Thinking about John Waynard Keynes: A man of vision

In “My Dear Li” (correspondence between Werner Heisenberg and his wife, Elizabeth), Werner Heisenberg wrote to his wife on 9/1939,

“. . . Your mother revealed a very deep-seated hatred of England, beyond of all rational thinking, which probably stems from the time of the Great War and has since been barely forgotten. . . . Nothing certain is known yet about my use in the war. Two departments want to have me, but none has definitely claimed me.”

John Maynard Keynes (a man of vision) tried in vain to prevent the chance of Hitler becoming Chancellor in 1932

Reading this, I can not but help thinking about John Maynard Keynes, who tried hard in vain to prevent the chance of Hitler becoming Chancellor in 1932, as predicted in Keynes' writing of Economic Consequence of the Peace, published in 1919, in which he wrote,

In his The Economic Consequence of the Peace (published in 1919), he wrote,

The policy of reducing Germany to servitude for a generation, of degrading the lives of millions of human beings, and of depriving a whole nation of happiness should be abhorrent and detestable, –abhorrent and detestable, even if it were possible, even if it enriched ourselves, even if it did not sow the decay of the whole civilized life of Europe. . . If we aim deliberately at the impoverishment of Central Europe, vengeance, I dare predict, will not limp.”

Keynes on Time cover

Writing in Dec. 1921, Keynes wrote about the Versailles Treaty. “The reparations settlement was not wise, nor in every respect practical. In some respects it was clearly dangerous.”

Keynes resigned from his position as the economic counselor while negotiating Versailles Treaty as his vehement opposition of harsh economic punishment against Germany fell to dead ears. Frances's Clemenceau and America's Wilson didn't understand him. Britain's Lloyd George was sympathetic to his view, but ignored, facing the pressure from re-election as the public wanted the Germans to be punished as much as possible.

There is no argument that the mass of German people turned to Hitler Nazism because of economic hardship, which was partly caused by the burden of the high compensation. The bitter feeling of Elizabeth Heisenberg's mother was not isolated in the pre-war (WWII) Germany. Elizabeth's family are educated intellectuals, very decent people.

The collect guilt of German people is always the topic of interest in my readings. Sometimes I felt their guilt can be forgiven or at least mitigated because of the economic circumstance under which they embraced Hitler, hoping he could bring them out of the economic calamity.

I know little about Keynesian economics; but I know after WWII most of the western world governments set up their economic policy following his mind and views. I got an impression that Keynesian economics is more liberal generally embraced by Democrats. The government bail out for the 2007-2008 financial crisis is Keynesian economics at work.

The conservative right wing (often Republican) economists attack Keynesian economics unfairly

Bloomsbury Group: Russell sitting in the center

A 5/7/2013 NY Times article (Keynes' biggest mistake) criticizes Keynes' lack of long term view. The Harvard historian Niall Ferguson blamed this to Keynes' homosexuality. Ferguson claimed that, those without children, as is the case with most gay men and women, would have less of a long-term view of the world.

Ferguson has since apologized for his off-the-cuff derogatory comment, but his opinion of Keynes having a short term view stood. By the way many conservative Republican economists often attack Keynesian economics by attacking his homosexuality, this is misguided and uncalled for.

Nobody (not George Lloyd, not Clemenceau, not Wilson, or their economic advisers) had a better long term view than Keynes when he alone saw the inevitable consequence of the high compensation of Germany.

John Keynes (right)

Rarely do I read about economists, John Maynard Keynes is the exception as he is one of the Bloomsbury Group, about which I read extensively for a while many years ago. T.S. Eliot, Bertrand Russell, Virginia Woolf, D.H. Lawrence, W.B. Yeats and Lytton Strachey are all the frequent visitors to Lady Ottoline Morrell's houses, where the Bloomsbury Group met.

A 1968 biography of Lytton Strachey revealed that Strachey was one of Keynes' partners/lovers.

On our London visit a few years ago, we came across one of the two houses of Lady Ottoline Morrell where John Maynard Keynes frequented.

http://doctorjytsai.blogspot.com/2014/11/lady-ottoline-morrell-literary-hostess.html

Take no thought for the morrow

Reading the Scripture is at times not as easy as one thinks; this is why we need good preachers or theologians. In Matthew 6: 34, we read, (This is part of Sermon on the Mount.)

