Constantine and the Complicated Canon of Scripture

Recently I read a brief apologetics essay that sought to debunk the myth that Emperor Constantine created the Bible at the Council of Nicea in 325 CE. For those who may not know, the myth states that the Bible as we know it today was created and compiled by Constantine's officials and bishops gathered in Nicea. According to the myth, the Council left out certain gospels and texts that did not align with their agenda, and edited the remaining texts to create the version of the Bible that supported their desired religious and political views.

Wrestling with God across Scripture and Life

Do you feel like you are wrestling with God through the trials and tribulations of life? You are not alone. Following God and being guided by God is not a matter of passive obedience and easy belief, but of passionate engagement and wrestling with God through the worst of life. This is illustrated in the life of Jacob, who wrestled emotionally with the consequences of running from one swindle to the next, endangering himself and his family and leaving a trail of destruction. In the midst of this emotional struggle, he encounters and wrestles with God:

Should we rethink the dates of the New Testament?

Recently, New Testament scholar Jonathan Bernier has put forth a powerful proposal about  "Rethinking the Dates of the New Testament". He shows that in the era of modern Biblical scholarship, there have been three basic kinds of dates proposed for the writing of the New Testament:

Stupidity as a gateway to Fascism

These excerpts on stupidity as a gateway to fascism are taken from a circular letter, addressing many topics, which was written by Dietrich Bonhoeffer to three friends and co-workers in the conspiracy against Hitler, on the tenth anniversary of Hitler’s accession to the chancellorship of Germany:

Proverbs 31 and the Noble Spouse

Recently on social media I read a thought provoking post that dealt with both the problems and enduring value of the “Noble Wife” passage in Proverbs 31. I think a simpler way to get at what they were saying is this: Proverbs 31 is an enduring list of virtues and values written in a culture that was cursed with patriarchy (if you read the consequences of sin for our first parents in Genesis 3) and tended toward misogyny (if you read many instances of the use and abuse of women in the books of Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles). Now we realize that in Christ there is “no male or female, no slave or free” (cf. Galatians 3). So the virtues are still valid, even if the patriarchal structure they were expressed in is obsolete and oppressive. 

Therefore, let’s extract the virtues and jettison the potential misogyny of the passage by simply universalizing for all people. It may have been first directed at women, but now it is directed at EVERYONE. An interpretation of this passage “in Christ” describes a hard working and virtuous spouse. Period. Regardless of whether that spouse is a man or woman. As such, in this text we find that we are ALL called to diligence, hard work, wisdom, discernment, and responsibility as spouses and partners. 

We might even imagine that we are translating Proverbs 31 into a language that does not conceive of gender the same way English and Hebrew have in the past. After all, English seems to be losing gendered grammar and vocabulary quite quickly, just as many other gendered languages have before us. So, imagine translating Proverbs 31 into a language that only has the word “spouse” or “companion”, and not “husband” and “wife”. A language into which “he” and “she” doesn’t really work. If we do this, we might read Proverbs 31 like this:

Arguing for the sake of God

Recently I saw someone post the meme “If only we fought as hard to understand as we do to disagree”. It is a beautiful sentiment. But I’m not sure I fully agree. 

Rabbinic students in Yeshiva are taught to “argue for the sake of God” or even “argue for the glory of God”. Argument— even vociferous argument— is often a means to deeper understanding, as long as it is combined with humility. It is often only by energetically dissecting and deconstructing inadequate ideas that we arrive at better ideas. 

A key Rabbinic text for this comes from Pirke Avot (The Ethics of the Fathers) 5.20: “Any controversy waged in the service of God shall in the end be of lasting worth, but any that is not shall in the end lead to no permanent result.” Indeed. Debate on behalf of that which is intrinsically Good and True and Beautiful will inevitably lead us into communion with God who is Goodness and Truth and Beauty, provided that we act and argue in ways that are good and true and beautiful. 

