Threads from Henry's Web

Category: Uncategorized

  • A Step for Abiogenesis?

    In a short article, ScienceNOW Daily news discusses some new research that may shed light on how life first emerged on this planet. I want to call attention to the article for a couple of reasons, but primarily because this, in my view, is how real science is done, and how it sounds when announced. No, they don’t know that this is an element of the formation of life, no, they don’t have the rest of the process, even the next step, figured out. What they have done is provide one more option, and filled in one more blank in the unknown.

    Michael Behe, in his book Darwin’s Black Box describes structure after structure and process after process, recounting how we have discovered new complexity as we continue to learn more about how the function. What is a black box at one point in the history of science will not necessarily remain so. Unfortunately, Behe uses all this skillful writing to produce an ode to ignorance, and complains that evolutionary pathways have not been found. He believes they never will be. But as things get more complex, one simply has to work harder to learn the details that are part of the complexity of nature. In this case, there is now a new reaction that opens up possibilities for study. Does it resolve the problem? No! But it suggests new research and provides more options for continuing the search. That’s how science works.

    Some may be wondering how I, a “theistic evolutionist” got onto the topic of abiogenesis. After all, the expected method of argument for theistic evolutionists is to distinguish evolution of life from abiogenesis. I do believe they should be regarded as distinct. But I also believe that abiogenesis will be solved, and an pathway for the origination of life will be formed. How then can I relate this to my belief that God is the creator of life? Actually, I believe God is the creator of everything. I believe God created the universe as a system, a system that works.

    Let me use the analogy of my car. I don’t regard periodic maintenance requirements for my vehicle as a sign of the wisdom of the engineers. Sure, they did well to warn me of those requirements, but I would be happier if they were less frequent, and if it were practical to produce a vehicle that never required maintenance, that would be even better. I also don’t look at the simple parts of my car and determine that they did not require an engineer, while the more complex parts must have been designed. I know that each element was put there as a part of the design strategy of the car. That they work together (mostly) seamlessly, and that I cannot find parts that are “more designed” than others is not a defect.

    Now as all analogies, this one has it’s limitations. My car is very little like a universe. But I think it does illustrate my point. If God designed the universe correctly, then it should work. If it requires periodic maintenance, like my car, it gives evidence of manufacture by a less-than-perfect creator.

    I don’t like the idea of tinkering, whether it comes at the time of speciation or when life first came into existence. I creidt life to God whether intervention was required or not, but I suspect a competent God of getting it right the first time (A “fully gifted universe” to borrow Howard Van Till’s phrase).

    So folks, I think this one will be solved in the next few years, and if you hooked your faith in God to the impossibility of life being formed from non-living matter without special miraculous intervention, you will be disappointed.

    But make no mistake, no matter how thick the gloves are on God’s hands, no matter how many processes supposedly separate him from his handiwork, it is still God that does it. An omnipresent God is not less present when working through process (and consistent processes at that), than he is working directly. The evidence suggests that he prefers working through consistent processes.

  • Jesus as King and Priest

    With the reference to Melchizedek (chapter 7), the author of Hebrews ties Jesus as King to his argument, though he doesn’t dwell on that. There is a key thought here that I would like to look at briefly. Often we find people disagreeing over just what type of person Jesus is. Is he the gentle, forgiving Jesus, or the ruler who rules with a rod of iron?

    That answer is that he is both. I’d like to illustrate this briefly from Revelation 5, which combines the two sets of imagery in one short passage:

    5Then on eof the elders said to me, “Stop crying! Look here! The Lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, has won the right to open the book and to break its seven seals.”

    6And I a lamb standing among the four creatures around the throne and among the elders, looking as though it had been sacrificed. It had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God who are sent out into all the earth. 7And he came and took the book out of the right hand of the one who was sitting on the throne.

