside the computer. Verify
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: this\nby shaking the computer and listening for rattling sounds. Metallic parts or metal flakes\ncan cause electrical shorts.\nAvant de remettre lâordinateur sous tension aprÃ¨s remplacement dâune unitÃ© en clientÃ¨le,\nvÃ©rifiez que tous les ressorts, vis et autres piÃ¨ces sont bien en place et bien fixÃ©es. Pour\nce faire, secouez lâunitÃ© et assurez-vous quâaucun bruit suspect ne se produit. Des piÃ¨ces\nmÃ©talliques ou des copeaux de mÃ©tal pourraient causer un court-circuit.\nBevor nach einem FRU-Austausch der Computer wieder angeschlossen wird, muÃ\nsichergestellt werden, daÃ keine Schrauben, Federn oder andere Kleinteile fehlen oder im\nGehÃ¤use vergessen wurden. Der Computer muÃ geschÃ¼ttelt und auf KlappergerÃ¤usche\ngeprÃ¼ft werden. Metallteile oder-splitter kÃ¶nnen KurzschlÃ¼sse erzeugen.\nPrima di accendere lâelaboratore dopo che Ã© stata effettuata la sostituzione di una FRU,\naccertarsi che tutte le viti, le molle e tutte le altri parti di piccole dimensioni siano nella\ncorretta posizione e non siano sparse allâinterno dellâelaboratore. Verificare ciÃ² scuotendo\nlâelaboratore e prestando attenzione ad eventuali rumori; eventuali parti o pezzetti\nmetallici possono provocare cortocircuiti pericolosi.\nAntes de encender el sistema despues de sustituir una FRU, compruebe que todos los\ntornillos, muelles y demÃ¡s piezas pequeÃ±as se encuentran en su sitio y no se encuentran\nsueltas dentro del sistema. CompruÃ©belo agitando el sistema y escuchando los posibles\nruidos que provocarÃan. Las piezas metÃ¡licas pueden causar cortocircuitos elÃ©ctricos.\n8\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety notices\nSafety notice 2\nDANGER\nSome standby batteries contain a small amount of nickel and cadmium. Do not\ndisassemble a standby battery, recharge it, throw it into fire or water, or short-circuit it.\nDispose of the battery as required by local ordinances or regulations. Use only the\nbattery in the appropriate parts listing. Use of an incorrect battery can result in\nignition or explo
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: sion of the battery.\nCertaines batteries de secours contiennent du nickel et du cadmium. Ne les dÃ©montez\npas, ne les rechargez pas, ne les exposez ni au feu ni Ã  lâeau. Ne les mettez pas en\ncourt-circuit. Pour les mettre au rebut, conformez-vous Ã  la rÃ©glementation en vigueur.\nLorsque vous remplacez la pile de sauvegarde ou celle de lâhorloge temps rÃ©el, veillez\nÃ  nâutiliser que les modÃ¨les citÃ©s dans la liste de piÃ¨ces dÃ©tachÃ©es adÃ©quate. Une\nbatterie ou une pile inappropriÃ©e risque de prendre feu ou dâexploser.\nDie Bereitschaftsbatterie, die sich unter dem Diskettenlaufwerk befindet, kann\ngeringe Mengen Nickel und Cadmium enthalten. Sie darf nur durch die Verkaufsstelle\noder den IBM Kundendienst ausgetauscht werden. Sie darf nicht zerlegt,\nwiederaufgeladen, kurzgeschlossen, oder Feuer oder Wasser ausgesetzt werden. Die\nBatterie kann schwere Verbrennungen oder VerÃ¤tzungen verursachen. Bei der\nEntsorgung die Ã¶rtlichen Bestimmungen fÃ¼r SondermÃ¼ll beachten. Beim Ersetzen der\nBereitschafts-oder Systembatterie nur Batterien des Typs verwenden, der in der\nErsatzteilliste aufgefÃ¼hrt ist. Der Einsatz falscher Batterien kann zu EntzÃ¼ndung oder\nExplosion fÃ¼hren.\nAlcune batterie di riserva contengono una piccola quantitÃ  di nichel e cadmio. Non\nsmontarle, ricaricarle, gettarle nel fuoco o nellâacqua nÃ© cortocircuitarle. Smaltirle\nsecondo la normativa in vigore (DPR 915/82, successive disposizioni e disposizioni\nlocali). Quando si sostituisce la batteria dellâRTC (real time clock) o la batteria di\nsupporto, utilizzare soltanto i tipi inseriti nellâappropriato Catalogo parti. Lâimpiego di\nuna batteria non adatta potrebbe determinare lâincendio o lâesplosione della batteria\nstessa.\nAlgunas baterÃas de reserva contienen una pequeÃ±a cantidad de nÃquel y cadmio. No\nlas desmonte, ni recargue, ni las eche al fuego o al agua ni las cortocircuite.\nDesÃ©chelas tal como dispone la normativa local. Utilice sÃ³lo baterÃas que se\nencuentren en la lista de piezas. La
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: utilizaciÃ³n de una baterÃa no apropiada puede\nprovocar la igniciÃ³n o explosiÃ³n de la misma.\nIntroduction\n9 Safety notices\nSafety notice 3\nDANGER\nThe battery pack contains small amounts of nickel. Do not disassemble it, throw it\ninto fire or water, or short-circuit it. Dispose of the battery pack as required by local\nordinances or regulations. Use only the battery in the appropriate parts listing when\nreplacing the battery pack. Use of an incorrect battery can result in ignition or\nexplosion of the battery.\nLa batterie contient du nickel. Ne la dÃ©montez pas, ne lâexposez ni au feu ni Ã  lâeau.\nNe la mettez pas en court-circuit. Pour la mettre au rebut, conformez-vous Ã  la\nrÃ©glementation en vigueur. Lorsque vous remplacez la batterie, veillez Ã  nâutiliser que\nles modÃ¨les citÃ©s dans la liste de piÃ¨ces dÃ©tachÃ©es adÃ©quate. En effet, une batterie\ninappropriÃ©e risque de prendre feu ou dâexploser.\nAkkus enthalten geringe Mengen von Nickel. Sie dÃ¼rfen nicht zerlegt,\nwiederaufgeladen, kurzgeschlossen, oder Feuer oder Wasser ausgesetzt werden. Bei\nder Entsorgung die Ã¶rtlichen Bestimmungen fÃ¼r SondermÃ¼ll beachten. Beim Ersetzen\nder Batterie nur Batterien des Typs verwenden, der in der Ersatzteilliste aufgefÃ¼hrt ist.\nDer Einsatz falscher Batterien kann zu EntzÃ¼ndung oder Explosion fÃ¼hren.\nLa batteria contiene piccole quantitÃ  di nichel. Non smontarla, gettarla nel fuoco o\nnellâacqua nÃ© cortocircuitarla. Smaltirla secondo la normativa in vigore (DPR 915/82,\nsuccessive disposizioni e disposizioni locali). Quando si sostituisce la batteria,\nutilizzare soltanto i tipi inseriti nellâappropriato Catalogo parti. Lâimpiego di una\nbatteria non adatta potrebbe determinare lâincendio o lâesplosione della batteria stessa.\nLas baterÃas contienen pequeÃ±as cantidades de nÃquel. No las desmonte, ni recargue,\nni las eche al fuego o al agua ni las cortocircuite. DesÃ©chelas tal como dispone la\nnormativa local. Utilice sÃ³lo baterÃas que se encuentren en la lista de pieza
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s al\nsustituir la baterÃa. La utilizaciÃ³n de una baterÃa no apropiada puede provocar la\nigniciÃ³n o explosiÃ³n de la misma.\n10\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety notices\nSafety notice 4\nDANGER\nThe lithium battery can cause a fire, an explosion, or a severe burn. Do not recharge it,\nremove its polarized connector, disassemble it, heat it above 100Â°C (212Â°F), incinerate\nit, or expose its cell contents to water. Dispose of the battery as required by local\nordinances or regulations. Use only the battery in the appropriate parts listing. Use of\nan incorrect battery can result in ignition or explosion of the battery.\nLa pile de sauvegarde contient du lithium. Elle prÃ©sente des risques dâincendie,\ndâexplosion ou de brÃ»lures graves. Ne la rechargez pas, ne retirez pas son connecteur\npolarisÃ© et ne la dÃ©montez pas. Ne lâexposez pas Ã  une temperature supÃ©rieure Ã  100Â°C,\nne la faites pas brÃ»ler et nâen exposez pas le contenu Ã  lâeau. Mettez la pile au rebut\nconformÃ©ment Ã  la rÃ©glementation en vigueur. Une pile inappropriÃ©e risque de\nprendre feu ou dâexploser.\nDie Systembatterie ist eine Lithiumbatterie. Sie kann sich entzÃ¼nden, explodieren\noder schwere Verbrennungen hervorrufen. Batterien dieses Typs dÃ¼rfen nicht\naufgeladen, zerlegt, Ã¼ber 100 C erhitzt oder verbrannt werden. Auch darf ihr Inhalt\nnicht mit Wasser in Verbindung gebracht oder der zur richtigen Polung angebrachte\nVerbindungsstecker entfernt werden. Bei der Entsorgung die Ã¶rtlichen Bestimmungen\nfÃ¼r SondermÃ¼ll beachten. Beim Ersetzen der Batterie nur Batterien des Typs\nverwenden, der in der Ersatzteilliste aufgefÃ¼hrt ist. Der Einsatz falscher Batterien\nkann zu EntzÃ¼ndung oder Explosion fÃ¼hren.\nLa batteria di supporto e una batteria al litio e puo incendiarsi, esplodere o procurare\ngravi ustioni. Evitare di ricaricarla, smontarne il connettore polarizzato, smontarla,\nriscaldarla ad una temperatura superiore ai 100 gradi centigradi, incendiarla o gettarla\nin acqua. Smaltirla secondo la no
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: rmativa in vigore (DPR 915/82, successive\ndisposizioni e disposizioni locali). Lâimpiego di una batteria non adatta potrebbe\ndeterminare lâincendio o lâesplosione della batteria stessa.\nLa baterÃa de repuesto es una baterÃa de litio y puede provocar incendios, explosiones\no quemaduras graves. No la recargue, ni quite el conector polarizado, ni la desmonte,\nni caliente por encima de los 100Â°C (212Â°F), ni la incinere ni exponga el contenido de\nsus celdas al agua. DesÃ©chela tal como dispone la normativa local.\nIntroduction\n11 Safety notices\nSafety notice 5\nIf the LCD breaks and the fluid from inside the LCD gets into your eyes or on your\nhands, immediately wash the affected areas with water for at least 15 minutes. Seek\nmedical care if any symptoms from the fluid are present after washing.\nSi le panneau dâaffichage Ã  cristaux liquides se brise et que vous recevez dans les yeux\nou sur les mains une partie du fluide, rincez-les abondamment pendant au moins quinze\nminutes. Consultez un mÃ©decin si des symptÃ´mes persistent aprÃ¨s le lavage.\nDie LeuchtstoffrÃ¶hre im LCD-Bildschirm enthÃ¤lt Quecksilber. Bei der Entsorgung die\nÃ¶rtlichen Bestimmungen fÃ¼r SondermÃ¼ll beachten. Der LCD-Bildschirm besteht aus Glas\nund kann zerbrechen, wenn er unsachgemÃ¤Ã behandelt wird oder der Computer auf den\nBoden fÃ¤llt. Wenn der Bildschirm beschÃ¤digt ist und die darin befindliche FlÃ¼ssigkeit in\nKontakt mit Haut und Augen gerÃ¤t, sollten die betroffenen Stellen mindestens 15\nMinuten mit Wasser abgespÃ¼lt und bei Beschwerden anschlieÃend ein Arzt aufgesucht\nwerden.\nNel caso che caso lâLCD si dovesse rompere ed il liquido in esso contenuto entrasse in\ncontatto con gli occhi o le mani, lavare immediatamente le parti interessate con acqua\ncorrente per almeno 15 minuti; poi consultare un medico se i sintomi dovessero\npermanere.\nSi la LCD se rompe y el fluido de su interior entra en contacto con sus ojos o sus manos,\nlave inmediatamente las Ã¡reas afectadas con agua durante 15 minutos como mÃn
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: imo.\nObtenga atenciÃ³n medica si se presenta algÃºn sÃntoma del fluido despues de lavarse.\n12\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety notices\nSafety notice 6\nDANGER\nTo avoid shock, do not remove the plastic cover that protects the lower part of the\ninverter card.\nAfin dâÃ©viter tout risque de choc Ã©lectrique, ne retirez pas le cache en plastique\nprotÃ©geant la partie infÃ©rieure de la carte dâalimentation.\nAus SicherheitsgrÃ¼nden die Kunststoffabdeckung, die den unteren Teil der\nSpannungswandlerplatine umgibt, nicht entfernen.\nPer evitare scosse elettriche, non rimuovere la copertura in plastica che avvolge la\nparte inferiore della scheda invertitore.\nPara evitar descargas, no quite la cubierta de plÃ¡stico que rodea la parte baja de la\ntarjeta invertida.\nIntroduction\n13 Safety notices\nSafety notice 7\nDANGER\nThough the main batteries have low voltage, a shorted or grounded battery can\nproduce enough current to burn personnel or combustible materials.\nBien que le voltage des batteries principales soit peu Ã©levÃ©, le court-circuit ou la mise\nÃ  la masse dâune batterie peut produire suffisamment de courant pour brÃ»ler des\nmatÃ©riaux combustibles ou causer des brÃ»lures corporelles graves.\nObwohl Hauptbatterien eine niedrige Spannung haben, kÃ¶nnen sie doch bei\nKurzschluÃ oder Erdung genug Strom abgeben, um brennbare Materialien zu\nentzÃ¼nden oder Verletzungen bei Personen hervorzurufen.\nSebbene le batterie di alimentazione siano a basso voltaggio, una batteria in corto\ncircuito o a massa puÃ² fornire corrente sufficiente da bruciare materiali combustibili o\nprovocare ustioni ai tecnici di manutenzione.\nAunque las baterÃas principales tienen un voltaje bajo, una baterÃa cortocircuitada o\ncon contacto a tierra puede producir la corriente suficiente como para quemar material\ncombustible o provocar quemaduras en el personal.\n14\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety notices\nSafety notice 8\nDANGER\nBefore removing any FRU, power off the computer, unplug all power
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: cords from\nelectrical outlets, remove the battery pack, and then disconnect any interconnecting\ncables.\nAvant de retirer une unitÃ© remplaÃ§able en clientÃ¨le, mettez le systÃ¨me hors tension,\ndÃ©branchez tous les cordons dâalimentation des socles de prise de courant, retirez la\nbatterie et dÃ©connectez tous les cordons dâinterface.\nDie Stromzufuhr muÃ abgeschaltet, alle Stromkabel aus der Steckdose gezogen, der\nAkku entfernt und alle Verbindungskabel abgenommen sein, bevor eine FRU entfernt\nwird.\nPrima di rimuovere qualsiasi FRU, spegnere il sistema, scollegare dalle prese elettriche\ntutti i cavi di alimentazione, rimuovere la batteria e poi scollegare i cavi di\ninterconnessione.\nAntes de quitar una FRU, apague el sistema, desenchufe todos los cables de las tomas\nde corriente elÃ©ctrica, quite la baterÃa y, a continuaciÃ³n, desconecte cualquier cable de\nconexiÃ³n entre dispositivos.\nIntroduction\n15 Safety information\nSafety information\nThe following section presents safety information with which you need to be\nfamiliar before you service a ThinkPad computer.\nGeneral safety\nFollow these rules to ensure general safety:\nv Observe good housekeeping in the area of the machines during and after\nmaintenance.\nv When lifting any heavy object:\n1. Make sure that you can stand safely without slipping.\n2. Distribute the weight of the object equally between your feet.\n3. Use a slow lifting force. Never move suddenly or twist when you attempt to\nlift.\n4. Lift by standing or by pushing up with your leg muscles; this action removes\nthe strain from the muscles in your back. Do not attempt to lift any object that\nweighs more than 16 kg (35 lb) or that you think is too heavy for you.\nv Do not perform any action that causes hazards to the customer, or that makes\nthe equipment unsafe.\nv Before you start the machine, make sure that other service representatives and\nthe customerâs personnel are not in a hazardous position.\nv Place removed covers and other parts in a safe place, away from all
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: personnel,\nwhile you are servicing the machine.\nv Keep your toolcase away from walk areas so that other people will not trip over\nit.\nv Do not wear loose clothing that can be trapped in the moving parts of a\nmachine. Make sure that your sleeves are fastened or rolled up above your\nelbows. If your hair is long, fasten it.\nv Insert the ends of your necktie or scarf inside clothing or fasten it with a\nnonconductive clip, about 8 centimeters (3 inches) from the end.\nv Do not wear jewelry, chains, metal-frame eyeglasses, or metal fasteners for your\nclothing.\nAttention: Metal objects are good electrical conductors.\nv Wear safety glasses when you are hammering, drilling, soldering, cutting wire,\nattaching springs, using solvents, or working in any other conditions that might\nbe hazardous to your eyes.\nv After service, reinstall all safety shields, guards, labels, and ground wires.\nReplace any safety device that is worn or defective.\nv Reinstall all covers correctly before returning the machine to the customer.\nv Fan louvers on the machine help to prevent overheating of internal components.\nDo not obstruct fan louvers or cover them with labels or stickers.\nElectrical safety\nObserve the following rules when working on electrical equipment.\n16\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety information\nImportant\nUse only approved tools and test equipment. Some hand tools have handles\ncovered with a soft material that does not insulate you when working with\nlive electrical currents.\nMany customers have, near their equipment, rubber floor mats that contain\nsmall conductive fibers to decrease electrostatic discharges. Do not use this\ntype of mat to protect yourself from electrical shock.\nv Find the room emergency power-off (EPO) switch, disconnecting switch, or\nelectrical outlet. If an electrical accident occurs, you can then operate the switch\nor unplug the power cord quickly.\nv Do not work alone under hazardous conditions or near equipment that has\nhazardous voltages.\nv Disconnect all power
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: before:\nâ Performing a mechanical inspection\nâ Working near power supplies\nâ Removing or installing Field Replaceable Units (FRUs)\nv Before you start to work on the machine, unplug the power cord. If you cannot\nunplug it, ask the customer to power-off the wall box that supplies power to the\nmachine, and to lock the wall box in the off position.\nv If you need to work on a machine that has exposed electrical circuits, observe the\nfollowing precautions:\nâ Ensure that another person, familiar with the power-off controls, is near you.\nAttention: Another person must be there to switch off the power, if\nnecessary.\nâ Use only one hand when working with powered-on electrical equipment;\nkeep the other hand in your pocket or behind your back.\nAttention: An electrical shock can occur only when there is a complete\ncircuit. By observing the above rule, you may prevent a current from passing\nthrough your body.\nâ When using testers, set the controls correctly and use the approved probe\nleads and accessories for that tester.\nâ Stand on suitable rubber mats (obtained locally, if necessary) to insulate you\nfrom grounds such as metal floor strips and machine frames.\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nObserve the special safety precautions when you work with very high voltages;\nInstructions for these precautions are in the safety sections of maintenance\ninformation. Use extreme care when measuring high voltages.\nRegularly inspect and maintain your electrical hand tools for safe operational\ncondition.\nDo not use worn or broken tools and testers.\nNever assume that power has been disconnected from a circuit. First, check that it\nhas been powered off.\nAlways look carefully for possible hazards in your work area. Examples of these\nhazards are moist floors, nongrounded power extension cables, power surges,\nand missing safety grounds.\nDo not touch live electrical circuits with the reflective surface of a plastic dental\nmirror. The surface is conductive; such touching can cause personal injury and\nmachine damage.\
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nIntroduction\n17 Safety information\nv Do not service the following parts with the power on when they are removed\nfrom their normal operating places in a machine:\nâ Power supply units\nâ Pumps\nâ Blowers and fans\nâ Motor generators\nand similar units. (This practice ensures correct grounding of the units.)\nv If an electrical accident occurs:\nâ Use caution; do not become a victim yourself.\nâ Switch off power.\nâ Send another person to get medical aid.\nSafety inspection guide\nThe purpose of this inspection guide is to assist you in identifying potentially\nunsafe conditions. As each machine was designed and built, required safety items\nwere installed to protect users and service personnel from injury. This guide\naddresses only those items. You should use good judgment to identify potential\nsafety hazards due to attachment of non-ThinkPad features or options not covered\nby this inspection guide.\nIf any unsafe conditions are present, you must determine how serious the apparent\nhazard could be and whether you can continue without first correcting the\nproblem.\nConsider these conditions and the safety hazards they present:\nv Electrical hazards, especially primary power (primary voltage on the frame can\ncause serious or fatal electrical shock)\nv Explosive hazards, such as a damaged CRT face or a bulging capacitor\nv Mechanical hazards, such as loose or missing hardware\nTo determine whether there are any potentially unsafe conditions, use the\nfollowing checklist at the beginning of every service task. Begin the checks with\nthe power off, and the power cord disconnected.\nChecklist:\n1. Check exterior covers for damage (loose, broken, or sharp edges).\n2. Power off the computer. Disconnect the power cord.\n3. Check the power cord for:\na. A third-wire ground connector in good condition. Use a meter to measure\nthird-wire ground continuity for 0.1 ohm or less between the external\nground pin and the frame ground.\nb. The power cord should be the type specified in the parts list.\nc. Insu
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lation must not be frayed or worn.\n4. Check for cracked or bulging batteries.\n5. Remove the cover.\n6. Check for any obvious non-ThinkPad alterations. Use good judgment as to the\nsafety of any non-ThinkPad alterations.\n7. Check inside the unit for any obvious unsafe conditions, such as metal filings,\ncontamination, water or other liquids, or signs of fire or smoke damage.\n8. Check for worn, frayed, or pinched cables.\n18\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Safety information\n9. Check that the power-supply cover fasteners (screws or rivets) have not been\nremoved or tampered with.\nHandling devices that are sensitive to electrostatic discharge\nAny computer part containing transistors or integrated circuits (ICs) should be\nconsidered sensitive to electrostatic discharge (ESD.) ESD damage can occur when\nthere is a difference in charge between objects. Protect against ESD damage by\nequalizing the charge so that the machine, the part, the work mat, and the person\nhandling the part are all at the same charge.\nNotes\n1. Use product-specific ESD procedures when they exceed the requirements\nnoted here.\n2. Make sure that the ESD protective devices you use have been certified\n(ISO 9000) as fully effective.\nWhen handling ESD-sensitive parts:\nv Keep the parts in protective packages until they are inserted into the product.\nv Avoid contact with other people while handling the part.\nv Wear a grounded wrist strap against your skin to eliminate static on your body.\nv Prevent the part from touching your clothing. Most clothing is insulative and\nretains a charge even when you are wearing a wrist strap.\nv Use the black side of a grounded work mat to provide a static-free work surface.\nThe mat is especially useful when handling ESD-sensitive devices.\nv Select a grounding system, such as those listed below, to provide protection that\nmeets the specific service requirement.\nNote\nThe use of a grounding system to guard against ESD damage is desirable\nbut not necessary.\nâ Attach the ESD ground clip to any
