POC Blog

The random technotheolosophical blogging of Reid S. Monaghan

Wilberforce Girls for World Vision

Greetings!

We are the girls of Class 4 at The Wilberforce School in Princeton, NJ. We want to share with you something exciting we are working on for our third trimester project. Our school is named after a man named William Wilberforce who combined his Christian faith with his academic and leadership abilities in order to see the slave trade abolished in the British empire. Each year one of our projects involves either active service to others (those in need) or helping the created order (the environment) of which we are called to be stewards.  We are excited to share with you our project for the spring and ask you to be a part of it. We are pretty excited so we want to begin with our story.

Bookmarking our Story

Earlier this year some of us began drawing handmade bookmarks. We think they look pretty cool. Many of the kids from our school liked them so we began making custom bookmarks for them. It became a pretty well known thing at our school. In thinking about our project for the spring, we thought it would be good to sell them for a quarter a piece to the kids at our school and donate all the money to World Vision. This is a Christian humanitarian organization dedicated to working with children, families, and their communities worldwide to reach their full potential by tackling the causes of poverty and injustice. In thinking about this project, we decided to take it up a notch and sell our bookmarks online to everyone in order to help other kids in another part of the world.

So what we came up with was an idea to learn some things and try to help out in a big way. The kids at our school have given their quarters; they do add up you know.  We are now asking kids young and old to join us in this project and buy a few cool bookmarks in the process. Let us share with you what we hope to learn.

Things we hope to learn

There is much to learn in our world today about how a business works.  Many today are beginning to see how their businesses have the ability to do good with the money they make.  We hear running a business is hard work, but hard work can bring a profit (Proverbs 14:23).  So instead of making a profit for ourselves, we figured we could learn how to make a profit and give all that money to World Vision. Pretty cool right? We think so.  So here are some of the things we hope to learn:

  • E-commerce and selling on the internet.
  • All the technology involved in that like electronic payments, secure web sites, order placement etc.
  • Viral marketing through things like blogs, twitter, Facebook and a community selling store. We are using Etsy and it is so cool!
  • Product design, inventory management and order fulfillment. One of our Dads has told us this could create a bunch of work for us if this goes big. So we hope you give us a ton of work to do: printing, cutting, addressing and stuffing envelopes and mailing bookmarks out to you.
  • We want to learn about entrepreneurship and doing good for others through such efforts. 

How we want to help

We selected World Vision as the organization we want to give all the proceeds from our bookmarks. We chose them because our teacher shared about them with us.  We like that they are working in nearly 100 countries around the world, serving all people. They are a Christian organization seeking to reflect the love of Jesus to others. We also like that they are financially responsible and accountable and most of the money will go directly to help people.

How you can help

Your part in this project is simple. Just buy a cool bookmark! Maybe buy one for yourself, your kids, your family members, the family dog, etc. The more we sell the more we give away. We have some capital investors who are helping us with materials and printing so we can give away all the profit we make from selling our bookmarks. The price you might ask? Just $5 plus shipping.

With this low price you will help us gain valuable experience and give generously to others.  And of course you will receive one of our five bookmarks specially selected for this project.  Great deal right!? We think so, so all you need to do is head to our brand new Etsy Shop called “The Wilberforce Girls

Load up those Etsy shopping carts and put us to work!

Thank you and God Bless!

The Wilberforce Class 4 Girls,

Oh, and one more thing…we have Twitter and Facebook accounts for this project. So if you want to help spread the word, like us, share, follow and “retweet” away.

Why I take vacations with my wife

Posted this today to some of my Jacob’s Well brothers…

—————————————————

Men,

Tonight I am heading out for a week with Mrs. Kasey Monaghan and the kiddos are staying with the grandparents here in NJ while we go have some fun. I wanted to share why I do this really quickly as I have been thinking about it some today.

#1 - My wife is fun, fly and fantastic

Remember, why you married that woman? You liked her a whole lot when you popped the big question. Marriage can take its toll on marriage without investing in your friendship and love together. I like my wife. I enjoy her company. I really don’t want to forget this over time as we raise kids, work jobs, go to bed exhausted day after day. Going away with Kasey without my kids allows me to focus on her heart, her joys, her longings, her soul. I think she is fly so we go enjoy one another.

#2 - I love my kids

I love my kids so much that it is painful. My baby duck Kayla still crawls up in my lap to snuggle even those she is about as tall as me. We love intellectual conversation and learning together…and don’t mind a few sporting events on the TV either. My sweetie Ky constantly makes me laugh, dazzles me with her cute artiness and fierce spirit. I am soft towards her - she makes me teary eyed happy. I want to crush anyone who would hurt her. My little buddy is a dynamo, clear thinker and master of Legos. He is quick witted and always up for kicking and wrestling with me. When they are with me all of them want my attention. When I take Kasey on vacation I don’t want my attention on them - so because I love my kids, I take Mom away without them. They probably have parents with a better marriage as a result as well.

#3 - I have a great family

Over the years of our marriage (we are on lap 16 around the sun now) my Mom and Kasey’s parents have served us in incredible ways to allow us to get away. Their sacrifice of time to let us break free is amazing and so appreciated. I think they have seen the fruit of this in our relationship and my hunch is that they love those grand kids as much, if not more, than we do. Win-Win. Kids get time with the grandparents (none of our family lives close by in NJ) and the grandparents get time with the kids. We can start telling them “no” again once we get back.

#4 - Having my wife feel like a lady

Kasey is part time taxi driver, teacher, soccer coach, domestic engineer and coordinator, friend and mentor. She carries a heavy load. I want her to drop all that for a week and get out and play a bit. We save money for this, we use tax refunds for this and we use a certain credit card (pay it off every month) to build up points for this. She is worth it. I want her to know that because I don’t always show it in all the ways I should.

#5 - Lovemaking (no elaboration here - none of your business)

Over the years we have done simple trips together when we just didn’t have any money. We have saved to take more vacation like vacations when were were able. Either way, because I like my wife, love my kids, have great family that helps and want my wife to feel special…we take vacations without our kids.

Yes, we do stuff with the kids as well, but I prioritize Kasey with the good trips.

Reid

PS: Full family vacations are awesome (ask Clark Griswald) and I am not advocating against anything. I am saying that getting away with just our ladies might be a good idea to stay close, connected and in deep friendship with our wives.

A Modern Father of Little Girls

Dadda can we snuggle
Dadda can I have a cookie
Dadda can I watch a movie
Dadda can I have a cell phone
Dadda can I wear THIS
Dadda can I have a car
Dadda I know he's an idiot guy, but can you give him a chance, I love him...oh dear God help me.

Friday Lenten Mediation - Renewal Through Confession, Repentance and the Faithfulness of Jesus...

Take and Read

  • Read the story of Israel asking for “a king to judge us like all the nations” in 1 Samuel 8:1-22. Reflect on our rejection of God as our king and asking others to rule over us. Read the retirement speech of Samuel the prophet found in 1 Samuel 12. Reflect upon Samuel’s counsel to God’s people.
  • Read the narrative of David and Nathan found in the Old Testament book of 2 Samuel. Read chapters 11 and 12 to enter the story.  Remember David is called “a man after God’s own heart” and was his chosen King (see 2 Samuel 7). What happened to David? How does he initially respond to Nathan?
  • Read Psalm 51 to see how David came to his senses. How did he see the character of God through all of this?

Meditate and Memorize

In light of our own sin and God’s promised grace in Jesus, reflect upon these Scriptures:

20 And Samuel said to the people, “Do not be afraid; you have done all this evil. Yet do not turn aside from following the LORD, but serve the LORD with all your heart. 21 And do not turn aside after empty things that cannot profit or deliver, for they are empty. 22 For the LORD will not forsake his people, for his great name’s sake, because it has pleased the LORD to make you a people for himself.

1 Samuel 12:20-22

1 Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions. 2 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin!

Psalm 51:1-2

28 “Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter,

Mark 3:28

Song and Celebration

If at work or on a lunch break somewhere, put in the headphones and listen to these songs. In listening to these, singing or reading the lyrics, reflect upon the great gift of repentance, faith and the full forgiveness in Christ found by God’s grace

I’m Coming Back by Rebecca Elliot

(Click here to listen to audio)

Iʼve wasted all I have
On things that will not last
Iʼve run so very far away from you

Iʼve tried to forget
Everything you said
My stubborn feet have walked the way of fools
But I canʼt escape from you
 
Iʼm coming back
Iʼm turning back to you
You loved me first
And now my soul thirsts for you… alone

The way Iʼve walked is death
All my strength is spent
Chasing after wind and fools gold

But my gold has turned to dust
And all my idols rusted over
I’ve gained the whole world but I’ve lost my soul

Iʼm coming back
Iʼm turning back to you
You loved me first
And now my soul thirsts for you…alone

Jesus Paid it All original lyrics by Elvina M. Hall

(Click here to listen to audio)

I hear the Savior say
Thy strength indeed is small
Child of weakness watch and pray
Find in me thine all in all

Jesus paid it all
All to him I owe
Sin had left a crimson stain
He washed it white as snow

Lord now indeed I find
Thy power and thine alone
Can change the lepers spots
And melt the heart of stone

Jesus paid it all
All to him I owe
Sin had left a crimson stain
He washed it white as snow

It’s washed away! All my sin! And all my shame!

And when before the throne
I stand in him complete
Jesus died my soul to save
My lips shall still repeat

Jesus paid it all
All to him I owe
Sin had left a crimson stain
He washed it white as snow
Sin had left a crimson stain
He washed it white as snow

Oh praise the one who paid my debt and raised this life up from the dead (Repeated)

Jesus paid it all
All to him I owe
Sin had left a crimson stain
He washed it white as snow

Prayer

Oh holy God, we are people who have walked away from you in both word and deed.  We have hurt others, we have gloried in our pride, we have neglected our heart for you and seen ourselves as better than others. We are so prone to wander away in our thoughts, our affections and in the things we do. But your magnificent mercy and grace captures us today with your marvelous love. We thank you that you welcome sinners and change us.  We thank you that you give us new hope for every day.  Whether we walk today in the valley of the shadow of death or sing upon the mountain tops of victory we know that you are with us. Thank you today for calling us your children, calling us to prayer and calling us by your own name. We are forgiven because we are yours. We have hope today because of your great and precious promises in Jesus our God, Savior and King.

Sojourner Truth - When I found Jesus

Sojourner Truth (1797-1883)

Each of our lives is shaped by a convoluted set of circumstances which mix in families, human culture and historical events and opportunities. Furthermore, Scripture teaches us that in all the seemingly random events, myriad of human choices and activity of spiritual forces that God is providentially guiding and ordering all things. Certain human lives are particularly marked by a convergence of people, events and history such that the fingerprints of God become more evidently seen.  One such individual was a woman born unnoticed, in bondage, under the name Isabella Baumfree. She died known to the whole nation as Sojourner Truth.

