The Bible: Transcultural Truth
The Bible, as God’s word, is not confined to a single time or culture. It claims to be the very word of God to us (e.g., 2 Timothy 3:16). Consequently, it can be challenging to read, understand, listen to, and apply in various ways. The Bible being outside of us makes it best suited to speak to us. Even if, for that very reason, it’s difficult for us to receive.
The Bible is, as Christopher Watkin has said, “a book that does not share our contemporary assumptions or blind spots and that was not written for our particular culture. More than that, it is a library of old books, illuminating our blind spots and assaulting our prejudices from a kaleidoscopic range of angles simultaneously.”[1]
So, the very thing that some people balk at in the Bible is one of the very things that shows its worth. We often need a critic of our culture even if we don’t think we do, probably especially if we don’t think we need it. The Bible being outside our culture is best able to speak to our culture. “The Bible will affirm some aspects of all cultures and challenge some aspects of all cultures, and it can find a home in all cultures as it transforms each of them from within.”[2]
If you think the Bible is out of date or not in line with your sensibilities, that might be just what you need. Your date and sensibilities are not the arbiter of truth. You need a measurement other than yourself. You need a compass outside your culture.
The Bible is much more than a map, but a map helps us not because it tells us what we want to hear, but because it aligns with reality. In fact, a map helps us in proportion to how much it matches reality. We need something outside of us to orient us, even if we don’t like it or naturally agree with it. Perhaps especially if we don’t agree with it; that’s when a map or GPS is most helpful, when we’d be most lost without it.
A treasure map like I used to make as a kid, with a squiggly line and an “X” marking the spot, doesn’t do anything to orient us. It’s fully autonomous.[4] Sometimes, however, we don’t like accurate maps. For instance, I don’t always like where the GPS says I am located in reference to my destination, especially if I’m late for an appointment. It’s true. It’s useful. But it’s not always enjoyable.
The Bible is not like a mirror reflecting an image of ourselves, but yet it is a mirror showing us ourselves.[5] But through the mirror of God’s word, we see ourselves not alone, but in reference to God, so we see ourselves as we were meant to be, and not just as we are (James 1:22-25). The Bible, in contrast to science (not that science is bad!), gives us what ought to be, not just what is.
I’m not trying to be unkind in saying this, but if we think about it for more than a moment, I think we should be able to realize that our autonomous reason is not the most reliable truth-discerning tool in the universe. If, however, there’s a God like the Bible describes, He’s smarter, and His judgments are more reliable than mine. If He and I differ on a matter, and He’s God and I’m a creature, it’s reasonable to assume He’s correct and I’m mistaken. If the Bible’s God exists, His reason and ways are more reliable than mine.[3]
God is much more than a cosmic referee, and the Bible is much more than a measuring stick. It is that. It tells the truth (John 17:17). And we need that. But the Bible tells a story. A big, grand, true story. A story that starts before time and ends in eternity, ends in happily ever after. It tells the story of a wise and loving King, a fierce dragon set to destroy, and a rebellious people in great need of rescue.
So, the Bible is not only transcultural truth, it’s a transcultural story. God not only speaks the truth to the world, but He loves and provides salvation to the world (John 3:16). The Bible narrates a cohesive story with Jesus as the central figure who fulfills every promise of Scripture and defeats sin, death, and the dragon of old. This story calls for a response, urging individuals to accept or reject Jesus and His promise of eternal life in a new creation.
Conclusion
The very thing that some people find objectionable in the Bible is one of its greatest strengths. We often need a critic of our culture, even if we don’t realize it, especially if we don’t think we need one. The Bible’s external nature is the quality that makes it both difficult to receive and inestimably valuable.
The Bible, as God’s word, transcends time and culture, challenging and affirming aspects of all cultures. It serves as a compass, aligning with reality and providing a grand, true story that offers a perspective beyond our own.
Notes
[1] Christopher Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory, 333.
[2] Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory, 583.
[3] Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory, 135.
[4] The ancient Greek word autonomos, which means “having one’s own laws” or “self-governing.” It combines autos (“self”) and nomos (“law”).
[5] God is not like us; He is not a mirror in the sky reflecting our reflections back at us. Instead, He is a window that shows us something beyond ourselves. He rebukes our pride and never quite conforms to our idea of how He should be (Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory, 522).
*Photo by Meredith Spencer
Jesus as the Unique: Does the Unique
Considering who we encounter in Jesus’ biographies, it would be amazing if He did not touch blind eyes and make the crippled walk. The miracles just fit in with the central miracle of who Jesus is.[1] The miracles surrounding Jesus are not absurd but natural, given His unique and divine nature.
Jesus “was the Unique, and therefore did the unique.”[2] Jesus’ miracles are a natural continuation, not a contradiction. Miracles are certainly supernatural. There is an explanation for miracles beyond the merely natural.