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: frame ground, ground braid, or green-wire\nground.\nâ When working on a double-insulated or battery-operated system, use an ESD\ncommon ground or reference point. You can use coax or connector-outside\nshells on these systems.\nâ Use the round ground prong of the ac plug on ac-operated computers.\nGrounding requirements\nElectrical grounding of the computer is required for operator safety and correct\nsystem function. Proper grounding of the electrical outlet can be verified by a\ncertified electrician.\nIntroduction\n19 Laser compliance statement\nLaser compliance statement\nSome models of ThinkPad computer are equipped from the factory with an optical\nstorage device such as a CD-ROM drive or a DVD-ROM drive. Such devices are\nalso sold separately as options. If one of these drives is installed, it is certified in\nthe U.S. to conform to the requirements of the Department of Health and Human\nServices 21 Code of Federal Regulations (DHHS 21 CFR) Subchapter J for Class 1\nlaser products. Elsewhere, the drive is certified to conform to the requirements of\nthe International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 825 and CENELEC EN 60 825\nfor Class 1 laser products.\nIf a CD-ROM drive, a DVD-ROM drive, or another laser device is installed, note\nthe following:\nCAUTION:\nUse of controls or adjustments or performance of procedures other than those\nspecified herein might result in hazardous radiation exposure.\nO uso de controles, ajustes ou desempenho de procedimentos diferentes daqueles aqui\nespecificados pode resultar em perigosa exposiÃ§Ã£o Ã  radiaÃ§Ã£o.\nPour Ã©viter tout risque dâexposition au rayon laser, respectez les consignes de rÃ©glage\net dâutilisation des commandes, ainsi que les procÃ©dures dÃ©crites.\nWerden Steuer- und Einstellelemente anders als hier festgesetzt verwendet, kann\ngefÃ¤hrliche Laserstrahlung auftreten.\nLâutilizzo di controlli, regolazioni o lâesecuzione di procedure diverse da quelle\nspecificate possono provocare lâesposizione a.\nEl uso de controles o ajustes o la ej
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ecuciÃ³n de procedimientos distintos de los aquÃ\nespecificados puede provocar la exposiciÃ³n a radiaciones peligrosas.\nOpening the CD-ROM drive, the DVD-ROM drive, or any other optical storage\ndevice could result in exposure to hazardous laser radiation. There are no\nserviceable parts inside those drives. Do not open.\n20\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Laser compliance statement\nA CD-ROM drive, a DVD-ROM drive, or any other storage device installed may\ncontain an embedded Class 3A or Class 3B laser diode. Note the following:\nDANGER\nEmits visible and invisible laser radiation when open. Do not stare into the beam, do\nnot view directly with optical instruments, and avoid direct exposure to the beam.\nRadiaÃ§Ã£o por raio laser ao abrir. NÃ£o olhe fixo no feixe de luz, nÃ£o olhe diretamente\npor meio de instrumentos Ã³ticos e evite exposiÃ§Ã£o direta com o feixe de luz.\nRayonnement laser si carter ouvert. Ãvitez de fixer le faisceau, de le regarder\ndirectement avec des instruments optiques, ou de vous exposer au rayon.\nLaserstrahlung bei geÃ¶ffnetem GerÃ¤t. Nicht direkt oder Ã¼ber optische Instrumente in\nden Laserstrahl sehen und den Strahlungsbereich meiden.\nKinyitÃ¡skor lÃ©zersugÃ¡r ! Ne nÃ©zzen bele se szabad szemmel, se optikai eszkÃ¶zÃ¶kkel.\nKerÃ¼lje a sugÃ¡rnyalÃ¡bbal valÃ³ Ã©rintkezÃ©st !\nAprendo lâunitÃ  vengono emesse radiazioni laser. Non fissare il fascio, non guardarlo\ndirettamente con strumenti ottici e evitare lâesposizione diretta al fascio.\nRadiaciÃ³n lÃ¡ser al abrir. No mire fijamente ni examine con instrumental Ã³ptico el haz\nde luz. Evite la exposiciÃ³n directa al haz.\nIntroduction\n21 Laser compliance statement\n22\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s General descriptions\nThe descriptions in this chapter apply to any ThinkPad model that has the\nPC-Doctor Â® for DOS diagnostics program. Some descriptions might not apply to\nyour particular computer.\nRead this first\nBefore you go to the checkout guide, be sure to read this section.\nImportant notes\nv Only certi
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: fied trained personnel should service the computer.\nv Before replacing any FRU, read the entire page on removing and\nreplacing FRUs.\nv When you replace FRUs, use new nylon-coated screws.\nv Be extremely careful during such write operations as copying, saving, or\nformatting. Drives in the computer that you are servicing sequence might\nhave been altered. If you select an incorrect drive, data or programs might\nbe overwritten.\nv Replace a FRU only with another FRU of the correct model. When you\nreplace a FRU, make sure that the model of the machine and the FRU part\nnumber are correct by referring to the FRU parts list.\nv A FRU should not be replaced because of a single, unreproducible\nfailure. Single failures can occur for a variety of reasons that have nothing\nto do with a hardware defect, such as cosmic radiation, electrostatic\ndischarge, or software errors. Consider replacing a FRU only when a\nproblem recurs. If you suspect that a FRU is defective, clear the error log\nand run the test again. If the error does not recur, do not replace the FRU.\nv Be careful not to replace a nondefective FRU.\nWhat to do first\nWhen you do return a FRU, you must include the following information in the\nparts exchange form or parts return form that you attach to it:\n__ 1. Name and phone number of servicer\n__ 2. Date of service\n__ 3. Date on which the machine failed\n__ 4. Date of purchase\n__ 5. Failure symptoms, error codes appearing on the display, and beep\nsymptoms\n__ 6. Procedure index and page number in which the failing FRU was detected\n__ 7. Failing FRU name and part number\n__ 8. Machine type, model number, and serial number\n__ 9. Customerâs name and address\nNote for warranty:\nDuring the warranty period, the customer may be responsible for repair costs if the\ncomputer damage was caused by misuse, accident, modification, unsuitable\nphysical or operating environment, or improper maintenance by the customer.\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n23 Read this first\nFollowing is a list of some common ite
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ms that are not covered under warranty and\nsome symptoms that might indicate that the system was subjected to stress beyond\nnormal use.\nBefore checking problems with the computer, determine whether the damage is\ncovered under the warranty by referring to the following list:\nThe following are not covered under warranty:\nv LCD panel cracked from the application of excessive force or from being\ndropped\nv Scratched (cosmetic) parts\nv Distortion, deformation, or discoloration of the cosmetic parts\nv Plastic parts, latches, pins, or connectors that have been cracked or broken by\nexcessive force\nv Damage caused by liquid spilled into the system\nv Damage caused by the improper insertion of a PC Card or the installation of an\nincompatible card\nv Improper disc insertion or use of an optical drive\nv Diskette drive damage caused by pressure on the diskette drive cover, foreign\nmaterial in the drive, or the insertion of a diskette with multiple labels\nv Damaged or bent diskette eject button\nv Fuses blown by attachment of a nonsupported device\nv Forgotten computer password (making the computer unusable)\nv Sticky keys caused by spilling a liquid onto the keyboard\nv Use of an incorrect ac adapter on laptop products\nThe following symptoms might indicate damage caused by nonwarranted\nactivities:\nv Missing parts might be a symptom of unauthorized service or modification.\nv If the spindle of a hard disk drive becomes noisy, it may have been subjected to\nexcessive force, or dropped.\n24\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Related service information\nRelated service information\nThis section provides information about the following:\nv âService Web siteâ\nv âRestoring the factory contents by using Product Recovery discsâ\nv âPasswordsâ on page 26\nv âPower managementâ on page 28\nService Web site\nWhen the latest maintenance diskette and the system program service diskette\nbecome available, they will be posted on http://www.lenovo.com/spm\nRestoring the factory contents by using Product R
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ecovery\ndiscs\nWhen the hard disk drive is replaced because of a failure, no Product Recovery\nprogram is on the new hard disk. In this case, you must use the recovery discs for\nthe computer. Order the recovery discs and the hard disk drive at the same time so\nthat you can recover the new hard disk drive with the pre-installed software when\nthey arrive. For information on which discs to order, see âRecovery discsâ on page\n218.\nTo install the factory contents by using Product Recovery discs, do the following:\nNote\nRecovery takes several hours. The length of time depends on the method you\nuse. If you use recovery discs, recovery takes at least five hours.\n1. Insert the Rescue and Recovery â¢ Disk1 of 1 into the optical drive, then restart\nthe computer. This will take several minutes.\n2. When the âWelcome to Rescue and Recoveryâ screen is displayed, press\nContinue. In the Rescue and Recovery menu, select Restore Your System. A\nmessage giving a warning that USB devices used in recovery must be\nconnected when the computer is turned on appears. Click OK.\n3. âRestore Your Systemâ window appears. Select Restore my hard drive to the\noriginal factory state, and click Next. A warning appears, click Yes. Then next\nmenu appears. Select I do not want to save any files and click Next. Following\nmenu appears with a warning, select Next. A warning appears not to power\ndown the computer during the recovery process. Click OK. One more warning\nappears saying that recovery is intended only for unrecoverable system\nproblems. Click OK.\n4. The Terms and Conditions window appears, select I accept these terms and\nconditions and press OK. Previous menus may remain on the screen, but the\nPredesktop installer begins copying files. When this completes, the computer\nwill restart and a window will ask you to insert a Product Recovery\nSupplemental Disk, if you have one. Press No.\n5. You will then be prompted to insert Product Recovery Disk 1 into the optical\ndrive. Insert the Product Recovery Disk 1 into
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: the optical drive, and press OK.\nIn similar fashion, you will be prompted to insert the remaining recovery discs\nuntil all the files are copied.\n6. After all the files are copied, the computer will restart and return to the\nâWelcome to Rescue and Recoveryâ screen where a window âRecovering your\nsystem, this may take several minutesâ appears and .IMZ files are processed.\nGeneral descriptions\n25 Related service information\nA total progress bar allows you to audit this process, which will take about 8\nminutes. The final recovery disc may be safely removed during this time, but\nmay also be left in the optical drive since it is not bootable.\n7. You will then be prompted to restart the computer. Select Yes. A warning\nwindow appears, giving you one last chance to stop the restart, but disappears\nautomatically after about 5 seconds. File processing continues in DOS full\nscreen mode for about two minutes and the computer restarts to the Windows Â®\ndesktop. No user intervention is required (and should be avoided) after this\npoint.\n8. Windows setup continues on the desktop and DOS window for IBM system\nsetup, with progress measured by a Factory Preinstallation window on the right\nside of the screen. The processes are updating installed softwares.\nA warning that antivirus software is not installed appears repeatedly in the\nsystem tray, but this should be ignored. The entire process at desktop takes\nabout 25 minutes.\n9. Then the computer restarts, does some more DOS full screen processing, and\nrestarts again to a Windows desktop where factory preinstallation continues for\nabout 12 more minutes, another restart to a DOS screen and then back to the\nWindows splash screen and back to the desktop for more preinstallation.\nThis lasts about 10 more minutes and the computer restarts to do NTFS\nconversion and then restarts to the OOBE (Out of Box Experience)\nenvironment.\nPasswords\nAs many as three passwords may be needed for any ThinkPad computer: the\npower-on password (POP), the hard-disk pass
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: word (HDP), and the supervisor\npassword (SVP).\nIf any of these passwords has been set, a prompt for it appears on the screen\nwhenever the computer is turned on. The computer does not start until the\npassword is entered.\nException: If only an SVP is installed, the password prompt does not appear when\nthe operating system is booted.\nPower-on password:\nA power-on password (POP) protects the system from being powered on by an\nunauthorized person. The password must be entered before an operating system\ncan be booted.\nHard-disk password:\nThere are two hard-disk passwords (HDPs):\nv User HDPâfor the user\nv Master HDPâfor the system administrator, who can use it to get access to the\nhard disk even if the user has changed the user HDP\nNote: There are two modes for the HDP: User only and Master + User. The\nMaster + User mode requires two HDPs; the system administrator enters\nboth in the same operation. The system administrator then provides the user\nHDP to the system user.\n26\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Related service information\nAttention: If the user HDP has been forgotten, check whether a master HDP has\nbeen set. If it has, it can be used for access to the hard disk drive. If no master\nHDP is available, neither Lenovo nor Lenovo authorized servicers provide any\nservices to reset either the user or the master HDP, or to recover data from the\nhard disk drive. The hard disk drive can be replaced for a scheduled fee.\nSupervisor password:\nA supervisor password (SVP) protects the system information stored in the BIOS\nSetup Utility. The user must enter the SVP in order to get access to the BIOS Setup\nUtility and change the system configuration.\nAttention: If the SVP has been forgotten and cannot be made available to the\nservicer, there is no service procedure to reset the password. The system board\nmust be replaced for a scheduled fee.\nHow to remove the power-on password\nTo remove a POP that you have forgotten, do the following:\n(A) If no SVP has been set:\n1. Turn off the compu
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ter.\n2. Remove the battery pack.\nFor how to remove the battery pack, see â1010 Battery packâ on page 60.\n3. Remove the backup battery.\nFor how to remove the backup battery, see â1140 Backup batteryâ on page 82.\n4. Turn on the computer and wait until the POST ends.\nAfter the POST ends, the password prompt does not appear. The POP has been\nremoved.\n5. Reinstall the backup battery and the battery pack.\n(B) If an SVP has been set and is known by the servicer:\n1. Turn on the computer; then, while the âTo interrupt normal startup, press the\nblue ThinkVantage buttonâ message is displayed at the lower-left of the screen,\npress the ThinkVantage Â® button. The Rescue and Recovery screen opens.\nFor models supporting the Passphrase function, press F1 while the POP icon is\nappearing on the screen; then enter the POP. For the other models, enter the\nPOP.\n2.\n3.\n4.\n5.\n6.\n7.\n8.\nNote: To check whether the ThinkPad computer supports the Passphrase\nfunction, enter the BIOS Setup Utility and go to Security --> Password.\nIf the Using Passphrase item is displayed in the menu, this function is\navailable on the ThinkPad computer.\nClick Access BIOS. The system Restart Required window is displayed.\nClick Yes. The computer restarts, and the BIOS Setup Utility screen opens.\nSelect Security, using the cursor directional keys to move down the menu.\nSelect Password.\nSelect Power-On Password.\nType the current SVP in the Enter Current Password field. then leave the Enter\nNew Password field blank, and press Enter twice.\nIn the Changes have been saved window, press Enter.\n9. Press F10; then, in the Setup confirmation window, select Yes .\nGeneral descriptions\n27 Related service information\nHow to remove the hard-disk password\nAttention: If User only mode is selected and the user HDP has been forgotten\nand cannot be made available to the servicer, neither Lenovo nor Lenovo\nauthorized servicers provide any services to reset the user HDPs or to recover data\nfrom the hard disk drive. The hard disk dr
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ive can be replaced for a scheduled fee.\nTo remove a user HDP that has been forgotten, when the SVP and the master HDP\nare known, do the following:\n1. Turn on the computer; then, while the âTo interrupt normal startup, press the\nblue ThinkVantage buttonâ message is displayed at the lower-left of the\nscreen, press the ThinkVantage button. The Rescue and Recovery screen\nopens.\nFor models supporting the Passphrase function, press F1 while HDP icon is\nappearing on the screen; then enter the master HDP. For the other models,\nenter the master HDP.\n2.\n3.\n4.\n5.\nNote: To check whether the ThinkPad computer supports the Passphrase\nfunction, enter the BIOS Setup Utility and go to Security --> Password.\nIf Using Passphrase item is displayed in the menu, this function is\navailable on the ThinkPad computer.\nClick Access BIOS. The system Restart Required window is displayed.\nClick Yes. The computer restarts, and the BIOS Setup Utility screen opens.\nSelect Security, using the cursor directional keys to move down the menu.\nSelect Password.\n6. Select Hard-disk x password, where x is the letter of the hard disk drive. A\npop-up window opens.\n7. Select Master HDP.\n8. Type the current master HDP in the Enter Current Password field. then leave\nthe Enter New Password field blank, and press Enter twice.\n9. Press F10.\n10. Select Yes in the Setup Configuration window.\nBoth user HDP and master HDP will have been removed.\nPower management\nTo reduce power consumption, the computer has three power management modes:\nscreen blank, standby, and hibernation.\nScreen blank mode\nScreen blank mode has three variants, as follows:\n1. If you press Fn+F3, or if the time set on the âLCD off timerâ in the BIOS Setup\nUtility expires,\nv The LCD backlight turns off.\nv The hard disk drive motor stops.\nv The speaker is muted.\n2. If you are using the Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI)\noperating system and you press Fn+F3,\nv The LCD backlight turns off.\nv The hard disk drive motor stops.\n3. If the
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: time set on the âTurn off monitorâ timer in the operating system expires,\nv The LCD backlight turns off.\nTo end screen blank mode and resume normal operation, press any key.\n28\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Related service information\nStandby mode\nWhen the computer enters standby mode, the following events occur in addition to\nwhat occurs in screen blank mode:\nv The LCD is powered off.\nv The hard disk drive is powered off.\nv The CPU stops.\nTo enter standby mode, press Fn+F4.\nNote: If you are using the ACPI operating system, you can change the action of\nFn+F4.\nIn certain circumstances, the computer goes into standby mode automatically:\nv If a âsuspend timeâ has been set on the timer,\nand the user does not do any\nÂ®\noperation with the keyboard, the TrackPoint , the hard disk, the parallel\nconnector, or the diskette drive within that time.\nv If the battery indicator blinks orange, indicating that the battery power is low.\n(Alternatively, if Hibernate when battery becomes low has been selected in the\nâPower Management Propertiesâ window, the computer goes into hibernation\nmode.)\nTo cause the computer to return from standby mode and resume operation, do one\nof the following:\nv Press the Fn key.\nv Open the LCD cover.\nv Turn on the power switch.\nAlso, in either of the following events, the computer automatically returns from\nstandby mode and resumes operation:\nv The ring indicator (RI) is signaled by a serial device or a PC Card device.\n(Windows 2000 does not support the ring indicator (RI) resume by PC Card device.)\nv The time set on the resume timer elapses.\nNote: The computer does not accept any input immediately after it enters\nstandby mode. Wait a few seconds before taking any action to reenter\noperation mode.\nHibernation mode\nIn hibernation mode, the following occurs:\nv The system status, RAM, VRAM, and setup data are stored on the hard disk.\nv The system is powered off.\nNote: If the computer enters the hibernation mode while it is docked to the\ndocking
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: station, do not undock it before resuming normal operation. If you\ndo undock it and then try to resume normal operation, you will get an error\nmessage, and you will have to restart the system.\nTo cause the computer to enter hibernation mode, do any of the following:\nv Press the Fn+F12 keys.\nv If you are using the ACPI operating system and have defined one of the\nfollowing actions as the event that causes the system to go into hibernation\nmode, perform that action.\nâ Closing the lid.\nâ Pressing the power button.\nGeneral descriptions\n29 Related service information\nâ Pressing Fn+F4 keys.\nAlso, the computer goes into hibernation mode automatically in either of the\nfollowing conditions:\nv If a âhibernation timeâ has been set on the timer, and if the user does not do\nany operation with the keyboard, the TrackPoint, the hard disk drive, the\nparallel connector, or the diskette drive within that time.\nv If the timer conditions are satisfied in suspend mode.\nWhen the power is turned on, the computer returns from hibernation mode and\nresumes operation. The hibernation file in the boot record on the hard disk drive is\nread, and system status is restored from the hard disk drive.\n30\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Checkout guide\nCheckout guide\nUse the following procedures as a guide in identifying and correcting problems\nwith the ThinkPad computer.\nNote: The diagnostic tests are intended to test only ThinkPad products. The use of\nnon-ThinkPad products, prototype cards, or modified options can lead to\nfalse indications of errors and invalid system responses.\n1. Identify the failing symptoms in as much detail as possible.\n2. Verify the symptoms. Try to re-create the failure by running the diagnostic test\nor by repeating the operation.\nTesting the computer\nThe ThinkPad computer has a test program called PC-Doctor Â® for DOS (hereafter\ncalled PC-Doctor). You can detect errors by running the diagnostics test included in\nPC-Doctor. This section is an overview of the procedure. For