Sermon on the Mount by Carl Block 1877

34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

The New Testament is all about the stories Jesus told and the stories told about Jesus. The number of people fortunate enough to hear Jesus' teaching, telling his parables, is probably in the thousands only at most. Jesus never wrote any book. We have no records that any hearers asked the question why there is no need to think about tomorrow; Jesus never elaborated.

How could the rabbi of Nazareth preached us not to think about tomorrow? It doesn’t make sense.  Isn't it true what we do today is hopefully for a better tomorrow? Some thought this is another way to express Carpe Diem. But my interpretation is that here Jesus acts as a psychiatrist and more.

We may not have control of what’s in store tomorrow, therefore, we should live the fullest for today, making the best of it, and not to worry about tomorrow, as Jesus said, tomorrow will take care of itself or work things out itself. If one reads Matthew 6: 25-34, Jesus clearly said the heavenly Father will be in hand to help one whatever it may come tomorrow.

“Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof”, it seems puzzling why there is “evil” for today; I think it is the issue of translation from Hebrew; it probably means the “trouble” or “dread” in the daily life.  Most people in history, including people in Jesus’ time, had a rough life.

Six years before Jesus was born there was a Palestine-wide rebellion and guerrilla war that was especially fierce in Galilee.  The uprising headquarter was four miles from Nazareth.  The Roman governor of Syria called the Roman troops to quell the rebellion, and the 2,000 insurgent troops were crucified.  It was said that the boy Jesus might have seen the crosses.

I, like Sally (Charlie Brown's sister), often feel sorry for the people while reading the history, although may be with somewhat different reason.  There were more dark ages than enlightened ones in history.  It was hard to get through a day for ordinary people; whether struggling to feed the mouths of the family or worrying about the sons taken away to fight the endless wars.

Jesus must have felt there were enough troubles, dreads and miseries to deal with for the day; he wanted his hearers/followers not to worry about tomorrow, not even to think about it.  Tomorrow will be anxious for itself.  We read the same message from Peter 5:7, “Casting all your anxiety upon him, for he careth for you”

So do not carry anxiety or worry, casting it upon someone who loves you, cares about you.

Holy men are only human

I read in Vanity Fair when the Trumps had an audience with Pope Francis who asked Melania if she fed Trump potica, a Slovenian nut bread—possibly referring to Trump's widening girth.

I like to see a holy man being human. Reading New Testaments one will find the human nature of Jesus on many occasions. Matthew 27, 46 and Mark 15, 34 say exactly the same thing, describing Jesus, on the cross, crying out loud that he was being forgotten and forsaken by God.

Matthew 27

45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour

46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, lama sabach thani? That is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Mark 15

33 And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.

34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eloi, Eloi, lama sabach thani? Which is, being interpreted, My God, my god, why hast thou forsaken me?

This post is simply to show Jesus suffering a betrayal by a friend, public humiliation (by the Roman soldiers) and excruciating physical pain inevitably thinking where is God when he needs him the most. This is a perfectly normal human nature.

I am not ready to discuss “Where was God at Auschwitz?” yet.

How can a rational medicine man accept the miracles performed by Jesus: a philosophical approach

Being a history buff and biography or autobiography reader, I always try to find out the “belief” of the scientists while reading their work and their life.  Stories of the “miracles” performed by Jesus obviously turn away many people in science and medicine and those so-called the educated or intellectuals.

Miracle is defined as things happen that defy the natural laws, which are themselves expressions of God’s will, so theoretically there cannot be any miracle; even God needs to abide His own laws.

I am a medicine man, a true believer in science.  Medicine is an exact science; life process is a bunch of chemical reactions that follow physical laws—an ultimate ‘truth’ that no one can claim its ownership except God Almighty.  I have never seen any miracle in my entire medical career, which has been long.  I did see some patients with positive attitude fared much better than medically expected, nevertheless, there were not miracles.

