Along with some other crazy seniors, I'm working through the greek of the Beatitudes for our exegesis class.  I don't understand.  The ones in Matthew are so very different than the ones in Luke.  In Luke, the picture is of the poor, the hungry, the thirsty, the mourners.  These are obviously people who are empty, but are blessed by being a part of the kingdom.  The picture in Matthew seems different.  Here we have the poor in spirit and those who hunger and thirst for righteousness.  Here, the same conditions that are in Luke seem more spiritualized.  Someone who is poor is blessed by God, but someone who is poor in spirit is another thing.  If the person who is poor of spirit is being blessed by God, then we're talking about conversion:  someone spiritually depraved is finding God.

Both are beautiful pictures.... but different ones. 

And I feel it only fair to assume all of the beatitudes are from the same perspective.  Therefore, if one is positive, the others should be too.  At least that's whaat makes sense to me.  So, I can understand why if I thirst for righteousness I am blessed, but why am I blessed if I mourn?  For mourning is obviously not a blessed place to be, but thirsting for righteousness is.  Some (ie Dallas Willard) have suggested that all are negative places to be (spiritually depraved, mourning, hungry, etc) but then where do peacemakers fit in?  The gospel obviously acknowledges that peacemaking is beneficial.

I don't understand. 

True Story:

I walked out of the coffeeshop last night, walked about 100 yards to where Kenyon stood outside of the library and in the two minutes that I was outside helping him saw some 1x3s, I was bitten by a number of misquitos.

In those two minutes, I acquired no less than FIVE mondo misquito bites.  Five.  I have several other little itchy spots that may be bites, but at least five are chomps from some very invasive misquitos.  And I'm ticked.

Two minutes.

Some guy tried to sell me fake magazine subscriptions last night.  I am annoyed.  He claimed he was going to be on the radio and that he needed to raise money for going to Spain. 

How the two are connected, I am not sure.  Most likely they are not.

He had printed up for himself a flyer... and had laminated it.  I did not have the heart to tell him that magazine corporations would not spend money on laminating their flyers (fliers? I'm not sure how to spell that).  Goodness.  He was so proud of himself.  The pictures he had most likely pulled off the web to represent his magazine offerings were grainey and outdated.  He neglected to check the dates printed on the icons he copied and pasted.

I didn't attack him or even accuse him of faking, just told him up front that I couldn't give him money, and that I didn't want to waste his time.  He very politely took his leave, after breifly inquiring about my neighbors.

I haven't had someone lie to my face like that in some time.  An entirely false conversation.  Truly amazing. 

I hope I'm wrong.  I also hope he figures out a more honest way to make money.  He'll probably sleep better.