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: details that depend\non model-unique functions, refer to âProduct overviewâ on page 38.\nFor some possible configurations of the computer, PC-Doctor might not run\ncorrectly. To avoid this problem, you need to initialize the computer setup by use\nof the BIOS Setup Utility before you run PC-Doctor. On the BIOS Setup Utility\nscreen, press F9, Enter, F10, and then Enter.\nNote: When you initialize the computer configuration, some devices are disabled,\nsuch as the serial port. If you test one of these devices, you will need to\nenable it by using PS2.EXE.\nPC-Doctor cannot be used to test a device that is in the docking station, even if the\ncomputer supports the docking station. To test a USB device, connect it to the USB\nconnector of the computer. To test the Ultrabay â¢ device, install it in the Ultrabay\nSlim slot of the computer.\nGeneral descriptions\n31 Checkout guide\nCreating the PC-Doctor diagnostics diskette\nIn X60, the PC-Doctor disk can be created by using the ThinkVantage Rescue\nand Recovery.\nTo create the PC-Doctor disk from the , do as follows:\n1. Enter the ThinkVantage Rescue and Recovery application by pressing the\nblue ThinkVantage button during POST.\n2. When the ThinkVantage Rescue and Recovery application finishes loading,\ndouble-click the âCreate diagnostic diskettesâ icon.\n3. It will take about 15 seconds to authenticate the digital signature, and\nthen the ThinkPad computer will reboot into PC-DOS.\n4. A batch file will automatically start up to prompt the user through\ncreating the boot diskettes. The user will be informed how many diskettes\nwill be needed.\na. The user will be prompted to insert each diskette in sequence.\nb. Typically, the user only needs to press the Enter key for the proper\nfloppy drive to format and create the diskette.\nc. Each diskette will be erased and formatted with the PC-Doctor for\nDOS boot image.\n5. Once all the diskettes have been created, the ThinkPad computer will\nreboot. The user is asked to remove all diskettes from the drive, or to
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \ninsert the first diskette created if it is desired to run the diagnostics.\nTo run the test, do as follows:\nNote: In the following procedure, you can select an item not only with the arrow\nkeys, but also with the TrackPoint. Instead of pressing Enter, click the left\nbutton.\n1. Insert the PC-Doctor disk into the diskette drive; then power on the computer.\nIf the computer cannot be powered on, go to âPower system checkoutâ on page\n34, and check the power sources.\nIf an error code appears, go to âSymptom-to-FRU indexâ on page 47.\nOn the first screen, select the model and press Enter. Follow the instructions on\nthe screen.\n2. The main panel of PC-Doctor appears.\n3. Select Diagnostics with the arrow keys, and press Enter.\nA pull-down menu appears. (Its exact form depends on the model.)\nNote: PC-Doctor menu does not mean the formal support device list. Some\nunsupported device names may appear in the PC-Doctor menu.\nThe options on the test menu are as follows:\n32\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Checkout guide\nDiagnostics\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nInteractive Tests\nRun Normal Test\nRun Quick Test\nCPU/Coprocessor\nSystemboard\nVideo Adapter\nSerial Ports\nParallel Ports\nFixed Disks\nDiskette Drives\nOther Devices\nThinkPad Devices\nCommunication\nWireless LAN\nMemory Test â Full\nMemory Test â Quick\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nKeyboard\nVideo\nInternal Speaker\nMouse\nDiskette\nSystem Load\nOptical Drive Test\nIntel Wireless Radio\nNotes:\nv In the Keyboard test in Interactive Tests, the Fn key should be held down for at least 2\nseconds; otherwise, it cannot be sensed.\nv Video Adapter test supports only the LCD display on the ThinkPad computer. If you\nhave an external monitor attached to your computer, detach it before running PC-Doctor\nfor DOS.\nv To test Digital Signature Chip, the chip must be enabled.\nv To test Serial Ports or Parallel Ports, the ThinkPad computer must be attached to the\nThinkPad X6 UltraBase â¢ .\nDiagnostics\nI n t e r a c t i v e Te s
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t s\nHardware Info\nUtility\nQuit\nF1=Help\nRun Normal Test\nRun Quick Test\nCPU/Coprocessor\nSystemboard\nVideo Adapter\nSerial Ports\nParallel Ports\nFixed Disks\nDiskette Drives\nOther Devices\nZIP Drive\nCommunication\nMemory Test - Full\nMemory Test - Quick\nPC-DOCTOR 2.0 Copyright 2001 PC-Doctor, Inc. All Rights Reserved.\nUse the cursor keys and ESC to move in menus. Press ENTER to select.\n4. Run the applicable function test.\n5. Follow the instructions on the screen. If there is a problem, PC-Doctor shows\nmessages describing it.\n6. To exit the test, select Quit â Exit Diag.\nTo cancel the test, press Esc.\nNote: After executing PC-Doctor, check the system time/date and reset them if\nneeded.\nDetecting system information with PC-Doctor\nPC-Doctor can detect the following system information:\nHardware Info\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nSystem Configuration\nMemory Contents\nPhysical Disk Drives\nLogical Disk Drives\nVGA Information\nIDE Drive Info\nPCI Information\nGeneral descriptions\n33 Checkout guide\nv\nv\nv\nv\nPNPISA Info\nSMBIOS Info\nVESA LCD Info\nHardware Events Log\nUtility\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nRun External Tests\nSurface Scan Hard Disk\nBenchmark System\nDOS Shell\nTech Support Form\nBattery Rundown\nView Test Log\nPrint Log\nSave Log\nFull Erase Hard Drive\nQuick Erase Hard Drive\nPC-Doctor for Windows\nThis product is designed to help you troubleshoot and resolve problems related to\nyour computer. Select one of the categories listed below to display symptoms and\nsolutions:\nv CHECK SYSTEM HEALTH\nv SYSTEM AND DEVICE TESTS\nv LENOVO TROUBLESHOOTING\nv CENTER\nv SYSTEM REPORTS\nv UPDATES AND SUPPORT\nPower system checkout\nTo\n1.\n2.\n3.\n4.\n5.\n6.\n7.\nverify a symptom, do the following:\nPower off the computer.\nRemove the battery pack.\nConnect the ac adapter.\nCheck that power is supplied when you power on the computer.\nPower off the computer.\nDisconnect the ac adapter and install the charged battery pack.\nCheck that the battery pack supplies power when you power on the com
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: puter.\nIf you suspect a power problem, see the appropriate one of the following power\nsupply checkouts:\nv âChecking the ac adapterâ\nv âChecking operational chargingâ on page 35\nv âChecking the battery packâ on page 35\nv âChecking the backup batteryâ on page 36\nChecking the ac adapter\nYou are here because the computer fails only when the ac adapter is used:\nv If the power problem occurs only when the port replicator is used, replace the\nport replicator.\nv If the power-on indicator does not turn on, check the power cord of the ac\nadapter for correct continuity and installation.\nv If the computer does not charge during operation, go to â³Checking operational\ncharging.â³\nTo check the ac adapter, do the following:\n34\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Checkout guide\n1. Unplug the ac adapter cable from the computer.\n2. Measure the output voltage at the plug of the ac adapter cable. See the\nfollowing figure:\nPin Voltage (V dc)\n1 Ground\n2 +19.5 to +21.0\n1\n2\n3. If the voltage is not correct, replace the ac adapter.\n4. If the voltage is acceptable, do the following:\nv Replace the system board.\nv If the problem persists, go to âProduct overviewâ on page 38.\nNote: Noise from the ac adapter does not always indicate a defect.\nChecking operational charging\nTo check whether the battery charges properly during operation, use a discharged\nbattery pack or a battery pack that has less than 50% of the total power remaining\nwhen installed in the computer.\nPerform operational charging. If the battery status indicator or icon does not turn\non, remove the battery pack and let it return to room temperature. Reinstall the\nbattery pack. If the charge indicator or icon still does not turn on, replace the\nbattery pack.\nIf the charge indicator still does not turn on, replace the system board. Then\nreinstall the battery pack. If it is still not charged, go to the next section.\nChecking the battery pack\nBattery charging does not start until the Power Meter shows that less than 95%
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: of\nthe total power remains; under this condition the battery pack can charge to 100%\nof its capacity. This protects the battery pack from being overcharged or from\nhaving a shortened life.\nTo check the status of your battery, move your cursor to the Power Meter icon in\nthe icon tray of the Windows taskbar and wait for a moment (but do not click),\nand the percentage of battery power remaining is displayed. To get detailed\ninformation about the battery, double-click the Power Meter icon.\nNote: If the battery pack becomes hot, it may not be able to charge. Remove it\nfrom the computer and leave it at room temperature for a while. After it\ncools down, reinstall and recharge it.\nTo check the battery pack, do the following:\n1. Power off the computer.\n2. Remove the battery pack and measure the voltage between battery terminals 1\n(+) and 5 (â). See the following figure:\nGeneral descriptions\n35 Checkout guide\n7\n6\n5\n4\nTerminal Voltage (V dc)\n2 + 0 to + 14.4\n6 Ground (â)\n3\n2\n1\n3. If the voltage is less than +14.4 V dc, the battery pack has been discharged.\nNote: Recharging will take at least 3 hours, even if the indicator does not turn\non.\nIf the voltage is still less than +14.4 V dc after recharging, replace the battery.\n4. If the voltage is more than +14.4 V dc, measure the resistance between battery\nterminals 4 and 5. The resistance must be 4 to 30 K \u0001.\nIf the resistance is not correct, replace the battery pack. If the resistance is\ncorrect, replace the system board.\nChecking the backup battery\nDo the following:\n1. Power off the computer, and unplug the ac adapter from it.\n2. Turn the computer upside down.\n3. Remove the battery pack (see â1010 Battery packâ on page 60).\n4. Remove the backup battery (see â1140 Backup batteryâ on page 82).\n5. Measure the voltage of the backup battery. See the following figure.\nRed (+)\nBlack (-)\nWire Voltage (V dc)\nRed +2.5 to +3.2\nBlack Ground\nv If the voltage is correct, replace the system board.\nv If the voltage is not corr
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ect, replace the backup battery.\nv If the backup battery discharges quickly after replacement, replace the system\nboard.\n36\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nProduct overview . . . . . . . . . . . .\nSpecifications . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nStatus indicators for X60, X60s, X61, and X61s . .\nFRU tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nFn key combinations . . . . . . . . . .\nSymptom-to-FRU index . . . . . . . . . .\nNumeric error codes . . . . . . . . . .\nError messages . . . . . . . . . . . .\nBeep symptoms . . . . . . . . . . . .\nNo-beep symptoms . . . . . . . . . . .\nLCD-related symptoms . . . . . . . . .\nIntermittent problems . . . . . . . . . .\nUndetermined problems . . . . . . . . .\nFRU replacement notices . . . . . . . . . .\nScrew notices . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nRetaining serial numbers . . . . . . . . .\nRestoring the serial number of the system unit\nRetaining the UUID . . . . . . . . .\nReading or writing the ECA information . .\nRemoving and replacing a FRU . . . . . . . .\n1010 Battery pack . . . . . . . . . . .\n1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber\nrails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1030 DIMM cover . . . . . . . . . . .\n1040 DIMM . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1050 Keyboard . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1060 Upper case . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1070 Fingerprint reader . . . . . . . . .\n1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch) . . . . . . . . .\n1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch) . . . . . .\n1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini card . . .\n1110 Intel Turbo Memory card . . . . . . .\n1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini card . . .\n1130 MDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1140 Backup battery . . . . . . . . . .\n1150 Second Fan . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1160 Speaker . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectors . . . . . .\n1180 LCD assembly . . . . . . . . . . .\n1190 Hard disk sub-card . . . . . . . . .\n1200 System board and lower case assembly with\nlabel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nÂ© Copyright Lenovo 2007, 2008\n38\n38\n41\n43\n45\n47\n47\n51\n53\
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n53\n54\n55\n55\n56\n56\n56\n57\n57\n57\n59\n60\n61\n63\n64\n65\n69\n72\n73\n74\n75\n77\n78\n81\n82\n83\n84\n85\n86\n92\n1210 Fansink . . . . . . . . . . . .\n2010 LCD bezel . . . . . . . . . . .\n2020 Inverter card . . . . . . . . . .\n2030 Bluetooth daughter card . . . . . .\n2040 LCD . . . . . . . . . . . .\n2050 Wireless WAN retractable antenna . .\n2060 Wireless WAN antenna cable (SPWG) .\n2070 Wireless LAN antenna cables (SPWG) .\n2080 Hinges . . . . . . . . . . . .\n2090 Wireless LAN antenna cables (TMD) . .\n2100 Wireless WAN antenna cable (TMD) . .\n2110 LCD panel and LCD cable . . . . .\nLocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nFront view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nRear view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nBottom view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and\nX61s . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nRear View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase . . .\nBottom View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase . .\nParts list . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nOverall . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nLCD FRUs . . . . . . . . . . . .\n12.1-in. XGA TFT . . . . . . . . .\nKeyboard . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nRecovery discs . . . . . . . . . . .\nFor Windows XP Professional SP2 CDs . .\nFor Windows XP Home Edition CDs . .\nFor Windows Vista Business (32 bit) DVDs\nFor Windows Vista Business (64 bit) DVDs\nFor Windows Vista Home Basic (32 bit)\nDVDs . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nFor Windows Vista Ultimate (32 bit) DVDs\nMiscellaneous parts . . . . . . . . .\nAC adapters . . . . . . . . . . . .\nCommon parts list . . . . . . . . . .\nTools . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nPower cords . . . . . . . . . . .\nNotices . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nTrademarks . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n. 96\n. 97\n. 100\n. 101\n. 102\n. 105\n. 106\n. 107\n. 109\n. 113\n. 115\n. 117\n. 119\n. 119\n. 120\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n.\n121\n122\n122\n123\n123\n196\n196\n216\n218\n218\n223\n224\n227\n. 228\n229\n. 230\n. 231\n. 232\n. 232\n. 232\n. 234\n. 235\n93\n37 Product overview\nProduct overview\nThis section presents th
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: e following product-unique information:\nv âSpecificationsâ\nv âStatus indicators for X60, X60s, X61, and X61sâ on page 41\nv âFRU testsâ on page 43\nv âFn key combinationsâ on page 45\nSpecifications\nFeature Description\nProcessor v Intel Â® Core â¢ 2 Duo processor T8300, Standard Voltage (2.40\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 3 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T8100, Standard Voltage (2.10\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 3 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7500, Standard Voltage (2.20\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7300, Standard Voltage (2.00\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7250, Standard Voltage (2.00\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7100, Standard Voltage (1.80\nGHz, 800 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T7200, Standard Voltage (2.00\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T5600, Standard Voltage (1.83\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor T5500, Standard Voltage (1.66\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor T2500, Standard Voltage (2.00\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor T2400, Standard Voltage (1.83\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor T2300, Standard Voltage (1.66\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor T2300E, Standard Voltage (1.66\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Solo processor T1300, Standard Voltage (1.66\nGHz, 667 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor L7700, Low Voltage (1.80 GHz,\n800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor L7500, Low Voltage (1.60 GHz,\n800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor L7300, Low Voltage (1.40 GHz,\n800 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core 2 Duo processor L7400, Low Voltage (1.50 GHz,\n667 MHz FSB, 4 MB L2 cache)\n(continued)\n38\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Product overview\nFeature Description\nProcessor (continued) v Intel Core
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Duo processor L2400, Low Voltage (1.66 GHz, 667\nMHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Duo processor L2300, Low Voltage (1.50 GHz, 667\nMHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Solo processor U1400, Ultra Low Voltage (1.20\nGHz, 533 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nv Intel Core Solo processor U1300, Ultra Low Voltage (1.06\nGHz, 533 MHz FSB, 2 MB L2 cache)\nMemory (standard and\noptional) v\nv\nv\nv\nv\nBus architecture v HUB link\nv PCI bus\nv LPC bus\nVideo v Graphics chip: Intel 945GM\nv Total video memory: UMA, 128MB max\nCMOS RAM v 242 bytes\nHard disk drive v\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nDisplay v 12.1-inch, 16M colors, super wide viewing angle XGA (1024\nÃ 768 resolution) TFT color LCD\nI/O port (system) v\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\n256-MB DDR2-667 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-5300) card\n512-MB DDR2-667 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-5300) card\n1-GB DDR2-667 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-5300) card\n2-GB DDR2-667 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-5300) card\n2-GB DDR2-533 SDRAM SO-DIMM (PC2-4200) card\n30.0 GB, 1.8-inch, PATA interface\n40.0 GB, 1.8-inch, PATA interface\n60.0 GB, 1.8-inch, PATA interface\n40.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n60.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n80.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n100.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n120.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n160.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\n200.0 GB, 2.5-inch, SATA interface\nExternal monitor connector\nRJ11 connector\nRJ45 connector\nStereo headphone jack\nMonaural microphone jack\nUniversal serial bus (USB) connector Ã 3\nPCMCIA CardBus\nInfrared port\nNote: The infrared port is not available on the ThinkPad\nX61 and X61s computer.\nDocking connector\nDC-in\nIEEE 1394 connector\nBluetooth antenna (Bluetooth models only)\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n39 Product overview\nFeature Description\nI/O port (ThinkPad X6\nUltraBase) v\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nInternal modem v 56.6 Kbps\nAudio v Internal monaural speaker\nv Software control volume\nInfrared transfer v IrDA 1.1\nNote: The infrared port is not available on the ThinkPad\nX61 and X61s computer.\nPCI Expr
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ess Mini Card v\nv\nv\nv\nPC card v One Type-II\nSD card v With I/O support\nUltrabay device UltraBay Slim (supported by ThinkPad X6 UltraBase)\nModem daughter card\n(MDC) v ThinkPad Modem (MDC-1.5)\nAC adapter v 65-watt type\nDiskette drive (external) v USB diskette drive\nBattery pack (main) v 1 parallel of 4 series of cells (1P4S) Li-Ion battery pack (2.0\nAH) (Prismatic)\nv 1 parallel of 4 series of cells (1P4S) Li-Ion battery pack (2.6\nAH) (Standard)\nv 2 parallel of 4 series of cells (2P4S) Li-Ion battery pack (5.2\nAH) (Hybrid)\nExternal monitor connector\nRJ11 connector\nRJ45 connector\nParallel connector\nSerial connector\nUniversal serial bus (USB) connector Ã 4\nDC-in\nStereo speakers\nMonaural microphone jack\nStereo headphone jack\n802.11a/b/g (Wireless LAN)\n802.11b/g (Wireless LAN)\nWireless WAN\n802.11n (Wireless LAN)\nNote: The prismatic battery is only for ThinkPad X60s and\nX61s computer. The standard and hybrid batteries require a\nspacer when used with ThinkPad X60s and X61s computer.\nPreinstalled operating\nsystem\n40\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nv\nWindows\nWindows\nWindows\nWindows\nWindows\nWindows\nXP Professional\nXP Home Edition\nVista â¢ Business (32 bit)\nVista Business (64 bit)\nVista Home Basic (32 bit)\nVista Ultimate (32 bit) Product overview\nStatus indicators for X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nThe system status indicators show the status of the computer, as follows:\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n8\n6\n9\n7\n8\n9\n10\n10\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n41 Product overview\nIndicator Meaning\n\u00011\u0002 Wireless LAN\nstatus Green: Wireless is operational and radio on state. This indicator\nis on when the data is transmitted.\n\u00012\u0002 Bluetooth status Green: The Bluetooth is operational. This indicator is on when\nthe Bluetooth is on and not in suspend mode.\nR\n\u00013\u0002 Wireless WAN\nstatus Green: Wireless is operational and radio on state. This indicator\nis on when the data is transmitted.\n\u00014\u0002 Num lock Green: The numeric keypad on the keyb
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: oard is enabled. To\nenable or disable the keypad, press and hold the Shift\nkey, and press the NumLk (ScrLk) key.\n\u00015\u0002 Caps lock Green: Caps Lock mode is enabled. To enable or disable Caps\nLock mode, press the Caps Lock key.\n\u00016\u0002 Drive in use Green: Data is being read from or written to the hard disk drive,\nor the drive in the Ultrabay device. When this indicator is\non, do not put the computer into standby mode or turn\noff the computer.\nNote: Do not move the system while the Green drive in use light\nis on. Sudden physical shock could cause drive errors.\n\u00017\u0002 Power on Green: The computer is on and ready to use. This indicator stays\nlit whenever the computer is on and is not in standby\nmode.\n\u00018\u0002 Battery status Green: The battery is in use and has enough power. The ac\nadapter has charged the battery completely.\nBlinking green:\nThe battery is being charged, but still has enough power\nto operate. (At regular intervals, the indicator light turns\noff briefly.)\nOrange:\nThe battery is being charged, but the battery power is still\nlow.\nBlinking orange:\nThe battery needs to be charged. When the indicator\nstarts blinking orange, the computer beeps three times.\n\u00019\u0002 AC power\nstatus Green: The ac adapter is connected and the computer is\noperating on ac power. If a battery is installed in the\ncomputer, it is charged when this indicator is green.\n\u000110\u0002 Standby status\n42\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nGreen: The computer is in standby mode.\nBlinking green:\nThe computer is entering standby mode or hibernation\nmode, or is resuming normal operation. Product overview\nFRU tests\nThe following table shows the test for each FRU.\nFRU Applicable test\nSystem board 1. Diagnostics --> CPU/Coprocessor\n2. Diagnostics --> Systemboard\n3. If the docking station or the port replicator is attached to the\nThinkPad computer, undock it. Place the computer on a\nhorizontal surface, and run Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices\n--> HDD Active Protection Tes