Then how can I accept Jesus and accept the concept of the existence of God, which is the essence of Christian belief as a medicine man?  This is why I read Lin Yutang’s From Pagan to Christen, Francis Collins’ The Language of God, Harvey Cox’s When Jesus Came to Harvard and read about C.S. Lewis.  This is my way of getting reconciliation and reassurance.

When Harvey Cox was giving a class (“Jesus and the moral life”) at Harvard, the enrollment went over 1,000 and the school had to limit the class size, according to a 5/22/1988 NY Times article.  He said in his first years of teaching he never mentioned the miracle stories that were performed by Jesus and recorded in the gospels, as he was afraid to mention it in a venerable institution that takes pride in its first-rate scientific research.  When students asked him about this omission, he would just say one cannot cover everything.  He knew he just didn’t know how to talk about it.

He began to talk about “miracle” after Dr. Herbert Benson (a cardiologist, founder of Mind/Body Medical Institute at MGH) approached him and after NIH established National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health Department, although he emphasize Jesus was not practicing alternative or complementary medicine.

John Polkinghorne

Harvey Cox said the people most likely went to Jesus for his healing (“miracles”), not for his teaching or elucidation of Hebrew Torah.  He discussed a specific case described in Mark 5:24-42, saying Jesus teaching and healing is integrated into one thing. Nevertheless I found no satisfactory answer in his book.  I turned to Dr. Francis Collins, who quoted John Polkinghorne (Cambridge U theoretical physicist, theologian and an ordained Anglican priest) and C.S. Lewis, from whom, I go along with their explanations.

John Polkinghorne said in his Science and Theology, “miracles are not to be interpreted as divine acts against the laws of nature, but as more profound revelations of the character of the divine relationship to creation. To be credible, miracles must convey a deeper understanding than could have been obtained without them.”

C.S. Lewis

C.S. Lewis told us not to perceive miracle in line of political or social history that may be beyond us to comprehend. He wrote in his Miracle: A Preliminary Study, “God does not shake miracles into nature at random as if from pepper-caster. They come on great occasions: they are found at the great ganglions of history—not of political or social history, but of that spiritual history which cannot be fully known by men. If your own life does not happen to be near one of those great ganglions, how should you expect to see one?”

Let me digress to mention the original shield/motto of Harvard University VERITAS (Latin for Truth). The top two books on the shield are face up (open) whereas the bottom book is face down, suggesting certain knowledge is beyond our reach, such as understanding miracles.

One can be a Christian on account of one being religious, pious and having faith, although studying Bible is still essential. Another path is through reading, thinking/meditating, seeking truth or even philosophical. C.S. Lewis said of his “from pagan to Christian”,

“I gave up Christianity at about 14, came back to it when getting on for 30. Not an emotional conversion; almost purely philosophical. I didn't want to, I'm not inn the least the religious type, I want to be let alone, to feel I'm my own master, but since the facts seem to be just the opposite, I had to give in.”

In another post, I have mentioned, using words of Will Durant, that Jesus did not claim omniscience; he could be surprised by events, that he refused to believe in his unusual powers. He was reluctant to attempt them, forbade his followers to advertise them. Christ himself attributed his cures to the “faith” of those whom he healed; but this was not so obvious in every case.

The role Pontius Pilate played in the trial of Jesus

Of the many paintings of “Ecce homo” (behold the man or here is the man), the one I like most is by Antonio Ciseri (a Swiss-Italian from Tuscany), painted in 1871.

Ecce homo by Antonio Ciseri

Is the collect guilt of Jewish people unfairly attributed?

It portrays Pontius Pilate (in white garment with stunning light effect) presenting the scourged Jesus Christ and Barabbas to the Jewish crowds below the balcony of the palace. The scene depicted vividly in the four gospels comes into view. The crowd is without individuality telling us we do not know who these people are individually. The indistinct image of the crowds may hint the Jewish people collectively may not be as guilty as the gospels say (post about this will come later).

We do not see the face of Pontius Pilate, and that doesn't surprise me as I have difficulty knowing who this Roman governor really is or his true character. Pontius Pilate's wife is also there as she did play a minor, yet not insignificant role in this affair.

This painting depicts the scene described in John 18, that Pilate offered to release Jesus according to the Jewish custom that one prisoner is released during Passover, but the crowds shouted not to release Jesus.