Early Life

Sojourner Truth was born at the close of the revolutionary century in America. She arrived into the world in 1797 under the slave name of Isabella.[1]She was born in Ulster County, New York[2]and was sold several times before becoming the property of one John Dumont at the age of thirteen[3]. She underwent brutal treatment and was beaten often as a child beginning at the tender age of nine. Slavery was made illegal in New York State by 1827 but Isabella would flee the tyranny of her masters three months ahead of this time. Her master had promised to free her and provide housing for her and her children in 1826, but upon his reneging on this promise she took matters in her own hands and walked away.[4]She would find shelter in the home of Issac and Maria Van Wagener who were devout Quakers. She recounted how God had shown her their home in a vision prior to her taking refuge there.[5]

An interesting fact from this period of her life involves the vengeful act taken by her former master. In light of her escape, he sold one of her sons back into slavery in Alabama where slavery had not yet been abolished. She actually sued her former master as New York law did not allow slaves to be sold across state lines. She won in court and her son was reconciled to the family.[6]

A New Name and New Calling

Truth’s faith was beginning to deepen and in this period of her story and she describes an awakening to Jesus that would shape the direction of her life. According to her narrated biography, A Narrative of Sojourner Truth,[7]she experienced a conversion which she described as follows:

God revealed himself to her, with all the suddenness of a flash of lightning, showing her, ‘in the twinkling of an eye, that he was all over’–that he pervaded the universe–‘and that there was no place where God was not.’ She became instantly conscious of her great sin in forgetting her almighty Friend and ‘ever-present help in time of trouble.

In 1843 she moved to New York City and had a time of wandering among some of the cults and false teachers of the great city. After coming out of these groups she became a member of The Mother African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, a congregation with its roots in historic biblical Christianity.[8] She would remain affiliated the AME Zion denomination for the rest of her life. At this juncture, she also sought God for a new name that would connect with her deep felt calling. She sensed that God wanted her to be called “Sojourner” as she was to “travel up an’ down the land, showin’ people their sins, an’ bein’ a sign unto them” and “Truth” as “I was to declare the truth to the people.”[9] Under this new name, one not chosen by slave masters, she set out to influence her world.

Activism

Sojourner Truth began to speak widely and her message would come to center on three great subjects. First, she spoke on the subject of Jesus changing her life, declaring on one occasion to a group of ministers the following:

“When I preaches,” she said, “I has just one text to preach from, an’ I always preaches from this one. My text is, “When I found Jesus.”[10]

She also took up the great cause of the 19th century which was joined by many others who named the name of Christ, that of the abolition of slavery. This caused her to connect and work with some of the looming figures of the abolitionist movement including William Lloyd Garrison and the eminent Frederick Douglas[11]. In addition to the abolitionist cause, she also took up women’s rights in the early 1850s. In 1851, while giving a speech in Akron, Ohio she spoke what would become her most famous and remembered words:

And ain’t I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm. I have plowed, I have planted, and I have gathered into barns. And no man could head me. And ain’t I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man—when I could get it—and bear the lash as well! And ain’t I a woman? I have borne children and seen most of them sold into slavery, and when I cried out with a mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me. And ain’t I a woman?[12]

Sojourner truth began her life in slavery and over the course of one lifetime she found freedom, met the risen Jesus, pointed out the sins of slavery and struggled for equality for women. While she remained illiterate her entire life she was able to make a myriad of speeches and gain an audience with Abraham Lincoln.[13] Sojourner Truth would retire to Battle Creek Michigan in 1875 and remained there until she died on November 26, 1883.

To close this brief biography I want to share a few things I learned reading about the life of Sojourner Truth.

Things I Learned

Sojourner Truth was born into a time of injustice and bondage in the early days of the American Republic. Though uneducated, she saw her life as usable in the hands of God and did not shrink back from pursuing what she sensed as a divine call. She was one who exercised great courage and boldness in her life which was exhibited on many occasions. She stood up to a slave master suing him for his breach of the law in the New York courts. She would not shrink back from speaking even when under threats and pressure to remain silent. In one particular instance she was beaten by a mob which left her walking with a cane for the remainder of her days. On another occasion, after disobeying a segregated street car ordinance in Washington DC, she was violently thrown from one of the cars by the conductor. This was some 90 years before a similar protest was taken up by Rosa Parks to fight segregation on the buses of Montgomery Alabama in 1955. Yet even in the midst of such realities Sojourner Truth maintained a quick wit and a vibrant spirit. Two stories demonstrate this well. First, when some people heckled and accused her of being a man disguised as a woman she simply opened her blouse on stage to settle the matter; an open-and-shut case.[14] On another occasion, when the venue where she was supposed to speak was threatened to be burned down, she replied “Then I will speak to the ashes.”[15] Finally she demonstrated in her life what it meant to suffer as a follower of Jesus. She had been beaten cruelly in her childhood, raised her own children in slavery, was forced to do hard labor, was beaten by mobs, thrown from a street car and yet she never gave up. In fact, when Frederick Douglas was despairing about the cause of abolition in 1852, Truth rose up and shouted from the congregation, “Frederick, is God dead?”[16] No, he was not and the sojourn of truth in the American experience resulted in the abolition of slavery with the 13th amendment to the United States Constitution in 1865.

As a follower of Jesus, Sojourner Truth was never able to read the Scriptures herself, yet she still committed to having Bible stories read to her over and over again for her understanding.[17] Though unable to have formal theological training, she lived and acted upon that which she did know. The Jesus died for her and could change people’s lives. How much more should the literate believer attend themselves to the words of God in our day?  

As we reflect upon the lives of others who have been transformed by forgiveness and grace, let us too follow with passion and courage the one who lived and died and rose again.

Reid S. Monaghan

EndNotes

[1] Mark Gali and Ted Olsen, ed. 131 Christians that Everyone Should Know, (Nashville: Broadman and Holman) 2000, 289.

[2] Marvin A. McMickle, African American Christian Heritage, (Valley Forge: Judson Press) 2002, 165.

[3] Gali and Olsen, 289.

[4] McMickle. An interesting accounting of the story has Truth saying the following: “I did not run off, for I thought that wicked, but I walked off, believing that to be all right.” See Women in History, Sojourner Truth (Isabella Baumfree) http://www.lkwdpl.org/wihohio/trut-soj.htm

[5] Gali and Olsen.

[6] McMickle.

[7] A Narrative of Sojourner Truth, was published in 1850. It is available online http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/truth/1850/1850.htmlHer autobiographical account was dictated orally and written down by one Olive Gilbert as Truth was illiterate.

[8] McMickle.

[9] Gali and Olsen.

[10] Ibid.

[11] A really challenging read from history is Douglas’ powerful call out of the church and white Christians in his day. See “The Church and Prejudice” http://www.frederickdouglass.org/speeches/index.html#church

[12] Gali and Olsen, 290.

[13] Ibid.

[14] McMickle, 166.

[15] Gali and Olsen, 289.

[16] McMickle.

[17] Ibid.

The timidity of truth in our time

I am in a class this week that is touching on the epistemological issues involved in doing theology and pretty much believing anything.  This morning’s discussion reminded me of a quote from my favorite dead Brittish author GK Chesterton:

We are on the road to producing a race of men too mentally modest to believe in the multiplication table. We are in danger of seeing philosophers who doubt the law of gravity as being a mere fancy of their own. Scoffers of old time were too proud to be convinced; but these are too humble to be convinced. The meek do inherit the earth; but the modern sceptics are too meek even to claim their inheritance.

GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy, 1908.

I do think that things have gotten a bit worse since Chesterton’s day some 100 years ago. I think the big fella, if alive today, would rend his garments to see a generation so passive and timid about the mere possibility of truth. I wonder if he knew that this gangrenous passivity would come to so infect those who claim to follow the one who once prayed “Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth.” John 17:17-19 ESV

Truth as a categorical reality is indispensable to all of life, without it we perish in a thousand unqualified ways. 

Passion - An Introduction to the Gospel of Mark

Background, Introduction and Themes in Mark’s Gospel - Full Booklet in PDF here
Reid S. Monaghan

Introduction

Some of the most unique writings in history are found in the gospels of the New Testament. These ancient scriptures place the life, teaching, kingdom, sacrificial death and glorious resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth on full display. Out of an obscure corner of the globe, from a small tribe of people came forth a figure that transformed all of human history. He was a man with a focused mission and the Gospel of Mark funnels our own lives into his story. The recounting of the life of Jesus by Mark brings to us fast paced action with a sense of divine drama and movement. We know Jesus is going somewhere; his life had a date with destiny. Mark unfolds the identity and mission of Jesus with a sense of passion and immediacy and by reading this book we enter into the drama which was brought forth from eternity.

In the gospel of Mark, we have no doubt that Jesus is bringing a new reality to the earth and heading to an appointment with suffering and triumph. We follow him today with a focus and passion for the great mission he entrusted to us…to see the salvation of God proclaimed to the world.

By God’s grace, over the course of the next eight months, we will be journeying through Mark’s gospel together to continue our growth into worshippers and disciples of Jesus who live out his mission here in central New Jersey. As we begin I want to take some time to lay out some background for the gospels in general and the gospel of Mark in particular. Also, I will highlight some books in the bibliography that I think will be helpful to your personal growth, family and missional community.

This essay will contain a few sections in order to orient us to the New Testament gospels. I will first give a short introduction to the shape and purpose of the biblical gospels. I will then briefly focus on the synoptic gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke and look at how Mark has been studied in order to treat the similarities and differences in these three gospel accounts. I will then turn to some basic background and introductory information for the gospel of Mark before offering a practical conclusion. The conclusion will highlight some of the features of Mark that I pray will continue to shape the Jacob’s Well community in a profound way.

The Gospels of the New Testament

To come to know Jesus in spirit and in truth we must arrive to him instructed by the canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. We must have knowledge of him as he really is, while the Spirit of God persuades us fully that he is the Christ, the Son of the living God. To know Jesus we must see him in the gospels and experience the living Jesus spiritually present with us by the Holy Spirit. Both truth and spiritual experience unite when we meet Jesus in the Scriptures.[1] In Jesus God became flesh and lived among the people of the earth displaying to us his nature and his glory. Jesus is the majestic one and the written and proclaimed Word of God brings his majesty to us.

In the gospels of the New Testament we have compiled eyewitness accounts[2] from people who walked with Jesus, talked with him, were taught by him, lived with him and were commissioned as his ambassadors and messengers to the world. The canonical gospels were all first century documents compiled as the mission of God spread geographically[3] and as the apostles neared the end of their lives on earth. They wanted to be certain to pass on the life, teaching and mission of Jesus to the broader Christian community and movement[4] who would continue to carry out his work as he had commanded (Matthew 28:18-20). These gospels, inspired by God, would grow in their importance as false teachers began to arise and circulate strange and esoteric opinions about Jesus which were not a part of the apostolic teachings. Many of these writings were poser “gospels” purporting to give secret knowledge and teachings about Jesus. Such writings were rejected by early leaders of the faith such as Irenaeus of Lyon who were directly connected to the apostolic tradition.[5] These works were never considered part of the Bible, have never been part of the Bible and never will be part of the Bible.[6] They were false teachings rejected firmly by pastors who loved their people. The four gospels of the New Testament are the agreed upon standards for the life of Jesus accepted by all Christians everywhere. Protestants, Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox believers all look to these works as the divine and inspired revelation of Jesus Christ. Now let us turn our attention to what makes a gospel writing “a gospel” and focus for a moment on the literary genre.

History, Biography, Theology?