    –Revelation 5:5-7 (from the TFBV project)

    The issue in this passage is the one who can open the seals, i.e. the one who has the sovereignty over history and who is able to open the seals and reveal what is to take place. One feels one is on the right track with the “lion of the tribe of Judah.” That sounds like a sovereign, one who can take charge. But when John turns to look, it’s a lamb, and it looks as though it has been sacrificed. It’s not even a healthy lamb!!

    But nonetheless, he is the one who has the sovereignty and proceeds to open the seals. This is the same theology as expressed by Philippians 2:1-11, only expressed symbolically. Consider this type of royal imagery “read into” Hebrews through the reference to Melchizedek, combined with the statement that Jesus, who must have something to offer as a priest, offers himself (Hebrews 8:3 and 9:12).

    The Lion is the Lamb.

  • Why a New Priest?

    The author of Hebrews is at some pains to make it clear to us that we need a new priest and indeed a new priesthood. As I’ve noted in previous entries, he has specific characteristics he expects in this new priest. The heart of his argument for a new priesthood is contained in chapter 7. Note that he builds the basis for this argument in chapters 1-6, and that he discusses the actual impact of the new priesthood in chapters 8-10, but the argument in favor of the new priesthood is in chapter 7.

    He has established to his satisfaction that Jesus is greater than the angels and greater than Moses. He has established that Jesus is able to empathize with us, because he is just like us. He is certain that Jesus is the new priest and that there is a new revelation now that is greater than the Torah. But he needs to find something there that points to a new order of priesthood. He finds that necessary “hook” in the story of Melchisedek in Genesis 14:18-20. A second reference to Melchizedek in Psalm 110 refers to an order of priesthood, and also helps relate the priesthood to royalty.

    Melchizedek has one wonderful feature that is helpful to the argument for a new priesthood: He arrives on the scene without geneology, and disappears without record of his dath. Thus our author can use him as the type of an eternal priesthood. He is clearly not happy with the idea of a set of rituals that go round and round year after year, and at least to his way of thinking don’t finally accomplish anything. Oh, they help people along the way, but doesn’t it have to end somewhere? So he wants a priesthood that will not end, that is eternal by nature, because only such a priesthood can accomplish an eternal redemption, once and for all, that doesn’t need to be repeated. I’m intentionally redundant. That’s precisely what our author sounds like in chapter 7.

    I’m going to discuss this some more in future entries. For now notice that the key to understanding how Melchizedek is used in Hebrews is the lack of genealogy along with no record of death. Combined with Psalm 110, “priest forever,” this makes the ideal type for his antitype of an eternal priesthood.

    I suggest reading Genesis 14 and Psalm 110, followed by Hebrews 7 to fix this picture in your mind.

  • Was Jesus a Lawful Priest and Sacrifice?

    I’m going to post next on the nature of the priesthood of Jesus, by looking at the major passages in the book of Hebrews. These especially chapter 2, 4:14-16, and 7. Obviously that list is not exhaustive, as priesthood is fundamental to most of the book, but those passages will get us started. First, however, I want to address the question in the title: Was Jesus lawful as either a priest or a sacrifice? I’ve seen this discussion between Jews and Christians, and a great deal of confusion was generated.

    The short answer is no. Jesus was not of the tribe of Levi, much less of the family of Aaron. He was not qualified according to the Torah to be a priest. Neither was he qualified to be a sacrifice. Humans are not kosher animals, and they are nowhere specifically authorized as sacrifices. Indeed human sacrifice is specifically forbidden.

    But none of this should be a surprise to a Christian Bible student, though unfortunately it seems to be for some. Indeed, the author of Hebrews is not only aware of this point; it’s a key element of his argument. Recall that he has been establishing Jesus, and the witness to Jesus, as superior to the Torah as a revelation. I have noted how this is completely contrary to the Jewish approach to scripture and its interpretation. (Note that I am in no way trying to tell Jews how to approach scripture; I’m addressing this to Christians, but the difference needs to be understood for interfaith discussions.) Having made such an argument he continues by establishing Jesus as a new kind of priest, on which he spends almost all of chapter 7, and then chapter 8 introduces the concept of a new covenant. If Jesus were here, he would not be a priest. There already are priests, but more importantly, Jesus comes from the tribe of Judah, and there is no privision in Torah for such a priest (Hebrews 7:14).