John 18 (Jesus condemned to die; Barabbas released)

38. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again onto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all.

39. But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the Passover; will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of Jews?

40. Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. . . .

Pontius Pilate washes hands

The hesitating Pilate tried to wash off his responsibility

There is no argument that Pilate is the one condemned and sent Jesus to Roman soldiers for crucifixion. But why Pilate and his wife were canonized by the Christian Coptic Orthodox Church as the most repentant of saints?

Pontius Pilate may not be a good guy with admirable character. But he seems to be just a wrong person to be in a wrong position at a wrong time. Various gospels clearly show his hesitation to condemn Jesus.

We read in Luke 23 that the Pilate repeatedly (3 times) says “what evil hath he done? I have found him no cause of death in him; I will therefore chastise him and let him go.”

Of course we know that the Pilate eventually gave in to the high priests, the Jewish religious hierarchy and the frenzy Passover crowd and condemned Jesus. When the Pilate knew he no longer could prevail, Matthew 27 tells us, “he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person; see ye to it.”

The true character of the complex Pontius Pilate

He clearly knew what he was doing was wrong; but this petulant, self-serving Roman official was too eager to please the Romans and meet their demand. (As far as I can tell, Jesus' crucifixion was not recorded in the Roman Annual, to them crucify Jesus is just get rid of one of the many that might make a stir against the state.)

The following is what Will Durant said of Pontius Pilate, who was later called to Rome and lost his job (and may be his life, too), seems to be harsher than I thought.

“. . . whether suicide or execution, his death is hold to have been violent. . according to a contemporary, the Roman official was notoriously detested on account of his corruption, his acts of insolence, his rapine, his habit of insulting people, his cruelty, his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, his never-ending gratuitous, and most grievous inhumanity.”

When Jesus came to Harvard

Jesus' response in his trial

Harvey Cox (author of When Jesus Came to Harvard) gave a class of Jesus and the Moral Life at Harvard. He once had a re-enactment of the trial of Jesus. He invited Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz as a defense counsel; Allen Callahan (a Divinity School faculty) as the prosecuting attorney and he himself as Pontius Pilate, Students and spectators the Jewish crowds.

The history tells us that if the accused readily admitted his guilt, the heroic effort of a superb defense counsel will be an exercise in futile. When asked whether he is King of Jews by Pilate or high priest, Jesus' response sounded ambiguous, but it was actually affirmative.

Luke 23,

3. And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of Jews? And he answered him and said, Thou sayest it.

4. Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man.

Matthew 26

63. . . thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

64. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: . . .

65. Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy.

Mark 14

61 . . . Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

62. And Jesus said, I am [or I am he] and ye shall see the Son of the man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Pilate Stone

The Pilate Stone: The authentic historicity of Pontius Pilate

In addition to the four canonical gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, Pontius Pilate was mentioned by the credible historians, almost his contemporary, the likes of Tacitus, Philo and Josephus. “Killing Jesus” by Bill O'Reilly is not included. The discovery of the Pilate Stone in 1961 lends further credibility to what we have known through the ages.

The Pilate Stone is now displayed in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. Its inscription says, translated from Latin,

To the Divine Augusti [this] Tiberieum

...Pontius Pilate

...prefect of Judea

...has dedicated [this] 

Scene of Garden of Gethsemane: In my Father's house are many mansions

While writing “Who're guilty of killing Jesus?”, I was reading the scene in the Garden of Gethsemane (where Jesus was arrested), I came across Elvis Presley's “In My Father's House”. We tend to forget this King of the Rock and Roll is also a very good gospel music singer.

As we know Jesus went to Jerusalem and had a Passover supper at a friend's home. Knowing the arrest was imminent, His apostles hoped Jesus to free himself by his miraculous powers. It is our understanding that Jesus perhaps hoped that His death would be received by God as a sacrificial atonement for the sins of His people. Feast of Passover involves offering sacrifice in the Temple.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeihHdD3e38

In my father's house are many mansions
If it were not true he would have told me so
He has gone away to live in that bright city
He's preparing me a mansion there I know.