When we come to the gospels we arrive at some very unique writings composed of many kinds of literature. These writings are composed of genealogies, narrative storytelling, historical facts, proverbs of wisdom, teaching parables, commands, and some apocalyptic sections. Many questions can rightly be asked about these books. Are these books of history, mere biographical sketch or simply theological books aiming to teach us truths about God? For instance, there are certainly historical realities about the gospels in that they are set in real time and real places speaking about real people. They do not speak about another mythical world in a galaxy far far away. So in that way the gospels are historical but they are not mere compilations of historical facts and figures. They endeavor to teach us more than that. Furthermore, it should be noted that the gospels may well be properly classified in the genre of ancient biography.[7] When we hear the word “biography” we may think of a show on A&E, VH1 behind the scenes or a book aiming to tell the whole life story of a certain person. We know the gospels do not do this as they only contain parts of Jesus’s story; parts that serve the purpose and theological aims of the particular gospel in question. This may lead us to see the gospels as books of theological facts but this seems far less personal that what we find when actually reading them. Scottish New Testament scholar Richard Bauckham gives a wonderful classification for the gospels in describing them as testimony:

Understanding the Gospels as testimony, we can recognize this theological meaning of the history not as an arbitrary imposition on the objective facts, but as the way the witnesses perceived the history, in an inextricable coinherence of observable event and perceptible meaning.  Testimony is the category that enables us to read the Gospels in a properly historical way and a properly theological way.  It is where history and theology meet..[8] 

Therefore, we shall see the gospels as eyewitness testimony pointing to a real person, in real history, revealing to us real truth about God, ourselves and Jesus of Nazareth, who is called the Christ.  It is my hope that we might enjoy a lifetime of studying these writings, meeting Jesus in them and growing spiritually through their nourishment as the Word of our God. Before we move into a general introduction to Mark’s gospel I want to provide a brief treatment of the importance or Mark to a particular area of gospel studies.

The Synoptic Gospels

The gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke are known as the Synoptic Gospels, in that each provides a synopsis, or outline of the life and teaching of Jesus. The word synoptic is derived from two Greek terms that when combined mean to see together.  When examined together, these gospels present a multifaceted view of the life and teaching of Jesus. There is an interesting body of scholarship whose goal has been to investigate the origin and compiling of the synoptic gospels from early oral tradition and eyewitness accounts. Scholars have labeled this the synoptic problem. The question arises from both the similarity and differences between the texts of Matthew, Mark and Luke and the potential literary and source connections between them. A complete summary of the synoptic problem is well beyond our purposes here, but I think a brief summary will help you at least know some of the issues. I will lay out a few of the issues that make the synoptic puzzle an interesting area of New Testament studies. For those interested in a very brief, approachable, but thoughtful summary of the current discussion I recommend Rethinking the Synoptic Problem published by Baker Academic.[9]  It is only about 160 pages so throw it in your Amazon shopping cart.

First Issue - We know the Gospels are Compilations

The fact that the evangelists, the writers of the synoptic gospels, compiled their accounts from other sources is non-controversial. It is the clear teaching of the Bible and of church tradition. For instance, Luke begins his gospel with the following statement:

1Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Luke 1:1-4 ESV

A few things should be noted about Luke’s goals in writing his gospel. First, he acknowledges others have taken up the task to compile a written narrative of Jesus. Second, these compilations are based on eyewitness accounts from those who were with Jesus and ministers of the word. Third, his concern was to put together a written, orderly, factual account of the teachings of the Christian faith. Additionally, there is a strong tradition stating that Mark’s gospel is a compilation of the account and preaching of Peter which was written around the time of the apostle’s death. We’ll have more on this a bit later in this essay. So if the gospels are compilations which were written down at different times, for different purposes, by different authors it is likely that they shared some of the same sources and perhaps used one another’s writings.

Second Issue - Same Stories, Different Accountings

If you ever interact with people who are skeptical about the Bible they are sure to bring up the so called “contradictions” in the gospel narratives. You see some of the stories are the same, sometimes verbatim (see next issue), but sometimes the stories are similar but have some pretty significant differences.  A quick read of the resurrection narrative accounts in the synoptic gospels will suffice to illustrate.  How many angels were there at the empty tomb?  If you go after answering that question for a moment you run into a feature of the synoptic problem. My answer? Probably, at least two…but each does not always get props in every version of the story.

Third Issue - Same Stories, Same Wordings

Many times the synoptic gospels contain the exact same stories and teachings of Jesus Christ. This would be rather uninteresting as a mere accounting of the same life would suffice to explain this occurrence. However, many times in the gospels we find Matthew and Luke repeating Mark almost word for word. Additionally Matthew and Luke contain some of the same sayings of Jesus that are not found in Mark. This has provoked the question: Who was using what writings in compiling their work? In any account, there appears to be a literary interdependence of the synoptic gospels and their sources. This has led to the dominant position among many scholars today known as the Two Source hypothesis which I will only sketch in bullet form here.

The Dominant Solution – Two Source Hypothesis

  • Mark was written first.  The view that Mark was the first gospel is simply assumed by many in New Testament studies today.[10] For example, Ben Witherington begins his commentary with a simple statement regarding studies of the gospel of Mark: “The sheer volume of recent studies, however, suggests that we are trying harder to grasp the meaning of this, the earliest of the gospels.”[11] There are many reasons for thinking Mark may have been written first.[12]
  • Matthew and Luke had Mark available to them as they wrote
  • Scholars have formed a hypothesis (a good and educated guess) of another source which they have called “Q”[13] (from the German quelle for “source”). It is held that this source contained sayings that Matthew and Luke share in common but are absent from Mark. Q is a working hypothesis used by some scholars. There is not a single shred of archaeological evidence of its existence; it is simply a literary inference. We do not have one copy of this source. Yet it is a reasonable inference due to the material shared by Matthew and Luke.  It is questioned by some scholars and an assumed hypothesis by others.
  • Today, Markan priority and the use of Luke/Matthew of Mark/Q remains the dominant view in explaining the synoptic gospels.

However, in the last several decades there have been others who are arguing quite convincingly for the priority of Matthew.[14]  This holds promise for a couple reasons.  First, the earliest traditions and teachings in church history are univocal that Matthew was written first. This was unchallenged for over 1800 years. Second, this school of thought is giving much more credence to patristic studies, studies of the writings of the church fathers. For those interested in this school of thought will want to see Why Four Gospels by David Allan Black.[15] I personally enjoy this work and would love to see more scholars attend to it.

Let me close briefly by saying that all evangelical scholars—whether those who hold to the two source/Markan priority hypothesis or the priority of Matthew—hold that the synoptic gospels were written down by the inspiration and direction of the Holy Spirit. All evangelical New Testament scholars agree that each view is compatible with the truth that the writers of the gospels recorded scripture as inspired by God. 

Dr. Craig Blomberg sums this up well:

…it is important to state up front that none of the major solutions to the Synoptic problem is inherently more or less compatible with historic Christian views of the inspiration and authority of Scripture.[16] 

Though the precise solution to the literary connectedness of the gospels is not of central importance to our faith, it is good to be aware of these issues.  Many so called “contradictions” that skeptics claim to find in the synoptic narratives are easily resolved when we realize that each author arranged his material to tell the story of Jesus from a particular perspective. Our chief concern with Matthew, Mark and Luke is the person to whom they testify. Our gaze is the person of Jesus who lived in history, taught us many things, gave his life as a sacrifice for sin and rose from death to set people free. Each of the synoptic gospels takes us to this Jesus in a unique way.

The Gospel of Mark - Basic Background

In terms of historical attention, the gospel of Mark has been a bit of a little step brother to the lengthier gospels of Matthew, Luke and John. In fact, many in the ancient world considered Mark to serve the church as a sort of abstract, or a short outline version, of the Gospel of Matthew.[17] Historically there has been much more preaching on John and Matthew. Even today, you will not encounter as many sermons preached from Mark’s gospel as you will from the more theological gospel of John. In recent times much more scholarly focus has been given to this gospel due to its helpfulness in a solution to the Synoptic Problem (see above). Mark is a mere sixteen chapters and is a fast paced accounting of the teaching and life of Jesus.  It contains no genealogies or birth narratives as do Matthew and Luke and is very concerned with presenting Jesus’ passion week as the focus of the story. In fact, about half of the book is about the last week of Jesus life. This will be only a brief introduction to the background of the book and its teaching.  For those who want more just follow the yellow brick road called the footnotes.  I am convinced that Jesus must just love good footnotes.  At least I do. Smile.

Authorship of Mark

All of the gospels do not have the author’s name as part of the text itself, but the four gospels have never really been anonymous in church history. The author’s name which is associated with the book is that of a man named Mark. This person is mentioned several times in the New Testament and was commonly known as John Mark. The earliest church traditions all associate this gospel with Mark and his task to record the account of the apostle Peter in writing. The earliest sources we have are from the writings of Papias, a church leader in Hierapolis (in modern day Turkey), and Irenaeus, a bishop from Lyon (in what is modern day France). Papias’ work survives in a text written by the prominent early church historian Eusebius.  It reads as follows:

And the Elder said this also: “Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he remembered of the things said and done by the lord, but no however in order.” For neither did he hear the Lord, nor did he follow him, but afterwards, as I said, Peter, who adapted his teachings to the needs of his hearers, but not as though he were drawing up a connected account of the Lord’s oracles.  So then Mark made no mistake in thus recording some things just as he remembered them.  For he took forethought for one thing, not to omit any of the things that he had heard, nor to state any of them falsely. [18] 

It is estimated the Papias tradition is very early and dates perhaps to within 90-100 AD.[19]  Irenaeus, writing in the second century, recorded the following:

After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him.[20]

The oldest traditions all hold that Mark was the other who arranged the teachings of Peter to give a written account of Jesus Christ to the church. In addition to the tradition there is good internal evidence in the book that Mark’s gospel greatly reflects the preaching of Peter that we see in the book of Acts.[21] New Testament scholar Daniel Wallace provides a great summary of the internal connection with Mark and Peter; I will quote him at length:

  1. John Mark had contact with Peter from no later than the mid-40s (Acts 12:12) and it appears that the church met at Mark’s own residence.
  2. Both Peter and Mark were connected to the churches in Antioch and Jerusalem.
  3. Paul sent Mark from Rome to the Colossian church and to Philemon in 60-62. If Peter were in Rome at this time, Mark would have had contact with him there.
  4. 2 Tim 4:11 we find Paul giving Timothy instructions to bring Mark with him from Ephesus to Rom (c. 64). It is possible that he had been outside of Rome since his departure in 62.
  5. Mark is with Peter in Rom in c. 65 (1 Peter 5:13) perhaps after his return at Paul’s request. Peter also calls Mark his “son” in this passage indicating a more long-standing relationship.
  6. The book of Mark’s outline follows the Petrine teaching recorded in Acts 10:36-41. (1) John the Baptist  (2) Jesus Baptized by John (3) Jesus’ miracles show he is from God (4) he went to Jerusalem (5) was crucified (6) he was raised on the third day. This shows that perhaps Mark even received a framework for the oracles of Jesus from Peter.
  7. The low view of Peter and the other apostles in Mark shows that the person writing was not trying to put them on a pedestal.  A non-apostolic writer would have done this unless he was recording what he actually had received from Peter. [22]

So we have good reasons, both the external testimony from church tradition and the content of the book itself, to hold that John Mark arranged the instruction of Peter who gave eyewitness testimony to the life and teaching of Jesus Christ.

Who was John Mark?

John Mark is mentioned several times in the New Testament as an associate in ministry of both Peter (1 Peter 5:13) and Paul (Acts 12:25, 15:37-39; 2 Timothy 4:11). In some ways he is one of the key players in the early church as he is a disciple and co-laborer of the two men who most shaped the Christian movement after the ascension of Jesus. In the early days in Jerusalem the church apparently met in his house (Acts 12:12), the same house in which the last supper was held.[23] He exhibits great ability as a storyteller and takes us on a journey to the central focus of the gospel – the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.