    Rather than trying to argue against this obvious fact, the author of Hebrews bases his argument for the superior priesthood of Jesus on that fact. He was not a priest like the old, Levitical priests. He was a priest of a new order, based on a new covenant, and new regulations. (We’ll discuss the priestly order of Melchisedek in a later entry.) He argues this superior priesthood on the same basis as he has argued the superiority of the revelation that comes through Jesus–he maintains that in all ways Jesus’ ministry is superior. Note that he does not start by establishing the ministry of Jesus from the Old Testament scriptures. (Those who recall how much Old Testament he quotes, hold your exclamations and questions.) Rather, he starts with the superiority of the established testimony of Jesus (2:1-4) and of his priesthood and sacrifice (7-10 passim), and then looks for pointers to something superior that is to come in the Old Testament scriptures.

    Thus the correct answer to the title question is, again, no. Under the Torah, Jesus was neither lawful as a priest nor as a sacrifice. Further, he was not offered according to the law. Does this mean that Jesus is not a priest or a sacrifice? Well, according to the book of Hebrews, he is. He is lawful because he inaugurated a new law.

    I would two other points. The first is the nature of metaphor. Jesus was not killed as a sacrifice from the point of view of those who did it, or from the point of view of those who watched. The Romans crucified Jesus as a routine act of political intimidation. The observers were, well, intimidated. One of the ways in which we can understand this is as a sacrifice–and indeed it was. But we will neither understand everything about it by this means, nor will we be able to connect it to a sacrifice at every point.

    The second is the idea of type and antitype. This is expressed in Hebrews 8:5. The earthly things are a sketch and shadow of heavenly things. Those who understand this passage as indicating that there is a building in heaven proportional to the tabernacle or the temple, and that in the most holy compartment of that temple there is an ark of the covenant miss the point. The ark of the covenant was the shadow, the representation, the physical expression of God’s presence. The heavenly reality is God’s actual presence. To read about the antitypical most holy place, read Revelation 4, and the experience of worship around the throne of God.

    Beware of getting two little or two much out of these types of parallels.

  • Are You a Priest?

    A key element of the participatory study method is getting up close and personal with the application. Since God indicated in Exodus 19:6 that his intention for Israel was that they should be a nation of priests, and that a similar goal was expressed for Christians in 2 Peter 2:9, the question I want to ask is how this applies to me.

    Let’s make a more extensive list of activities of a priest:

    1. Teaching to distinguish holy from unholy, clean and unclean, right and wrong (see my previous post on priesthood)
    2. Bearing sin (High Priest particularly)
    3. Presenting sacrifices
    4. Judging issues based on their knowledge and divine instruction
    5. Leading in worship

    This list isn’t exhaustive, but it gives us some idea.

    Many people have a hard time seeing themselves in this role, but God presents it as an ideal. I think if we clean out the theological terminology, there is nothing here that we can’t all do.

    First, though not all of us are teachers by office (James 3:1), all of us have something to teach. At a minimum, we can share our own testimony. (I wrote some notes on this for the Pacesetters Bible School Newsletter blog.) We do not ourselves carry other peoples sins, but we can help them find forgiveness. We can all present sacrifices–in the modern Christian sense with our gifts, our service, and our praise of God. We do not all serve as judges, but we can all participate in the ministry of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:16-21). Finally, we may not all see ourselves as leaders in worship, but we all can be. It’s easy to lean on the worship leader to get us into the attitude of worship. How much better would it be if each person in a worship service was helping to lead their little corner of the church into worship?

    But there is one major difference when we are all part of the priesthood. While we are called to do all of these things as a member of Christ’s “royal priesthood” we are also called to receive from one another. Today you may be the leader, helping someone else get closer to God. Tomorrow it may be you who needs the help. The benefit of a nation of priests or a priestly kingdom is that we are all equipped to help one another.