Jesus died upon the cross to bear my sorrow

Freely died that soul like you might have new life

But I know that soon there'll come a bright tomorrow

When the world will all be free from sin and strife

In my Father's house are many mansions

If you're true then to this land you'll surely go.

The following is from Will Durant's The Story of Civilization, Caesar and Christ,

In accord with Jewish ritual Jesus blessed the wine that he gave the apostles to drink, and then they sang together the Jewish ritual song Hallel. He told them, says John, that he would be with them “only a little longer. . . Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God and believe in me. In my Father's house are many mansions. . . I go to prepare a place for you.”

In my previous post I have mentioned that Churchill quoted John 14:1 in a correspondence to FDR, and didn't even write down the quote, as he was sure FDR always had a Bible at hand. As Edward Murrow said of Churchill, who “mobilizes the English language and sends it into battle.” Some of the languages come from Scripture.

John 14:1

Let let not your heart be troubled” ye believe in God, believe also in me.

In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you onto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

Cairo Conference

After attending the Cairo Conference in Nov. 1943, General Eisenhower took a “vacation trip” to Luxor to visit the Valley of the Kings, the Pyramids, and the great temple of Karnak. Kay Summersby [Ike's war time driver] recalled “a stroll in the Garden of Gethsemane was the high point of the visit.”

My hesitation to say the Scripture is a great literary work, but it is

Lin Yutang

Lin Yutang's father is a Christian minister; in his youth he at times would give a sermon when his father was away. He once said to the congregation that he approached the Bible as a literary work. His father was not pleased as a minister reads the Bible with a pious heart, not with an enlightening mind.

Lin Yutang's father is right, but few can argue that the Scripture is in and of itself a great literary work. A bit over 400 years ago James I convened about 50 most distinguished scholars, many of them may be men of letters, in his days to translate the Bible into English for the Church of England, now known as King James Bible.

After being exposed to the intellectual academic world in Shanghai and Peking, Lin turned away from Christianity, only to return to it in his 50s. The journey of the heart and mind (心路歷程) is told in his book of From Pagan to Christian, which I read earlier this year. I believe there is nothing wrong to study religion with a rigor as we would other scholarly and intellectual subjects.

Let there be light: and there was light

Professor Roy Glauber

Upon hearing the news of Roy Glauber's (Harvard professor) Nobel award (in physics) in October 2005, I wrote an article, in which I said, “Let there be light: and there was light.” I am pleased to note, about 2 months later, on December 8, 2005, when he gave the Nobel Lecture, he also began with something like this: Our good Lord said, “Let it be quantum electrodynamics.” . . . that was the modern translation of the Hebrew. We quote the same Scripture, but he said it in a more poetic, aesthetic, subtle, and dynamic way, no doubt.

He also quoted Shakespeare's way of using 'light' in a splendid way,

“These dark days in Stockholm emphasize the importance of light in our lives. It is equally important in our literature. The word, "light", has vastly many meanings. Shakespeare, in Love's Labours Lost, has one of his cleverer characters make fun of that by speaking the line, ‘Light, seeking light, doth light of light beguile ...’ Loosely translated, that means: Intellect, seeking understanding, easily fools reason. - Or perhaps it's the other way around.”

Bible quotations in Churchill's speeches

Churchill often quoted Bible in his speech. We heard the following in his first speech to the Joint Session of Congress on December 26, 1941, a bit over one year before Madame Chiang Kai-Shek did.

As long as we have faith in our cause and an unconquerable will-power, salvation will not be denied us. In the words of the Psalmist, “He shall not be afraid of evil tidings; his heart is fixed, trusting in the Lord.” [Psalm 112:7 King James Bible] Not all the tidings will be evil.

Churchill was hesitated to quote the Scripture in the speech and mentioned his concern to FDR, who gave his approval; at which time Churchill was living in the White House.

While Cairo Conference was being planned, FDR cabled Churchill that their “meeting place is known to enemy” and suggested moving to Khartoum. Churchill thought Cairo well protected and cabled FDR, “See St. John, Chapter 14, Verses 1 to 4”; the passages are

Let not your heart be troubled:

Ye believe in God,

Believe also in me. . .

I go to prepare a place for you.