When people consider the miraculous claims of the New Testament, they must consider the central person from whom they flow. “When the emphasis is on the whom then the how becomes credible.”[3] In Christianity, we don’t talk about miracles based on natural law, but in light of Jesus. And that makes a huge difference. The question is, would miracles happen around someone like Jesus?[4]
When the broken and dispirited disciples, now radiant with a wild hope, whispered to each other, ‘He is arisen,’ they were simply echoing what his whole life had done. Throughout his life he arose. Where we sank, he arose. The resurrection fits in with that fact. There must be an empty tomb where there is such a fullness of Life.[5]
Two things destroy all humans—sin and death. Jesus conquered sin as we see through His utterly unique life. It would then be surprising if He didn’t also conquer death.[6] Of course, Jesus’ biographies say He did in fact defeat death. Jesus’ resurrection, if not His most profound and powerful miracle, is preceded only by His very incarnation.
One of the very reasons I believe in Jesus is because He is the utterly unique. He is heaven touching earth. He is God made visible. He is love incarnate. Miracles flow from Him as naturally as rays of light come from the sun. He the Supernatural, He the Creator of all, does the supernaturaland recreates.
Jesus’ miracles, including His resurrection, are a natural extension of His unique and divine nature. The miracles surrounding Jesus are not absurd but expected, given His identity as God incarnate.
Notes
[1] E. Stanley Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 161.
[2] Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 162.
[3] Ibid., 162.
[4] Ibid., 158. “In the light of natural law miracle seems absurd, but in the light of this person of Jesus it becomes the most natural of things” (Ibid., 159).
[5] Ibid., 162-63.
[6] Ibid.
Jesus: The Embodiment of God
One of the things that makes Jesus utterly unique is His concrete embodiment. Jesus did not just have a dream or an idea; He is not just an ideal. He is God become man; God in flesh, living and loving for all to see.
God is not aloof in an ivory tower. Jesus is down on earth in the muck and grime, being spit upon and crying. Jesus’ life and teachings reveal God’s character and compassion. Creation has always revealed God’s utter glory (Ps. 19:1), but Jesus reveals the abundance of God’s grace (Jn. 1:14-18).
Jesus reveals God to us. Jesus makes God known. People may have questions and confusion about God, but when they see Jesus, those questions are answered. “The distracted and doubting mind turns toward Jesus with relief and says, ‘If God is like that, He is all right.’”[1]
If the best and brightest humans on earth sat down to the task of thinking about the best possible God they would like to see run the universe, they would gradually form a description of Jesus of Nazareth. Who better could humans contrive? And yet the Bible says He really is the God running the universe. “The greatest news that has ever been broken to the human race is the news that God is like Christ.”[2]
Jesus is unique because He is God incarnate, revealing God’s character and compassion through His life and teachings. He answers questions about God and embodies the best possible God that humans could imagine.
Notes
[1] E. Stanley Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 35.
[2] Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 36.
*Photo by Jon Tyson
The Concrete Christ
One of the things that makes Jesus utterly unique is that He didn’t just teach truth; He is the Truth. Jesus was not theoretical. He didn’t just talk about a good idea; He is Himself good; He Himself is goodness.
Jesus was not abstract. He’s the truth embodied in concrete form. That’s what John’s biography of Jesus tells us. God became flesh and lived among humans (Jn. 1:14).[1]
Jesus did not just know the truth or teach the truth. He Himself is the Truth. Jesus doesn’t just know the way; He is the Way. Jesus didn’t just live a good life; He is the Life (Jn. 14:6). Jesus is the concrete embodiment of all that is good.[2] He is God in flesh; Truth lived out for all the world to see. So, Jesus was different than every guru, every moral guide, every leader of mankind.
As E. Stanley Jones astutely pointed out, “Many teachers of the world have tried to explain everything—they changed little or nothing. Jesus explained little and changed everything. Many teachers have tried to diagnose the disease of humanity—Jesus cures it.”[3] Jesus is different. “Many teachers have told us why the patient is suffering and that he should bear with fortitude Jesus tells him to take up his bed and walk. Many philosophers speculate on how evil entered the world—Jesus presents himself as the way by which it shall leave.”[4]
We see the utter contrast between Christ and all others when we consider the crucifix. Compare the meditating guru with Christ on the cross. Christ’s eyes are open, His body torn, and His arms are outstretched to welcome whosoever in. The guru’s eyes are closed, turned inward. His arms and whole body are self-contained. He is not torn. He is unaffected by conflict. Sin and suffering are not solved but dissolved.[5]
Christ suffers in the concrete struggles of the real world. “Jesus does not stand before the blind and the leper and the poor and the sinner and discourse philosophically on why they are in such condition, but lays his hands of sympathy upon them and heals.”[6] Jesus did not teach in the schoolroom manner the necessity of humility—He took up a towel and kneeled down and washed His disciples’ feet.[7]
He didn’t merely argue about justice and how the poor should be treated. He brought justice and changed the world. He did not argue, like Socrates, about the immortality of the soul—He raised the dead.[8]
Jesus didn’t just speculate or talk a good game. He did the thing. He did all the things. It was His eat and drink to do His Father’s will (Jn. 4:34). Jesus did not make a long, eloquent argument that God answers prayer—He prayed, sometimes all night, and in the morning the power of the Lord was present to heal. He did not paint in glowing colors the beauties of friendship and the need for sympathy; He wept at the grave of His friend.[9]
Jesus turned the world upside down. Not because He was a philosopher, ethicist, or charismatic leader. He was all of those things. But He was more. He was the embodiment of all humans were ever meant to be. But He was more than that; He is God in flesh. God in physical form.[10]
Conclusion
Jesus did not love and word and talk but in deed and truth (1 Jn. 3:18). He was concrete. Not hypothetical or abstract. Jesus is the embodiment of truth, goodness, and life, unlike any other being in the universe. While others teach or speculate, Jesus actively demonstrates and brings about.
