The Trajectory we follow in interpreting Scripture

For the last several years, I have been tweaking a Hebrew and Greek daily Scripture reading system, with a lectionary for reading through the English Bible every year and a half. If you are interested in viewing or using it, a PDF is available HERE. 

What is of interest here is that, in the introduction to this reader (pages 2-3), I most clearly lay out how I interpret Scripture, and the main concerns I pay attention to when seeking to understand what God has revealed to us through Scripture. I have written elsewhere about how I apply the Biblical laws to our ethical life, and how Scriptural difficulties are worked out when we see Scripture as a process of Developmental Revelation, which is on a trajectory that is fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. In this understanding, to use words spoken by Martin Luther King Jr.: The Moral Arc of History (and Scripture) is long, but it trends toward Justice. This view has been shaped by voices as diverse as CS Lewis (in terms of overall narrative development of History), NT Wright (in terms of looking at the Old Testament from the perspective of the New Testament), Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (in his work on confronting violence in the Torah). 

When Goodness is repellant and Evil is seductive

I just saw Venom, and along with it a preview for Captain Marvel. Very enjoyable movie, and interesting preview. But I realized something that has always struck me as hollow about the Marvel Universe, and most other movie universes* from DC to Star Wars to Harry Potter to Indiana Jones. That is this: Evil is not evil until it is truly seductive, and Good is not good unless it is truly repellant. 

Let me explain. 

Things left behind

Some prefer to leave behind
Buildings and statues
That stay static and inert
Until they crumble
To dust

I prefer to leave behind
Ideas and stories
That ever change and evolve
Until they inspire us
To live

Childlike Faith and the Neverending Story

I watched the Neverending Story with my kids this morning. This movie impressed me deeply as a child with a view of imagination, and multiple dimensions of reality, which shaped me at a deep level. In many ways this movie and several other books I read as a young person “baptized my imagination” to experience our co-authorship, with God, of the great unfolding Story of Creation and Redemption centered in Christ. What I did not realize until watching this movie as an adult: 

First, this movie may be the best illustration of Jesus’ saying that the Kingdom of God belongs to those with childlike faith which I have ever seen. 

Second, it is a potent critique of living in a world culture of Consumerism, in which every Corporation and advertisement seeks to co-opt our imagination, and stop us from dreaming, with the lie that their products can satisfy our every desire, and bring us to true happiness. 

On Sickness, Healing, and Unforgiveness

“But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an everlasting sin.” (Jesus, according to Mark 3:29)

“Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors... If you forgive others their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your transgressions.” (Jesus, according to Matthew 6:12–15)

Out of all the things Jesus said and did, at the top of his list were Love, forgiveness, and healing. Jesus taught and acted as if all things could be forgiven and healed, no matter how big or how small. From little children, to squabbling siblings, to women caught in immorality, to a thief dying on a cross, to his best friend denying him in his time of need: Jesus forgave everything, and healed everyone, out of his deep Love. 

All except for one thing.

Bart Ehrman, Theodicy, and Leaving Evangelicalism

Recently I posted a chart about various models of dealing with "Theodicy" (the problem of how evil and God can co-exist in the same reality). Someone asked me if I had read the 2009 book by New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman on Theodicy entitled "God's Problem". Now I have read a couple of Ehrman books on Biblical studies, and heave seen several of his debates, lectures, and interviews (including him talking about his deconversion and the problem of suffering). But I have never read this book, although I have heard him sum it up several times in his videos on YouTube.

Ehrman's book and his talks strike me as having very similar themes to other books I have read, particularly by Evangelicals who have lost their faith. As a former Evangelical, I have experienced much of what Ehrman (and others like him) have experienced, except that it turned me to a broader and deeper faith in Christ rather than abandoning Christ. While I disagree with Ehrman on several core ideas, from the Divinity of Christ to the basic reliability of Scripture, I do find him to be a rational, honest, and well-intentioned thinker who is pursuing the truth as best he can. Erman’s story, as I understand it, points out several gaping holes (or persistent heresies) in American Evangelicalism:

Models of Theodicy Chart

How do we deal with God allowing evil and suffering? This ever-daunting "Problem of Evil" is one of the biggest perennial problems in Theology and the Philosophy of Religion. The academic name for this problem is "Theodicy", and it is one of the things I have blogged about the most on this website, with articles big and small discussing the problem from all kinds of perspectives. Today in teaching Philosophy, we talked about the subject once again. And as a result I decided to turn my class notes into a chart. 

You will note that it lays out the essential logic of the problem of Theodicy in a flowchart of options which are either affirming to the reality of God, or which diminish or deny the reality of God. I have even further simplified this flowchart into an image which can be displayed on one slide as part of a presentation or sermon:

If you would like to use these charts or image, you can click the image above, or download the charts in PDF or JPEG here.

.

Heresies Alive!

This weekend I was honored to teach seminarians about the Age of the "Ecumenical Councils" and help them understand the heresies which helped define orthodoxy in the Imperial Church. One of the persistent problems in teaching this material is the interconnected and confusing convergence of different groups in the early Church and the specialized terminology they used to explain themselves and condemn each other. 

So, to help students understand these issues and concepts, I find it helpful to discuss how we find these heresies alive and well in our churches today. We tend to think of heresies as something that happened "back then" which are only of academic interest today. But the fact is, the same heresies pop up over and over and affect people in profound ways. Thus, I created the chart above (and available in PDF HERE) which helps students connect these heresies with the contemporary world. 

Models of Metaphysical Cosmology

In my philosophy class my students are trying to wrap their minds around what is different about how Plato and Aristotle viewed Reality, and how this relates to other thinkers and models of Reality. Basically, Plato is seen as the prototypical rationalist, viewing Reality from the "top down", while Aristotle is seen as a proto-empiricist, viewing Reality from the "bottom up". If this is already confusing, Crash Course has a nice summary HERE.

Anyway, there are many terms that could be used for comparing different views of how to understand the essence of Reality. In one way, we are discussing Metaphysics, because it is a discussion of how the realm of physical reality might relate to "higher" or more fundamental levels of reality (if there are such levels). In another way, we are discussing Ontology, because we are trying to understand what the natures of things are, and what are the essential aspects that make a thing what it is. In a final sense, we are discussing Cosmology, because we are seeking to understand the nature of the Universe (the Cosmos) in relation to various ways of understanding Ultimate Reality. 

So, I have chosen to call it "Models of Metaphysical Cosmology". I know people may disagree, but it's what I will go with right now. My summary chart for teaching can be seen by clicking the JPEG at the top of this post, or by clicking on THIS PDF.

And, if you are up for more charts, you can see my whole collection of charts for teaching Religion, Scripture, Theology, and Philosophy HERE.