How do we do this, in the midst of a heated argument, without slipping into evil and deception and ugliness? The difference, it seems to me, is that at Yeshiva the day’s arguments always end in prayer, as every disputant stops to acknowledge their smallness before, and constant dependence on, God. Perhaps if this was where all of our arguments ended, we would have better arguments. 

Why we really believe what we believe

So I’m on this religion discussion board, and recently the rather mundane observation was made that people’s religious beliefs tend to mirror their family of origin. Overwhelmingly, Muslim adults were born into Muslim families. Jewish adults were born into Jewish families. Christians in Christian families, Hindus with Hindus, Buddhists with Buddhists, etc. A very low number of people, statistically, tend to adopt a spiritual path that they did not grow up around and have extensive interactions with. Many Christians who commented on this discussion board seemed to have a huge problem with this mundane statistical fact. They found this undermined the veracity of their belief (because they assumed that a belief handed down from others is somehow less true), as well as the authenticity of their belief (because most wanted to think of their belief as something they chose for good reasons). But is this the case?

A Post Pentecost Poem

We Christians love to affirm:

.

Semper Reformanda!

Always reformed

Always reforming!

Until that reformation

Reforms the way we read the Bible

Reforms the kinds of families we approve

Reforms our understanding of how God made us

Through the unfolding dance of evolution

Reforms the ways patriarchy and hierarchy 

Have silenced and sidelined

Women and Queers and Outsiders

So we can at last hear Christ

Speak through them!

.

When Reformation reforms too much

We cling to Tradition

To keep the boundary stones

Firmly in place

Predictably

Immovably

Inertly

In place...

Theology and Compassion, Objectivity and Subjectivity

One of the pastoral and practical tools I use to evaluate theology— besides whether it is Biblical and Creedal and rooted in the Trinity and Incarnation— is this:

If you cannot preach it to hurting people, or pray it with a forgiving heart, it’s bad theology. If you won’t preach it, and can’t pray it, you shouldn’t believe it.

This is to say that our theology must integrate Christlike Compassion as its first and foremost effect on our life for it to be healthy theology.

The Temptation of being too clever

The persistent temptation of intellectual pursuit is that we become satisfied with being clever instead of living life better. The reason we have been gifted with reason and knowledge is that we may learn to better live and love and experience the abundance of the world we inhabit. Through us the universe has become aware of itself, as we consciously harness the powers of creation to strive ever onward into countless forms of Truth and Goodness and Beauty. Through us God experiences every possible form of life, and gives Godself in love to every particular situation and person, suffering in love with all of our pains, and rejoicing in love with all of our joys. For Christians this is embodied in the One who embodied Divine Logic and Reason in the form of a human servant, that we all might be joined to the Divine Life of God. It is a tragic loss to view the mind as an end in itself, and knowledge as a kind of trophy that sets us apart from others as a source of pride. This disconnects us from the very reason we are gifted with Reason in the first place: For connection, for relationship, for Love.

Sacred Ideas within Secular Idioms

As a school chaplain I am blessed to live and work with people from all faith backgrounds, and those who claim no religious faith at all. With this in mind, I strive to make our spirituality program at my school "authentically Christian and genuinely inclusive". Thus, I try to shape our chapel program so that it has something to say to everyone, Christian and non-Christian alike. From our prayers to our Scripture readings to our mediations to our sermons, it is my hope that every member of our school community can find something that speaks to their life, and challenges them to grow spiritually and ethically. 

As a result, I frequently try to "translate" Christian texts and concepts into language that speaks more directly to "Religious Others". This is NOT as a substitute for Christian texts and prayers, but as an explanation or interpretation of them. In particular, I like to imagine what Jesus' teachings might sound like if he were talking to postmodern secular people who do not adhere to any formal religion, and who may not have space for "God" or transcendence in their worldview. 

A Spiritual Reading of the TMI Alma Mater

What happens when we read a text in a new way, looking for deeper levels of meaning? How can we take common, everyday words and phrases and find something we've never seen before in them? Once we "take it for granted" is there any way to "take it in a new direction"?