    That is the call of the priesthood.

  • What is a Priest?

    If you read through the book of Hebrews as a whole, you cannot help but notice the central place that the concept of priesthood has for the author of the book. His metaphors come strongly from the tabernacle or sanctuary service, and especially the wilderness version. Where he refers to these things he doesn’t reference the second temple or even Solomon’s temple, but the original tent. Some believe this means he wrote after the temple was destroyed, but I would suggest that there must be a greater motivation than that. The wilderness tabernacle itself was not in existence either. I would suggest that his interest in the tabernacle is because he sees this version as the pristine form, the inaugural form, if you will, and because it is the form described directly in Torah. He is working on a contrast of the person of Jesus with the whole of Torah, so he takes his illustration from the Torah as directly as possible. (We will note when we discuss his use of the Old Testament that he works from the LXX to some extent.)

    The problem for modern readers is that we do not hear the same things by these words as he probably did. Terms like priest, high priest, sacrifice, pure, impure, and even worship don’t necessarily mean the same thing to us simply because we live in a vastly different cultural context. The sacrifices fit well into their cultural context and served a teaching purpose. I was energized by studying through Leviticus with Jacob Milgrom’s 3 volume commentary in the Anchor Bible series (see my review).

    [For those who are working through my study guide, you might stop at this point and work with the advanced question on priests, ministers, and intercessors, and fill in the chart on page 29.]

    Milgrom suggests two key functions of the priest. These are not the only functions, but they are critical. First, according to Leviticus 10:10-11, the priests are to be teachers, and the key element that they teach is distinguishing sacred from common and pure from impure. (I could write an entry on that, but I will refrain for the moment. Milgrom’s key comments are on pp. 615-618 of Volume 1 of his series.) This function is restated and reemphasized in Ezekiel 44:23-28. This pair of distinctions is pervasive through the book of Leviticus, and it is made clear that the priests are to know them, to be able to render judgments about them, and to teach them.

    Secondly, priests, and particularly the High Priest, were to carry and/or carry away sin. This is illustrated at Exodus 28:38, but could well be expanded from many other passages in Exodus and Leviticus, looking at how sin is handled in connection with sacrifices. (Again, Milgrom comments in his first volume, pp. 622-625.) So we have these two functions that we often do not think about in connection with priests and the tabernacle–teaching and bearing sin and impurity. (Note these two are not identical, something Christian readers often miss.)

    The tabernacle, and particulary the priestly service as carried out in it, is the central metaphor of Hebrews, the means by which he conveys his message. If we don’t understand his metaphor, we’re not going to understand what it means. This is something we will work on through several posts.

    Do these two key elements of the priestly function play a role in the book of Hebrews? Indeed they do.

    First, the learning of distinctions:

    14Solid food is for the mature, for those who through practice have exercised their understanding to distinguish good and evil. — Hebrews 5:14 (from the TFBV project).

    This single reference would not be nearly as important as it is if it did not occur in a section leading up to one of the key points of the book. At the end of chapter 5 our author is explaining why he can’t go deeper into certain things: Believers need more maturity to understand. The key requirement of maturity is a well-trained discernment. Isn’t it interesting that one of the key things the priests were to teach the Israelites through the sanctuary service was precisely this? All those weird rules about which animals to eat and which not to, and what to touch and what not to were, at least in part, an exercise in learning how to make distinctions.

    We are frequently hesitant to make distinctions in the church, fearing the dreaded accusation of “discrimination.” But our author here is affirming that there are right and wrong actions, and that the mature Christian has a mind trained to choose between them. We must guard against a critical spirit or nitpicking on non-essentials, but there is a place, and apparently a fairly substantial one, for making distinctions.

    Second, bearing sins . . .

    4 . . . it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to carry sin away. — Hebrews 10:4 (TFBV)

    This is again a key problem addressed by the book of Hebrews. His answer is the once and for all sacrifice for sins by Jesus who is able to bear away the sins of many once and for all.