One of the things I appreciate most about John Mark is that he is a bit of a comeback kid. In his relationship with Paul we see him as one of the earliest missionaries taking the gospel out into the world.  Then apparently he becomes a little freaked out in the field and abandons the mission. This of course had Paul a little miffed and Paul and Barnabas actually part ways over the incident. Paul simply doesn’t trust Mark after he tapped out on him. Yet Barnabas, whose name means son of encouragement, gives him a second chance and Mark was greatly used by God. He eventually becomes Peter’s right hand man and what God does in his relationship with Paul is encouraging. Paul’s last comments about him are very endearing.  Just before Paul’s death, he asks Timothy to send for John Mark; he wanted his friend at his side in his last days (2 Timothy 4:11)

Dating of Mark

Many events factor into a dating of the gospel of Mark and knowing some important and confirmed/accepted times from the first century is always helpful.  These dates will be brought into our discussion of a date for Mark’s writing.

Event

Date (AD - apprx)

Fall of Jerusalem

70

Martyrdom of Paul and Peter

64-68

Epistles of Paul

45-68

Some Oral Tradition

32-70

Crucifixion of Jesus

32

In looking at the date of Mark’s gospel we find several important issues. First, if we accept the tradition that he recorded the teaching of Peter then we must place it somewhere in the locus of the life of the apostle. Second, if one finds the two source/Markan priority hypothesis as a good solution to the Synoptic Problem, then Mark precedes Matthew and Luke and this affects its dating. Third, we have testimony from the early church that Mark wrote either just before or just after the death of Peter which we date to the persecution under Nero after a great fire in AD 64. With the theme of suffering so prominent in Mark and Peter’s execution in the mid-sixties, most prefer a date for the gospel between 60 and 70, usually right around 65. 

Yet some who favor Markan priority place it in the mid-50s[24] for the following reasons. If Mark was written first then the gospel of Luke must be dated after Mark. Dating Luke’s gospel is not so difficult.  We know from the text itself that the same author composed by Luke and Acts as a two part volume with Luke compiled first. A few dates help us position Luke-Acts. First, Acts has no mention of the fall of Jerusalem which we date conclusively to AD 70. This would be strange if this painful event had already occurred. This gives us confidence to place the writing of Acts to before 70. Additionally, Acts also ends with Paul living under house arrest in Rome. We estimate that Paul is martyred in between 64-68 so this would place Acts some time before his death. If Luke came before Acts we find that gospel coming on to the scene in the very early part of the 60s with some placing it around AD 62. So if one favors the thesis that Mark was written first, then a date preceding Luke, sometime in the late 50s seems to be preferred.  However, if you hold to the tradition that Matthew was first, then Mark can be happy at around AD 65. With either consideration, Mark is one of the earliest gospels recorded to pass the teaching and story of Jesus on for the generations which were to come. 

Provenance of Mark

Here is our big word for the day…provenance. It simply means the origin of the writing or the place where it was written. The church has always held that the gospel was written from Italy, in the imperial capital of Rome. The use of technical Latin terminology, the use of Roman accounting of time (6:48; 13:35) all point towards Rome. Mark’s use of the Greek version of the Old Testament, his explanation of Jewish customs and practices, his translation of Aramaic terms indicate he was likely writing with a Gentile audience in mind.[25] Finally, Mark’s lack of inclusion of a Jewish genealogy for Jesus perhaps points to a Roman audience as well. We have no good reason to doubt that the gospel originated in the first century Christian community in Rome. 

Context and Purpose of Mark

Ben Witherington’s commentary on Mark calls to mind two very important cultural contexts which are in play in Mark’s gospel.  First, the culture of early first century Galilee/Judea in AD 20-30 and second, the mid first century culture of Rome in the 60s.[26] It is an interesting fact that both contexts presented great difficulty for both the Jewish and early Christian communities. Galilee/Judea was under Roman occupation and rule where Jesus and his following appeared a religious-political threat to imperial power. Rome in the mid-60s presented an intense, though brief, time of suffering and persecution under the maniacal leadership of Nero. That story requires a brief explanation.

In the early days of Nero’s reign Christians lived in relative peace in the empire. They were seen with some suspicion due to their rejection of pagan gods and festivals as well as their preaching of the gospel. Aggressive seeking of converts put them at odds with the established and ancient religions of the day. Though Peter and Paul were executed for their leadership in preaching the gospel, aggressive, wide spread persecution of Christians as a class of people was not yet the reality. This changed around AD 64 with a widespread fire in Rome. The cause of the fire is uncertain with some blaming the emperor as the source. Nero, however, found a different scapegoat to turn suspicion away from him. He blamed the Christians. This was significant for two reasons. First, he was the first emperor to treat the Christians as followers of a different religion than that of the Jews. This made them believers in a new religion, not an ancient and accepted faith.[27] Second, he declared open season on Christians and set off unprecedented abuse of Christian people. After the time of Nero’s persecutions, a brutal account was recorded by the ancient historian Tacitus. Oh, how our sisters and brothers suffered for the sake of the name of Christ. Here is the account:

But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man’s cruelty, that they were being destroyed.[28]

Nero sounds like a punk to me and just making an educated guess I imagine that he received a really, really warm reception in the afterlife. The themes in Mark reflect this context of suffering and persecution. In the gospel Jesus is presented as the suffering servant, wrongly and brutally punished by the hand of Rome. Christians in Rome under Nero’s reign would have understood this message. Follow the example of Jesus in the midst of their own suffering. 

Such is our own call; we are called to Jesus and to live together in his mission. Whether we live in times of open suffering or lulled to sleep by comfort and familiarity we must be shaken loose from our current views of life in order to follow Jesus in our world today. We need his life, his kingdom and his story to constantly define our own. This is our invitation, to see Jesus as the founder and definition of our faith, the definer of life and the person whose story gives us reference points for every turn of life ahead.

Themes of Mark

Though much could be said about all the teaching and themes found in the gospel of Mark, for our purposes here I simply want to bring the following to light for the Jacob’s Well family. These themes are important theologically to understand ourselves and our Lord so that we might live out the gospel mandate in our time.

King and Kingdom

Two inextricably connected realities explode on to the scene in the very first chapter of Mark’s gospel. Here we read, “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” and further, “…Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel’.” Here is the language of the arrival of a King and a great Kingdom, yet not just any royal reign. This is God’s King and God’s Kingdom. A new way of living under the rule and reign of Christ, the Messiah, God’s anointed king has arrived and all of history, including our lives, will be forever changed. Jesus is a different King than the temporal rulers and potentates of our world. Those who call him Lord are transformed and live under a different reality now and forever. God’s people become a tangible expression of the rule of Jesus now as we extend the gospel to others around us. The good news of the Bible is that God’s King has come, we can live under his rule and we enter his covenant community by repenting of sin and placing complete faith and trust in Christ.

Identity through Action OR Identity in Action

How do you get to know someone? Personally, I have read books and biographies about people where I feel like I know a little bit about them. You can listen to others tell you about a friend and you can also actually watch him live. The disciples and apostles lived with Jesus and watched him live out his ministry. Peter, through Mark’s writing, wants to let us in on this action. Mark’s gospel says this to us: “If you want to know the identity of Jesus, just watch him.” What does he do? How does he go about his purpose and mission? Yes, Mark does contain some of Jesus’s teaching in its pages but far less than the other gospels. The reason seems to be that Mark wants us to know Jesus by watching what he does in fast and furious action. As we read Mark, illuminated by the Spirit, we see someone to follow quite clearly. We need to experience Jesus in both his teaching and his works and then obey and follow. The apostle John describes this as the “abundant life” with Christ as our chief shepherd; our master and commander in life.

The Joy of Suspense

What will he do next? I find myself asking this as I read through Mark. A great exercise for me has been to listen to Mark read aloud. The sense of movement and anticipation is quite a joyful experience. In the same way our lives are similar. We should always be asking the question: Lord Jesus, what are you going to do next!? I personally love a good story or film at the movies. Yet I do think we can neglect the significance of the story of our own lives. We watch a movie with suspense and expectation but we do not seem to watch “Tuesday” in the same way. Reading the story of Jesus makes me realize that he is present with me every day in significant events and in the normal routines of eating and sleeping. He also calls us to follow him in his work on the earth now. This calling, when obeyed, leads to some joyful suspense as well as opportunities to let faith conquer our fears. My hope is that Mark would encourage us to swing our bat each day and joyfully watch as Jesus works in our lives and world. Standing on the sidelines, sitting the bench, standing with the bat on our shoulder as the pitch goes by, not trying at all to follow is lame Christianity as religion. I pray that in the joyful suspense of believing and following we might find life in his name (John 1:12). Sometimes there is a cross and pain in the trail before us, sometimes there is resurrection glory, yet on either path our hope is in Jesus. With this hope as a firm anchor to the soul (Hebrews 6:19) and our joy is seeing him lead us and surprise us day after day.

Sacrifice, Service and Suffering

There is a current sickness of sin in the modern American church which brings many to proclaim a dangerous half-truth to people. God only wants you to be rich, happy and never face sickness or extreme suffering or difficulty, they say. The Bible calls BS on this sort of teaching, yet the airwaves and interwebs are filled with such nonsense. Yes, God is the source of every blessing (James 1:16, 17). Yes, we should pray for healing (James 5:13-15). Yes, joy, when found in the right things, is a great gift of God. In fact, in God’s presence there is fullness of joy (Psalm 16). We must never forget, however, that Jesus both calls and models a life for us that also includes service to others, suffering for others and sacrifice in mission. To serve means to be inconvenienced and to bear others burdens. To love, particularly the unlovely, the difficult and the challenging, will mean we will suffer. To simply follow Jesus in a world where many do not like him or his message means we too will endure some persecution for our faith (2 Timothy 3:10-17). Mark’s gospel reveals a beautiful purpose in Jesus’s life and mission and hence our own:

[42] And Jesus called them to him and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. [43] But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, [44] and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. [45] For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Mark 10:42-45 ESV

Triumph into Mission

The gospel of Mark is about Jesus who is the pinnacle of the story of the Bible. We must remember that the story of God is written in history and the Scriptures record but a beginning and commissioning of the mission of God. The final book of the Bible records the great return of King Jesus to vanquish all evil, to reconcile all things back to God and place all his enemies under his feet. Mark’s gospel teaches us that we are part of the story and mission of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. His final triumph on the earth was over the grave itself where God the Father powerfully raises Jesus from the dead. The apostle Paul tells us that this triumph extends into our lives now when he wrote:

[9] You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. [10] But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. [11] If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

Romans 8:9-11 ESV

Today, now, and until eternity, we have the Holy Spirit living in us to transform our lives, empower and embolden us to proclaim the gospel and joyfully follow Jesus…all the way home friends, all the way home. If the Kingdom of Heaven is our final home and his call upon us now is to follow in life and mission we indeed must give ourselves fully to this work. To do anything else, as the writer of Ecclesiastes teachers us, is but a chasing after the wind.

Yours for seeing, savoring, following and being transformed by Jesus as he is revealed to us in the gospel of Mark. The journey begins, with a passionate summons from our King. Let us respond and follow with great passion of our own.

In His Name in the year of our Lord 2012

 

Pastor Reid S. Monaghan 

 

Recommended Resources

General Resources for the Study of the Gospels

       Rethinking The Synoptic the Problem edited by David Alan Black and David R. Beck

       Why Four Gospels by David Alan Black

       Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony and The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences by Richard Bauckham

       Promises Kept, The Message of the New Testament by Mark Dever

       Can We Trust the Gospels by Mark D. Roberts

       The Historical Reliability of the Gospels by Craig Blomberg

The Gospel of Mark

       The King’s Cross by Timothy Keller – popular level treatment derived from some of Dr. Keller’s teaching at Redeemer NYC from the book of Mark.