Notes
[1] He “pitched His tent” or tabernacled. This langauge alludes to God’s dwelling among the Israelites in the tabernacle (Ex. 25:8–9; 33:7).
[2] “Jesus underlies our moral and spiritual universe deeper than the force of gravity underlies our material universe” (E. Stanley Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 134).
[3] Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 187.
[4] Ibid., 187.
[5] Peter Kreeft, Fundamentals of The Faith: Essays in Christian Apologetics (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1988), 93.
[6] Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 205. “He did not speculate on why temptation should be in this world—he met it, and after forty days struggle with it in the wilderness he conquered, and returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee. He did not discourse on the dignity of labor—he worked at a carpenter’s bench and his hands were hard with the toil of making yokes and plows, and this forever makes the toil of the hands honorable” (Ibid., 182).
[7] Ibid., 183.
[8] Ibid., 182.
[9] Ibid., 183.
[10] See Phil. 2:6-7; Col. 2:9; Heb. 1:3; Ezek. 1:26-28; Dan. 7:9; Gen. 18:1-3; 32:30 and also what I have written on the Trinity.
*Photo by Jon Tyson
Jesus: The Utterly Unique
When we read Jesus’ biographies, we realize we are “in the presence of the utterly unique.”[1]
The Utterly Unique
Consider some of the most unique and paradigm-shifting musical artists—whether Nirvana, Elvis, The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, or Taylor Swift—they all left an indelible impact. Whether raw and real emotions, gyrating hips, or unbelievably packed stadiums. Each one of these artists brought a massive shift in music culture. They redefined style and what was possible. They were unique and had an impact.
But they were not utterly unique. They shifted a paradigm; they weren’t something entirely new. Jesus was different. Obviously, he wasn’t a musical artist. But He was different in that He was and is someone entirely different and unexpected. He was “utterly unique.”
Jesus transcends conventional notions. He was and is much, much more than people imagine. Jesus is larger, more profound, and disturbing than anyone could conceive.[2]
People did not have categories to understand who Jesus was. Again, He brought more than a paradigm shift. He was something else altogether and brought a Kingdom not of this world.
Jesus did so many things and had such an impact, but His biographies couldn’t nearly communicate everything. In fact, one of his biographers wrote that there is not room enough in all the world to contain all the books that would need to be written (John 21:25). But there have been some 109,000,000 books about Jesus.
Jesus was not a king; He was the true King. People are accustomed to “the ordinary, shabby, second-rate sort.” People were seeking a builder to construct their desired home, but Jesus was the architect with a new plan entirely. They wanted a singer to sing their familiar song, but Jesus was the composer bringing a whole new beautiful genre. Jesus redefined what it means to lead and love. Jesus gave us a new way to be human.[3]
Because Jesus was so unique, people were all sorts of confused by Him. His biographies repeatedly capture this confusion. There were questions in public (Matt. 11:2–3; Lk. 7:18–20; Jn. 10:24). In fact, when Jesus enters Jerusalem, the entire city is stirred up and asking, “Who is this?” (Matt 21:10).
There are all sorts of reactions to Jesus’s authority. The disciples ask, “Who is this that even the wind and sea obey Him?” (Mk. 4:41; Matt. 8:27; Lk. 8:25). The religious leaders of the time challenge His authority to forgive sins, asking “Who can forgive sins except God?” (Mk. 2:7; Lk. 5:21; 7:49). People marvel at His authority over unclean spirits, asking what this new teaching is (Mk. 1:27; Lk. 4:36).
People were dumbfounded by who Jesus was and questioned His origins. They marveled and questioned: “Is not this the son of the carpenter?” (Matt 13:54–56). “Is not this the carpenter, son of Mary?” (Mk. 6:2–3). “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph?” (Jn. 6:42). “Is not this the son of Joseph?” (Lk. 4:22).
There was debate about Jesus’ identity as the promised Messiah. Some of the people of Jerusalem said, “Can it be that the authorities really know that this is the Messiah?” (Jn. 7:26). The crowd debates whether He is the prophet or the Messiah, questioning whether the Messiah could come from Galilee (Jn. 7:40–43).[4]
Sometimes there were direct questions: “Who are you?” (Jn. 8:25). “Who do you claim to be?” (Jn. 8:53) “Who is this Son of Man?” (Jn. 12:34). The Samaritan woman wondered aloud whether Jesus might be the Messiah (Jn. 4:29). The Pharisees debated whether Jesus was from God, with some claiming He couldn’t be because He broke the Sabbath, while others questioned how a sinful man could perform such signs (Jn. 9:16).
