Theological rants
of a liberal Christian

Luke 2:7, No Room at the Inn

Saturday, August 31, 2013 in Bible Commentary | 0 comments

Luke 2:7, No Room at the Inn

And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

//This verse is about the birth of Jesus, of course. The story in Luke is that Jesus had to be born in the manger, because there was no room in the inn. There was no room because a decree from Caesar required all Jews to return to the city of their lineage for a tax census. Joseph, Jesus’ father, had to go to Bethlehem because he was of the lineage of David, who was a Bethlehemite.

Ever wonder how many Jews had to go to Bethlehem for this census? How many descendants of David would be alive after fifty generations? If they all lived, of course, it would number in the billions. But they didn’t; Wikipedia tells us that there were about 3.5 million Jews at the time of Jesus.

We can work with that number, though. How many of these 3.5 million came from David? He had 19 sons that we know of. God only knows how many kids David’s son Solomon had, with his hundreds of wives and concubines and his legendary sexual prowess. But for now, let’s concentrate on just King David. If archaeological estimates are correct that David reigned over a nation of about 20,000 people, that would be about 10,000 males, and David and his sons accounted for 20 of them – .1%.

So, if estimates of the number of Jewish descendants in the time of Jesus are correct at 3.5 million, then a rough guess is that .1%, or 3,500, were descendants of David alone.

If Bethlehem housed around 300 people, and had 3,500 descendants of David alone traveling there for registration, then how many thousands more would there be? This number doesn’t even count anyone else living in Bethlehem at the time of David! No wonder there was no room at the inn for Joseph and Mary.

Got an opinion? 0 comments

Acts 2:46, Did Christians Worship in the Temple?

Friday, August 30, 2013 in Bible Commentary | 5 comments

Acts 2:46, Did Christians Worship in the Temple?

Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts

//Answer to today’s question: yes. Christianity was merely an offshoot of Judaism. It essentially was Judaism with one important claim: that the Messiah had arrived.

So long as there was a Temple in Jerusalem, Christians continued to visit there. It was at least a decade after the Temple was destroyed, and many decades after Jesus died, before the rift between Christians and Jews became severe enough for Jews to put the Christians out of the Synagogue. That is when writings began to crop up in the Bible that appear anti-Semitic.

Here are a few more verses that verify that the earliest Christians continued Temple worship:

One day Peter and John were going up to the temple at the time of prayer—at three in the afternoon. –Acts 3:1

The apostles performed many signs and wonders among the people. And all the believers used to meet together in Solomon’s Colonnade. –Acts 5:12 (Solomon’s porch is part of the Temple)

But during the night an angel of the Lord opened the doors of the jail and brought them out. “Go, stand in the temple courts,” he said, “and tell the people all about this new life.” –Acts 5:21

Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Messiah. –Acts 5:42

Got an opinion? 5 comments

Book review: Invitation to the New Testament

Thursday, August 29, 2013 in Book Reviews | 0 comments

Book review: Invitation to the New Testament

by Ben Witherington III

★★★★★

This is a beautiful, full-color university text, complete with Further Reading and Study Questions at the end of each section. It’s very well written in Witherington’s usual fascinating prose, though I did uncover a few editing errors.

The book does a very good job of immersing you into the culture of the first century. Praying for daily bread was a normal prayer for most ancients. You’ll get to know the Judaizers well, whom Witherington presents as subversive competitors to Christianity. To an important extent, you’ll need to be open to the possibility of miracles in order to truly understand the writings.

Be aware that you will receive a biased view of the topic. For example, Witherington argues strongly for one of his pet conclusions: that the author and the Beloved Disciple of the Gospel of John is the man Lazarus, who was raised from the dead. He also is a proponent of early (pre-war) writings in nearly all cases, and argues that every book in the Bible was written before the turn of the century. His trust in the church fathers’ testimony and traditional authorship (such as Peter as the author of 1st Peter) flavors his interpretation. Witherington considers none of the New Testament pseudonymous, arguing that it may have been composed by as small a group as these 11 men: Mark, Matthew, Luke, the Beloved Disciple, John of Patmos, Paul, Peter, James, Jude, Apollos, and the compiler of 2 Peter.

This emphasis is both good and bad: I certainly prefer that a scholar boldly present his own conclusions, especially when they are as well-argued as in this book, but a university text is also expected to present other scholarly opinion, so balance is key. I wouldn’t want this to be the only book you read about the New Testament, but I wouldn’t want you to miss it, either!

One topic where I did feel the treatment was too imbalanced was Witherington’s introduction to Paul. For example, he submits the controversial hymn in 1 Corinthians as evidence of Paul’s high Christology. While Witherington does not emphasize the contested epistles as much as he does the agreed-upon authentic writings of Paul, he does at times seem to lean on the atmosphere of those letters, and thus betrays his conservative bent. The end result is that this portion of the book comes off more as an evangelical work than a scholarly one.