    27And just as it is the nature of men to die one time, and after that the judgment, 28so also Christ will appear again without sin, having offered himself to bear the sins of many, to those who wait for salvation. — Hebrews 9:27-28 (TFBV).

    So two key elements of the book of Hebrews are based on these two functions of the priesthood as taught in Exodus, Leviticus, and Ezekiel. In future entries, I will discuss the characteristics that our author believes make Jesus the perfect High Priest.

  • Hebrews 10:19-25: Why Meet for Worship?

    19Now then, brethren, we have boldness to go into the holiest place through the blood of Jesus, 20which he placed as a living way through the curtain, not previously available, which is his flesh. 21Jesus is also a great priest over the household of God. 22So let’s come with true hearts and full assurance of faith, our hearts sprinkled clean from bad conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. 23Let us hold firmly the confession of our hope without wavering, for the one who promised is faithful. 24And let us pay attention to each other, so as to stir up of love and good works, 25not neglecting our meetings, as is the practice of some, but encouraging, and doing this even more as we see the day approaching. — Hebrews 10:19-25 (from my TFBV project)

    (OK, this one is way out of order, and is not arranged according to the lessons either. I just had some thoughts about worship.)

    Why do we need to meet for worship?

    I hear many answers to this question and I sense many more in meeting with people, both those who do meet regularly for worship and those who don’t. Some of us meet just because it’s habit. Our parents went to church, and they got us in the habit, and somehow we preserved that habit. Some go for social reasons. It’s a good time to meet friends and business associates, an opportunity for networking. Some go to get points toward their hoped-for ticket to heaven. Perhaps if their lives during the week were not quite up to standard, attendance at a worship service or so might make up the difference.

    The author of Hebrews has some specific, and he thinks compelling reasons to worship.

    1. We can!
      Since we can approach God boldly, why not do so? Much of the book of Hebrews deals with our access to God, and one of the assumptions of the author is that those who can approach God boldly will want to do so in worship. One of his concerns is that it seems his assumption might not be quite true. There seem to be some people who just don’t get the need.
    2. God is faithful! and we need to be reminded of that fact
    3. We need encouragement.
      What better place to get encouragement is there than with a group of people who realize the possibility of boldness before God and come together to claim that boldness? Of course, as our author again has noted throughout the book, not everyone seems to live up to the possibilities.
    4. Others need encouragement.
      And here’s one of the keys. When you’re feeling really good, filled up, and ready to go, and don’t feel the need of another church service, you may need to go in order to encourage someone else.
    5. It’s time to stir up love and good works.
      But do we? Is this what happens at your church on Sunday morning? Do we leave feeling that it is easier to do good?

    These are some of the key reasons the author of Hebrews sees for gathering together in worship. I’d suggest three areas for consideration. Ask yourself:

    1. Does my behavior at church and in worship services help encourage others to good deeds?
    2. Do I come home from worship motivated and energized in my love and my service for others?
    3. Is there something I could do about the worship service I attend that would make it more likely that all who attend would be energized and encouraged in their love and good works?

    Perhaps there are some reforms you could look into in your own life, your worship experience, and the way worship is practiced at your church.

  • Hebrews 4:12-13: God’s Word is Alive and Active

    Yes, but what does it do?

    I sometimes think that this passage should be our key passage for the inspiration of the Bible rather than 2 Timothy 3:16. After opening with the wonderful passage in Hebrews 1:1-4, and telling us how God has communicated in so many ways, he begins to close the circle on the Word of God, and the powerful work that it does. The word came in many ways at many different times, but now it has come through a Son, Jesus Christ. This word challenges us to its quality and nature (Hebrews 2:1-4). God not only has information for us; he has a plan. We don’t only need to know the contents; we need to let our lives reflect that content. When we “consider the apostle and high priest of our confession” it is not so that we can polish up our doctrinal statements, it is so that we will be faithful to our confession.