Jesus Himself asked His disciples who people said He was. “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets” (Matt. 16:13–15). Then Jesus asked them directly who they believe He is. “You are the Christ,” is the response (Mk. 8:27–29; Lk. 9:18–20).
The disciples, captivated by Jesus’ character, miracles, and teachings, follow Him, yet they struggle to comprehend who He really is.[5] The confusion about Jesus’ identity in His biographies isn’t accidental—it’s integral to how their honest message is communicated. Everyone was confused by Jesus the Christ. Of course they were. No one on earth had ever been like Him. To truly understand Jesus, we must work backwards from His crucifixion and resurrection.[6] We must see that He is the utterly unique.
When we read Jesus’ biographies, the Gospels about Him, we read with hindsight. We read knowing about the end. His earliest disciples didn’t have that convenience. They were perplexed. “Who is this man?”
Jesus’ biographers were honest about Jesus and His story, the confusing and the fantastic. They could be honest because “Jesus does not need to be protected. He needs to be presented. He protects himself.”[7]
Jesus “was not a hothouse plant that would wither under the touch of criticism, but he was rooted in reality, was the very living expression of our moral and spiritual universe.”[8] Christ comes out of the storms untouched and stronger when really seen. “The only way to kill Christianity is to take it out of life and protect it. The way to make it shine and show its genius is to put it down in life and let it speak directly to life itself. Jesus is his own witness.”[9]
We can be honest too. We can take our trust in Jesus and put it out before the world. We can say, “There He is, break Him if you can.” But the more people try to crush Him, the more He shines.[10]
Conclusion
Jesus is absolutely unprecedented. His biographies capture the confusion and awe He inspired, as people struggled to comprehend His identity as the true King and Messiah. Despite the confusion, Jesus’ biographers present an honest portrayal of His life, confident in His ability to withstand scrutiny and reveal His true nature: the utterly unique.
If you like this post, you might also like “Who is the real Jesus of history?“
Notes
[1] E. Stanley Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 160.
[2] N.T. Wright, Simply Jesus.
[3] Wright, Simply Jesus.
[4] Jesus also asks the Pharisees what they think about the Messiah and whose son he is (Matt 22:41–46) (Matt. 22:41–46; Mk. 12:35–37; Lk. 20:41–44). The Phariees show constanation and can’t answer Jesus’ question.
[5] Mark J. Keown, Discovering the New Testament: An Introduction to Its Background, Theology, and Themes: The Gospels & Acts (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018).
[6] Stefan Alkier and David M. Moffitt, New Testament Basics: A Guide for Reading and Interpreting the Text (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2022), 354.
[7] E. Stanley Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 133.
[8] Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 132.
[9] Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 132.
[10] Jones, The Christ of the Indian Road, 132.
*Photo by Stephanie LeBlanc
Should Christians Legislate Morality?
Christians Should Not Enforce “Vertical” Morality
In our modern, pluralistic, and heavily secularized society, John Warwick Montgomery points out that Christians should be particularly cautious not to jeopardize the spread of the gospel by insensitively imposing Christian morality on unbelievers. We must avoid any recurrence of the Puritan Commonwealth, where people are compelled to act externally as Christians regardless of their true faith. Unfortunately, these efforts often lead to the institutionalization of hypocrisy and a decline in respect for genuine Christian values.[1] It can also lead people to a false assurance of a right relationship with God.
Instead, Montgomery says Christians should recognize that Scripture presents two distinct types of moral commands. We see this in the first and second parts of the Ten Commandments.[2] In the first part, we see duties related to God. These commands cover the relationship between individuals and God (“vertical” morality). In the second part, we see duties related to neighbors. These commands cover the relationship between individuals and other people (“horizontal” morality).
Montgomery believes it is crucial not to impose the first part of the Ten Commandments on unbelievers. These commands are:
- “You must not have any other god but Me.”
- “You must not make for yourself an idol.”
- “You must not misuse the name of the Lord your God.”
- “Remember to observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.”
Even if Christians are in the majority in a country, they should not impose laws related to the above four commandments. “This is because the proper relationship with God can only be established through voluntary, personal decision and commitment.”[3]
1 Corinthians 5:10 is an important verse for us to consider on this subject as well. Paul argues that avoiding all sinful individuals in the world would mean that Christians would need to “leave the world” entirely, which is an impractical and unrealistic standard. Instead, the church’s primary responsibility is not to judge those outside the faith; it is their duty to judge those who claim to be believers but live in sin within the church.
The Quran says there is no compulsion in religion. Jesus demonstrated that principle. He never forced anyone to follow Him. That’s what we see throughout the New Testament. Christians are to be evangelistic and strive to compel people to see the goodness and glory of Jesus. Still, they are never commanded to command people to bow to Jesus.