       Mark for Everyone by N.T. Wright – though we do not stand with Wright on some important theological positions, this commentary is helpful, devotional and accessible.

       The Gospel According to Mark, Pillar New Testament Commentary by James R. Edwards – excellent commentary that is scholarly but not overwhelmingly technical.

       The Gospel of Mark by William Lane – comprehensive and excellent commentary that will take you into Mark with some depth of understanding.

       The Gospel of Mark, A Socio Rhetorical Commentary by Ben Witherington – a unique commentary focusing on the social and rhetorical contexts that are the backdrop of Mark.

Bibliography

Bauckham, Richard. The Gospels for All Christians : Rethinking the Gospel Audiences. Grand Rapids, Mich. ; Cambridge, U.K.: W.B. Eerdmans, 1997.

________. Jesus and the Eyewitnesses : The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony. Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2006.

Black, David Alan. Why Four Gospels - the Historical Origins of the Gospels. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2001.

Black, David Alan, and David R Beck. Rethinking the Synoptic Problem. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.

Bock, Darrell L. The Missing Gospels-Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2006.

Calvin, John. “Institutes of the Christian Religion.”

Carson, D. A., Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1992.

Edwards, James R. The Gospel According to Mark. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2002.

Farmer, William Reuben. The Synoptic Problem, a Critical Analysis. New York: Macmillan, 1964.

France, R. T. The Gospel of Mark : A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002.

Irenaeus, “Against Heresies”, Christian Classics Ethereal Library http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.ii.html (accessed Jan 4 2012).

Kirby, Peter, “Q Document ” http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/q.html (accessed Jan 4 2012).

Lane, William L. The Gospel According to Mark; the English Text with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes. Grand Rapids,: Eerdmans, 1974.

Tacitus, “The Annals “, MIT Internet Classics Archive http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.11.xv.html (accessed Jan 4 2012).

Wallace, Daniel, “Mark: Introduction, Argument, and Outline”, Bible.org http://bible.org/seriespage/mark-introduction-argument-and-outline (accessed Jan 4 2012).

Witherington, Ben. The Gospel of Mark : A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 2001.

 

ENDNOTES


[1]John Calvin, “Institutes of the Christian Religion.” says this well “Scripture will ultimately suffice for a saving knowledge of God only when its certainty is founded upon the inward persuasion of the Holy Spirit” (Book I, viii, 13).

[2] A compelling case for the gospels being comprised of eyewitness testimony is found in Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses : The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2006). 

[3] David Alan Black, following the work of William Farmer and Bernard Orchard gives an interesting hypothesis that the gospels were written during the periods of missional unfolding during the apostolic era. Matthew in the Jerusalem period, Luke in the gentile mission of Paul, Mark in Rome and John adding his theological gospel towards the end of the apostolic age. See David Alan Black, Why Four Gospels - the Historical Origins of the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2001).

[4] See Richard Bauckham, The Gospels for All Christians : Rethinking the Gospel Audiences (Grand Rapids, Mich. ; Cambridge, U.K.: W.B. Eerdmans, 1997), 8-49.   

[5] See Irenaeus, “Against Heresies”, Christian Classics Ethereal Library http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.ii.html (accessed Jan 4 2012). Irenaeus is said to have heard the gospel from a man named Polycarp who was a disciple of some guy named John the apostle.  The point is Irenaeus, in refuting false teachings, was in the position to know.

[6] Some scholars today such as Bart Ehrman of UNC Chapel Hill and Elaine Pagels of Princeton present these other books as “Lost Scriptures” from “Lost Christianities” rather than “rejected books” and “rejected” Christianities. This is historical revisionism at its worst. For a treatment of these issues see Darrell L. Bock, The Missing Gospels-Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2006).

[7] See genre analysis in Richard A. Burridge “About People, by People, for People: Gospel Genre and Audiences” in Bauckham, The Gospels for All Christians : Rethinking the Gospel Audiences, 113-145.

[8] Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses : The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony, 5,6.

[9] David Alan Black and David R Beck, Rethinking the Synoptic Problem (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001).

[10] Ibid., 17.

[11] Ben Witherington, The Gospel of Mark : A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 2001), 1. Emphasis added.

[12] D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1992), 32-36.

[13] More on “Q” can be found here Peter Kirby, “Q Document ” http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/q.html (accessed Jan 4 2012).

[14] Most influential has been the late William Reuben Farmer, The Synoptic Problem, a Critical Analysis (New York: Macmillan, 1964).  See brief discussion in R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark : A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002), 42.

[15] Black, Why Four Gospels - the Historical Origins of the Gospels.

[16] Black and Beck, Rethinking the Synoptic Problem, 18.

[17] William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark; the English Text with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes (Grand Rapids,: Eerdmans, 1974), 3.

[18] Ibid., 8.

[19] James R. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark (Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2002), 4.

[20] Irenaeus.

[21] Lane, 10-12.

[22] Daniel Wallace, “Mark: Introduction, Argument, and Outline”, Bible.org http://bible.org/seriespage/mark-introduction-argument-and-outline (accessed Jan 4 2012).

[23] Edwards, 5.

[24] This is the position favored in Carson, Moo, and Morris.

[25] Lane, 25.

[26] Witherington, 31.

[27] Ibid., 34-35.

[28] Tacitus, “The Annals “, MIT Internet Classics Archive http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.11.xv.html (accessed Jan 4 2012). Emphasis added.

The Joy of Suspense

What will Jesus do next? I find myself asking this as I read through the gospel of Mark in the New Testament. A great exercise for me has been to listen to Mark read aloud. The sense of movement and anticipation is quite a joyful experience. In the same way our lives are similar. We should always be asking the question: Jesus, what are you going to do next!?

I personally love a good story or film at the movies. Yet I do think we can neglect the significance of the story of our own lives. We watch a movie with suspense and expectation but we do not seem to watch “Tuesday” in the same way. Reading the story of Jesus makes me realize that he is present with me every day in significant events and in the normal routines of eating and sleeping. He also calls us to follow him in his work on the earth now.

This calling, when obeyed, leads to some joyful suspense as well as opportunities to let faith conquer our fear. My hope is that Mark would encourage us to swing our bat each day and joyfully watch as Jesus works in our lives and world. Standing on the sidelines, sitting the bench, standing with the bat on our shoulder as the pitch goes by, not trying at all to follow is lame Christianity as religion. I pray that in the joyful suspense of believing and following we might find life in his name (John 1:12). Sometimes there is a cross and pain in the trail before us, sometimes there is resurrection glory, yet on either path our hope is in Jesus. With this hope as a firm anchor to the soul (Hebrews 6:19) and our joy is seeing him lead us and surprise us day after day.

GK Chesterton once wrote that the modern mechanistic view of life and the universe drains it of its wonder. Real joy comes from knowing that life has a captain and we find delight as he fills each day with unexpected realities.

Isaac Watts - Joy to the World

Introduction

There have been many things born in barns over the years. In one sense, Jesus himself had such a rustic beginning and in many ways the modern hymnody movement in the English speaking world was born in a barn. In May 1731 Philip Doddridge, a minister in the congregational church, dispatched a joyous letter to his friend Isaac Watts.  Watts and Doddridge were a part of a movement who were known as non-conformists, those who were not a part of the official state church on England.  Doddridge had held a service in a barn for “plain country people” in which they sang one of Watts’s hymns which had brought a tearful and celebratory response within the congregation present.[1] The church in the English speaking world began to sing, and write its own songs, and sing some more. In many ways, we are the recipients of their work.  The churches in Europe had typically sung from the Psalter, the psalms of the Old Testament.  Watts and those following after him wrote songs in the language of the common people expressing biblical theology in the style and language of the people.  The Protestant churches of England and the American colonies were profoundly impacted by this upheaval. Historian Mark Noll in his early chapter of the book Wonderful Words of Life – Hymns in American Protestant History and Theology sums up well the influence of hymn singing on the faith and religion of people in the early days of the evangelical movement of the early 18th century:

From the early generations of evangelicals, hymn singing became almost sacramental. It was the one physical activity that all evangelicals shared and it was the one experience that bound them most closely together with each other. In fact, it is difficult to discover any significant event, person, or structure of early Evangelicalism that did not involve the singing of hymns. It is likewise difficult to discover any significant experience of singing or hands have not been freshly written by the evangelicals themselves (or by Isaac Watts who befriended them and his hands they embraced enthusiastically from the start)[2].

In the 18th century revivals of England and her colonies figures such as Jonathan Edwards, Charles and John Wesley and George Whitfield take up much of the historical horizon. Isaac Watts perhaps had as large an impact upon this time yet his voice is not as pronounced in our histories. Interestingly it was this man’s hymns and his courageous break with tradition that brought a myriad of voices to life in those striking years of awakening and revival.  So much is the influence of Watts on the history of evangelical hymn writing that Mouw and Noll entitled the first section of their book on English Protestant Hymn singing, “In the Beginning was Watts”. [3]

The Beginnings of Watts

Isaac Watts was born in 1674 in the town of Southampton in England.  He was raised by a father of strong biblical convictions.  His father stood so much by his convictions that he did some jail time for his dissent from the Church of England and was apparently on lock down when little Isaac was born.[4] During his lifetime England underwent tumultuous vacillations with the forces of Catholicism and Protestantism still yet in struggle for the soul of the island nation. Bernard Manning, in a paper on Watts delivered at Cambridge in 1937, made this commentary on the times in which Watts lived his life:

At the very end of his life, Dr. Watts had the satisfaction of witnessing in the failure of the ‘45 the collapse of the Young Pretender, and the final deliverance of Great Britain from the dangers that had menaced it since the death of Oliver Cromwell. The Constitution was saved from Divine Right. Protestantism was saved from France and the Pope. Dissent was saved from Toryism and persecution. Watts, then, was one of those fortunate persons whose life coincides with the increasing triumph of his own cause. The right people win. The wicked are cast down. All things — visibly — work together for good to them that love God. The note of cheerfulness — perhaps the most distinct note in Watts’s poetry — comes appropriately from such a setting.[5]

Though the end saw the triumph of Watt’s community and its beliefs, his life was lived in a time of great change, some of which he would later bring to the churches himself. 

As a young boy Watts showed himself to be quite intelligent and somewhat a master of languages.  He began learning Latin at age four and went on to master of Greek, Hebrew and French.[6] Apparently he had a tendency towards rhyming which makes me think he would drop some great freestyle if living in our day. One impish little instance from his youth is recorded by Norman Mable:

One morning while the household were engaged in family prayers little Isaac was heard to giggle. The other worshippers were very shocked, and when devotions were over his father demanded in a freezing tone why he had laughed. ‘Because, replied the boy nervously, while he pointed to the bell-rope that hung by the fire-place, I saw a mouse running up that; and it came to my mind: There was a mouse for want of stairs, Ran up a rope to say his prayers. The father, without a word, turned to a shelf and took down the rod, whereupon poor little Isaac, falling on his knees, begged with streaming eyes: father, father, pity take, And I will no more verses make.[7]

Nice flow, young Isaac, nice flow. 