    Hebrews 4:12-13 brings a close to this part of the argument and launches us into a new phase as we discuss priesthood. To catch the emphasis, let me translate very literally: “Living is the Word of God and active/powerful . . .” There has been some debate over whether our author here is talking about Jesus (John 1:1-3) as the word, or is talking about the scriptures. Scholarly opinion centers on the second. But I think both are too narrow. I think he has seen the marvelous ways in which God, through his word, intrudes himself into our lives. He sees the benefits that will result from responding to this activity and makes a call for us to be faithful to that call.

    That’s why the next section of this passage talks about knowledge. God’s word not only enlightens us and informs us, it discovers all that there is to be known about us. You can get a picture almost of dissection, but that wasn’t on our author’s mind. He was probably looking more at a combat metaphor of the skilled swordsman whose sword finds the precise mark. But in this case the purpose is not to wound, but to lay it all bare before the eyes of God. All creation is open to him because, after all, he is the creator of all creation. It’s all laid bare.

    The word of God is both informative and formative. It provides us with knowledge of God. It is God, knowing all there is to know about us. It is the motivator of our actions and the empowerment to do them.

    By the word of YHWH the heavens were made,
    By the breath of his mouth, all their host! — Psalm 33:6

    But then perhaps 2 Timothy 3:16 is not so far off after all. In fact, as I read it, I see much the same thing. “Every scripture is God-breathed, and is useful for teaching, for rebuke, for correction (straightening out), and for instruction in righteousness.” Isn’t that pretty much what this is saying? I find that this verse gets quoted more often to tell us what the content of scripture is. The Greek term “theopneustos” is analyzed to tell us how inspiration works, and what it must do to the words of scripture. In fact, the Revised English Bible translates, “All inspired scripture has its use . . .” and many people have told me that this takes all meaning from the verse. Not at all! What Paul is getting at here is how to put the scripture to practical use. The word is active, and we need to get active with the word. We need to let the word change us.

    One particularly important point I like to emphasize in Bible study is the need to let the word correct you personally first. It is so easy to read the Bible, or hear the word in any context, and find all of the things that other people need to hear. There is correction there for my wife, for my children, for my pastor, for my Sunday School class. But the real question is this: When that sword cut to the heart of the matter, what did it find?

    That should be the focus of our Bible study!

  • God’s Nature in the Natural World – Take 1

    Study Guide Q2: How much of God’s nature and will can be determined from nature? How do the natural and moral laws of God differ?

    This question spans this less and the next, which is about God as creator. I suggest doing it as I’m doing it here and taking a look first from the point of view of God’s direct or “special” revelation, and then looking at it again after looking at God as creator, and what this might mean about the physical world. Applicable additional reading is Psalm 33 and Romans 1-3. Genesis 1-2 & 6-9 provide more advanced background.

    This question is not a primary concern of the book of Hebrews. The reason I suggest studying it at this point is simply to round out one’s doctrine of divine communication. I think that too frequently we look simply at a doctrine of scripture, or of prophetic utterance, and not at the overall view of how God communicates with people.

    The author of Hebrews is focussed on God’s communication specifically through prophets. He does see this as happening in small portions at different times and in different ways. He also clearly sees the communication via the events of history and the testimony of individuals in the long history of God’s relationship with Israel (see especially Hebrews 11). His focus is on showing the superiority of the revelation though Jesus due to the superiority of the messenger. But just what is the actual superiority of the message?

    One exercise I suggest is taking each major topic and then re-reading the book of Hebrews with that topic and its major questions in mind. This means that if one completes all 13 lessons of the study guide, one will have read the book of Hebrews a minimum of 13 times during the course of that study. This may seem like a lot of reading to many people, but the book is actually only a few pages, and you will benefit from such study.