Christians Should Work Towards A General “Horizontal” Morality
Christians should, however, encourage people towards general “horizontal” morality. Even while the focus in the New Testament is on the morality of Jesus’ followers, we do see warrant for the promotion of social order and general morality. I think of John the Baptizer and the Apostle Paul, for example (Mark 6:14-20; Matt. 14:1-12; Acts 16:35-39; 24:25; 1 Tim. 2:1-4 also see Rom. 13 and 1 Peter 2). But the letters of the New Testament were written to Christians, telling Christians how to live.
Here’s the second part of the Ten Commandments, which are good for every society to lovingly and practically apply.
- “Honor your father and your mother”
- “You shall not murder”
- “You shall not commit adultery”
- “You shall not steal”
- “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor”
- “You shall not covet”
These commands are applied in various ways throughout the Bible. For example, the Bible talks about the importance of railings on the top of buildings to protect people from falling off and getting hurt or killed.
But even here, we don’t want to put our hope or emphasis on “horizontal” morality. Part of the point of the law is to point us to our need for Jesus. It is not an end in itself. So, we must remember that mere morality is not the solution.
The Problem of Secularism and Morality
Britannica says secularism is “a worldview or political principle that separates religion from other realms of human existence, often putting greater emphasis on nonreligious aspects of human life or, more specifically, separating religion from the political realm.”
One of the problems with secularism, though, is that it is not set up very well to give us a societal analysis. How is secularism going to provide us with:
- The Ideal of what’s healthy
- Observation of symptoms
- Diagnosis or analysis of the disease/disorder
- Prognosis or prediction of cure/remedy
- Prescription or instruction for treatment/action for a cure
Secularists believe Christians should not legislate morality. They say that religion has no place in government. Christian beliefs are not allowed, but their core beliefs are allowed. But, as Britannica aludes to, secularism is really an ultimate commitment—a whole world-and-life-view.
Even atheism has the markings of a religion. Atheists have a creed. Theirs is just that there is no god. Atheism addresses the ultimate concerns of life and existence and answers the questions of who people are and what they should value. A committed atheist is even unlikely to marry someone outside of their beliefs. Many atheists even belong to a group and may even attend occasional meetings (see e.g., atheists.org) and have their own literature they read that supports their beliefs.
A merely secular society cannot give a moral framework that transcends individual belief systems. We are left with a “might makes right morality.” It seems to me that secularism leaves us with the column on the left, whereas Christianity gives us the column on the right.
I believe we need and should want Christianity to help our nation work towards a general “horizontal” morality. Our Founding Fathers (along with Alexis de Tocqueville), many of whom were deists and not Christians, agree. Yet, Christians should realize that legislating morality is not the answer.
Legislating Morality is Not the Ultimate Solution
Christians both understand that sinners will sin and that morality is good for the nation. Righteousness exalts the land, as Proverbs says (Prov. 14:34). Yet, Christians are compassionate and humble. We realize that we all stumble in many ways, as the letter of James says, but if we can help people from stumbling, that’s good. But Christians don’t confuse the kingdom of man with the Kingdom of God. Christians know that here we have no lasting city, but we seek the City that is to come (Heb. 13:14).
Legislating morality is not the solution; Jesus is. As C.H. Spurgeon said, “Nothing but the Gospel can sweep away social evil… The Gospel is the great broom with which to cleanse the filthiness of the city; nothing else will avail.”
Paul David Tripp has wisely said that “We should be thankful for the wisdom of God’s law, but we should also be careful not to ask it to do what only grace can accomplish.” It is the Spirit of God that transforms, although it is true that He often works through law. We need our rocky hearts to become flesh through the work of the Spirit.
Conclusion
The question of whether Christians should legislate morality reveals the complexities of faith in a diverse and secular society. While Christians are called to embody and promote a morality rooted in their faith, imposing a “vertical” morality can hinder the spread of the gospel, foster hypocrisy, and promote a misunderstanding of genuine faith. Instead, the focus should be on humbly and lovingly encouraging “horizontal” morality—principles that promote societal well-being and can be embraced by individuals regardless of their faith.
As apprentices of Jesus, Christians are primarily called to lead by example and encourage ethical behavior rooted in love and respect for one another. The emphasis should be on exemplifying Jesus’ teachings and fostering relationships that draw others to the faith, rather than seeking to enforce morality. That’s what Jesus Himself did.
By fostering relationships and demonstrating the transformative love of Jesus, Christians can influence the moral fabric of society without simply relying on legislation. True change comes through the work of the Holy Spirit rather than external mandates. In this way, the Christian community can contribute to a more just and moral society while remaining faithful to the fundamental teachings of their faith.
Notes
[1] John Warwick Montgomery,Theology: Good, Bad, and Mysterious, 122.