However, when Witherington begins to discuss each epistle individually, he does a superb job. Absolutely superb. With an emphasis on rhetorical style, he presents his case for authorship and dating, and fits the texts together like a jigsaw puzzle.

Regarding the Gospels, Witherington displays an odd lack of emphasis on the passion story. That suits me fine; I just found it odd. His treatment of the Gospels focuses more on the teachings of Jesus than on Jesus’ accomplishments.

All in all, though I’ve presented a few negatives, I have no qualms about ranking this textbook as one of the best religious works of 2013. If Ben Witherington writes it, you should read it.

One final note: If you don’t buy the book, at least sneak into a university bookstore and check out the discussion of the Synoptic Problem in the appendix …with its fascinating color visual of duplicate verses.

Got an opinion? 0 comments

Matthew 16:18, The Gates of Hell

Wednesday, August 28, 2013 in Bible Commentary | 6 comments

Matthew 16:18, The Gates of Hell

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

//Ever wonder about this verse? What is it saying? That the fiery armies of the underworld cannot overcome the church?

Not likely. It’s actually sort of the opposite.

The word “hell” is a translation of the Greek word Hades, which in New Testament writings replaced the Hebrew concept of Sheol, so “hell”, here, should be understood as the realm of the dead. But the important thing to grasp is that, with very few exceptions, everybody went to Sheol/Hades/hell in the Old Testament! It was a holding place where you awaited resurrection; or, if you don’t believe in resurrection, it was where you slowly faded away into forgottenness.

Today’s verse is not saying that evil beings down in hell cannot prove victorious over the church, because in Hebrew thinking, there were no evil beings governing the underworld. Just dead people. Rather, it is saying something extraordinary, making a bold claim: that the gates of hell cannot keep the souls of believers from escaping back to the realm of the living … being resurrected again!

Got an opinion? 6 comments

1 Cor 15:55, Sheol becomes Hades

Tuesday, August 27, 2013 in Bible Commentary | 0 comments

1 Cor 15:55, Sheol becomes Hades

O Death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory?

//Hades is the Greek word for the underworld, named after the god of the same name. It describes a dark, dreary, misty existence after death, down under the earth. Compare the above verse to this one:

O Death, I will be your plagues!* O Sheol, I will be your destruction! –Hosea 13:14

What we see is that the Old Testament concept of Sheol, a dark void where the dead slowly faded away, has morphed under the influence of Hellenism into Hades, a  dwelling place ruled by the gods of the underworld. Here is a more poignant example, first from the Old Testament:

For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. –Psalm 16:10

And then from the New Testament:

For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. –Acts 2:27

Both of these words, of course, we think of today as hell. I’ve read several books about the evolution of ideas regarding hell, but the most fascinating for me is when I can trace the way ideas came about in the Bible itself.

Got an opinion? 0 comments

Book review: Cycles of Salvation History

Thursday, August 22, 2013 in Book Reviews | 0 comments

Book review: Cycles of Salvation History

by Ulrich Utiger

★★★★

An interesting theology! The idea is that the truths of the Bible repeat in cycles throughout history, culminating in the second coming of Jesus for a final fulfillment.

Utiger begins with the assumption that the Bible is of divine authorship, and then proceeds to make sense of it in light of history and scientific findings. In discussing the creation, for example, he notes that Genesis records the creation of birds before animals, though they actually appeared later in evolutionary history. So the creation story probably merely uses “birds” to refer to the celestial world, and the creation of angels, right? Birds live in a medium representing heaven.

As you can see, not all images in Genesis should be interpreted literally. The snake in the Garden is merely a representation of Satan, and the paradise of Eden was “of course childhood, during which the boy is still free form work and the girl does not yet bring forth children in the pain.”

Transition from one phase to another is significant. Since the sixth day of creation is a transition from land animals to humans, this may be a hint that humans descend from the animal kingdom. (Utinger is not, however, a believer in natural selection. He finds it in opposition to reality: the aim of evolution was to bring forth humankind created in the image of God, so it could hardly have been undirected).

Utiger speculates about Genesis, Daniel, Revelation, and more. An interesting side trip into Marian apparitions rounds out the discussion. This focus on the Blessed Virgin is not coincidental; Utiger has studied Catholic theology and Mariology, and finds apparitions to be supported and predicted by the Bible. For example, read about the apparition of a woman clothed with the sun in Revelation chapter 12.

This is not an easy read, because the author makes a marked attempt to be brief. I got the feeling, as I was reading, that I was barely scraping the surface of a huge topic. Readers: before you dig into the book, take a peek at pages 186 and 187, which show five major eras of time, from the creation of angels to the millennial reign. These eras are further broken down into fourteen different cycles, where each cycle goes through the four stages of peace, sin, judgement, and revival. You will want to refer back to this chart as you read, so that you can get your bearing with each topic Utinger introduces. I discovered the chart about halfway through my reading, and things began to fall into place with that visual, making the rest of the book easier to comprehend.