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t.\nNote: Do not apply any physical shock to the computer while the\ntest is running.\nPower Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices --> AC Adapter, Battery 1\n(Battery 2)\nLCD unit 1. Diagnostics --> Video Adapter\n2. Interactive Tests --> Video\nModem, MDC1.5 1. Make sure the modem is set up correctly.\n2. Replace the modem jack and the modem card in turn, and run\nthe following test in Diagnostics --> Communication:\na. Conexant Smart Modem Interrupt\nb. Conexant Smart Modem Dialtone\nAudio Enter the BIOS Setup Utility and change Serial ATA (SATA) setting\nto Compatibility, and run Diagnostics --> Other Devices -->\nAnalog Devices HDA CODEC Test\nSpeaker Interactive Tests --> Internal Speaker\nNote: (For X61/X61s only) Once Modem/Audio test is done, if no\nsound is heard in this test, turn the computer off and on. Then, run\nthis test again.\nPC Card slot Diagnostics --> Systemboard --> PCMCIA\nKeyboard 1. Diagnostics --> Systemboard --> Keyboard\n2. Interactive Tests --> Keyboard\nTrackPoint or pointing If the TrackPoint does not work, check the configuration as\ndevice\nspecified in the BIOS Setup Utility. If the TrackPoint is disabled,\nselect Enable to enable it.\nAfter you use the TrackPoint, the pointer may drift on the screen\nfor a short time. This drift can occur when a slight, steady pressure\nis applied to the TrackPointing Stick. This symptom is not a\nhardware problem. If the pointer stops after a short time, no\nservice action is necessary.\nIf enabling the TrackPoint does not correct the problem, continue\nwith the following:\nv Interactive Tests --> Mouse\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n43 Product overview\nFRU Applicable test\nHard disk drive Enter the BIOS Setup Utility and change Serial ATA (SATA) setting\nto Compatibility, then run Diagnostics --> Fixed Disks\nDiskette drive 1. Diagnostics --> Diskette Drives\n2. Interactive Tests --> Diskette\nCD-ROM or DVD\ndrive 1. Diagnostics --> Other Devices --> Optical Drive\n2. Interactive Tests --> Optical Drive Test\nMemory 1. If two DIM
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Ms are installed, remove one of them and run\nDiagnostics --> Memory Test - Quick.\n2. If the problem does not recur, return the DIMM to its place,\nremove the other one, and run the test again.\n3. If the test does not detect the error, run Diagnostics -->\nMemory Test - Full.\nNote: The maximum supported memory size is 3GB.\nFan\n44\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n1. Turn on the computer and check the air turbulence at the\nlouver near the power switch.\n2. Run Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices --> Fan. Product overview\nFn key combinations\nThe following table shows the function of each combination of Fn with a function\nkey.\nKey combination Description\nFn+F1 Reserved.\nFn+F2 Reserved.\nFn+F3 Standby mode\nTurn off the LCD display, leaving the screen blank. Hard disk drive\nspindown while CPU still works. To turn the LCD display on\nagain, press any key or the TrackPoint stick.\nFn+F4 Sleep mode\nThis function causes the system to enter a low power sleep state.\nThe unit may remain in the Sleep state for an extended time. For\nACPI systems the OS will determine which state the system will\nenter by user setting on the control panel.\nFn+F5 Wireless radio on/off switching\nEnable or disable the built-in wireless networking features (the\nIEEE 802.11 standard and wireless WAN if available), and the\nBluetooth features. If this combination of keys are pressed, a list of\nwireless features is displayed in the Wireless Radio Control\nwindow. The user can quickly change the power state of each\nfeature in the list.\nFn+F6 Reserved.\nFn+F7 Switch a display output location\nv External monitor (CRT display)\nv Computer display and external monitor (LCD + CRT display)\nv Computer display (LCD)\nNote: For any operating system other than Windows 2000 or\nWindows XP, no additional procedure is needed; just press Fn+F7.\nNote:\n1. This function does not work when different desktop images are\ndisplayed on the computer display and the external monitor\n(the Extend desktop function).\n2. This function does not work wh
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ile a DVD movie or a video clip\nis playing.\n3. For Windows 2000 or Windows XP, a hotkey application might\ntake over the switching function.\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n45 Product overview\nKey combination Description\nFn+F8 Mouse Property\nOpens the window for setting up mouse properties. Tabs for the\nfollowing choices are displayed:\nv Buttons: User can make decisions on button configuration,\ndouble-click speed, and click lock function.\nv Pointers: User is able to customize pointerâs graphic appearance.\nv Pointer Options: User can select pointerâs motion and visibility.\nv Hardware: User is able to view the hardware device property of\nthe mouse.\nv TrackPoint: User is able to select and set TrackPoint Stick speed,\nScrolling or Magnifying Glass function.\nNote: This function is supported only in Windows XP and\nWindows 2000.\nFn+F9\nIssue device ejection\nOpens the ThinkPad EasyEject Utility screen. Buttons for the\nfollowing choices are displayed:\nv Run EasyEject Actions: User can select, stop, and remove\nexternal devices connected to the ThinkPad computer.\nv Configure EasyEject Actions: User can open the ThinkPad\nEasyEject Utility main window.\nv Fn+F9 Settings: User can configure the settings for the Fn+F9\nfunction.\nNote: This function is supported only in Windows XP and\nWindows 2000.\n46\nFn+F10 Reserved.\nFn+F11 Reserved.\nFn+F12 Hibernation\nTurn hibernation mode on. To return to normal operation, press the\npower button for less than four seconds.\nNote: To use Fn+F12 for hibernation in Windows XP and Windows\n2000, the PM device driver must have been installed on the\ncomputer.\nFn+Home LCD brightness up\nThe LCD becomes brighter.\nFn+End LCD brightness down\nThe LCD becomes less bright.\nFn+Spacebar FullScreen magnifier\nEnable the FullScreen Magnifier function.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Symptom-to-FRU index\nSymptom-to-FRU index\nThe symptom-to-FRU index in this section lists symptoms and errors and their\npossible causes. The most likely cause is lis
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ted first, in boldface type.\nNote: Do the FRU replacement or other actions in the sequence shown in the\ncolumn headed âFRU or action, in sequence.â If replacing a FRU does not\nsolve the problem, put the original part back in the computer. Do not\nreplace a nondefective FRU.\nThis index can also help you determine, during regular servicing, what FRUs are\nlikely to need to be replaced next.\nA numeric error is displayed for each error detected in POST or system operation.\nIn the displays, n can be any number.\nIf no numeric code is displayed, check the narrative descriptions of symptoms. If\nthe symptom is not described there, go to âIntermittent problemsâ on page 55.\nNote\nFor a device not supported by diagnostic codes in the ThinkPad notebook\ncomputers, see the manual for that device.\nNumeric error codes\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\n0175\nBad CRC1, stop POST taskâThe EEPROM\nchecksum is not correct. System board.\n0176\nSystem SecurityâThe system has been\ntampered with. 1. Run BIOS Setup Utility, and save the\ncurrent setting by pressing F10.\n2. System board.\n0177\nBad SVP data, stop POST taskâThe\nchecksum of the supervisor password in the\nEEPROM is not correct. System board.\n0182\n1. Run BIOS Setup Utility. Press F9, and\nBad CRC2. Enter BIOS Setup and load Setup\nEnter to load the default setting. Then\ndefaults.âThe checksum of the CRS2 setting\nsave the current setting by pressing F10.\nin the EEPROM is not correct.\n2. System board.\n0185\nBad startup sequence settings. Enter BIOS\nSetup and load Setup defaults. 1. Run BIOS Setup Utility. Press F9, and\nEnter to load the default setting. Then\nsave the current setting by pressing F10.\n0187\nEAIA data access errorâThe access to\nEEPROM is failed. System board.\n0188\nInvalid RFID Serialization Information Area. System board.\n0189\nSystem board.\nInvalid RFID configuration information\nareaâThe EEPROM checksum is not correct.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n47 Symptom-to-FRU index\n48\nSymptom or error F
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: RU or action, in sequence\n0190\nCritical low-battery error 1. Charge the battery pack.\n2. Battery pack.\n0191\nSystem SecurityâInvalid Remote Change\nrequested. 1. Run BIOS Setup Utility, and then save\ncurrent setting by pressing F10.\n2. System board.\n0192\nSystem Securityâ Embedded Security\nhardware tamper detected. System board.\n0199\nSystem Securityâ Security password retry\ncount exceeded. 1. Run BIOS Setup Utility, and then save\nthe current setting by pressing F10.\n2. System board.\n01C8\nTwo or more modem devices are found.\nRemove all but one of them. Press <Esc> to\ncontinue. 1. Remove either a Mini-PCI Card or a\nmodem daughter card. Otherwise, press\nEsc to ignore the warning message.\n2. System board.\n01C9\nMore than one Ethernet devices are found.\nRemove one of them. Press <Esc> to\ncontinue. 1. Remove the Ethernet device that you\ninstalled; or press Esc to ignore the\nwarning message.\n2. System board.\n01CA\nMore than one Wireless LAN devices are\nfound. Remove one of them. 1. Remove the wireless LAN device that\nyou installed.\n2. System board.\n0200\nHard disk errorâThe hard disk is not\nworking. 1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\n2. Load Setup Defaults in BIOS Setup\nUtility.\n3. Hard disk drive.\n4. System board.\n021x\nKeyboard error. Run interactive tests of the keyboard and\nthe auxiliary input device.\n0220\nMonitor type errorâMonitor type does not\nmatch the one specified in CMOS. Load Setup Defaults in BIOS Setup Utility.\n0230\nShadow RAM errorâShadow RAM fails at\noffset nnnn. System board.\n0231\nSystem RAM errorâSystem RAM fails at\noffset nnnn. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n0232\nExtended RAM errorâ Extended RAM fails\nat offset nnnn. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n0250\nSystem battery errorâSystem battery is\ndead. 1. Charge the backup battery for more\nthan 8 hours by connecting the ac\nadapter.\n2. Replace the backup battery and run BIOS\nSetup Utility to reset the time and date.\n0251\nSystem CMOS checksum badâ Default\nconfiguration used. 1. Charge the bac
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: kup battery for more\nthan 8 hours by connecting the ac\nadapter.\n2. Replace the backup battery and run BIOS\nSetup Utility to reset the time and date.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Symptom-to-FRU index\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\n0252\nPassword checksum badâThe password is\ncleared. Reset the password by running BIOS Setup\nUtility.\n0260\nSystem timer error. 1. Charge the backup battery for more\nthan 8 hours by connecting the ac\nadapter.\n2. Replace the backup battery and run BIOS\nSetup Utility to reset the time and date.\n3. System board.\n0270\nReal-time clock error. 1. Charge the backup battery for more\nthan 8 hours by connecting the ac\nadapter.\n2. Replace the backup battery and run BIOS\nSetup Utility to reset the time and date.\n3. System board.\n0271\nDate and time errorâNeither the date nor\nthe time is set in the computer. Run BIOS Setup Utility to reset the time\nand date.\n0280\nPrevious boot incompleteâ Default\nconfiguration used. 1. Load âSetup Defaultâ in BIOS Setup\nUtility.\n2. DIMM.\n3. System board.\n02B2\nIncorrect drive A type. 1. Diskette drive.\n2. External FDD cable.\n3. I/O card.\n02F0\nCPU ID:xx Failed. 1. CPU.\n2. System board.\n02F4\nEISA CMOS not writable. 1. Load Setup Defaults in BIOS Setup\nUtility.\n2. Replace the backup battery.\n3. System board.\n02F5\nDMA test failed. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n02F6\nSoftware NMI failed 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n02F7\nFail-safe timer NMI failed 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\n1801\nAttached docking station is not supported Shut down the computer and remove it\nfrom the docking station.\n1802\nUnauthorized network card is plugged\ninâTurn off and remove the miniPCI\nnetwork card. 1. Remove Mini PCI network card.\n2. System board.\n1803\nUnauthorized daughter card is plugged\ninâTurn off and remove the daughter card. 1. Remove the daughter card that you\ninstalled.\n2. System board.\n1804\nUnauthorized WAN card is plugged\ninâPower off and remove the WAN card. 1. Remove the WAN card that you\ninsta
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: lled.\n2. System board.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n49 Symptom-to-FRU index\n50\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\n1805\nUnauthorized Wireless USB card is plugged\ninâPower off and remove the Wireless USB\ncard. 1. Remove the Wireless USB card that you\ninstalled.\n2. System board.\n1810\nHard disk partition layout error. 1. If the Access Predesktop Area has been\npreviously disabled, then go to the\nBIOS Setup Utility by pressing F1 to\nopen the BIOS Setup Utility. Select\nSecurity --> Predesktop Area --> Access\nPredesktop Area. Set this item to\nDisabled. Save and exit.\n2. If the Access Predesktop Area has not\nbeen previously disabled, press Enter to\nload Access Predesktop Area. Then run\nRECOVER TO FACTORY CONTENTS\nin Access Predesktop Area.\n3. If item 2 failed, press F3 in the Welcome\nscreen in RECOVER TO FACTORY\nCONTENTS. Run FDISK, and then\ndelete all partitions. Run RECOVER TO\nFACTORY CONTENTS in Access\nPredesktop Area again.\n4. If item 3 failed, select CD-ROM boot in\nStartup in Access Predesktop Area. Boot\nfrom the Recovery CD and perform full\nrecovery from it.\n5. If item 4 failed, replace the hard disk\ndrive.\n1820\nMore than one external fingerprint reader is\nattached. Power off and remove all but the\nreader that you set up within your main\noperating system. Remove all but the reader that you set up\nfor the authentication.\n1830\nInvalid memory configurationâPower off\nand install a memory module to Slot-0 or\nthe lower slot. Install DIMM in Slot-0, but not in Slot-1.\nNote: For the construction of the DIMM\nslot, seeâ1040 DIMMâ on page 64.\n2000\nHard Drive Active Protection sensor\ndiagnostics failed.\nPress <Esc> to continue.\nPress <F1> to enter SETUP 1. Undock docking station or port\nreplicator if it is attached to the\nThinkPad computer, and place the\ncomputer on a horizontal surface. Do not\napply any physical shock to the\ncomputer.\n2. Run Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices\n--> HDD Active Protection Test.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Sym
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ptom-to-FRU index\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\n2010\nWarning: Your internal hard disk drive\n(HDD) may not function correctly on this\nsystem. Ensure that your HDD is supported\non this system and that the latest HDD\nfirmware is installed. Inform the following information to the\ncustomer:\nIf in the primary bay the customer is using a\nnon-IBM or non-Lenovo hard disk drive\n(HDD), or an old generation IBM HDD\nwhich is not supported by this system, with\nthe risk in mind, the customer can still use it\nby pressing ESC. If in the primary drive bay\nthe customer is using a supported\nIBM/Lenovo HDD with an old firmware,\nthe customer needs to update its firmware to\nthe latest. The latest version is available at\nhttp://www.lenovo.com/support\n2100\nInitialization error on HDD0 (Main hard\ndisk drive) 1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\n2. Main hard disk drive.\n3. System board.\n2102\nInitialization error on HDD1 (Ultrabay hard\ndisk drive) 1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\n2. Ultrabay hard disk drive.\n3. System board.\n2110\n1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\nRead error on HDD0 (Main hard disk drive) 2. Main hard disk drive.\n3. System board.\n2112\nRead error on HDD1 (Ultrabay hard disk\ndrive)\n1. Reseat the hard disk drive.\n2. Ultrabay hard disk drive.\n3. System board.\nError messages\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\nDevice address conflict. 1. Load âSetup Defaultsâ in the BIOS\nSetup Utility.\n2. Backup battery.\n3. System board.\nAllocation error for device. 1. Load âSetup Defaultsâ in the BIOS\nSetup Utility.\n2. Backup battery.\n3. System board.\nFailing bits: nnnn. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\nInvalid system configuration data. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board.\nI/O device IRQ conflict. 1. Load âSetup Defaultsâ in the BIOS\nSetup Utility.\n2. Backup battery.\n3. System board.\nHibernation error. 1. Restore the system configuration to\nwhat it was before the computer\nentered hibernation mode.\n2. If memory size has been changed,\nre-create the hibernation file.\nThinkPad X60,
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: X60s, X61, and X61s\n51 Symptom-to-FRU index\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\nFan error. 1. Fan.\n2. Thermal grease.\n3. System board.\nThermal sensing error. System board.\nCannot boot from any device. Check the status of device which you want\nto boot from.\nDevice not found.\n1. The device you want to boot from.\n2. System board.\nDevice Error.\n1. The device you want to boot from.\n2. System board.\nNo valid operating system.\n1. Check that the operating system has no\nfailure and is installed correctly.\n2. Reinstall the operation system.\nExcluded from boot order.\nv Enter the BIOS Setup Utility and add the\ndevice in boot order.\n52\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Symptom-to-FRU index\nBeep symptoms\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\nOne beep and a blank, unreadable, or\nflashing LCD. 1.\n2.\n3.\n4.\nOne long and two short beeps, and a blank\nor unreadable LCD. 1. System board.\n2. LCD assembly.\n3. DIMM.\nTwo short beeps with error codes. POST error. See âNumeric error codesâ on\npage 47.\nTwo short beeps and a blank screen. 1. System board.\n2. DIMM.\nThree short beeps, pause, three more short\nbeeps, and one short beep. 1. DIMM.\n2. System board\nReseat the LCD connector.\nLCD assembly.\nExternal CRT.\nSystem board.\nOne short beep, pause, three short beeps,\npause, three more short beeps, and one short\nbeep.\nOnly the cursor appears. Reinstall the operating system.\nFour cycles of four short beeps and a blank\nscreen. System board (security chip)\nFive short beeps and a blank screen. System board\nNo-beep symptoms\nSymptom or error\nFRU or action, in sequence\nNo beep, power-on indicator on, LCD blank, 1. Make sure that every connector is\nand no POST.\nconnected tightly and correctly.\n2. DIMM.\n3. System board.\nNo beep, power-on indicator on, and LCD\nblank during POST. 1. Reseat DIMM.\nThe power-on password prompt appears. A power-on password or a supervisor\npassword is set. Type the password and\npress Enter.\nThe hard-disk password prompt appears. A hard-disk
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: password is set. Type the\npassword and press Enter.\n2. System board.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n53 Symptom-to-FRU index\nLCD-related symptoms\nImportant: The TFT LCD for the notebook computer contains many thin-film\ntransistors (TFTs). The presence of a small number of dots that are\nmissing, discolored, or always lighted is characteristic of TFT LCD\ntechnology, but excessive pixel problems can cause viewing concerns.\nThe LCD should be replaced if the number of missing, discolored, or\nlighted dots in any background is as follows:\nMinimum quantity of defective pixels required for LCD replacement on June 2006 or later\nmanufactured ThinkPad\nLCD resolution\nBright dots\nDark dots\nBright and dark dots\nXGA, WXGA 5 6 6\nWXGA+, SXGA+,\nWSXGA+ 5 8 10\nUXGA, WUXGA,\nQXGA 5 13 13\nNotes:\n1. Lenovo will not provide replacement if the LCD is within specification as we\ncannot guarantee that any replacement LCD will have zero pixel defects.\n2. A bright dot means a pixel is always on (white or color.)\n3. A dark dot means a pixel is always off (black color.)\n4. One pixel consists of R, G, B sub-pixels.\nSymptom or error FRU or action, in sequence\nNo beep, power-on indicator on, and a\nblank LCD during POST. System board.\nv\nv\nv\nv LCD\nLCD\nLCD\nLCD\nbacklight not working.\ntoo dark.\nbrightness cannot be adjusted.\ncontrast cannot be adjusted.\nv\nv\nv\nv LCD screen unreadable.\nCharacters missing pixels.\nScreen abnormal.\nWrong color displayed.\nHorizontal or vertical lines displayed on\nLCD.\n54\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n1. Reseat the LCD connectors.\n2. LCD assembly.\n3. System board.\n1. See important note for âLCD-related\nsymptoms.â\n2. Reseat all LCD connectors.\n3. LCD assembly.\n4. System board.\nLCD assembly. Symptom-to-FRU index\nIntermittent problems\nIntermittent system hang problems can be due to a variety of causes that have\nnothing to do with a hardware defect, such as cosmic radiation, electrostatic\ndischarge, or software errors. FRU replacement should be considere
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: d only when a\nproblem recurs.\nWhen analyzing an intermittent problem, do the following:\n1. Run the diagnostic test for the system board in loop mode at least 10 times.\n2. If no error is detected, do not replace any FRUs.\n3. If any error is detected, replace the FRU shown by the FRU code. Rerun the\ntest to verify that no more errors exist.\nUndetermined problems\nIf the diagnostic tests did not identify the adapter or device that has failed, if\nwrong devices are installed, or if the system simply is not operating, follow these\nprocedures to isolate the failing FRU (do not isolate FRUs that have no defects).\nVerify that all attached devices are supported by the computer.\nVerify that the power supply being used at the time of the failure is operating\ncorrectly. (See âPower system checkoutâ on page 34.)\n1. Turn off the computer.\n2. Visually check each FRU for damage. Replace any damaged FRU.\n3. Remove or disconnect all of the following devices:\na. Non-ThinkPad devices\nb. Devices attached to the port replicator\nc. Printer, mouse, and other external devices\nd. Battery pack\ne. Hard disk drive\nf. External diskette drive or optical drive\ng. DIMM\nh. Optical disk or diskette in the internal drive\ni. PC Cards\n4. Turn on the computer.\n5. Determine whether the problem has been solved.\n6. If the problem does not recur, reconnect the removed devices one at a time\nuntil you find the failing FRU.\n7. If the problem remains, replace the following FRUs one at a time (do not\nreplace a nondefective FRU):\na. System board\nb. LCD assembly\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n55 FRU replacement notices\nFRU replacement notices\nThis section contains notices related to removing and replacing parts. Read this\nsection carefully before replacing any FRU.\nScrew notices\nLoose screws can cause a reliability problem. In the ThinkPad computer, this\nproblem is addressed with special nylon-coated screws that have the following\ncharacteristics:\nv They maintain tight connections.\nv They do not easily come loose,