[2] Often referred to as the First and Second Tables of the Decalogue. The “First Table” consists of commands 1-4 and has to do with people’s relationship with God (vertical relationship). The “Second Table” consists of commands 5-10 and has to do with people’s relationship with other humans (horizontal relationships). The First Table can be summed up by “love God,” and the Second Table can be summed up by “love others.”
[3] Montgomery, Theology: Good, Bad, and Mysterious, 123.
Revelation Is Not Mainly About When the World Will End
Eschatology is not mainly about predicting the end, but about living rightly in light of the end. Revelation does not reveal when exactly the world will end, but it does reveal what the end will entail and whose side we want to be on. As many commentators note, the visions in Revelation primarily confront us with God’s demands and promises, they are not meant to satisfy our curiosity about minute end-time details.[1] Vern Poythress says it this way: “Revelation renews us, not so much from particular instructions about particular future events, but from showing us God, who will bring to pass all events in his own time and his own way.”[2]
Interestingly, “one in four Americans believe that the world will end within his or her lifetime.”[3] But America should never be the interpretive lens by which we interpret and think about eschatology. As Craig S. Keener has said,
If today’s newspapers are a necessary key to interpreting the book, then no generation until our own could have understood and obeyed the book… They could not have read the book as Scripture profitable for teaching and correction—an approach that does not fit a high view of biblical authority (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16-17).[4]
There have been many specific failed predictions. Actually, “The failure rate for apocalyptic predictions sits right at 100 percent.”[5] Sadly, sometimes what we think is in the Bible “is actually an indicator of our own biases and pre-conceptions.”[6] Hal Lindsey predicted the end in 2000. Many believe Y2K would be the end. Harold Camping said the rapture would happen on September 6th, 1994. His radio “station raised millions to get word of the end on billboards, pamphlets, and the radio.”[7] One newspaper “estimated that worldwide more than $100 million was spent by Family Radio on promotion of the date.”[8] For some who had “pinned their beliefs to this date, the failure of Camping’s apocalypse left them lost, with little trust in God.” They were “disappointed and adrift” and for some “there was financial ruin.”[9] That’s sad and unnecessary.
As we study eschatology, we should do so with the world and the scope of history in mind. Remembering intense tribulation has
been present at various times, with great severity and over large areas. We think especially of the Mohammedan invasion in the seventh and eighth centuries which swept across all of the Near East, up into Europe as far as Italy and Austria, across all of North Africa, across Spain and into France. The Black Plague ravaged Asia and Europe in the fourteenth century. The Thirty Years War devastated much of central Europe in the seventeenth century. There have been two so-called World Wars in our twentieth century. For a time each of those seemed to qualify as great tribulation.[10]
Also, “As for the Antichrist, various ones have been temporarily cast in that role: Attila the Hun in the fifth century; the pope at the time of the Protestant Reformation; Napoleon in the nineteenth century; Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin in the twentieth century.”[11]
As faithful Christians, we should do our best to present ourselves to God as approved, workers who have no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). We should know the “signs of the times”[12] and we must be faithful and ready for the return of Jesus. But, “because the exact time when Christ will return is not known, the church must live with a sense of urgency, realizing that the end of history may be very near. At the same time, however, the church must continue to plan and work for a future on this present earth which may still last a long time.”[13]
Notes
[1] Craig S. Keener, The NIV Application Commentary: Revelation, 32. Since Revelation is both apocalyptic and prophecy we must understand that its primary purpose is to provide words of comfort and challenge to God’s people then and now, rather than precisly predicting the future, especially in great detail. Visions of the future are not an end in themselves but rather a means by which people are to be warned and to comforted (Michael J. Gorman, Reading Revelation Responsibly: Uncivil Worship and Witness: Followingthe Lamb into the New Creation, 41).
[2] Vern Poythress, The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation.
[3] Jessica Tinklenberg Devega, Guesses, Goofs, and Prophetic Failures, 10.
[4] Keener, The NIV Application Commentary: Revelation, 30.
[5] Devega, Guesses, Goofs, and Prophetic Failures, 193.
[6] Ibid., 7.
[7] Ibid., 157.
[8] Ibid., 159.
[9] Ibid., 161.
[10] Loraine Boettner, “A Postmillennial Response” in The Meaning of the Millennium, 204-05.
[11] Boettner, “A Postmillennial Response,” 205.
[12] Wars, famines, earthquakes, tribulation, apostasy, antichrist(s), the proclamation of the gospel to the nations, and the salvation of the fullness of Israel.
[13] Anthony A. Hoekema, “Amillennialism” in The Meaning of the Millennium, 178-79.
Free e-Book
In preparation for Easter, I put together a devotional book. If you don’t have something to go through, I encourage you to check it out.
Here’s the link to the free e-book, I hope you find it helpful: Psalms of Our Suffering Savior
Equality: What it is & where it comes from
In the United States equality is at least expressed to be important. Its importance is seen in people’s views and policies on political participation, education access, views on employment and pay, and disability rights. The Civil Rights Movement has shown that equality is valued by many but not all.
What does equality mean and where did the concept of equality come from? It means the state or quality of being equal. Are there good reasons for believing in equality?