From my perspective, I think the book is fun, and filled with interesting tidbits, but I can’t get behind the theology … or any theology which treats the Bible like a divine puzzle to be solved more than a collection of human experiences grasping toward God. Read it for an interesting perspective of salvation history, and decide for yourself.

Got an opinion? 0 comments

Ezekiel 14:11, The Three Most Righteous Men

Wednesday, August 21, 2013 in Bible Commentary | 3 comments

Ezekiel 14:11, The Three Most Righteous Men

A dollar says you can’t guess the three most righteous men in the Bible, according to God. I wouldn’t have guessed right.

Hint: They’re listed in Ezekiel, so that’s before Jesus’ time. Gotta be Old Testament fellas.

God was telling Ezekiel that if He has a mind to destroy a country, it’s going to happen—even if the three most righteous men in the world were living there:

[E]ven if these three men—Noah, Daniel and Job—were in it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign LORD.

If you said Abraham, Moses and David, you weren’t even close.

Remember Noah’s drunkenness? Daniel’s confession? Job admitting that he cannot stand in his own defense? Can’t God find any righteous men at all? I guess the lesson, here, is that mankind is deeply flawed, but still loved by God.

Got an opinion? 3 comments

2 Corinthians 12:7-9, Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh

Tuesday, August 20, 2013 in Bible Commentary | 0 comments

2 Corinthians 12:7-9, Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh

Therefore, in order to keep me from becoming conceited, I was given a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.

//These three verses have long been the topic of speculation among Bible readers. What is the “weakness” which torments Paul? There have been many speculations, and one that seems common among other Liberal Christians, is the idea that Paul was a repressed gay. But that simply makes no sense to me. Whatever the weakness was, it was presented as a qualification for apostleship, a weakness to boast about. He doesn’t say what it is, but he clearly expects his audience to know what he’s talking about. It doesn’t sound like he repressed anything.

Instead, probably the most common assumption among Bible scholars is merely that Paul’s eyes were failing. This is not wild speculation; this guess is supported by a couple things Paul writes to the Galatians:

See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand! –Galatians 6:11

Paul presents big letters as sort of his “signature style,” as if to say, “see, this is how you know it is really me writing, because I have to write very large.” In another place, he writes:

Where, then, is your blessing of me now? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. –Galatians 4:15

That’s a strange thing to do for someone … to tear out your eyes and give them away. It probably indicates that the Galatians were sympathetic to Paul’s eye problems.

So, I’m happy to write this mystery off as a probable case of bad eyesight.

Got an opinion? 0 comments

John 19:28, I Thirst

Monday, August 19, 2013 in Bible Commentary | 0 comments

John 19:28, I Thirst

After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.

//Readers of my book about John’s Gospel are aware of the many parallels between the opening story, of Jesus turning water into wine, and the ending story, Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. But I was recently made aware of another simple parallel … one of theological importance that I can’t believe I missed! It is these two words: I thirst.

The story is this: Jesus attends a marriage in Cana, where his mother comes to him saying they have run out of wine. The guests are thirsty. Jesus’ reply, which sounds a little harsh, is to say “Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.”

The ancient prophecies promised a coming day when wine would be abundant, when no one would go thirsty. This would happen when the Messiah arrived. But Jesus, when reminded that there was no wine, replied as if he didn’t care that the wedding guests were thirsty. His hour had not yet come for that sort of miracle.

At the marriage, Jesus is somewhat pressured into providing wine before his “hour came,” but nevertheless, the dialogue surrounding the first miracle in John sets the stage for the coming hour. This “hour,” repeated over and over in John’s Gospel, would arrive when Jesus rose into the air on the cross.

So, now, at the end of the Gospel story we finally come to Jesus’ “hour,” and what happens? Still, he hasn’t provided wine in abundance as promised by the prophets. Still, he hasn’t met the need of the thirsty. In fact, Jesus himself admits his thirst! The very last words of Jesus according to John’s Gospel, are an admission that he still thirsts! Did the prophecies fail?

I don’t think so. This verse follows quickly after Jesus’ death:

But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. –John 19:34

Thus appears, finally, the fountain of wine promised by the prophets, and Jesus’ “hour” finally arrives in its fullness. A spring of abundance and hope opens from Jesus side and pours forth the saving blood of Jesus … the wine of the new era.

Got an opinion? 0 comments

Luke 4:6, Who Has Dominion Over The Earth?

Sunday, August 18, 2013 in Bible Commentary | 2 comments

Luke 4:6, Who Has Dominion Over The Earth?

And the devil said unto [Jesus], All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.

//In this verse, Satan makes a bold claim: that he has dominion over all the nations, and has the power to grant that position to Jesus. However, Matthew claims just the opposite in his gospel:

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth –Matthew 28:18

So who is the big boss? Satan or Jesus?

It’s a trick question. The verse in Luke is at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry; the verse in Matthew is at the very end, after Jesus has been resurrected. The Gospel message is that Jesus overcame the world; Jesus proved victorious over evil, and over Satan.

Therefore, what used to belong to Satan now belongs to Jesus.

Got an opinion? 2 comments