As a member of a non-conformist community he was not permitted to study at Oxford and Cambridge the bastions of English intellectualism.[8] This lack of pomp and pedigree did not thwart him becoming a first rate thinker and scholar albeit at what would have been considered a secondary school. Watts’s studies led him into Christian ministry as a pastor and theologian but he was also a first rate logician.  It is less known but Watts’s textbook on Logic was used in as the standard text at Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard and Yale and it found use for decades in the academies.[9]  Yet most rightly remember Watts for the six hundred or some hymns he wrote and the precious poetical gems still sung in churches until this day. Isaac Watts departed this earth in 1748 but his influence would echo long after his flesh had passed away.

Watts’s Influence

We cannot say enough about Watt’s influence upon the singing scenes of the English speaking churches in the 18th and 19th century.  After his studies in college he began to be frustrated with the singing and music in the churches and complained about it. Having a good dad, Watts was challenged by his father to come up with something better.[10] He did.  Watts began writing “new hymns” and published several volumes in the early 1700s.  Hymns and Spiritual Songs, in Three Books (1707) and Psalms of David Imitated (1719) were perhaps most influential in his efforts to reform singing in the churches.[11] The latter was an effort to state some of the biblical Psalms with Christ-centered meaning and the poetic structure of the times.  Not surprisingly this was opposed vigorously by some traditionalist with some wonderfully titled pamphlets Vindication of David’s Psalms from Mr. I. Watts’s Erroneous Notions and Reasons wherefore Christians ought to worship Go, not with Dr. Watts’s Psalms, but with David’s Psalms.[12] Particularly opposed was Thomas Bradbury who referred to Watts’s works as whims instead of hymns.[13]Yet Watts’s work would find traction in hungry souls seeking some freshness and heart expression in the worship of their great God and King.  His hymns took particular root in the American colonies.

Watt’s work was known in the colonies from his personal connection and correspondence with church leaders in New England.  It is known that Cotton Mather, had received copies of Watts’s work directly from the English poet himself[14] and in 1729 his Psalms of David was published in the colonies by none other than Benjamin Franklin.[15]

Watts’s influence on colonial and then later American Christian faith has been profound. His songs crossed racial boundaries which were being sung in black and white churches. Congregations of African slaves took to Watts’s music so much that a certain type of singing became known as “Dr. Watts” singing.[16] His hymn When I Survey the Wondrous Cross has been labeled by some greatest hymn in the English language.[17] The 19th century abolitionist and preacher Henry Ward Beecher had this to say of the impact of Watts:

When believers analyze their religion emotions, it is as common to trace them back to the early hymns of childhood as to the Bible itself. At least until very recently, most English-speaking Protestants who thought about heaven did so more in the terms of Dr. Watts than of the Revelation of St. John.[18]

This broad influence continued in England as well with a profound influence on the singing of Charles Haddon Spurgeon’s Metropolitan Tabernacle.[19]  Finally, in our own day, churches continue to sing classic hymns by Isaac Watts. Today Sojourn Community Church in Louisville Kentucky has put out two albums which remix the hymns in fresh new music and styles.[20] I think Dr. Watts would likely approve.   Yet one cannot miss Dr. Watts as Christmastime when his wonderful hymn Joy to the World bursts forth new each year with resounding joy. We will close with a brief treatment of that work.

Joy to the World

The text of Joy to the World was originally titled “The Messiah’s Coming and Kingdom” when it first appeared in Watts’s Psalms of David Imitated of 1719.[21] It was his interpretation of Psalm 98 which read in the King James Bible, “Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise.” Watts connected the joy found in the Psalm to the worship and praise of the coming Messiah. The song was conceived by Watts as a poem celebrating the second and final coming of Jesus but as we know, it has become a precious Christmas carol for the churches.  It would not get set in its current musical form until a Jersey born son named Lowell Mason put his musical arrangements to the hymn in 1836.[22] In 1911 a recording of Joy to the World by Elise Stevenson and Trinity Choir climbed up into the top five on contemporary charts; a remarkable feat for a song typically sung in houses of worship.[23]

Joy to the World continues to receive love and attention by Christians who sing the words of Dr. Isaac Watts set to the Lowell Mason tune.  It celebrates the King of Kings who comes to make blessings flow as far as the curse of sin and death is found.  Sins and sorrows will flow no more when King Jesus renews all things.

Repeat the sounding joy my friends, repeat the sounding joy.

Notes

[1] Mark A. Noll, “The Defining Role of Hymns in Early Evangelicalism,” in Wonderful Words of Life : Hymns in American Protestant History and Theology, ed. Richard J. Mouw and Mark A. Noll(Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 2004), 3-4.

[2] Ibid., 4.

[3] Ibid., 1.

[4] Ace Collins, Stories Behind the Best-Loved Songs of Christmas (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2001), 108.

[5] Bernard Manning, “The Hymns of Isaac Watts,” in The Hymns of Wesley and Watts: Five Papers (The Epworth Press  1942). Online edition published in the Christian Classics Ethereal Library at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/manning/wesleyhymns.P4.html

[6] “Biography of Isaac Watts.” http://www.ccel.org/w/watts/ (accessed 12/15/2011).

[7] Norman Mable, “Popular Hymns and Their Writers ” ( Independent Press Ltd.). Locations 3004-3011

[8] “Biography of Isaac Watts.”

[9] The book’s short title is simple Logic but in the original form, and typical of titles in that time, it was Logic, or, The Right Use of Reason in the Inquiry after Truth: With a Variety of Rules to Guard against Error in the Affairs of Religion and Human Life, as Well as in the Sciences

[10] Collins, 108.

[11] Esther Rothenbusch Crookshank, “We’re Marching to Zion: Isaac Watts in Early America,” in Worderful Words of Life, Hymns in American Protestant History and Theology, ed. Richard Mouw and Mark Noll(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 18.

[12] Ibid., 22.

[13] Robert J. Morgan, Then Sings My Soul 2vols. (Nashville, Tenn.: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 2004), Book 2, 24.

[14]  Crookshank, 24.

[15] “Biography of Isaac Watts.”

[16] Crookshank, 34.

[17] Kenneth W. Osbeck, 101 Hymn Stories (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Publications, 1982), 278.

[18] Crookshank, 17.

[19] C. H. Spurgeon, Our Own Hymn Book: A Collection of Psalms and Hymns for Public, Social and Private Worship (London: Passmore & Alabaster., 1883).

[20] See Sojourn Music, Sojourn Community Church http://www.sojournmusic.com/category/albums/ (accessed December 16 2011). I particularly recommend the Watts remix “Over the Grave”

[21] Kenneth W. Osbeck, Amazing Grace : 366 Inspiring Hymn Stories for Daily Devotions (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Publications, 1990).

[22] Collins, 112.

[23] Ibid., 113.

Bibliography

“Biography of Isaac Watts.” http://www.ccel.org/w/watts/ [accessed 12/15/2011].

Collins, Ace. Stories Behind the Best-Loved Songs of Christmas. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2001.

Crookshank, Esther Rothenbusch. “We’re Marching to Zion: Isaac Watts in Early America.” In Worderful Words of Life, Hymns in American Protestant History and Theology, edited by Richard Mouw and Mark Noll. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.

Mable, Norman. Popular Hymns and Their Writers Kindle Edition ed.: Independent Press Ltd.

Manning, Bernard. “The Hymns of Isaac Watts.” In The Hymns of Wesley and Watts: Five Papers: The Epworth Press  1942.

Morgan, Robert J. Then Sings My Soul 2vols. Nashville, Tenn.: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 2004.

Music, Sojourn, Sojourn Community Church http://www.sojournmusic.com/category/albums/ (accessed December 16 2011).

Noll, Mark A. “The Defining Role of Hymns in Early Evangelicalism.” In Wonderful Words of Life : Hymns in American Protestant History and Theology, edited by Richard J. Mouw and Mark A. Noll, xx, 288 p. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 2004.

Osbeck, Kenneth W. 101 Hymn Stories. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Publications, 1982.

________. Amazing Grace : 366 Inspiring Hymn Stories for Daily Devotions. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Publications, 1990.

Spurgeon, C. H. Our Own Hymn Book: A Collection of Psalms and Hymns for Public, Social and Private Worship. London: Passmore & Alabaster., 1883.

The Virtues of Advent...


The virtues of Advent that we are celebrating together through, hymns, history and song are not “givens” in the world. In fact, if you look throughout history there have been many civilizations and societies with quite different sets of virtues. The Roman legion sought honor, power and glory and the 3rd Reich of Germany certainly had no place for Kings in humble mangers. Other cultures see the highest virtue as a renunciation of the material world and value the extinguishing of the self into a mystical oneness of being.  No, the gifts Jesus brought to the earth are universal and human - but they are distinctly of divine origin. 

His coming into the manger was also a stamp of endorsement upon the value of this world and individual human lives. His gifts of hope, love, peace and joy through the gospel are indicative of divine grace operating in people and culture.

Let us never grow weary of the glory of God become flesh and God with us…Emmanuel.  For in this person is the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in a face (2 Cor 4:1-6).  The face of a baby, a face grown into manhood, a face marred and beaten and unjustly executed like a common criminal.  Yet that face and its glory shined ever more brightly when it triumphed over even the grave itself.  This world, with all of our sin and all of the mess in which we still travel, is the place where God still meets us today.

The Word was made flesh and we beheld its glory; at Christmas and at the Cross.  Today, as we read the story with our families, celebrate his goodness at Christmas and seek to be generous to others, let us never forget the grace we have been given in the gospel.

Light a candle in the darkness of winter my friends to loudly say that Jesus wins. Don’t forget this at Christmastime this year.

Finding God Dialogues

On the POCBlog we wrote a series of dialogues between two friends traveling through life as university students.  One of them, Richard, is a philosophy undergraduate student with ambitions towards a career in jurisprudence. He likes banter and debating but can be impatient and at times unsympathetic to the questions of God. The other, Sundar, is a student in electrical engineering with hopes of working in the field of wireless communications. Both young men enjoy each others company and discussion even though one is an atheist and the other a committed follower of Jesus and the Christian way.

The following is a list of each of the dialogues:

  1. What’s all this then? A discussion of created world
  2. Why are we building alters? A discussion of the religious nature of people
  3. Nobody’s Perfect? A discussion of the perfect and the good
  4. Why do mean people suck? A discussion of the reality of suffering
  5. What of love? A discussion of love, the brain and God
  6. What of death? A discussion of death and eternity
  7. Jesus? Always comes back to him

Jesus?

Richard is a philosophy undergraduate student with ambition toward a career in jurisprudence. He likes banter and debating but can be impatient and at times unsympathetic to the questions of God. Sundar is a student in electrical engineering with hopes of working in the field of wireless communications. Both young men enjoy each other’s company and discussion even though one is an atheist and the other a committed follower of Jesus and the Christian way.

Why I always come back to Jesus?

[Richard spent the summer at home with his family after the passing of his father, he is now at NYU in his first semester of law school. Sundar landed a dream job working at Apple working on antenna design issues with the iPhone – the two are catching up via Skype]

Sundar – How is the family doing?

Richard – OK I guess, Mom seems a bit lost after Dad’s passing but she is hanging in there. First semester of law school is a bit rough—so much reading I’m just swamped. I feel bad because I can’t be there for her but I have my own life to live.

Sundar – You doing OK?

Richard – I guess, still seems surreal him being gone, but I really haven’t had too much time to think about it with all the prep and reading I have to do. Trying to stay focused but I do miss home a bit.

Sundar - Yeah, I’m a bit home sick as well but California is great – how’s that New York weather treating you?