The Assumption of Equality is An Assumption
Naturalism, the belief that no God exists, gives no explanation or reason for equality. People who don’t believe in God or the relevance of God might believe in equality but the belief for them is not based on any foundation. The idea of equality is accepted as true without proof or a solid reason to believe it.
Yuval Noah Harari is a historian, philosopher, and author who received a PhD from the University of Oxford and is a lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. I appreciate his candor in this quote from his book Sapiens:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. According to the science of biology, people were not ‘created’. They have evolved. And they certainly did not evolve to be ‘equal’. The idea of equality is inextricably intertwined with the idea of creation. The Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God. However, if we do not believe in the Christian myths about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all people are ‘equal’? Evolution is based on difference, not on equality. Every person carries a somewhat different genetic code, and is exposed from birth to different environmental influences. This leads to the development of different qualities that carry with them different chances of survival. ‘Created equal’ should therefore be translated into ‘evolved differently.’[1]
So, Harari rewrites the famous line from the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truth to be self-evident, that all men evolved differently, that they are born with certain mutable characteristics, and that among these are life and the pursuit of pleasure.”[2]
For the naturalist, equality isn’t really a thing. It is a dream wish. Perhaps maybe pleasant make-believe.
Christians have a Foundation for Equality
The Bible teaches the equality of all humans by saying all humans are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27). It also explains that we are all equally fallen. That is, we all sin and do wrong things. Lastly, it says that salvation is freely offered to all through Jesus.[3]
In Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World, Tom Holland argues that Christianity has profoundly shaped Western civilization, influencing core values like human rights and equality. It may not be consciously recognized but many Christian beliefs our embedded in society. As Harari has said, we “got the idea of equality from Christianity.”
The belief in human equality and rights, equality of men and women, love for foreigners, and care for the poor, weak, and marginalized are specifically Christian beliefs. History shows us that it was only as Christianity spread that these believes became generally accepted. The ancient Greeks and Romans would have laughed at them.[4]
Christian Equality has a lot of Explanatory Power
“We’ve all got both light and dark inside us. What matters is the part we choose to act on. That’s who we really are.” Sirius Black said this to Harry Potter in one of their last meanings. Humans have complexity as J.K. Rowling is so adept at showing. The Bible agrees. We are complex beings. We are all equally made in the image of God, fallen, and redeemable.
The Bible says we all stumble in many ways (James 3:2). We are all broken. Christians are no less complex. Christians are simultaneously sufferers, strivers, sinners, and saints. So, “The line between good and evil is never simply between ‘us’ and ‘them.’ The line between good and evil runs through each one of us.”[5] Or as Dietrich Bonhoeffer said in prison in Nazi Germany, “Nothing that we despise in the other man is entirely absent from ourselves.”[6]
Therefore, in one sense, Christians should be “culturally wary because they know that evil is real, that everyone is a sinner, that no one is beyond a stumble or a scandal, and that human beings are capable of some devious deceptions and horrific thoughts, words, and acts.”[7] Yet, in another sense, Christians should also be cultural optimists “because they know that no matter how grim and hopeless sin makes the world or how wretched sin makes an individual or a group, it does not define us at our deepest level, and it is an imposter that has no ultimate claim on anyone, whoever they may be and whatever they may have done.”[8]
Christianity gives a realistic and complex picture that explains the paradoxical nature of people.
If we lose Jesus, we lose our bases for Equality
I appreciate how Rebecca McLaughlin says it:
Even if historians agree that our moral building blocks came to us from Christianity it’s tempting to think we can keep the values we cherish while gently removing the claims about Jesus Himself. Like easing out a bottom layer Jenga block, perhaps we can build our moral tower higher without belief in God at all. But extracting Jesus from our moral structure isn’t like gently sliding out a Jenga block. It’s like pulling the pin on a grenade. In the resulting explosion we don’t just lose morality, are sense of meaning blows up too.”[9]
This is the case because if Jesus is not real and right, the next most plausible explanation is that of Harari or Nietzsche.
Conclusion
Secular culture assumes equality but gives no basis for it. Christianity, and specifically Jesus, gives a solid footing for equality. Without Jesus equality is on a shoddy structure and is destined to fall. In other words, if Jesus is make-believe so is equality. On the other hand, if Jesus and His ethic are real, we can’t mix and match to our liking. He is either a liar, lunatic, legend, or the Lord. But if He is anything other than the Lord, His emphasis on equality evaporates with Him.
Notes
[1] Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, 109.
[2] Harari, Sapiens, 110.
[3] See Christopher Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory: How the Bible’s Unfolding Story Makes Sense of Modern Life and Culture, 116.
[4] Rebecca McLaughlin, Is Christmas Unbelievable?
[5] N. T. Wright, Evil and the Justice of God, 38.
[6] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, 10 as quoted in Biblical Critical Theory, 128.
[7] Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory, 168
[8] Ibid.
[9] McLaughlin, Is Christmas Unbelievable?