A Provocation about Postmodern Thought

Theologian Ted Peters makes a distinction between two trends in postmodernism in his book “God: The World’s Future”. The first trend is toward holistic postmodernism, in which we recognize the immense diversity present in the natural and social worlds we inhabit, and we seek to find an organic unity within which they all inhere, which celebrates all our unique and distinct contributions to the whole, without distorting, denying, or doing violence to any of those distinctions. The second trend is toward deconstructive postmodernism, which disbelieves all metanarratives, distrusts all over-arching structures, and in general denies all absolute and objective claims about Reality. However...

In the Divine Symphony: Why I think God is Real

In the school where I am chaplain, two of the skills we try to teach students are: First, how to build an evidence-based argument, and second, how to present the view you hold without demeaning or belittling those who disagree. This is especially true with controversial subjects that people hold strong opinions on. 

Since we give feedback about this so often, to so many of our students, I thought I would create an example of a controversial, evidence-based argument, which was presented in a way that sought to include even those who disagree with my conclusion. And voila: This sermon was born. The texts read before this sermon included: Psalm 19.1-9; Acts 17.27-28; Romans 1.19-20; 1John 4.7-16.

As we continue our journey through Epiphany, the season when Christ's Light shines on ALL kids of people, through ALL kinds of experiences, I wanted to challenge you a little today about HOW we see God's Light. And this challenge comes from a question I frequently get asked, and that I was asked again last week. The question goes something like this:

"Fr. Nate, you seem like a smart guy. How come you still believe in God?" 

A provocation on Scriptural inspiration

God inspired Scripture not only to show us what to DO, but also to show us what NOT to do. The Bible is not only filled with positive examples to imitate, but also negative examples to avoid. So beware, lest you model your life on a negative example and invite your own destruction. For we can tell the intent of the Spirit’s inspiration of a text by asking what end it resulted in. Did the text result in death and destruction and character that is the inversion of Christ? Then the Spirit inspired it that we may avoid its example. Did the text result in Life and Love and striving for Christlikeness? Then the Spirit inspired it that we may follow its example. 

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). 

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:

Truth is always Stranger

Tertullian once said “I believe because it is absurd”. It is the strangeness of an idea— it’s undeniable texture and inconsistent density— which is a hallmark of its truthfulness, and not the smoothness and consistency of an idea. The old quip that “truth is stranger than fiction” has much in common with Tertullian here. Fictions have smoothness and consistency, clear beginnings and symmetrical endings. But reality makes twists and turns which, while they do not contradict reason, neither can they be predicted by reason. Real things are irreducible, and defy being fully encapsulated in a conceptual system, to be rendered completely predictable, and hence controllable. 

How to read the Whole Bible

2022 Update: Based on the material found here, I have created an updated plan to read through the whole Bible. Click here to try this Weekly World Scripture Reader.

This year I have student graduating who I have known since he was a precocious 6th grader. He is a young man who has always been skeptical, hovering somewhere between faith and ridicule, atheism and theism, during his entire time at our school. This young man of considerable intellect and intense curiosity recently asked me:

"I am really determined to read the entire bible cover to cover during my summer vacation. However, there seem to be so many choices of translation and I don't know which is better for my purposes. I want a Bible that is closest to the original translation but also full of helpful footnotes explaining things. Do you have any suggestions regarding a good bible? Also, feel free to recommend any companion books to go with it."

And so, this essay was born:

On the Boundaries and Tasks of Ideology and Philosophy

I'm fleshing out some ideas for teaching philosophy next year, and at the beginning of the class I take students through an "Ideological Toolbox", meant to introduce them to the basic tasks and subjects within philosophy. So, below are some notes from me "thinking out loud".

Ideology refers to the symbolic maps we use, as individuals and as a society, to navigate reality and lead us to the realization of our ultimate values. Note that an ideology can come in many forms. Ideology can appeal to a transcendent source, and thus be a form of “Theology”. Or ideology can claim to stay proscribed within empirical reality and present itself as a form of science or psychology or sociology or political philosophy or economics or cultural critique.