Richard – Well a blizzard in October doesn’t exactly make for a nice walk in central park.

Sundar – It’s a bit chilly here already. Loving the new job here and started attending a great new church. It’s a start up deal so I suppose it fits Silicon Valley culture well.

Richard – So you have found your religious club already. Any cute girls there?

Sundar – Well, that isn’t exactly why I am part of a church community and it isn’t my religious club.

Richard – Well are there? [both laugh]

Sundar – What? Girls? [Grinning]

Richard – I see…you are wasting no time my Jedi master.

Sundar – Dude, shut up. [long pause] I have been out with one girl a few times. She is really smart and works at Google. Not sure how we are going to deal with that as I work on the iPhone now – she of course has that little robot phone going. She is new to the area as well and is involved at Garden City as well.

Richard – Uh, and what is Garden City?

Sundar – Sorry, that’s the name of the church

Richard – Weird – I’m used to Holy Church of the Saints and Holy Mother stuff. Garden City Church – simple and clear enough. I’m going to come and visit when I’m on break.

Sundar – What?! For church?

Richard – No dummy, coming to visit you and check out Silicon Valley. Plus, if I end up doing patent law I may move out there. But yes, I’ll visit your church as well. What is the church all about?

Sundar – Jesus.

Richard – Well, I know, I mean what is the focus there?

Sundar – I’m serious, it’s about Jesus. Remember how you asked me how Jesus can seem to get lost in all that religious mumbo jumbo? I suppose we are trying NOT to do that. Or get sidetracked from who Jesus is and what he is all about.

Richard – You are not about getting a republican in every office?

Sundar – Well, there are Democrats and Republicans and Ron Paulians and even some anarchists hanging around our community

Richard – I like Ron Paulians – they are always eager to convert you. And anarchists for Jesus?! Awesome.

Sundar – Well, they are friends but I’m not sure who they are for or against at this point – right now I’m guessing they might be against quite a bit. [both laugh]

Richard – I want to hang out with the anarchists for Jesus when I visit for sure.

Sundar – How about just believing in Jesus instead?

Richard – You always get back to that don’t you?

Sundar – I try you know.

Richard – I know.

Sundar – You know you can tell me if I ever need to back off.

Richard – Yeah, I told you I’m cool with the way you engage stuff with me. I’ve actually been thinking about our conversation about death quite a bit since my Dad passed away. I’m to the point where I want the gospel to be true – but I still have so many doubts and feel like an idiot for wanting to believe. I really want to believe. To be honest, I’m going to lose friends over this. I’ll tell you more when I come out over break.

Sundar – More about what?

Richard – I want to tell you in person…and meet your girlfriend.

Sundar – She’s not my “girlfriend” – yet [both laugh]

What of Death? Richard and Sundar Discuss Eternity

Richard is a philosophy undergraduate student with ambition toward a career in jurisprudence. He likes banter and debating but can be impatient and at times unsympathetic to the questions of God. Sundar is a student in electrical engineering with hopes of working in the field of wireless communications. Both young men enjoy each others company and discussion even though one is an atheist and the other a committed follower of Jesus and the Christian way.

Death and Eternity?

Richard: He’s dead

Sundar: What, who? What are you talking about? Are you OK?

Richard: No, I’m really not OK…he’s dead, my Dad died yesterday and I just got word from my brother. Nobody saw it coming, he’s just gone.

Sundar: I’m so sorry man. Can I do anything for you and your family.

Richard: I don’t even know Sundar – I wasn’t ready for this. He was only forty-eight years old. I thought we would have more time. I didn’t think this would happen so soon.

Sundar: yeah, I guess [Richard interrupts him]

Richard: Why does it hit me like this? Why is death so disturbing to us? I mean, it is the most normal thing on earth. Every single one of us will die at some point. Yet it doesn’t seem right. Why don’t we expect it? It should be the most normal thing ever, but I hate this. I didn’t even get to say goodbye to him. I didn’t even get to tell him how pissed I was at him. I didn’t get to…[expletive] - I don’t know. [heavy exhale] This just sucks man, what do I do with this!?

Sundar: I don’t know Richard – I’m just glad you are talking about it. I really want to be here for you man, help you make any arrangements you need, just do whatever. I hate it too.

Richard: It’s like all of sudden everything just crashes down and it’s gone.  Everything we work for, everything we think is important, everything we think makes life meaningful is just gone, gone in a moment. We are so helpless to it.

Sundar: Do you mind me asking what happened?

Richard: [speaking quickly] He had a massive heart attack and died in his office. Nobody even knew for like six hours – he was by himself – and they just found him there. [long pause] I wish someone could have been there…I wonder if he was afraid.

Sundar: Man, hard to even think about what that must have been like.

Richard: I wonder if his tough guy, I don’t need anyone but God shtick was going through his head. I never believed that mess but it sure seemed he did. I never believed it. I always thought we would have it out big and really understand each other. I really didn’t hate the guy – that was my own front. I really just didn’t get why he was that way – why he didn’t want to know me. [gets choked up] – ah this is stupid man, I just don’t know what to think. Just feeling it all too much.

Sundar: You wanna get drunk? [awkward silence]

Richard: Do you mean that? [Richard starts to laugh] Are you messing with me?

Sundar: Sorry, I just wanted to lighten things a bit. No we don’t need to get drunk – that would not be good right about now but I thought it might have crossed your mind. [laugh together]

Richard: Has anyone close to you ever died?

Sundar: Yeah, my grandparents. But they were older so it was sort of expected.  

Richard: I think that is why this is hitting me so hard – totally not expected. I don’t know why we don’t think about this stuff more. I mean, do we know when we will die? I think we would live differently if we knew we just had a few more weeks or something.

Sundar: Yeah, I don’t think I think about dying enough. It is easy just to fill life with work, jobs, having fun, going through life. Sometimes I think as if I have all the time in the world and none of us really knows when our days will be up. I think we would use our time with more wisdom if we knew we soon would tap out of this world.

Richard: I know I would have had that big shake down with my Dad. Now, it’s too late now I guess.

Sundar: Who knows man, maybe you’ll get another shot to see him. It is at least possible.

Richard: Remember, I’m going to hell [sarcastically].

Sundar: I don’t think this is the right time Richard.

Richard: No, No. What better time is there? [slightly miffed] You think my Dad is with Jesus now and probably want me to go there. I think death is the end. Click. You are out.  Ball game. Game over.

Sundar: Well, I hope not. I think your reaction to all this should tell you something. Death is not a good thing man. It isn’t just nature’s way of taking out the trash. It is devastating, real and an enemy to life. You said it yourself a few minutes ago “death should be the most normal thing.”  But it isn’t – we know it is not. It feels bad because it is bad.

Richard: I know that nobody can live forever. I understand that Sundar. What bugs me is that it seems to wreck everything and feels so bad. I just wish I didn’t have to experience this. Why is it?

Sundar: Because death is a part of the brokenness of our world. We were not meant for it – so we feel it that way as well. You ever see a baby born?

Richard: No, not yet.

Sundar: It is one of the craziest things to see. I watched the video of my aunt’s kid being born and the joy, natural joy was just crazy.

Richard: You watched that?

Sundar: Not the details man. But Mom weeping for joy, holding the baby for the first time, my uncle acting like an idiot behind the camera. We see the flip side of this when we encounter death. It’s like everything comes crashing down.

Richard: Life and death – are you saying they are two sides of the same coin?

Sundar: No, that is precisely what I’m not saying…some of my relatives might say that. What I am saying is that we know that death is a problem, not simply “the other side of the coin.”  I’m saying death feels bad because it IS BAD.

Richard: I agree man.

Sundar: After my baby cousin was born, he had a lot of complications. Couldn’t breathe on his own, couldn’t digest food and turned all yellow.  They had to put him in neonatal intensive care unit. I remember going in there to see him and being overwhelmed with the beauty and fragility of life. I also had the odd feeling that all the kids in the NICU may not make it. It was like a small picture of what life is really like – fragile, beautiful and needing help. I’ll never forget it. In there, things were a lot clearer.  Life and death were real and had to be considered. I think people probably thought a lot more about God in there.  Have you ever read that book in the Bible I asked you to read?

Richard: A little of it – Ecclesiastes right?

Sundar: Yeah, can I read something out of that?

Richard: Sure, I actually wouldn’t mind at all.

Sundar: [finds a passage on his smartphone] A good name is better than precious ointment, and the day of death than the day of birth. It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting, for this is the end of all mankind, and the living will lay it to heart. Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad. The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth. It is better for a man to hear the rebuke of the wise than to hear the song of fools. For as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of the fools; this also is vanity.

Richard: where is that? Sundar: Ecclesiastes 7

Richard: So is that saying that dying is better than birth?  Sounds like you were positive on birth a minute ago.

Sundar: This isn’t talking about our experience but about the soul being open to learning. That you learn more about wisdom and meaning in life at a funeral than giggling life away like a fool…that we need to face the emptiness, the shortness, the ridiculous ways we waste away our lives not realizing we are all heading towards the grave. It is telling us to really face the coming of our own death in some way before it overtakes us.

Richard: I hear you – I know I was not ready for this. So this would be “the house of mourning” and Jersey Shore would be the “house of mirth”.

Sundar: Something like that. I don’t want to press you on anything now Richard – your family needs you, there is probably a lot of things you need to tend to.

Richard: Well, I’m in the house of mourning so I might as well learn something. I want you to tell me what you think about death, life and if anything is ahead of us after this world. I know I said I don’t believe in an afterlife but I sort of wish there was something. Reincarnation, heaven, nirvana or something.  I mean it is a nice thought to think of seeing loved ones again. 

Sundar: To be honest those are really different ideas. Reincarnation means your soul migrates into other existences and nirvana would be the freeing of oneself from the cycle of suffering, reaching full enlightenment and escaping the trap of reincarnation. These are not ideas about YOU being YOU after your death. Seeing your loved ones again would not quite be part of those ideas. The idea of heaven though is different. That would have to do with you living again as you.

Richard:  Yeah, I heard about that in Catholic school – where you float in the clouds with angels or something like a ghost right.

Sundar: Uh, not exactly. That sounds weird. What Jesus taught was actually about the defeat of death itself and being resurrected from the dead.

Richard: Where did he teach that?

Sundar: To some friends in the “house of mourning” – we actually see what Jesus said and did at the funeral of a good friend named Lazarus in the New Testament book of John.

Richard: He gave the funeral speech?

Sundar: Not exactly, he interacted with some people who were hurting because of death. They were feeling the pain of it and in confusion were asking Jesus some questions. They wondered why he didn’t help.

Richard: Yeah, I do wonder why God doesn’t help. Why he doesn’t just get rid of death and suffering. It sucks you know. He ought to know that too.

Sundar: Indeed. I think he does. Jesus does a few things when his friend died. He wept with the people – God does really care.  He taught them through some hard questions – he wanted them to know the truth about death.  He raised a man from the dead – he wanted to show us what the future could be. [a long silence from both men]

Richard: Well, what did he say, what were the questions he asked?

Sundar: [reading again] Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died. But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you.” Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.” Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”

Sundar: So Jesus wants us to trust him, believe him in the face of death. Afterall, he is the one who died and came back again to speak of it. He promises resurrection and life to all who believe. So his question was simple “Do you believe this?” His followers are certain that death itself has been defeated and they do not fear it any longer. They do not fear God’s just judgment, nor do they fear their current bodies passing away.

Richard: You always come back to Jesus.