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: even with shock or vibration.\nv They are harder to tighten.\nv Each one should be used only once.\nDo the following when you service this machine:\nv Keep the screw kit (for the P/N, see âMiscellaneous partsâ on page 230) in your\ntool bag.\nv Always use new screws.\nv Use a torque screwdriver if you have one.\nTighten screws as follows:\nv Plastic to plastic\nTurn an additional 90 degrees after the screw head touches the surface of the\nplastic part:\n90 degrees more\n(Cross-section)\nv Logic card to plastic\nTurn an additional 180 degrees after the screw head touches the surface of the\nlogic card:\n180 degrees more\n(Cross-section)\nv Torque driver\nIf you have a torque driver, refer to the âTorqueâ column for each step.\nv Make sure that you use the correct screw. If you have a torque screwdriver,\ntighten all screws firmly to the torque shown in the table. Never use a screw\nthat you removed. Use a new one. Make sure that all of the screws are\ntightened firmly.\nv Ensure torque screwdrivers are calibrated correctly following country\nspecifications.\nRetaining serial numbers\nThis section includes the following descriptions:\nv âRestoring the serial number of the system unitâ on page 57\n56\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s FRU replacement notices\nv âRetaining the UUIDâ\nv âReading or writing the ECA informationâ\nRestoring the serial number of the system unit\nWhen the computer was manufactured, the EEPROM on the system board was\nloaded with the serial numbers of the system and all major components. These\nnumbers need to remain the same throughout the life of the computer.\nIf you replace the system board, you must restore the serial number of the system\nunit to its original value.\nBefore replacing the system board, save the original serial number by doing the\nfollowing:\n1. Install the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later, and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 1. Set System Identification.\n3. Select 2. Read S/N data from EEPROM.\
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: nThe serial number of each device in your computer is displayed; the serial number\nof the system unit is listed as follows:\nv 20: Serial number\nWrite down that number.\nNote: The serial number of the system unit is also written on the label attached to\nthe bottom of the computer.\nAfter you have replaced the system board, restore the serial number by doing the\nfollowing:\n1. Install the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 1. Set System Identification.\n3. Select 1. Add S/N data from EEPROM.\nFollow the instructions on the screen.\nRetaining the UUID\nThe Universally Unique Identifier (UUID) is a 128-bit number uniquely assigned to\nyour computer at production and stored in the EEPROM of your system board.\nThe algorithm that generates the number is designed to provide unique IDs until\nthe year A.D. 3400. No two computers in the world have the same number.\nWhen you replace the system board, you must set the UUID on the new system\nboard as follows:\n1. Install the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later, and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 4. Assign UUID.\nA new UUID is created and written. If a valid UUID already exists, it is not\noverwritten.\nReading or writing the ECA information\nInformation on Engineering Change Announcements (ECA) are stored in the\nEEPROM of the system board. The electronic storage of this information simplifies\nthe procedure to check if the ECA has been previously applied to a machine. The\nmachine does not need to be disassembled to check for the ECA application.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n57 FRU replacement notices\nTo check what ECAs have been previously applied to the machine, use the ECA\nInformation Read/Write function on the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette\nVersion 1.73 or later.\n1. Insert the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later, and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 6. Set ECA Informatio
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n.\n3. To read ECA information, select 2. Read ECA/rework number from EEPROM\nand follow the instruction.\n4. To read box build date, select 5. Read box build date from EEPROM, and\nfollow the instruction on the screen.\nAfter an ECA has been applied to the machine, the EEPROM must be updated to\nreflect the ECA's application. Use the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette\nVersion 1.73 or later to update the EEPROM.\nNote: Only the ECA number is stored in the EEPROM. The machine type of the\nECA is assumed be the same as the machine type of the machine that had\nthe ECA applied to it.\n1. Insert the ThinkPad Hardware Maintenance Diskette Version 1.73 or later, and\nrestart the computer.\n2. From the main menu, select 6. Set ECA Information.\n3. To write ECA information, select 1. Write ECA/rework number from EEPROM,\nand follow the instruction.\n4. To write box build date, select 4. Write box build date from EEPROM, and\nfollow the instruction on the screen.\nIf the system board is being replaced, try to read the ECA information from the old\nsystem board and transfer the information to the new system. If the system board\nis inoperable, this will not be possible.\n58\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nRemoving and replacing a FRU\nThis section presents directions and drawings for use in removing and replacing a\nFRU. Be sure to observe the following general rules:\n1. Do not try to service any computer unless you have been trained and certified.\nAn untrained person runs the risk of damaging parts.\n2. Before replacing any FRU, review âFRU replacement noticesâ on page 56.\n3. Begin by removing any FRUs that have to be removed before the failing FRU.\nAny such FRUs are listed at the top of the page. Remove them in the order in\nwhich they are listed.\n4. Follow the correct sequence in the steps for removing the FRU, as given in the\ndrawings by the numbers in square callouts.\n5. When turning a screw to replace a FRU, turn it in the direction as given by the\narrow in the dra
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: wing.\n6. When removing the FRU, move it in the direction as given by the arrow in the\ndrawing.\n7. To put the new FRU in place, reverse the removal procedure and follow any\nnotes that pertain to replacement. For information about connecting and\narranging internal cables, see âLocationsâ on page 119.\n8. When replacing a FRU, use the correct screw as shown in the procedures.\nDANGER\nBefore removing any FRU, turn off the computer, unplug all power cords from\nelectrical outlets, remove the battery pack, and then disconnect any interconnecting\ncables.\nAttention: After replacing a FRU, do not turn on the computer until you have\nmade sure that all screws, springs, and other small parts are in place and none are\nloose inside the computer. Verify this by shaking the computer gently and listening\nfor rattling sounds. Metallic parts or metal flakes can cause electrical short circuits.\nAttention: The system board is sensitive to, and can be damaged by, electrostatic\ndischarge. Before touching it, establish personal grounding by touching a ground\npoint with one hand or by using an electrostatic discharge (ESD) strap (P/N\n6405959).\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n59 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1010 Battery pack\nDANGER\nUse only the battery specified in the parts list for your computer. Any other battery\ncould ignite or explode.\n2\n1\n3\n60\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber rails\nNote: This procedure is only for models with a 2.5-inch hard disk drive.\nAttention\nv Do not drop or apply any shock to the hard disk drive. The hard disk\ndrive is sensitive to physical shock. Incorrect handling can cause damage\nand permanent loss of data.\nv Before removing the drive, have the user make a backup copy of all the\ninformation on the drive if possible.\nv Never remove the drive while the system is operating or is in suspend\nmode.\nFor access, remove following FRU:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\n2\n1\nStep Screw (quan
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: tity) Color Torque\n\u00011\u0002 M3 Ã 3 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (1) Black 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n3\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n61 Removing and replacing a FRU\n4\n4\nWhen installing: Make sure that the hard disk is connected firmly.\n62\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1030 DIMM cover\nFor access, remove following FRU:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nNote: Loosen the screws \u00011\u0002, but do not remove them.\n1\n1\n2\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00011\u0002 M2 Ã 3 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Black 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n63 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1040 DIMM\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1030 DIMM coverâ on page 63\nb\na\n1\n2\n1\nNote: If only one DIMM is used on the computer you are servicing, the card must\nbe installed in SLOT-0 (\u0001a\u0002), but not in SLOT-1 (\u0001b\u0002).\n64\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1050 Keyboard\nFor access, remove following FRU:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nRemove 4 screws with keyboard icon to remove keyboard.\nNote: Place the system on a hard flat table when you remove or reinstall the\nscrews. When reinstalling the screw \u00011a\u0002, use a manual screwdriver. Do not\nsecure this screw too tightly.\n1\n1a\n1\n1\nStep\nIcon\n\u00011\u0002\u00011a\u0002\nScrew (quantity) Color Torque\nM2 Ã 6 mm, wafer-head,\nnylon-coated (4) Black 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n65 Removing and replacing a FRU\nGently push the keyboard forward, as shown in step \u00012\u0002. Then lift up the\nkeyboard slightly, as shown in step \u00013\u0002.\n2\n3\n3\n3\nDetach the keyboard connector \u00014\u0002 to remove the keyboard \u00015\u0002.\n4\n5\n66\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nWhen installing: Follow the steps below.\n1. Attach the connector.\n2. Make sure that the keyboard edges are under the fra
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: me. Then press the keys to\nlatch the keyboard firmly in place.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n67 Removing and replacing a FRU\n3. To make sure that the front side of the keyboard is housed firmly, gently press\nthe keys with your thumbs and try to slide the keyboard toward you.\n4. Secure the keyboard by tightening the screws from the bottom side of the\ncomputer.\n68\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1060 Upper case\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00011\u0002 M2 Ã 6 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (6) Black 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\nNote: Place the system on a hard flat table when you remove or reinstall the\nscrews.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n69 Removing and replacing a FRU\nNote: For models with a fingerprint reader, detach the fingerprint cable \u00012\u0002.\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\n2\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n2\n(continued)\n70\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nNote: Open the LCD at least 150 degrees.\nPress down and gently lift upper case up, as shown in steps \u00013\u0002 and \u00014\u0002, to\nremove upper case.\n3\n4\n3\nWhen installing: Follow the steps below to make sure that the upper case is\ninstalled firmly.\n1\n2\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n71 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1070 Fingerprint reader\nNote: This procedure is only for models with a fingerprint reader.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\n4\n1\n2\n2\n3\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n4\n1\n1\n2\n3\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00012\u0002 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\nNote: For ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers with wireless WAN, copper and\naluminum shielding are present on the
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: upper case and the fingerprint reader\ncable.\n72\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch)\nNote: This procedure is only for models with a 1.8-inch hard disk drive.\nAttention\nv Do not drop or apply any shock to the hard disk drive. The hard disk\ndrive is sensitive to physical shock. Incorrect handling can cause damage\nand permanent loss of data.\nv Before removing the drive, have the user make a backup copy of all the\ninformation on the drive if possible.\nv Never remove the drive while the system is operating or is in suspend\nmode.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n1\n2\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n73 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch)\nNote: This procedure is only for models with a 1.8-inch hard disk drive.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch)â on page 73\n1\n2\n74\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00011\u0002 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini card\nNote: This procedure is only for models with wireless WAN feature. Step 2 is only\nfor models with the Sierra Wireless EV-DO Wireless WAN Mini PCI Express\nAdapter.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n1\n1\n2\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n75 Removing and replacing a FRU\n3\n4\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00013\u0002 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n76\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00013\u0002 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wa
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: fer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1110 Intel Turbo Memory card\nNote: Either a wireless WAN PCI Express Mini Card or an Intel Turbo Memory\ncard can be installed in the system at one time, as they occupy the same\nslot.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\n1\n2\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00011\u0002 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n77 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini card\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nFor systems with 802.11a/b/g or 802.11b/g antenna cable connection\n1\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\n3\n2\n78\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00012\u0002 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nWhen installing: If you are installing a 802.11n wireless LAN card, attach the grey\ncable to the left connector and the black cable to the right\nconnector. If you attach either cable to the center connector, the\nconnection speed will be lower.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n79 Removing and replacing a FRU\nFor systems with 802.11n wireless LAN 3rd antenna cable connection\nFor ThinkPad X60 and X60s computers:\nFor ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers:\n2\n2\n3\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00012\u0002 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.157 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\nWhen installing: If you are installing a 802.11a/b/g or 802.11b/g card, first insert\nthe connector end of the white cable into a plastic cable bag and\naffix the cable to the mainboard with tape. Then insert the card,\nand attach the grey cable to the
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: [1.9K blob data]
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: [2.0K blob data]
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: itting the LCD hinge into the system, make sure the\nwireless antenna cables do not get pinched in by the hinge. Then\nroute the wireless antenna cables as shown below. For wireless\nWAN: red or black with red tag is main; blue is aux. For wireless\nLAN: gray is main; black is aux; white is MIMO (for 802.11n\nmodels). Remember to reattach the mylar and tapes.\n1\n2\n3\nNote: For ThinkPad X61 and X61s computers with wireless WAN, re-affix the\ncopper shielding to cover the antenna cables.\n(continued)\n90\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\nWhen installing: Make sure to position the LCD cable properly and reattach the\nmylar and tape. The LCD cable switch should fit in its slot \u00017\u0002.\n5\n5\n7\n6\n4\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n91 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1190 Hard disk sub-card\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber railsâ on page 61\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch)â on page 73\nv â1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch)â on page 74\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nNote: The hard disk sub-card is different for 2.5-inch hard disk drives and 1.8-inch\nhard disk drives.\nFor 1.8-inch hard disk drive\nFor 2.5-inch hard disk drive\n92\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n1200 System board and lower case assembly with label\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber railsâ on page 61\nv â1030 DIMM coverâ on page 63\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch)â on page 73\nv â1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch)â on page 74\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75 or â1110 Intel Turbo\nMemory cardâ on page 77\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nv â1130 MDCâ on page 81\nv â1150 Second Fanâ on page 83\nv â1160 Speakerâ on page 84\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nv â1190 Hard disk sub-cardâ on page 92\nImportant notices for handling the system board\nWhen handling the system board, bear the following in mind.\nv The system board has an accelerometer, which can be broken by applying\nseveral thousands of G-forces.\nNote: Dropping a system board from a height of as little as 6 inches so\nthat it falls flat on a hard bench can subject the accelerometer to as\nmuch as 6,000 Gâs of shock.\nv Be careful not to drop the system board on a bench top that has a hard\nsurface, such as metal, wood, or composite.\nv If a system board is dropped, you must test it, using PC-Doctor for DOS, to\nmake sure that the HDD Active Protection still functions (see below).\nNote: If the test shows that HDD Active Protection is not functioning, be\nsure to document the drop in any reject report, and replace the\nsystem board.\nv Avoid rough handling of any kind.\nv At every point in the process, be sure not to drop or stack the system\nboard.\nv If you put a system board down, be sure to put it only on a padded\nsurface such as an ESD mat or conductive corrugated material.\nAfter replacing the system board, run PC-Doctor for DOS to make sure that\nHDD Active Protection still functions. The procedure is as follows:\n1. Place the computer on a horizontal surface.\n2. Run Diagnostics --> ThinkPad Devices --> HDD Active Protection Test.\nAttention: Do not apply physical shock to the computer while the test is\nrunning.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n93 Removing and replacing a FRU\nFollowing components soldered on the top and bottom sides of the system board\nare extremely sensitive. When you service the system board, avoid any kind of\nrough handling.\n\u0001a\u0002 Accelerometer chip for the HDD Active Protection System\n\u0001b\u0002 Security chip\n\u0001c\u0002 CPU\n\u0
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 001d\u0002 MCH (Memory Controller Hub)\n\u0001e\u0002 ICH (I/O Controller Hub)\nTop\nb\nBottom\nc\nd\na\n94\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\ne Removing and replacing a FRU\n1\n1\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00011\u0002 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (2) Silver 0.1372 Nm\n(1.4 kgfcm)\n2\nWhen installing: Do not damage the wireless micro switch \u00011\u0002 on the system\nboard.\n1\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n95 Removing and replacing a FRU\n1210 Fansink\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1020 Hard disk drive (2.5-inch) and HDD rubber railsâ on page 61\nv â1030 DIMM coverâ on page 63\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1080 Hard disk (1.8-inch)â on page 73\nv â1090 Hard disk housing (1.8-inch)â on page 74\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nv â1130 MDCâ on page 81\nv â1150 Second Fanâ on page 83\nv â1160 Speakerâ on page 84\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nv â1190 Hard disk sub-cardâ on page 92\nv â1200 System board and lower case assembly with labelâ on page 93\nFor models with LV processor\n3b\n2\n3c\n3a\n4\n1\nFor models with NV processor\n3c\n2\n3b\n3a\n4\n1\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00012\u0002 M2 Ã 3.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (1) Silver 0.196 Nm\n(2 kgfcm)\n\u00013\u0002 M2 Ã 7.5 mm, flat-head, spring-loaded, (3) Silver 0.245 Nm\n(2.5 kgfcm)\nNote: Remove the fansink screws in the order shown: \u00013a\u0002, \u00013b\u0002, and \u00013c\u0002.\n96\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n2010 LCD bezel\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on p
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: age 78\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nFor SPWG LCD\n1\n1\n1\n2\n2\n2\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00012\u0002 M2.5 Ã 5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (3) Black 0.294 Nm\n(3 kgfcm)\nNote: The adhesive on the bezel can make bezel removal difficult.\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n97 Removing and replacing a FRU\n3\n3\n3\n3\nWhen installing: The replacement bezel should have adhesive pre-applied;\ntherefore, remove the covering from the bezel to expose the\nadhesive, and then place the top edge under the frame, then\npush the bezel down and secure with the latches firmly. Be\ncareful to route the antenna cables properly.\nFor TMD LCD\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n(continued)\n98\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n2\n2\n3\n3\n2\n3\n2\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00012\u0002 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (4) Black 0.1568 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\n\u00013\u0002 M2.5 Ã 5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (3) Black 0.294 Nm\n(3 kgfcm)\nNote: The adhesive on the bezel can make bezel removal difficult.\n4\n4\n4\n4\nWhen installing: The replacement bezel should have adhesive pre-applied;\ntherefore, remove the covering from the bezel to expose the\nadhesive, and then place the top edge under the frame, then\npush the bezel down and secure with the latches firmly. Be\ncareful to route the antenna cables properly.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n99 Removing and replacing a FRU\n2020 Inverter card\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nv â2010 LCD bezelâ on page 97\n1\n2\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00011\u0002 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (1) Silver 0.1568 Nm\n(1.