    But the revelation through prophets and even the revelation through Jesus Christ is not the whole of God’s revelation. Paul tells us: “For [God’s] invisible attributes, his unending power and divinity, have been understood and seen since the creation of the world” (Romans 1:20). I would suggest that this is a neglected text. Just how much can one learn simply from the creation without the benefit of direct revelation. Paul seems to think this revelation is sufficient that there is no excuse for missing the essentials of this revelation. Thus apparently one can derive from God’s created things sufficient to be in favor with God, i.e. presumably for salvation, and this is clear enough that one cannot be excused for failing to understand. I don’t think we give enough weight to the implications of this passage in Romans.

    But Paul continues later:

    12 All who have sinned apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but the doers of the law who will be justified. 14 When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. 15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, to which their own conscience also bears witness; and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God, through Jesus Christ, will judge the secret thoughts of all. — Romans 2:12-16

    This passage makes several additional points. First, according to verses 15 & 16, this knowledge is sufficient for one to take into judgment, and God may find the person acceptable. Second, there is an interesting possible allusion to the law written on the heart (Jeremiah 31:33), a characteristic of the Messianic age. Third, it is apparent that one can follow the law instinctively.

    The further passages on the creation emphasize that the creation, the physical universe, results from God’s word, from God’s will and command. This suggests that we can learn a great deal about God simply from the way he has constructed the universe. I would suggest that Christians ignore this aspect of God’s revelation too frequently. I discuss one aspect of this in my post Evolution, Theology, and Respect.

    Let me suggest not conclusions, but questions:

    1. What can we learn about God from nature?
    2. What is the role of the Holy Spirit when we receive revelation?
    3. Does the Holy Spirit always enlighten the mind of one who honestly seeks knowledge (a broadened prevenient grace)?
    4. How does the revelation of God in the natural world interact with direct or special revelation?

  • Cute Bunny Rabbits, Eggs, and Resurrection

    Is there a resurrection in your future? In your near future?

    Often concerned Christians complain about the pagan background of Easter, and such practices as Easter eggs, bunny rabbits, and all the signs of spring. Pagan religions in many countries have celebrated spring and the new life that it represents. Fall and spring festivals celebrate the cycle of life as we know it. I believe there is something very appropriate in placing the Christian celebration of the resurrection at the time of the spring, and I am even pretty happy with some of the pagan connections.

    Christian easter both reaffirms and transforms the idea generally behind spring festivals. (I’m not trying to make a connection with any particular festival here; I’m just looking at spring festivals in general.) We celebrate on the one hand that God does renew things on a regular basis. There may be valleys in our lives, but there are also mountaintops, and if we’re traveling with God, we know that the mountaintops will follow the valleys without fail. For every trial there’s a potential victory. We live in a world of death, but at the same time a world of life.

    As Christians we often look down on those pagan religions that emphasize fertility. Stories of sexual orgies and perversions help foster that attitude. But the elements of excess and perversion are just that–a perversion of something that God made and that God said was good. Human sexuality and reproduction are to be celebrated. Why? Because they provide us with the best example of God’s life giving power placed in our own hands. The passion of a husband for his wife, or a wife for her husband and the response of one to the other provide the greatest metaphor of God’s passion for his people and our response to him. It is not that sex is dirty without the metaphor; it is God’s gift of life and of passion. Try reading Song of Solomon as a love story. Don’t worry about any spirituality; just read it as passionate poetry and enjoy it. It is that passion that represents God’s desire to commune with you, to be intimate with you, and to renew your life.

    At the same time the resurrection transforms the whole idea of a spring festival. In many ancient religions there was an endless cycle of celebrations or commemorations of the changing of the seasons with no expectation that humanity was going anywhere. The resurrection transforms that. We are not in an endless cycle; God has a plan! We’re going somewhere. That’s the central message of Easter. We cannot have Easter without first going through Good Friday. The trial came first. But the cross would be a symbol of death if it was not followed by Easter. The resurrection breaks the cycle and brings life.

    So enjoy the cute fluffy bunnies, and eat the chocolate easter eggs. There’s a resurrection in your future!