Photo by Jacek Dylag
What is Christmas about?
Christmas is about the coming of the Christ. But, what does “Christ” mean? And why does it matter?
The word Christ comes from New Testament Greek. The Greek word is Christos (Χριστός), and it translates the Hebrew word Messiah (מָשִׁיחַ). Great. But what does Christ/Messiah mean? The simple answer is that Messiah means “anointed one.” But there is much more behind the meaning of the word Messiah than just “anointed one.” The Old Testament in various ways and in numerous writings promises that one would come and fulfill various promises. So, the expectation for the Messiah cannot be captured if we think it just means “anointed one.” It does mean that, but that is not all it means.
Do you know what a “honey-do-list” is? Have you ever seen one? I currently have a few things on the list: fix the leaky faucet, refinish the chair, and paint my son’s bedroom. A “honey-do-list” is a checklist of expectations. My wife, Leah, gave me a list and expects me to get everything done on the list. I am glad my wife is understanding and gracious, so the list isn’t very long.
As we think about the Jewish expectations for the Promised One, we are looking at a “honey-do-list” of sorts. We see from Scripture and history the “honey-do list” was not as small and understanding as my wife’s. The Jewish people had a huge list. And different people had different lists, but any list would be difficult to check off.
I think of the messianic expectations like water and oil. You don’t expect them to go together. How can the promised one be a king (2 Sam. 7:12-13; 1 Chron. 17:11-14) and a servant (Is. 52:13-53:12)? “One like the son of man” (Dan. 7:13) and also “Everlasting Father” (Is. 9:6)? How could the promised one suffer and die for His people and yet bring an eternal righteous reign? You don’t think of those things as going together. But sometimes things that you wouldn’t think go together, work quite nicely.
You wouldn’t think oil and vinegar make sense together. And you probably wouldn’t initially think it would make sense to have bacon with anything! It’s good enough on its own, right? But if you add spinach, candied pecans, cheese, oil, and vinegar (transformed into salad dressing), the bacon is elevated, and maybe even a little healthier.
If unexpected combinations result in delicious food, how great would the impact be on a spiritual level? A king who is also a servant?! Someone who has all power but is also all good? We don’t often think of these combinations, but if they could happen, it would be amazing.
The expectation presented in the Old Testament for the Promised One seems almost impossibly diverse. How could any one person fulfill the many expectations? How could it make sense for the “Ancient of Days” (Dan. 7:9, 13, 22) to be a descendant of king David (2 Sam. 7:12-16; Is. 11:1; Jer. 23:5-6)?
The New Testament authors, over and over, argue that Jesus is the Promised One, the long-awaited Messiah, who fulfills the prophecies, patterns, pointers, and promises of the Old Testament (2 Cor. 1:20). He will crush the serpent of old (Gen. 3:15) and lead the way back into Eden, He will bless all the nations of the earth, and He will set up His righteous and eternal Kingdom.
The messianic expectations appeared to be nothing more than unrelated and random shards of glass. But the New Testament helps us see they all work together to form an astounding, almost unbelievable, stained-glass picture of Jesus, the long-awaited, promised Messiah. That’s why understanding what Christ means matters. Without understanding the expectations for the Messiah, we’re left with broken glass, rather than a breath-taking mosaic.
Regarding prophecy, there are several Old Testament passages we could consider. I’ll give the Old Testament reference and then the New Testament reference.
- His appearance will be disfigured (see Isaiah 52:14 and Matthew 26:67).
- He will be despised and rejected (see Isaiah 53:3 and John 11:47-50).
- He will take sin upon Himself (see Isaiah 53:4-6, 8 and 1 Corinthians 15:3).
- He will be silent before His oppressors (see Isaiah 53:7 and Matthew14:60-61).
- He will be assigned a grave with the wicked and the rich in His death (Isaiah 53:9 and Mark 15:27-28, 43-46).
- He will be a descendant of king David (see 1 Chronicles 17:11-14 and Luke 3:23, 31).
- He will be born in Bethlehem (see Micah 5:2 and Matthew 2:1).
- He will be preceded by a messenger (see Isaiah 40:3-5 and Matthew 3:1-2).
- He will have a ministry of miracles (see Isaiah 35:5-6 and Matthew 9:35; 11:4-5).
- He will enter Jerusalem on a Donkey (see Zechariah 9:9 and Matthew 21:7-9).
- His hands and feet will be pierced (see Psalm 22:16 and Luke 23:33).
- He will be hated without reason (see Psalm 69:4 and John 15:25).
- His garments will be divided and lots will be cast for them (see Psalm 22:18; John 19:23-24).
- His bones will not be broken (see Psalm 34:20 and John 19: 33).
- His side will be pieced (see Zechariah 12:10 and Jn. 19:34).
- He, the Mighty God, will be born (see Isaiah 9:2-7 and Matthew 1:23; John 1:1-3, 14).
Christmas—the real meaning of the season—is about Christ, the fulfillment of God’s promises, and all the many things that means.
Photo by Jakob Owens
in X 