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 6 kgfcm)\n4\n3\nWhen installing: Make sure that both connectors are attached firmly.\n100\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n2030 Bluetooth daughter card\nNote: The following procedures are for models with Bluetooth.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nv â2010 LCD bezelâ on page 97\nv â2020 Inverter cardâ on page 100\nWhen installing: Make sure that the connector is attached firmly.\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n101 Removing and replacing a FRU\n2040 LCD\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nv â2010 LCD bezelâ on page 97\nv â2020 Inverter cardâ on page 100\nv â2030 Bluetooth daughter cardâ on page 101\nFor SPWG LCD\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n(continued)\n102\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n2\n2\n2\n2\n2\n2\nStep Screw (quantity) Color Torque\n\u00012\u0002 M2 Ã 2.5 mm, wafer-head, nylon-coated (6) Black 0.1568 Nm\n(1.6 kgfcm)\n4\n3\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n103 Removing and replacing a FRU\nFor TMD LCD\nWhen removing: Make sure you do not touch or put pressure on these two\nsections of the LCD indicated below.\n1\n3\n2\nWhen installing: Affix the aluminum shielding for ThinkPad X61 and X61s\nmodels with wireless WAN.\n104\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n2050 Wireless WAN retractable antenna\nNote: This procedure is only for T
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: hinkPad X61 and X61s computers with wireless\nWAN.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\n1\n2\n3\nNote: The special tool shown in step \u00012\u0002 for removing the rod antenna is shipped\nwith the rod antenna FRU.\n4\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n105 Removing and replacing a FRU\n2060 Wireless WAN antenna cable (SPWG)\nNote: The following procedure is for SPWG LCD only.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nv â2010 LCD bezelâ on page 97\nv â2020 Inverter cardâ on page 100\nv â2030 Bluetooth daughter cardâ on page 101\nv â2040 LCDâ on page 102\nv â2050 Wireless WAN retractable antennaâ on page 105\n1\n2\nWhen installing: Route the cable properly along the side and into the hinge, and\nreattach the tape.\n106\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Removing and replacing a FRU\n2070 Wireless LAN antenna cables (SPWG)\nNote: The following procedure is for SPWG LCD only.\nFor access, remove following FRUs, in order:\nv â1010 Battery packâ on page 60\nv â1050 Keyboardâ on page 65\nv â1060 Upper caseâ on page 69\nv â1100 Wireless WAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nv â2010 LCD bezelâ on page 97\nv â2020 Inverter cardâ on page 100\nv â2030 Bluetooth daughter cardâ on page 101\nv â2040 LCDâ on page 102\nv â2050 Wireless WAN retractable antennaâ on page 105\nv â2060 Wireless WAN antenna cable (SPWG)â on page 106\n1\n1\n1\n1\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n107 Removing and replacing a FRU\n3\n2\n3\nWhen installing: Route the
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: [1.9K blob data]
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: [2.0K blob data]
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: xpress Mini cardâ on page 75\nv â1120 Wireless LAN PCI Express Mini cardâ on page 78\nv â1170 DC-in and RJ-11 connectorsâ on page 85\nv â1180 LCD assemblyâ on page 86\nv â2010 LCD bezelâ on page 97\nv â2020 Inverter cardâ on page 100\nv â2030 Bluetooth daughter cardâ on page 101\nv â2040 LCDâ on page 102\nv â2050 Wireless WAN retractable antennaâ on page 105\nv â2060 Wireless WAN antenna cable (SPWG)â on page 106\nv â2070 Wireless LAN antenna cables (SPWG)â on page 107\nv â2080 Hingesâ on page 109\nv â2090 Wireless LAN antenna cables (TMD)â on page 113\nv â2100 Wireless WAN antenna cable (TMD)â on page 115\nFor SPWG LCD\n1\n2\nWhen installing: Make sure that the cable is positioned correctly, the connector is\nattached firmly, and the tape is reattached.\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n117 Removing and replacing a FRU\nFor TMD LCD\n3\n2\n1\nWhen installing: Make sure that the cable is positioned correctly, the connector is\nattached firmly, and the tape is reattached.\nNote: For models with Bluetooth, the Bluetooth Daughter Card is attached to the\nLCD cable.\n118\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Locations\nLocations\nFront view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n\u00011\u0002\n\u00012\u0002\n\u00013\u0002\n\u00014\u0002\n\u00015\u0002\n\u00016\u0002\n\u00017\u0002\n\u00018\u0002\n\u00019\u0002\n\u000110\u0002\n\u000111\u0002\n\u000112\u0002 Computer display\nSystem status indicators\nPower switch\nSecurity keyhole\nAC power connector\nModem connector\nHard disk drive\nMicrophone jack\nStereo headphone jack\nUSB connectors\nIEEE 1394 connector (for some models)\nInfrared port\n\u000113\u0002 Note: The infrared port is not available on the ThinkPad X61 and X61s\ncomputer.\nFingerprint reader (for some models)\n\u000114\u0002\n\u000115\u0002\n\u000116\u0002 Note: The fingerprint reader is located beside the TrackPoint buttons on\nthe ThinkPad X61 and X61s computer.\nTrackPoint stick\nThinkVantage button\nThinkLight Â®\n16\n1\n2\n15\n14\
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: n3\n4\n5\n6\n13\n7\n8\n10\n12\n9\n11\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n119 Locations\nRear view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n\u00011\u0002\n\u00012\u0002\n\u00013\u0002\n\u00014\u0002\n\u00015\u0002\n\u00016\u0002\nPC Card slot\nSD card slot\nEthernet connector\nExternal monitor connector\nUSB connector\nBattery pack\n1\n2\n6\n3\n4\n5\n120\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Locations\nBottom view for ThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n\u00011\u0002\n\u00012\u0002\n\u00013\u0002\n\u00014\u0002\n\u00015\u0002\nBattery latch\nDocking connector\nMemory door\nSpeaker\nBattery lock\n1\n2\n5\n3\n4\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n121 Locations\nRear View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase\n\u00011\u0002\n\u00012\u0002\n\u00013\u0002\n\u00014\u0002\n\u00015\u0002\n\u00016\u0002\n\u00017\u0002\n\u00018\u0002\n\u00019\u0002\n\u000110\u0002\n\u000111\u0002\n\u000112\u0002\n\u000113\u0002\nAC power connector\nUSB connectors\nExternal monitor connector\nSerial connector\nParallel connectors\nStereo headphone jack\nMicrophone jack\nEthernet connector\nModem connector\nSecurity lock key\nUltrabay latch\nUltrabay Slim device\nNote: The Ultrabay Slim device accepts several storage devices, such as a\nDVD drive, a CD-RW / DVD combo drive, or a second hard disk drive.\nDocking connector\n13\n1\n2\n3\n12\n4\n5\n6\n11\n10\n9\n8\n7\nBottom View for ThinkPad X6 UltraBase\n\u00011\u0002\n\u00012\u0002\n\u00013\u0002\n\u00014\u0002\n\u00015\u0002\n\u00016\u0002\n\u00017\u0002\nLeg\nSecurity keyhole\nUSB connectors\nDocking indicators\nDocking release\nStereo speakers\nPower switch\n1\n7\n2\n3\n4\n6\n5\n122\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nParts list\nOverall\n29\n1\n28\n27\n2\n3\n4\n26\n25\n5\na\nb\n24 c\n23\n22\n21 6\n7\n20\n8\n19\n9\n18\n17\n16\n15\n14\n13\n30\n10\n11\n12\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n123 Parts list\nv Each FRU is available for all types or models, unless specific types or models are\nspecified.\nv FRU with specific models listed and described as xxU (where U is an example of\na country
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: designator) should be used for all models ending in U.\nv FRU with specific models listed and described as 3Dx (where 3D is an example\nof a unique configuration) should be used for all of these models, unless specific\ncountry or region designator is specified.\nv A CRU (customer-replacable unit) is identified by a single asterisk (*) or two\nasterisks (**) in the CRU ID column. An N in the CRU ID column means the\npart is not a CRU. A single asterisk (*) means the part is a Tier 1 CRU; two\nasterisks (**) means the part is a Tier 2 CRU.\nA tier 1 CRU is very easy to remove and replace. It can be done by virtually all\ncustomers. A tier 2 CRU may require the use of a common tool to remove and\nreplace it.\nv An RoHS compliant FRU is identified by an R. An N in the RoHS ID column\nmeans the part is not a RoHS compliant FRU.\nv FRUs marked with \u0001OP\u0002 are available as options.\nNo.\nFRU\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nR **\na - c See âMiscellaneous partsâ on page 230.\n1 LCD unit (see âLCD FRUsâ on page 196.)\n2 Keyboard* (see âKeyboardâ on page 216.)\n3 Keyboard bezel\n39T7304\nv 1702-CTO, 3Jx, 3Lx, 49x, 24x, 37x, 3Hx, 3Dx, 3Ex, 3Cx,\n94x, 4Ax, 3Gx, 3Mx, 3Nx, 3Ax, 83x, 84x, 85x, 36x, 3Fx,\n35x, 46x, 47x, 3Kx, 53x, 23x, 7Ax, 7Bx, 4Lx, 26x\nv 1703-CTO, 37x, 3Jx\nv 1704-CTO, 33x, 3Dx, 43x\nv 1705-CTO, 24x, 33x, 3Gx, 43x, 48x, 53x, 54x, 85x\nv 2507-CTO, 3Bx\nv 2508-CTO, 3Bx\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 5Dx, 7Ax, 5Cx, 59x, 5Ax, 77x, 58x, 7Bx,\n5Bx, 5Fx, 5Gx, 56x, 55x, 78x, 84x, 44x, 33x, 4Dx, 4Ex,\n27x, 28x\nv 1707-CTO, 5Dx\nv 1708-CTO, 53x, 73x\nv 1709-CTO, 24x, 45x, 53x, 59x, 5Ax, 5Ex, 73x, 79x, 83x,\n84x\nv 2509-CTO, 57x\nv 2510-CTO, 57x\n(continued)\n124\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU FRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n3 Keyboard bezel\nv 1702-CTO, D5x, D6x, D8x, E3x, E4x, 7Cx, H4x, H5x,\nH6x, 88x, ELx, DCx\nv 1703-CTO, D6x, D8x\nv 1704-CTO, D3x, 3Yx\nv 1705-CTO, D3x, 89x, B6x, B7x, 3Xx, D9x, K7x, K9x\nv 2507-CTO, D4x\nv 2508-CTO, D4x\nv 1706-CTO, A6x, C5x, 5Qx, 5Rx\nv 1707-CTO\nv 170
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 8-CTO, PBx, AWx, PBx, KMx\nv 1709-CTO, ASx, A6x, BBx, KLx\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO 39T7480 R **\nKeyboard bezel with IBM logo\nv 7666-24x, 8Cx, 3Fx for xxB, xxH, xxC, xxV\nv 7667-3Fx for xxB, xxH, xxC, xxV\nv 7668-24x, 65x, 25x\nv 7669-7Fx\nv 7670-23x\nv 7673-65x, 3Fx, 3Kx, 66x for xxB, xxH, xxC, xxV\nv 7674-65x, 66x for xxB, xxH, xxC, xxV\nv 7675-CTO, 33x, 39x, 27x, 29x, 3Mx, 26x\nv 7678-63x\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO 42W3768 R **\nKeyboard bezel with ThinkPad logo\nv 7666-63x, 26x, 24x, 8Cx, 3Fx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP,\nxxS, xxY, xxG, xxM, xxA, xxT, xxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7667-3Fx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxG, xxM,\nxxA, xxT, xxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7670-23x\nv 7673-65x, 23x, 33x, 39x, 66x for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP,\nxxS, xxY, xxG, xxM, xxA, xxT, xxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7674-65x, 66x for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxG,\nxxM, xxA, xxT, xxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7678-63x\nv 7673-CTO, H3x, H8x, HCx, HGx\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, H4x, H6x\nv 7676-CTO 42W3770 R **\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n125 Parts list\nNo. FRU FRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n3 Keyboard bezel with IBM logo for WWAN\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO 42X3800 R **\nKeyboard bezel with ThinkPad logo for WWAN\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO 42X3802 R **\nKeyboard bezel with fingerprint\n39T7305\nv 1702-CTO, 34x, 44x, C3x, 79x, 93x, 3Qx, 4Ex, 5Nx, 4Fx,\n3Sx, 68x, 6Cx, 5Fx, 74x, 76x, 55x, 4Gx, 58x, 5Px, 4Kx,\n5Ex, 5Cx, 5Kx, 5Jx, 95x, 96x, 98x, 99x, C4x, C5x, C6x,\nC7x, 5Mx, 86x, 38x, 4Bx, 5Gx, 63x, 6Bx, 45x, 64x, 65x,\n4Hx, 97x, 3Rx, 75x, 77x, 78x, 5Qx, 5Rx, 87x, 39x, 5Dx,\n57x, 25x, 73x, 5Sx, 5Tx\nv 1703-CTO, 3Qx\nv 1704-CTO, 34x, 3Qx, 3Tx, 44x, 4Cx, 4Dx, 4Jx, 56x, 5Bx,\n5Lx, 63x, 66x, 69x, 6Ax\nv 1705-CTO, 34x, 3Px, 3Qx, 3Ux, 44x, 4Cx, 59x, 5Ax,\n5Dx, 5Ex, 5Hx\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 2533-CTO, A3x, A4x, A5x, B3x, B4x, B5x\nv 1706-CTO, 54x, 74x, 43x, 23x, 5Kx, 7Fx, 7Gx, 5Px, 63x,\n64x, 8Ax, 69x, 6Bx, 85x, 86x, 8Gx, 95x, 6Dx, 89x, 87x,\n8Ex, 8Dx, 4Bx, 4Cx, 46x, 49x, 4Ax, 26x, 25x, 5Hx, 7Cx,\n8Bx, 7Ex, 75x, 76x, 93x, 94x, 5Lx, 48x, 8Fx, 8Hx, 8Jx,\n88x, 47x, 34x, 8Kx\nv 1707-CTO, 5Kx\nv 1708-CTO, 54x, 5Kx, 5Mx, 74x, 7Dx, 86x, 8Cx, 95x\nv 1709-CTO, 47x, 54x, 5Jx, 5Lx, 5Nx, 74x, 7Dx, 7Hx, 85x,\n86x, 89x, 8Cx, 96x, 97x\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO R **\n(continued)\n126\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU FRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n3 Keyboard bezel with fingerprint\nv 1702-CTO, HFx, 3Wx, E7x, E8x, HCx, EHx, F3x, F6x,\nF7x, H7x, H8x, H9x, E5x, EEx, HAx, HDx, HEx, 7Dx,\n7Fx, 7Ex, 7Gx, E6x, HGx, K4x, K5x, ENx, F9x, K6x,\nEPx\nv 1703-CTO, 3Wx, E7x\nv 1704-CTO, EAx, ECx, EFx, EGx, E9x, F4x, F5x, EBx,\nG3x, 7Mx, J8x, EKx, F8x, EMx, FAx, KAx\nv 1705-CTO, DBx, EJx, D7x, Dax, HBx, 7Dx, 7Fx, 7Ex,\n7Gx, H3x, HHx, 7Kx, 7Lx, EKx, 7Nx\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, B5x, BAx\nv 1707-CTO, B5x\nv 1708-CTO, B7x, E4x, M7x, H7x, PCx, Q8x, Q9x, P8x,\nHBx, QHx, HEx, PHx\nv 1709-CTO, ARx, ATx, 5Sx, C4x, B6x, C8x, HDx, Q4x,\nHAx, P7x, Q6x, Q7x, PEx, QCx, Pax, KLx\nv 2509-CTO, B4x\nv 2510-CTO, B4x 39T7479 R **\nR **\nKeyboard bezel with fingerprint, IBM logo\n42W3769\nv 7666-34x, 7Gx, 38x, 8Ex, 84x, 73x, 8Ax, 8Bx, 8Dx, 3Cx,\n3Dx, 3Ex for xxB, xxH, xxC, xxV\nv 7667-34x, 36x, 3Ex for xxB, xxH, xxC, xxV\nv 7668-79x, 7Hx, 7Ax, 7Jx, 7Bx, 7Kx, 7Cx, 7Lx, 7Gx, 38x,\n87x\nv 7669-35x, 37x, 56x, 7Dx, 88x, 85x, 46x, 27x, 29x\nv 7671-33x\nv 7673-74x, 24x, 4Dx, 47x, 4Lx, 75x, 3Gx, 45x, 46x, 7Cx,\n7Dx, 4Gx, 7Hx, 7Jx, 4Mx, 4Nx for xxB, xxH, xxC, xxV\nv 7674-74x, 4Nx for xxB, xxH, xxC, xxV\nv 7675-34x, 35x, 49x, 38x, 4Ax, 3Ax, 3Bx, 4Bx, 3Ex, 4Cx,\n28x, 3Jx, 48x, 75x, 7Fx, 4Kx, 7Kx\nv 7676-35x, 4Fx, 3HX, 3Lx, 35x, 4Fx, 3HX, 58x, 3Lx, 4Px,\n3Px\nv 7679-43x\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n127 Parts list\nNo. FRU FRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n3 Keyboard bezel with fingerprin
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: t, ThinkPad logo\nv 7666-34x, 3Ax, 36x, 86x, 7Mx, 74x, 75x, 7Px, 77x, 78x,\n7Gx, 38x, 8Ex, 76x, 64x, 83x, 53x, 54x, 55x, 8Ax\nv 7667-34x, 36x, 3Ex for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY,\nxxG, xxM, xxA, xxT, xxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7671-33x\nv 7673-74x, 4Jx, 4Hx, 34x, 3Hx, 78x, 3Jx, 79x, 3Ax, 3Nx,\n7Ax, 7Gx, 3Dx, 3Lx, 7Bx, 24x, 4Dx, 47x, 4Lx, 75x, 54x\nfor xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxG, xxM, xxA, xxT,\nxxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7674-74x, 4Nx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxG,\nxxM, xxA, xxT, xxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7676-35x, 4Fx, 3HX, 3Lx\nv 7679-43x\nv 7673-CTO, H4x, H5x, H6x, H7x, H9x, HAX, HBx,\nHFx, HHx, J2x, J3x, J5x, J6x, J7x, J8x, J9x, JAx, JBx,\nJDx, JFx, JGx\nv 7674-CTO, J2x\nv 7675-CTO, H7x, H9x, HAx, HBx, HCx\nv 7676-CTO, J3x, J4x, J5x, J6x 42W3771 R **\nKeyboard bezel with fingerprint, IBM logo, for WWAN\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 44x, 44x, 93x, 94x\nv 7669-CTO, 45x, 49x, 4Ax, 4Bx\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 53x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, 55x, 59x, 5Ax, 5Bx\nv 7676-CTO, 56x, 57x, 5Cx, 5Ex\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO 42X3801 R **\n(continued)\n128\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU FRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n3 Keyboard bezel with fingerprint, ThinkPad logo, for\nWWAN\nv 7666-CTO, 47x, 43x, 93x, 94x for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP,\nxxS, xxY, xxG, xxM, xxA, xxT, xxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 53x, 5Ax, 5Bx, 5Dx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP,\nxxS, xxY, xxG, xxM, xxA, xxT, xxQ, xxE, xxJ, xxK\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, HJx, JEx, K1x, K2x, K3x, K4x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, J2x, J3x, J4x, J5x, J6x, J7x, J8x, J9x, K2x\nv 7676-CTO, K1x, K2x, K3x 42X3803 R **\nKeyboard bezel with fingerprint, ThinkPad logo, for\nKDDI\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO 42X4680 R **\nKeyboard bezel with fingerprint, IBM logo, for KDDI\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO 42X4681 R **\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n129 Part
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: s list\nNo. FRU\n4 Fingerprint FPC\n91P6977\nv 1702-CTO, 34x, 44x, C3x, 79x, 93x, 3Qx, 4Ex, 5Nx, 4Fx,\n3Sx, 68x, 6Cx, 5Fx, 74x, 76x, 55x, 4Gx, 58x, 5Px, 4Kx,\n5Ex, 5Cx, 5Kx, 5Jx, 95x, 96x, 98x, 99x, C4x, C5x, C6x,\nC7x, 5Mx, 86x, 38x, 4Bx, 5Gx, 63x, 6Bx, 45x, 64x, 65x,\n4Hx, 97x, 3Rx, 75x, 77x, 78x, 5Qx, 5Rx, 87x, 39x, 5Dx,\n57x, 25x, 73x, 5Sx, 5Tx\nv 1703-CTO, 3Qx\nv 1704-CTO, 34x, 3Qx, 3Tx, 44x, 4Cx, 4Dx, 4Jx, 56x, 5Bx,\n5Lx, 63x, 66x, 69x, 6Ax\nv 1705-CTO, 34x, 3Px, 3Qx, 3Ux, 44x, 4Cx, 59x, 5Ax,\n5Dx, 5Ex, 5Hx\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO, A3x, A4x, A5x, B3x, B4x, B5x\nv 1706-CTO, 54x, 74x, 43x, 23x, 5Kx, 7Fx, 7Gx, 5Px, 63x,\n64x, 8Ax, 69x, 6Bx, 85x, 86x, 8Gx, 95x, 6Dx, 89x, 87x,\n8Ex, 8Dx, 4Bx, 4Cx, 46x, 49x, 4Ax, 26x, 25x, 5Hx, 7Cx,\n8Bx, 7Ex, 75x, 76x, 93x, 94x, 5Lx, 48x, 8Fx, 8Hx, 8Jx,\n88x, 47x, 34x, 8Kx\nv 1707-CTO, 5Kx\nv 1708-CTO, 54x, 5Kx, 5Mx, 74x, 7Dx, 86x, 8Cx, 95x\nv 1709-CTO, 47x, 54x, 5Jx, 5Lx, 5Nx, 74x, 7Dx, 7Hx, 85x,\n86x, 89x, 8Cx, 96x, 97x\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nv 1702-CTO, HFx, 3Wx, E7x, E8x, HCx, EHx, F3x, F6x,\nF7x, H7x, H8x, H9x, E5x, EEx, HAx, HDx, HEx, 7Dx,\n7Fx, 7Ex, 7Gx, E6x, HGx, K4x, K5x, ENx, F9x, K7x,\nEPx\nv 1703-CTO, 3Wx, E7x\nv 1704-CTO, EAx, ECx, EFx, EGx, E9x, F4x, F5x, EBx,\nG3x, 7Mx, J8x, EKx, F8x, EMx, FAx, KAx\nv 1705-CTO, DBx, EJx, D7x, Dax, HBx, 7Dx, 7Fx, 7Ex,\n7Gx, H3x, HHx, 7Kx, 8Lx, EKx, 7Nx\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, C9x, GAx, AXx, CCx, C6x, C7x, G5x, G6x,\nCDx, CFx, GBx, GCx, G7x, E5x, HCx, CHx, QFx, QDx,\nP4x, QAx, PFx, Q5x, KHx, P9x, QBx, PDx, Q9x, CJx,\nQEx, P5x, P6x\nv 1707-CTO, C9x\nv 1708-CTO, B7x, E4x, M7x, H7x, PCx, Q8x, Q9x, P8x,\nHBx, QHx, HEx, PHx\nv 1709-CTO, G3x, H3x, H4x, 5Wx, 5Xx, G8x, C8x, HDx,\nQ4x, HAx, P7x, Q6x, Q7x, PEx, QCx, PAx, KLx\nv 2509-CTO, B4x\nv 2510-CTO\n(continued)\n130\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nR N Parts list\nNo. FRU\n4\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nFingerprint FPC\n93P4521\nv 7666-CTO, 34x, 36x, 38x, 39x, 3Ax, 3Cx, 3Dx, 3Ex, 53x,\n54x, 55x, 59x, 64x, 73x, 74x, 75x, 76x, 77x,
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 78x, 7Gx,\n7Mx, 7Px, 83x, 84x, 86x, 8Ax, 8Bx, 8Dx, 8Ex, 8Jx, 8Kx,\nA4x, A5x, A6x, A7x, A8x, A9x, AAX, B4x\nv 7667-34x, 36x, 3Ex, 4Nx\nv 7668-CTO, 38x, 57x, 58x, 79x, 7Ax, 7Bx, 7Cx, 7Gx, 87x,\nA3x, B3x\nv 7669-CTO, 27x, 29x, 35x, 37x, 46x, 56x, 7Dx, 85x, 88x,\n3Gx, 3Hx\nv 7671-33x\nv 7673-CTO, 24x, 25x, 34x, 3Ax, 3Dx, 3Gx, 3Hx, 3Jx, 3Lx,\n3Nx, 3Qx, 44x, 45x, 46x, 47x, 4Dx, 4Gx, 4Hx, 4Jx, 4Lx,\n4Mx, 4Nx, 4TU, 54x, 73x, 74x, 75x, 76x, 78x, 79x, 7Ax,\n7Bx, 7Cx, 7Dx, 7Ex, 7Gx, 7Hx, 7Jx, 85x, 86x, 87x, 8Ax,\n8Bx, 8Hx, 8Kx, 97x, 98x, 99x, 9Ax, 9Bx, 9Cx, 9Dx, 9Ex,\n9Fx, 9Gx\nv 7674-74x\nv 7675-CTO, 28x, 34x, 35x, 38x, 3Ax, 3Bx, 3Ex, 3Jx, 48x,\n49x, 4Ax, 4Bx, 4Cx, 4Kx, 75x, 7Fx, 7Kx, 8Px, 8Rx, 8Sx,\n92x, 93x, 94x, 95x, 96x\nv 7676-35x, 4Fx, 3HX, 3Lx, 35x, 4Fx, 3HX, 58x, 3Lx, 4Px,\n3Px\nv 7679-43x\nv 7673-CTO, H4x, H5x, H6x, H7x, H9x, HAx, HBx, HFx,\nHGx, HJx, HHx, J2x, J3x, J5x, J6x, J7x, J8x, J9x, JAx,\nJBx, JDx, JEx, JFx, JGx\nv 7674-CTO, J2x\nv 7675-CTO, H7x, H8x, H9x, HAx, HBx, HCx, J2x, J3x,\nJ4x, J5x, J6x, J7x, J8x, J9x\nv 7676-CTO, H5x, H6x, J3x, J4x R N\nFingerprint FPC for WWAN\nv 7666-CTO, 47x, 43x, 93x, 94x, E3x, E4x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 44x, 93x, 94x\nv 7669-CTO, 45x, 49x, 4Ax, 4Bx\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 53x, 54x, 5Bx, 5Dx, A3x, A4x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, 55x, 59x, 5Ax, 5Bx\nv 7676-CTO, 56x, 57x, 5Cx, 5Ex\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, K1x, K2x, K3x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, K2x\nv 7676-CTO, K1x, K2x, K3x R N\n93P4537\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n131 Parts list\nNo. FRU\n5 Fingerprint card\n42W7764\nv 7666-CTO, 38x, 3Cx, 3Dx, 3Ex, 43x, 53x, 54x, 55x, 59x,\n64x, 73x, 74x, 75x, 76x, 77x, 78x, 7Gx, 7Mx, 7Px, 83x,\n84x, 8Ax, 8Bx, 8Dx, 8Ex, 8Jx, 8Kx, 93x, 94x, A4x, A5x,\nA6x, A7x, A8x, A9x, AAX, B4x, E3x, E4x\nv 7667-34x, 36x, 3Ex, 4Nx\nv 7668-CTO, 38x, 44x, 57x, 58x, 79x, 7Ax, 7Bx, 7Cx, 7Gx,\n87x, 93x, 94x, A3x, B3x\nv 7669-CTO, 27x, 29x, 35x, 37x, 45x, 46x, 49x, 3Gx, 3Hx,\n4Ax, 4Bx, 56x, 7Dx, 85x, 88x\nv 7671-33x\nv 7673-CTO, 24x, 25x, 34x, 3Ax, 3Dx, 3Gx, 3Hx, 3Jx, 3L
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: x,\n3Nx, 3Qx, 44x, 45x, 46x, 47x, 4Dx, 4Gx, 4Hx, 4Jx, 4Lx,\n4Mx, 4Nx, 4TU, 53x, 54x, 5Ax, 5Bx, 5Dx, 73x, 74x, 75x,\n76x, 78x, 79x, 7Ax, 7Bx, 7Cx, 7Dx, 7Ex, 7Gx, 7Hx, 7Jx,\n85x, 86x, 87x, 8Ax, 8Bx, 8Hx, 8Kx, 97x, 98x, 99x, 9Ax,\n9Bx, 9Cx, 9Dx, 9Ex, 9Fx, 9Gx, A3x, A4x\nv 7674-74x\nv 7675-CTO, 28x, 34x, 35x, 38x, 3Ax, 3Bx, 3Ex, 3Jx, 48x,\n49x, 4Ax, 4Bx, 4Cx, 4Ex, 4Kx, 55x, 59x, 5Ax, 5Bx, 75x,\n7Fx, 7Kx, 8Px, 8Rx, 8Sx, 92x, 93x, 94x, 95x, 96x\nv 7676-35x, 4Fx, 3HX, 3Lx, 4Px, 3Px, 5Cx, 5Ex\nv 7679-43x\nv 7673-CTO, H4x, H5x, H6x, H7x, H9x, HAx, HBx, HFx,\nHGx, HJx, HHx, J2x, J3x, J5x, J6x, J7x, J8x, J9x, JAx,\nJBx, JDx, JEx, JFx, JGx, K1x, K2x, K3x, K4x\nv 7674-CTO, J2x\nv 7675-CTO, H7x, H8x, H9x, HAx, HBx, HCx, J2x, J3x,\nJ4x, J5x, J6x, J7x, J8x, J9x, K2x\nv 7676-CTO, H5x, H6x, J3x, J4x, K1x, K2x, K3x\n(continued)\n132\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nR N Parts list\nNo. FRU\n5\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nFingerprint card\n42T0065\nv 1702-CTO, 34x, 44x, C3x, 79x, 93x, 3Qx, 4Ex, 5Nx, 4Fx,\n3Sx, 68x, 6Cx, 5Fx, 74x, 76x, 55x, 4Gx, 58x, 5Px, 4Kx,\n5Ex, 5Cx, 5Kx, 5Jx, 95x, 96x, 98x, 99x, C4x, C5x, C6x,\nC7x, 5Mx, 86x, 38x, 4Bx, 5Gx, 63x, 6Bx, 45x, 64x, 65x,\n4Hx, 97x, 3Rx, 75x, 77x, 78x, 5Qx, 5Rx, 87x, 39x, 5Dx,\n57x, 25x, 73x, 5Sx, 5Tx\nv 1703-CTO, 3Qx\nv 1704-CTO, 34x, 3Qx, 3Tx, 44x, 4Cx, 4Dx, 4Jx, 56x, 5Bx,\n5Lx, 63x, 66x, 69x, 6Ax, KAx\nv 1705-CTO, 34x, 3Px, 3Qx, 3Ux, 44x, 4Cx, 59x, 5Ax,\n5Dx, 5Ex, 5Hx, 7Nx\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO, A3x, A4x, A5x, B3x, B4x, B5x\nv 1706-CTO, 54x, 74x, 43x, 23x, 5Kx, 7Fx, 7Gx, 5Px, 63x,\n64x, 8Ax, 69x, 6Bx, 85x, 86x, 8Gx, 95x, 6Dx, 89x, 87x,\n8Ex, 8Dx, 4Bx, 4Cx, 46x, 49x, 4Ax, 26x, 25x, 5Hx, 7Cx,\n8Bx, 7Ex, 75x, 76x, 93x, 94x, 5Lx, 48x, 8Fx, 8Hx, 8Jx,\n88x, 47x, 34x, 8Kx\nv 1707-CTO, 5Kx\nv 1708-CTO, 54x, 5Kx, 5Mx, 74x, 7Dx, 86x, 8Cx, 95x\nv 1709-CTO, 47x, 54x, 5Jx, 5Lx, 5Nx, 74x, 7Dx, 7Hx, 85x,\n86x, 89x, 8Cx, 96x, 97x\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nv 1702-CTO, HFx, 3Wx, E7x, E8x, HCx, EHx, F3x, F6x,\nF7x, H7x, H8x, H9x, E5x, EEx, HAx, HDx, HEx, 7Dx
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: ,\n7Fx, 7Ex, 7Gx, E6x, HGx, K4x, K5x, ENx, F9x, K7x,\nEPx\nv 1703-CTO, 3Wx, E7x\nv 1704-CTO, EAx, ECx, EFx, EGx, E9x, F4x, F5x, EBx,\nG3x, 7Mx, J8x, EKx, F8x, EMx, FAx\nv 1705-CTO, DBx, EJx, D7x, Dax, HBx, 7Dx, 7Fx, 7Ex,\n7Gx, H3x, HHx, 7Kx, 8Lx, EKx\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 54x, AVx, 5Yx, CEx, B8x, AUx, 5Vx, G4x,\nE3x, H5x, 5Tx, GDx, 5Ux, GEx, E5x, HCx, CHx, QFx,\nQDx, P4x, QAx, PFx, Q5x, KHx, P9x, QBx, PDx, Q9x,\nCJx, QEx, P5x, P6x\nv 1707-CTO, B8x, 5Vx\nv 1708-CTO, B7x, E4x, B7x, E4x, M7x, H7x, PCx, Q8x,\nQ9x, P8x, HBx, QHx, HEx, PHx\nv 1709-CTO, CGx, CBx, H6x, E5x, C6x, CAx, B9x, G9x,\n5Tx, GDx, 5Ux, GEx, B3x, C3x, 54x, C8x, C8x, HDx,\nQ4x, HAx, P7x, Q6x, Q7x, PEx, QCx, PAx, KLx\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO, B4x R N\n6 Cable assembly kit, DC-in 93P4390 R N\n7 Cable assembly kit, RJ11 91P6979 R N\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n133 Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID\nCRU\nID\n8 Battery 4-cell Li-Ion (Prismatic)\nv 1702-CTO, 3Hx, 68x, 6Cx, 5Fx, 3Ex, 3Cx, 94x, 55x, 5Px, 3Ax, 83x, 85x, 45x, 97x\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO, 4Cx, 56x, 5Lx, 6Ax\nv 1705-CTO, 48x, 4Cx, 5Hx, 85x, 3Px\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO, B4x, B5x, A5x, A4x\nv 1702-CTO, HCx, EHx\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO, EAx, ECx, EFx, EGx, E9x, F4x, F5x, EMx\nv 1705-CTO, EJx, 89x, B6x, B7x, 3Xx, D7x, D9x\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nSanyo 92P1163 R *\nLGC 42T5224 R *\nBattery 4-cell Li-Ion (Prismatic)\nv 7666-CTO, 63x, 26x, 86x, 73x, 76x, 64x, 83x, 53x, 8Ax, 8Bx, 8Cx, 8Dx, 3Cx, 3Dx, 8Jx,\nA4x, A6x, A8x, E3x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 65x, 25x, 8Fx, 8Gx, 8Hx\nv 7669-CTO, 7Fx, 7Dx, 27x, 49x, 29x, 4Ax\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nSanyo 42T5247 R *\nLGC 42T5266 R *\nBattery 4-cell Li-Ion (2.6AH cylindrical)\nv 1702-CTO, 24x, 74x, 76x, 4Kx, 95x, 96x, 98x, 99x, C4x, C5x, C6x, C7x, 36x, 3Fx, 35x,\n5Dx, 53x, 57x, 23x, 25x, 73x, 7Ax, 5Sx, 5Tx, 7Bx, 4Lx, 26x\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO, 4Dx\nv 1705-CTO, 24x, 5Dx, 53x\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 5Cx, 63x, 64x, 8Ax, 5Ax, 58x, 69x, 6Bx, 85x, 8Gx, 95x, 6Dx, 56x, 4Bx,\n4Cx, 46x, 49x, 4Ax,
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 26x, 25x, 5Hx, 55x, 78x, 7Cx, 7Ex, 75x, 48x, 88x, 84x, 44x, 47x,\n33x, 34x, 8Kx, 4Dx, 4Ex, 27x, 28x\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO, 7Dx, 95x, 8Cx\nv 1709-CTO, 24x, 47x, 79x, 7Dx, 8Cx, 5Ax, 5Jx, 5Ex, 45x, 84x, 85x\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nSanyo 92P1167 R *\nSony 92P1169 R *\n(continued)\n134\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID\nCRU\nID\n8 Battery 4-cell Li-Ion (2.6AH cylindrical)\nv 1702-CTO, HFx, D5x, E7x, E3x, E4x, H4x, H8x, H9x, H5x, H6x, 88x, 7Dx, 7Fx, 7Ex,\n7Gx, E6x, ELx, ENx, K6x, EPx\nv 1703-CTO, E7x\nv 1704-CTO, EBx, 7Mx, J8x, EKx, KAx\nv 1705-CTO, 7Dx, 7Fx, 7Ex, 7Gx, HHx, 7Kx, 7Lx, K7x, EKx, K9x\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, AVx, B5x, C9x, GAx, AXx, A6x, 5Tx, GDx, 5Ux, GEx, C5x, CCx, 5Qx,\n5Rx, CHx, QFx, QDx, P4x, QAx, KKx, KHx, BAx, Q9x, CJx\nv 1707-CTO, B5x, C9x\nv 1708-CTO, E4x, PBx, PCx, Q8x, Q9x, AWx, QHx, PHx, KMx\nv 1709-CTO, ASx, C4x, B9x, A6x, 5Tx, GDx, 5Ux, GEx, KHx, P7x, Q6x, Q7x, KJx,\nBBx, KLx\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nv 7666-CTO, 7Mx, 74x, 75x, 7Px, 77x, 78x, 24x, 7Gx, 38x, 8Ex, 93x, 94x, 59x, A9x,\nAAX, B5x, B6x, E4x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 24x, 79x, 7Ax, 7Bx, 7Cx, 7Gx, 38x, 87x, 44x, 93x, 94x, 57x, 58x, A3x, B3x\nv 7669-CTO, 46x, 4Bx\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 53x, 23x, 33x, 34x, 3Hx, 78x, 3Jx, 79x, 39x, 3Ax, 3Nx, 7Ax, 7Gx, 3Dx,\n3Lx, 7Bx, 24x, 4Dx, 47x, 4Lx, 75x3Fx, 3Gx, 45x, 46x, 3Kx, 5Ax, 5Bx, 82x, 83x, 84x,\n85x, 86x, 88x, 89x, 8Ax, 8Bx, 8Cx, 8Dx, 8Ex, 8Gx, 8Hx, 8Kx, 97x, 9Dx, 9Ex, 9Fx,\n9Gx, A4x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, 26x, 33x, 34x, 35x, 49x, 36x, 37x, 38x, 4Ax, 39x, 3Ax, 3Bx, 4Bx, 3Cx, 3Dx,\n3Ex, 4Cx, 27x, 28x, 3Jx, 48x, 75x, 29x, 3Mx, 4Kx, 5Ax, 5Bx, 8Lx, 8Mx, 8Nx, 8Px,\n8Rx, 8Sx, 95x, 96x\nv 7676-CTO, 35x, 3Lx, 88x, 89x\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, H3x, H4x, H6x, H7x, H8x, H9x, HAx, HCx, HFx, HGx, HHx, HJx, J2x,\nJ3x, J5x, J6x, J7x, J8x, JDx, JEx, JFx, K1x, K3x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, H4x, H6x, H8x, H9x, HAx, HBx, HCx, J2x, J4x, J5x, J6x, J7x, J8x\nv 7676-CTO, K1x, K2x\nSanyo 93P5027 R *\nSanyo 42T4505 R *\nSony 93P5028
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: R *\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n135 Parts list\nNo. FRU\n8 Battery 8-cell Li-Ion (5.2AH cylindrical)\nv 1702-CTO, 3Jx, 3Lx, 3Qx, 49x, 4Ex, 37x, 5Nx, 4Fx, 3Sx, 3Dx, 4Gx, 58x, 4Ax, 3Gx,\n3Mx, 3Nx, 5Ex, 5Cx, 5Kx, 5Jx, 84x, 5Mx, 86x, 38x, 46x, 47x, 4Bx, 5Gx, 63x, 6Bx, 64x,\n65x, 4Hx, 3Rx, 3Kx, 75x, 77x, 78x, 5Qx, 5Rx, 87x, 39x\nv 1703-CTO, 37x, 3Jx, 3Qx\nv 1704-CTO, 3Qx, 5Bx, 3Tx, 63x, 69x, 66x, 4Jx, 3Dx\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx, 7Ax, 7Fx, 7Gx, 5Px, 59x, 77x, 86x, 7Bx, 5Bx, 5Fx, 5Gx, 89x,\n87x, 8Ex, 8Dx, 8Bx, 76x, 93x, 94x, 5Lx, 8Fx, 8Hx, 8Jx\nv 1707-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx\nv 1708-CTO, 5Kx, 86x, 5Mx\nv 1709-CTO, 96x, 97x, 86x, 7Hx, 83x, 59x, 5Lx, 5Nx, 89x\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO, 57x\nRoHS\nID\nCRU\nID\nSanyo 92P1171 R *\nSony 92P1173 R *\n(continued)\n136\nFRU no.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID\nCRU\nID\n8 Battery 8-cell Li-Ion (5.2AH cylindrical)\nv 1702-CTO, D6x, 3Wx, D8x, E8x, F3x, F6x, 7Cx, H7x, E5x, EEx, HAx, HDx, HEx,\nHGx, K4x, DCx, K5x, F9x\nv 1703-CTO, D6x, 3Wx, D8x\nv 1704-CTO, G3x, F8x, FAx\nv 1705-CTO, DBx, DAx, HBx, 7Nx\nv 2507-CTO, D4x\nv 2508-CTO, D4x\nv 1706-CTO, 5Yx, CEx, B8x, AUx, 5Vx, G4x, E3x, H5x, C6x, C7x, G5x, G6x, CDx,\nCFx, GBx, GCx, G7x, E5x, HCx, PFx, Q5x, P9x, QBx, PDx, QEx, P5x, P6x\nv 1707-CTO, B8x, 5Vx\nv 1708-CTO, B7x, P8x, HBx, HEx\nv 1709-CTO, CGx, CBx, H6x, E5x, C6x, 5Wx, 5Xx, G8x, ATx, 5Sx, B6x, CAx, G9x,\nC8x, HDx, Q4x, HAx, PEx, QCx, PAx, PGx, QGx\nv 2509-CTO, B4x\nv 2510-CTO, B4x\nv 7666-CTO, 34x, 3Ax, 36x, 47x, 84x, 54x, 43x, 55x, 3Fx, 3Ex, 8Kx, A5x, A7x, B4x\nv 7667-CTO, 34x, 36x, 3Fx, 3Ex\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO, 35x, 37x, 56x, 45x, 88x, 85x, 3Gx, 3Hx\nv 7670-CTO, 23x\nv 7671-CTO, 33x\nv 7673-CTO, 65x, 74x, 4Jx, 4Hx, 54x, 7Cx, 7Dx, 4Gx, 25x, 44x, 76x, 3Hx, 7Ex, 73x,\n7Hx, 7Jx, 4Mx, 66x, 4Nx, 5Dx, 4TU, 87x, 98x, 99x, 9Ax, 9Bx, 9Cx, A3x\nv 7674-CTO, 65x, 74x, 66x, 4Nx\nv 7675-CTO, 7Fx, 55x, 7Kx, 59x, 92x, 93x, 94x\nv 7676-CTO, 56x, 4Fx, 3HX, 57x, 58x, 43x, 4Px, 5Cx\nv 7678-CT
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: O, 63x\nv 7679-CTO, 43x\nv 7673-CTO, H5x, HBx, J9x, JAx, JBx, JGx, K2x, K4x\nv 7674-CTO, J2x\nv 7675-CTO, H7x, J3x, J9x, K2x\nv 7676-CTO, H5x, H6x, J3x, J4x, K3x\nSanyo 93P5029 R *\nSanyo 42T4506 R *\nSony 93P5030 R *\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n137 Parts list\nNo. FRU FRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n8 Extended battery Li-Ion (Sanyo) 40Y7904 R *\nâ Battery spacer 92P1227 R *\nBattery spacer\nv 1702-CTO, D6x, 3Wx, D8x, E8x, F3x, F6x, E5x, EEx,\nD5x, E7x, E3x, E4x, 88x, 7Dx, E6x, Ehx, ELx, K4x,\nDCx, K5x, ENx, F9x, K6x, EPx\nv 1703-CTO, D6x, 3Wx, D8x, E7x\nv 1704-CTO, 3Yx, EBx, G3x, EKx, F8x, EMx, FAx\nv 1705-CTO, 7Dx, 7Fx, 7Ex, 7Gx, Dbx, Dax, HBx, K7x,\nEKx, K9x\nv 2507-CTO, D4x\nv 2508-CTO, D4x\nv 7666-CTO, 26x, 86x, 73x, 76x, 64x, 83x, 43x, 8Ax, 8Bx,\n8Cx, 8Dx, 63x, 3Cx, 3Dx, 8Jx, A4x, A6x, A8x, E3x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 25x, 65x, 8Fx, 8Gx, 8Hx\nv 7669-CTO, 7Fx, 7Dx, 27x, 49x, 29x, 4Ax\nv 7670-CTO, 23x\nv 7671-CTO, 33x 42W3050 R *\n9 Hard disk drive cover 42X4316 R *\n10 Hard disk drive, 30GB, PATA, 4200rpm, 1.8-inch\nv 1702-CTO\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO, B4x, A5x, A4x 39T2747 R N\n39T2749 R N\nToshiba\nHard disk drive, 40GB, PATA, 4200rpm, 1.8-inch\nv 1702-CTO\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nToshiba\n(continued)\n138\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\n10 Hard disk drive, 60GB, PATA, 4200rpm, 1.8-inch\nv 1702-CTO\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO, B5x\nToshiba\nFRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n39T2751 R N\nHard disk drive, 40GB, SATA, 5400rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 1702-CTO, 24x, 37x, 94x, 95x, 96x, C4x, C5x, 83x, 84x, 85x, 36x, 86x, 38x, 35x, 45x,\n39x, 23x\nv 1703-CTO, 37x\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO, 24x, 85x\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 4Bx, 4Cx, 46x, 26x, 25x, 55x, 75x, 76x, 44x, 33x\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO\nv 1709-CTO, 24x, 45x\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nHitachi 39T2701 R *\nToshiba 39T2709 R *\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 139 Parts list\nNo. FRU\n10 Hard disk drive, 60GB, SATA, 5400rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 1702-CTO, 3Jx, 3Lx, 3Qx, 49x, 4Ex, 4Fx, 3Hx, 3Sx, 3Dx, 3Ex, 3Cx, 4Gx, 4Bx, 4Kx,\n4Ax, 3Gx, 3Mx, 3Nx, 3Ax, 3Fx, 46x, 47x, 4Bx, 63x, 6Bx, 4Hx, 97x, 3Rx, 3Kx, 87x,\n25x, 73x, 4Lx, 26x\nv 1703-CTO, 3Jx, 3Qx\nv 1704-CTO, 3Qx, 3Tx, 4Dx, 63x, 4Jx, 3Dx, 4Cx\nv 1705-CTO, 3Qx, 48x, 4Cx, 3Ux, 3Gx, 3Px\nv 2507-CTO, 3Bx\nv 2508-CTO, 3Bx\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx, 7Ax, 7Fx, 7Gx, 5Cx, 5Px, 59x, 5Ax, 77x, 58x, 7Bx, 5Bx, 5Fx,\n5Gx, 56x, 5Hx, 78x, 7Cx, 7Ex, 5Lx, 48x, 47x, 34x, 4Dx, 4Ex, 27x, 28x\nv 1707-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx\nv 1708-CTO, 5Kx, 5Mx, 7Dx\nv 1709-CTO, 7Hx, 47x, 79x, 59x, 7Dx, 5Lx, 5Nx, 5Ax, 5Jx, 5Ex\nv 2509-CTO, 57x\nv 2510-CTO, 57x\nv 7666-CTO, 7Mx, 7Px\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 23x, 33x, 34x, 39x, 3Ax, 3Dx\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, 33x, 34x, 39x, 3Ax\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nRoHS\nID\nCRU\nID\nHitachi 42T1407 R *\nFujitsu 39T2883 R *\nSeagate 42T1303 R *\nHGST 42T1489 R *\n(continued)\n140\nFRU no.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n10 Hard disk drive, 60GB, SATA, 7200rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 1702-CTO\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO\nv 1709-CTO\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO, J2x\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nHitachi 42T1401 R *\nSeagate 39T2795 R *\nHGST 42T1483 R *\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n141 Parts list\nNo. FRU\n10 Hard disk drive, 80GB, SATA, 5400rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 1702-CTO, 5Fx, 74x, 55x, 58x, 5Ex, 5Cx, 5Kx, 5Jx, 98x, 99x, C6x, C7x, 5Mx, 5Gx,\n64x, 65x, 75x, 5Dx, 53x, 57x, 7Ax, 5Sx, 5Tx, 7Bx\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO, 5Bx, 66x, 56x, 5Lx, 6Ax\nv 1705-CTO, 59x, 54x, 5Ax, 5Hx, 5Ex, 5Dx, 53x\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 63x, 64x, 8Ax, 85x, 86x, 95x, 6Dx, 89x, 87x, 8Ex, 8Dx
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: , 49x, 4Ax, 8Bx, 93x,\n94x, 8Fx, 88x, 84x, 8Kx\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO, 86x, 95x, 8Cx\nv 1709-CTO, 96x, 86x, 83x, 8Cx, 89x, 84x, 85x\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nv 7666-CTO, 34x, 63x, 26x, 74x, 75x, 77x, 78x, 24x, 76x, 64x, 83x, 53x, 54x, 8Bx, 8Cx,\n3Cx, 3Fx, 93x, 94x\nv 7667-CTO, 34x, 3Fx\nv 7668-CTO, 24x, 79x, 7Ax, 7Bx, 7Cx, 65x, 25x, 8Fx, 93x, 94x\nv 7669-CTO, 7Fx, 35x, 37x, 56x, 7Dx\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 65x, 74x, 4Hx, 3Hx, 3Jx, 3Nx, 3Lx, 24x, 3Fx, 3Gx, 25x, 44x, 3Hx, 3Kx,\n66x, 8Cx, 8Dx, 8Ex, 8Gx\nv 7674-CTO, 65x, 74x, 66x\nv 7675-CTO, 35x, 38x, 3Bx, 3Ex, 27x, 29x, 3Mx, 8Lx\nv 7676-CTO, 35x, 3HX, 3Lx, 4Px, 3Px\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, H5x, H7x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, H9x, HAx\nv 7676-CTO, H6x\nRoHS\nID\nCRU\nID\nHitachi 42T1409 R *\nFujitsu 39T2885 R *\nSeagate 42T1305 R *\nHGST 42T1491 R *\n(continued)\n142\nFRU no.\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n10 Hard disk drive, 100GB, SATA, 5400rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 1702-CTO, 5Nx, 68x, 6Cx, 76x, 5Px, 77x, 5Qx\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO, 69x\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 69x, 6Bx, 8Gx, 8Hx\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO\nv 1709-CTO, 97x\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nHitachi 39T2707 R *\nToshiba 39T2715 R *\nFujitsu 39T2643 R *\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n143 Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n10 Hard disk drive, 100GB, SATA, 7200rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 1702-CTO, 78x, 5Rx\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 8Jx\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO\nv 1709-CTO\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nv 7666-CTO, 3Ax, B4x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO, 45x, 3Hx\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 4Jx, 7Jx, 4Mx, 9Fx, 9Gx, A4x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, H7x\nv 7676-CTO\nHitachi 42T1403 R *\nSeagate 39T2799 R *\nHGST 42T1485 R *\n(continued)\n144\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID\nCRU\nID\n10 Hard disk drive, 120GB, SATA, 540
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 0rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 1702-CTO\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 1706-CTO\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO\nv 1709-CTO\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nv 7666-CTO, 36x, 86x, 7Gx, 38x, 73x, 43x, 55x, 8Ax, 8Dx, 3Dx, 3Ex, 59x, B5x, B6x\nv 7667-CTO, 36x, 3Ex\nv 7668-CTO, 7Gx, 38x, 44x, 58x, 8Gx, 8Hx\nv 7669-CTO, 85x, 46x, 27x, 49x, 29x, 4Ax, 4Bx\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 54x, 78x, 79x, 7Ax, 7Gx, 7Bx, 47x, 75x, 45x, 46x, 4Gx, 76x, 4Nx, 5Dx,\n4TU, 82x, 83x, 84x, 85x, 88x, 89x, 8Ax, 8Bx, 8Hx, 8Kx\nv 7674-CTO, 4Nx\nv 7675-CTO, 49x, 4Ax, 4Bx, 4Cx, 28x, 48x, 75x, 4Kx, 7Kx, 8Mx, 8Nx, 8Px, 8Sx\nv 7676-CTO, 88x, 89x\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, H3x, H4x, H6x, H8x, H9x, HCx, HHx, HJx\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, H6x\nv 7676-CTO, H5x, J3x\nHGST 42T1417 R *\nFujitsu 39T2889 R *\nSeagate 42T1307 R *\nHGST 42T1499\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n145 Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID\nCRU\nID\n10 Hard disk drive, 160GB, SATA, 5400rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 7666-CTO, 47x, 8Ex, 84x, 8Jx, A4x, A5x, A8x, A9x, AAx, E3x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 87x\nv 7669-CTO, 88x\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 4Dx, 4Lx, 7Cx, 7Dx, 7Ex, 7Hx, 5Ax, 5Bx, 86x, 87x, 97x, 98x, 99x, 9Dx,\nA3x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, 3Jx, 7Fx, 55x, 59x, 5Ax, 5Bx, 92x, 8Rx\nv 7676-CTO, 56x, 4Fx, 57x, 58x, 5Cx, 5Ex\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, HAx, HBx, HFx, HGx, J3x, J6x, J7x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, H8x, J2x, J5x, J7x, J8x, J9x, K2x\nv 7676-CTO, K3x, J4x\nHGST 42T1501 R *\nSeagate 42T1309 R *\nFujitsu 39T2899 R *\nSeagate 42T1439 R *\nHGST 42T1461 R *\n42T1311 R *\nHard disk drive, 160GB, SATA, 7200rpm, 2.5-inch\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, HFx, J2x, JAx, JBx, JEx, JGx, K1x, K3x, K4x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO, K1x, K2x\nHard disk drive, 160GB, SATA, 7200rpm, 2.5-inch,\nSeagate\nv 7673-CTO, J5x\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\n(continued)\n146\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\n10\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nHard disk drive, 2
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 00GB, SATA, 7200rpm, 2.5-inch, HGST 42T1463\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, JDx, K2x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, J3x\nv 7676-CTO R *\n11 Hard disk drive bracket screw kit, 1.8-inch\nv 1702-CTO, 74x, 94x, 76x, 95x, 96x, 98x, 99x, C4x, C5x,\nC6x, C7x, 97x, 75x, 77x, 78x, 73x, 7Ax, 7Bx\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO 41W2142 R N\n12 Hard disk drive sub card, 1.8-inch\nv 1702-CTO, 74x, 94x, 76x, 95x, 96x, 98x, 99x, C4x, C5x,\nC6x, C7x, 97x, 75x, 77x, 78x, 73x, 7Ax, 7Bx\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO, B4x, B5x, A5x, A4x 92P6238 R N\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n147 Parts list\nNo. FRU\n12 13\nFRU no.\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nHard disk drive sub card, 2.5-inch\n92P6237\nv 1702-CTO, 3Jx, 3Lx, 3Qx, 49x, 24x, 4Ex, 37x, 5Nx, 4Fx,\n3Hx, 3Sx, 68x, 6Cx, 5Fx, 3Dx, 3Ex, 3Cx, 55x, 4Gx, 58x,\n5Px, 4Kx, 4Ax, 3Gx, 3Mx, 3Nx, 5Ex, 5Cx, 3Ax, 5Kx,\n5Jx, 83x, 84x, 85x, 36x, 3Fx, 5Mx, 86x, 38x, 35x, 46x,\n47x, 4Bx, 5Gx, 63x, 6Bx, 45x, 64x, 65x, 4Hx, 3Rx, 3Kx,\n5Qx, 5Rx, 87x, 39x, 5Dx, 53x, 57x, 23x, 25x, 5Sx, 5Tx,\n4Lx, 26x\nv 1703-CTO, 37x, 3Jx, 3Qx\nv 1704-CTO, 3Qx, 5Bx, 3Tx, 4Dx, 63x, 69x, 66x, 4Jx, 3Dx,\n4Cx, 56x, 5Lx, 6Ax\nv 1705-CTO, 3Qx, 24x, 59x, 48x, 54x, 4Cx, 5Ax, 5Hx,\n3Ux, 3Gx, 85x, 3Px, 5Ex, 5Dx, 53x\nv 2507-CTO, 3Bx\nv 2508-CTO, 3Bx\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx, 7Ax, 7Fx, 7Gx, 5Cx, 5Px, 63x,\n64x, 8Ax, 59x, 5Ax, 77x, 58x, 69x, 6Bx, 85x, 86x, 8Gx,\n95x, 6Dx, 7Bx, 5Bx, 5Fx, 5Gx, 89x, 87x, 56x, 8Ex, 8Dx,\n4Bx, 4Cx, 46x, 49x, 4Ax, 26x, 25x, 5Hx, 55x, 78x, 7Cx,\n8Bx, 7Ex, 75x, 76x, 93x, 94x, 5Lx, 48x, 8Fx, 8Hx, 8Jx,\n88x, 84x, 44x, 47x, 33x, 34x, 8Kx, 4Dx, 4Ex, 27x, 28x\nv 1707-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx\nv 1708-CTO, 5Kx, 86x, 5Mx, 7Dx, 95x, 8Cx\nv 1709-CTO, 96x, 97x, 24x, 86x, 7Hx, 47x, 79x, 83x, 59x,\n7Dx, 8Cx, 5Lx, 5Nx, 5Ax, 5Jx, 5Ex, 45x, 89x, 84x, 85x\nv 2509-CTO, 57x\nv 2510-CTO, 57x\nv 7666-All\nv 7667-All\nv 7668-All\nv 7669-All\nv 7670-All\nv 7671-All\nv 7673-All
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: \nv 7674-All\nv 7675-All\nv 7676-All\nv 7678-All\nv 7679-All R N\nWWAN aux cable for Sierra Wireless EV-DO Wireless\nWAN Mini PCI Express Adapter R **\n93P4388\nNote: The WWAN aux cable for Sierra Wireless EV-DO Wireless WAN Mini PCI\nExpress Adapter \u000113\u0002 is included in FRU 93P4388 together with the WAN\nantenna cable set for Sierra Wireless EV-DO Wireless WAN Mini PCI\nExpress Adapter (SPWG) \u00015\u0002 listed in âLCD FRUsâ on page 196.\n(continued)\n148\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n14 WWAN card\nSierra Wireless EV-DO Wireless WAN Mini PCI\nExpress Adapter\nv 1702-CTO, F6x\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO, G3x, FAx\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, E3x, H5x\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO\nv 1709-CTO, H3x, H6x, HAx\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO 41W1177 R **\nSierra Wireless MC8755 PCI Express MiniCard\nv 1702-CTO, F3x\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO, F4x, F5x, F8x\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, P6x\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO, E4x, H7x, HBx, HEx\nv 1709-CTO\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO 42T0835 R N\nIntegrated Cingular HSDPA 3G Wireless Broadband\nNetwork Adapter\nv 1702-CTO, F7x\nv 1703-CTO\nv 1704-CTO\nv 1705-CTO\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO\nv 1709-CTO\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO 42T0804 R N\nSierra Wireless EV-DO Wireless WAN Mini PCI\nExpress Adapter\nv 1706-CTO, E5x, HCx\nv 1707-CTO\nv 1708-CTO\nv 1709-CTO, HDx\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO 42T0863 R N\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n149 Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n14 WWAN card\nVerizon (MC5725)\nv 7666-CTO, 47x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO, 45x\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO,\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, 55x, 59x\nv 7676-CTO, 56x\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, K2x\nv 7676-CTO 42T0929 R **\nVodafone HSDPA (MC8775)\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 44x, 49x, 4Ax\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 53x, A3x, A4x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO, 5Cx\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CT
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: O\nv 7673-CTO, K1x, K2x, K3x, K4x\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO, K1x, K2x, K3x 42T0931 R **\nCingular (MC8775)\nv 7666-CTO, 43x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO 42T0933 R **\n(continued)\n150\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n14 WWAN card\nSierra Wireless HSDPA (MC8775)\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO 42T0901 R **\nTelus (MC5725)\nv 7666-CTO\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO\nv 7669-CTO, 4Bx\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 5Dx\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO, 57x, 5Ex\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO 42T0897 R **\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n151 Parts list\nNo. FRU\n14 WWAN card\nKDDI Wireless WAN Modem Adapter\nv 7666-CTO, 93x, 94x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 93x, 94x\nv 7669-CTO\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7671-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 5Ax, 5Bx\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, 5Ax, 5Bx\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO\nv 7676-CTO\n15\nIntel Turbo Memory Card 1GB\nv 7666-CTO, A4x, A5x, A6x\nv 7667-CTO\nv 7668-CTO, 57x, 58x, A3x, B3x\nv 7669-CTO, 3Gx\nv 7670-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, 85x, 86x, 97x, 98x, 99x, 9Ax, 9Bx, 9Cx, 9Ex\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, 7Kx, 8Rx, 8Sx, 93x, 94x, 95x, 96x\nv 7676-CTO\nv 7678-CTO\nv 7679-CTO\nv 7673-CTO, H5x, H6x, HFx, J3x, J5x, J6x, J8x, J9x, JAx\nv 7674-CTO\nv 7675-CTO, H8x, J2x, J3x\nv 7676-CTO\n(continued)\n152\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nFRU no. RoHS\nID CRU\nID\n42T0909 R **\n42T0907 R ** Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no.\n16 Intel PRO Wireless 3945ABG PCI Express Mini Card\nUS/CAN/LA/ANZ/AP/India/Hong Kong\n42T0853\nS.A.R./Taiwan\nv 1702-CTO, 3Jx, 3Qx, 49x, 24x, 4Ex, 37x, 5Nx, 4Fx,\n3Hx, 3Sx, 68x, 6Cx, 3Dx, 3Ex, 3Cx, 76x, 55x, 58x,\n5Px, 4Kx, 4Ax, 3Gx, 3Mx, 3Nx, 5Ex, 5Cx, 5Kx, 5Jx,\n95x, 96x, 98x, 99x, C4x, C5x, C6x, C7x, 83x, 84x,\n85x, 36x, 3Fx, 5Mx, 8
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: 6x, 38x, 35x, 46x, 47x, 4Bx,\n5Gx, 63x, 6Bx, 45x, 64x, 65x, 4Hx, 3Rx, 3Kx, 75x,\n77x, 78x, 5Qx, 5Rx, 87x, 39x, 5Dx, 53x, 57x, 23x,\n25x, 73x, 7Ax, 5Sx, 5Tx, 7Bx, 4Lx, 26x for xxU,\nxxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV,\nxxP\nv 1703-CTO, 37x, 3Jx, 3Qx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS,\nxxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1704-CTO, 3Qx, 5Bx, 3Tx, 4Dx, 63x, 4Jx, 3Dx for\nxxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH,\nxxV, xxP\nv 1705-CTO, 3Qx, 24x, 59x, 48x, 54x, 4Cx, 5Ax, 3Px\nfor xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB,\nxxH, xxV, xxP\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx, 7Ax, 7Fx, 7Gx, 5Cx, 5Px,\n59x, 5Ax, 77x, 58x, 85x, 86x, 95x, 6Dx, 7Bx, 5Bx,\n5Fx, 5Gx, 89x, 87x, 8Ex, 8Dx, 5Hx, 55x, 78x, 7Cx,\n8Bx, 7Ex, 75x, 76x, 93x, 94x, 5Lx, 48x, 8Fx, 8Hx,\n8Jx, 88x, 84x, 44x, 47x, 33x, 34x, 8Kx, 4Dx, 4Ex,\n27x, 28x for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA,\nxxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1707-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY,\nxxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1708-CTO, 5Kx, 86x, 5Mx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS,\nxxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1709-CTO, 24x, 86x, 7Hx, 47x, 79x, 83x, 59x, 7Dx,\n5Jx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ,\nxxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nR **\n(continued)\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n153 Parts list\nNo. FRU\n16 Intel PRO Wireless 3945ABG PCI Express Mini Card\nFRU no.\nUS/CAN/LA/ANZ/AP/India/Hong Kong\n42T0853\nS.A.R./Taiwan\nv 1702-CTO, HFx, D5x, D6x, 3Wx, D8x, E7x, E8x,\nHCx, F3x, E3x, F6x, 7Cx, H7x, H8x, H9x, H5x,\nH6x, ELx, HGx, K4x, DCx, K5x, ENx, F9x, K6x,\nEPx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ,\nxxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1703-CTO, D6x, 3Wx, D8x, E7x for xxU, xxF, xxL,\nxxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1704-CTO, 3Yx, EBx, 7Mx, J8x, EKx, F8x, EMx,\nFAx for, xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ,\nxxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1705-CTO, Dbx, Ejx, B6x, B7x, HHx, 7Kx, 7Lx,\nK7x, EKx, 7Nx, K9x for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY,\nxxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 2507-CTO for xxU, x
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: xF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA,\nxxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 2508-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA,\nxxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1706-CTO, 5Yx, B5x, C9x, CEx, B8x, AUx, 5Vx,\nE3x, C5x, 5Qx, 5Rx, C6x, C7x, E5x, CHx, QFx,\nQDx, P4x, QAx, KKx, PFx, Q5x, KHx, P9x, QBx,\nPDx, BAx, Q9x, CJx, QEx, P5x, P6x for xxU, xxF,\nxxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1707-CTO, B5x, C9x, B8x, 5Vx for xxU, xxF, xxL,\nxxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1708-CTO, B7x, PBx, PCx, Q8x, Q9x, P8x, HBx,\nAWx, HEx, PHx, KMx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY,\nxxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 1709-CTO, H6x, C6x, ASx, 5Wx, 5Xx, HDx, KHx,\nQ4x, HAx, KJx, PEx, QCx, PAx, PGx, QGx, KLx\nfor xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB,\nxxH, xxV, xxP\nv 2509-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA,\nxxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\nv 2510-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA,\nxxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV, xxP\n(continued)\n(continued)\n154\nThinkPad Â® X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nR ** Parts list\nNo. FRU\nFRU no.\n16 Intel PRO Wireless 3945ABG PCI Express Mini Card\nUS/CAN/LA/ANZ/AP/India/Hong Kong\n42T0853\nS.A.R./Taiwan\nv 7666-CTO, 63x, 26x, 86x, 47x, 7Mx, 74x, 75x, 7Px,\n77x, 78x, 24x, 7Gx, 38x, 8Ex, 73x, 76x, 64x, 83x,\n43x, 8Ax, 8Bx, 8Cx, 8Dx, 3Cx, 3Dx, 93x, 94x for\nxxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB,\nxxH, xxV\nv 7667-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM,\nxxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7668-CTO, 24x, 7Gx, 38x, 65x, 44x, 25x, 93x, 94x\nfor xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ,\nxxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7669-CTO, 7Fx, 37x, 56x, 45x, 7Dx, 88x, 85x, 27x,\n49x, 29x, 4Ax for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY,\nxxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7670-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM,\nxxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7671-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM,\nxxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7673-CTO, 4Hx, 53x, 54x, 7Gx, 24x, 4Dx, 4Lx, 3Fx,\n3Gx, 4Gx, 3Hx, 7Ex, 3Kx, 5Ax, 5Bx, 5Dx, 4Tx for\nxxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB,\nxxH, xxV\nv 7674-CTO, 65x, 74x for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS,\nxx
>Sep 28 18:39:22 odvarok org.freedesktop.Tracker1.Miner.Extract[6516]: Y, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7675-CTO, 26x, 34x, 37x, 3Ax, 3Dx, 27x, 3Jx, 48x,\n29x, 55x, 3Mx, 4Kx, 59x, 34x, 3Ax, 27x, 3Jx, 48x,\n29x, 55x, 3Mx, 4Kx, 59x, 5Ax, 5Bx for xxU, xxF,\nxxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7676-CTO, 56x, 3HX, 57x, 58x, 4Px, 5Ex for xxU,\nxxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH,\nxxV\nv 7678-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM,\nxxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7679-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM,\nxxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7673-CTO, HJx, JDx, JGx for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP,\nxxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7674-CTO, J2x for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY,\nxxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7675-CTO, HBx, JCx, J9x for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP,\nxxS, xxY, xxM, xxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nv 7676-CTO for xxU, xxF, xxL, xxP, xxS, xxY, xxM,\nxxA, xxQ, xxB, xxH, xxV\nRoHS\nID CRU\nID\nR **\n(continued)\nThinkPad X60, X60s, X61, and X61s\n155 Parts list\nNo. FRU\n16 Intel PRO Wireless 3945ABG PCI Express Mini Card\nFRU no.\nEMEA\n42T0855\nv 1702-CTO, 3Jx, 3Qx, 4Ex, 37x, 55x, 5Px for xxG\nv 1703-CTO, 37x, 3Jx, 3Qx for xxG\nv 1704-CTO, 4Cx, 56x, 5Lx, 6Ax for xxG\nv 1705-CTO, 4Cx, 5Hx for xxG\nv 2507-CTO\nv 2508-CTO\nv 2533-CTO\nv 1706-CTO, 8Gx for xxG\nv 1707-CTO, 5Dx, 5Kx for xxG\nv 1708-CTO, 7Dx, 95x, 8Cx for xxG\nv 1709-CTO for xxG\nv 2509-CTO\nv 2510-CTO\nv 1702-CTO, D6x, 3Wx, D8x, E7x, E8x, HCx, ELx,\nHGx, K4x, DCx, K5x, ENx, F9x, K6x, EPx for xxG\nv 1703-CTO, D6x, 3Wx, D8x, E7x for xxG\nv 1704-CTO, EAx, ECx, EFx, EGx, F4x, 7Mx, J8x,\nEKx, F8x, EMx, FAx for xxG\nv 1705-CTO, HHx, 7Kx, 7Lx, K7x, EKx, 7Nx, K9x\nfor xxG\nv 2507-CTO for xxG\nv 2508-CTO for xxG\nv 1706-CTO, B5x, C9x, AXx, B8x, 5Vx, E5x, CHx,\nQFx, QDx, P4x, QAx, KKx, PFx, Q5x, KHx, P9x,\nQBx, PDx, BAx, Q9x, CJx, QEx, P5x, P6x for xxG\nv 1707-CTO, B5x, C9x, B8x, 5Vx for xxG\nv 1708-CTO, E4x, PBx, PCx, Q8x, Q9x, P8x, HBx,\nAWx, HEx, PHx, KMx for xxG\nv 1709-CTO, HDx, KHx, Q4x, HAx, KJx, PEx, QCx,\nPax, PGx, QGx, KLx for xxG\nv 2509-CTO for xxG\nv 2510-CTO for xxG\nv 7666-CTO, 63x, 26x, 86x, 47x, 7

Actions: View

Attachments on bug 1148570: 943181 | 964593 | 964594 | 964595 | 964680