Sundar: I don’t know of anyone else I would turn to when looking at the face of death.

Richard: Why does Jesus get so lost in all the religious mumbo jumbo?

Sundar: I don’t know man… [Richard’s phone rings]

Richard: Hi Mom, yeah, I’m doing OK…lots to think about. I have my flight booked…yes, I know. I know. Love you too.

What of Love? Richard and Sundar discuss love, the brain and God

Richard is a philosophy undergraduate student with ambition toward a career in jurisprudence. He likes banter and debating but can be impatient and at times unsympathetic to the questions of God. Sundar is a student in electrical engineering with hopes of working in the field of wireless communications. Both young men enjoy each other’s company and discussion even though one is an atheist and the other a committed follower of Jesus and the Christian way.

What of Love?

Richard: Another day, another step closer to the dollas

Sundar: What are you all giddy about?

Richard: Got into NYU law school!!!

Sundar: Oh my, now you are really going to be insufferable

Richard: Unstoppable!  Don’t worry, I won’t forget the little guys who helped me along the way [laughs]

Sundar: Oh good for me. What did your Dad think?

Richard: I don’t care what he thinks – he is just pissed I don’t say hail Mary any more. We don’t connect much and to be honest I don’t really care.

Sundar: Isn’t he paying for school?

Richard: Was, I’ve been on my own for a couple of years. He cut me off after I told him what I thought of him.

Sundar: Man, I didn’t know.

Richard: Its ok, I don’t really care

Sundar: You have to care a little – I mean, who wants to be estranged from family. That has to bum you out a little, no?

Richard: No, I sort of hate the guy to be honest. Not trying to sound like a jerk or anything but I pretty much feel only contempt there. But stop all this noise and lets go get a beer and celebrate! NYU and Columbia were my top two and I’m in!!!

Sundar: Aight, give me a half an hour to finish up this digital electronics homework and we’ll head out. Nothing crazy though; I don’t want to tuck you in again like spring break your freshman year. We’ll hang but I don’t want you getting all sloppy drunk OK? I’m not your momma.

Richard: Ok, but hey, I’m not a freshman any more, I’ve matured a bit you know. But we need to have some fun – our time here is coming to a close quickly. We’ve had some good times. We need to soak this in.

[Richard drumming fingers on table, Sundar giving him an angry look…Sundar finally finishes up his last schematic]

Sundar: Aight, lets hit it

Richard: Finally

Sundar: Why don’t you ever talk about your Dad – I mean, I had no idea what was up there.

Richard: Nothing to say.

Sundar: Don’t you love the guy?

Richard: I got no need for love. And that man is the ultimate object of my disaffection. I’m not sure I believe in that whole love business any way.

Sundar: Seems pretty central to being human.

Richard: Love is just input and outputs Sundar. It’s a feeling in the brain – neuroscience has demonstrated that love is nothing but your brain getting all jazzed up in a certain area. We have located the way the brain reacts when people feel love. All just chemistry man…I have not use for that game.

Sundar: Did you get dumped in high school? [laughing]

Richard: Shut up you tool, I mean I like some people and certainly enjoy women, I’m just saying I’m not into all that sappy, “you should love your Dad” stuff you want to bring up.

Sundar: Whether you should love your Dad is another question. I think love is central to who we are. That we are made for relationship.

Richard: Social creatures, yes. But love I can see through that stuff.

Sundar: Hey, just a question about what you said a minute ago about neuroscience. Isn’t that a bit reductionist to say that love equals a certain brain function?

Richard: Not at all, you just have someone think fuzzy thoughts about their Mom or husband or wife or kid or something and watch the brain. When they are feeling love; the brain lights up. It’s pretty simple actually.

Sundar: Yes, but that is my point, there is a person who is thinking and feeling something. How do you know they are not thinking about MMA and beating someone down?

Richard: Well, you tell them what to think about dumb dumb.

Sundar: And how do you know they are thinking about their puppy or girlfriend they love?

Richard: They tell you!

Sundar: What if they are lying? You’d never know.

Richard: [Pauses for a second] I guess you have to take their word for it. But why would they lie?

Sundar: I’m not saying they would or did in the experiment you referred to. I am saying that we must rely on a real person to explain what they are thinking/feeling and then your sensors can perceive the corresponding brain function.  But the love is not the brain function, the brain function is a correlated result of feeling the love.

Richard: But this would imply the person is more than their brain. Which I don’t believe.

Sundar: Well, maybe we are more than our brains.  We both like neuroscience – fascinating stuff – but materialism is a philosophical claim and is not something science can prove. The existence of other minds we may believe, and be right to believe, but we cannot prove this scientifically. It is a truth of philosophy and of experience.

Richard: Yet we have demonstrated clearly that the most important aspect about us is our brains. Our higher and lower brain function dictate everything in our conscious and subconscious experience.

Sundar: I agree that our brains are indispensable – I’m not saying that we are ghosts operating without our bodies. But the mind is something immaterial which is causally and uniquely correlated to our brains.  The brain is the bodily organ where the drama of minds takes place.  Think of it this way [whips out his smartphone and launches a YouTube app].

Richard:  Oh I love that “Guy on a Buffalo” video – so stupid and funny

Sundar: Ok, we’ll watch it – I like it too [they watch a 2 min clip]. Now, if I were to ask you what is the movie we just watched, what would you say?

Richard: “He’s on a buffalo!” [laughing] I would say it’s a story about a guy riding a buffalo in the wilderness and some crazy dudes writing some funny songs to go around it.

Sundar: Right, you would not say that the movie was “just some glass, an AMOLED display, electrons turning on and off in a machine.”

Richard: No, who would talk like that

Sundar: You would. You realize that the movie is a plot, some characters, in this case a buffalo and a guy riding on it, [both laugh] it has people interacting and we have an understanding of these interactions.  Only a goofball would reduce the movie to “physical electronic parts.” And you, being a goofball, do that to a human being. Our brains are the medium of the mind but the mind is not the medium.

Richard: I see what you are saying. Hard to prove that though – especially when we can see so much can be reduced to the brain.

Sundar: Well, as a future NYU law dog, you should think about these things. After all, if we are simply matter bumping around due to the previous states of matter there is no “real” volition, ethics, spirituality or possibility of “changing oneself” as you so often like to say “you” did.  You don’t get credit for your LSAT score as the bumping of matter that is you simply and necessarily had to do this because of the laws of physics.

Richard: Well, if I have to give credit to MY LSAT score to physics maybe I’ll believe I’m more than my brain. I’ve just built my brain so awesomely you know. [laughs]

Sundar: I really just wanted to ask about your Dad. How did we get on all that schmack?

Richard: I said love is just brain chemistry and off you went

Sundar: Sorry man, you must get sick of me doing all that 

Richard: No, I love it. No pun intended.

Sundar: I think you know love is important and central to being human. Otherwise, why would you be so disappointed with your Dad.

Richard: Because he’s a piece of crap – you don’t know what it was like Sundar, you parents, pujas and all – are nice people. Pops…not so much.  Just disappointing.

Sundar: Naw dog, it is just the bumping of atoms bro, your Dad’s brain is what it is. No reason to be disappointed. C’est la vie.

Richard: Stop it [laughs subtely]

Sundar: The central nature of love to our existence is why it’s so disappointing. You had hopes and expectations – the stuff of relationship – that didn’t work out with your Dad. So your hope of love and friendship with Pops is why it hurts so much. You won’t convince me otherwise.

Richard: OK, Dr. Freud, Ok, maybe I wish things were different. To be honest, I’m really thankful for a friend like you. Most people don’t put up with my BS – for some reason you hang around. Probably just want to convert me.

Sundar: No, Richard we are friends, you know that. Whether or not you convert, I like you anyway man. Even in your crusty arrogance and LSAT dominance. [laughs] But for sure, you know I want you to believe in Jesus.

Richard: Sappy bro, let’s get another beer.

Sundar: I’m about done. You should slow it down after that one as well. 

Richard: I have thought more about Jesus in a serious way since meeting you. My Dad and his church friends seem so stupid to me. I couldn’t even look at Jesus as anything but silly…but you messed that up for me Sundar. I’ve realized there are thoughtful and caring believers out there and certainly Jesus is an enigmatic figure.  Maybe after law school I’ll pick back up some religious reading and have some questions for you.

Sundar: I’d really rather you not just put down your wrestle with God and faith in Jesus.  It is more important than law school you know.

Richard: Blasphemy!!! [laughs boisterously]

Sundar: I know, but hear me out. Afterall, your Dad is going to die soon.

Richard: What does THAT have to do with anything!? [a little agitated]

Sundar: Death is a serious thing and that end is coming to us all. Sorry to be so blunt but you shouldn’t put off stuff that is important. Like your jacked up relationship with your Pops or the destiny of your own soul.

Richard: Is this where you tell me why I’m going to hell again?

Sundar: No, we’ve had that discussion – and God knows on that one – but I will say that before our current brainwaves cease, we should care about our own destiny.

Richard: Indeed – I hear you man. Can we just hang now?

Sundar: Never. [both laugh]

Why do mean people suck? Richard and Sundar discuss the reality of suffering

Richard is a philosophy undergraduate student with ambition toward a career in jurisprudence. He likes banter and debating but can be impatient and at times unsympathetic to the questions of God. Sundar is a student in electrical engineering with hopes of working in the field of wireless communications. Both young men enjoy each other’s company and discussion even though one is an atheist and the other a committed follower of Jesus and the Christian way.

Why do mean people suck?

Sundar – Duuude, you wouldn’t believe what happened last night in the parking lot at Houlihans!

Richard – What happened, did a girl talk to you?

Sundar  – Shut up man, it’s crazy what happened.

Richard – Oh boy, here we go.

Sundar  So I’m standing outside in the parking lot talking to a friend. We are standing there and we watch this car back up full speed and smash into a parked car.  We were like: Did you see that!?  But then the guy just tries to drive off. The owner of the car comes out goes crazy, beating on the other guy’s car. So the guy trying to get away almost runs him over getting out of there. Nobody got his license plate number or anything.

Richard – People suck man.

Sundar – Yeah, you think when you hit someone’s car you apologize, not try to run them over!

Richard – You act surprised. Doesn’t your religion teach you that other people are evil doers?  

Sundar – Well, yes and no

Richard – Wow, you trying to sound all eastern on me now? What do you mean “yes” AND “no” – Either your faith teaches you that people are inherently good or that they suck…right?

Sundar – Well, my faith teaches that “we” are evil doers but also that we shouldn’t be…so it’s not just other people. I am assuming that you would not include yourself in “people who suck.”

Richard – Of course not, I’m awesome. Everyone else is the problem. [laughs]

Sundar – Do you really believe that?

Richard – A little…no, not really. All the suffering and junk in the world does tend to bum me out about the state of the world. I mean look around – some good, lots of evil doing. Really makes it hard for me to believe in God. Sometimes I want to – when talking to a guy like you – but then I see all the evil and senseless suffering and I just can’t believe anyone is behind all this noise.

Sundar – But when you say something is “evil” or that people “suck” doesn’t this assume something really important?

Richard – What do you mean?

Sundar – I mean isn’t saying something is evil making the assumption that there is such a thing as good?  Really good, not simply people’s opinions?  To say something is evil, we are saying that it is not the way it should be. Right?

Richard – I suppose so, but I don’t see your point.

Sundar – Well, if we say something is evil and not good don’t we have a standard by which we can make such judgments between things? Doesn’t this assume that we have some sort of moral compass or even a moral law by which we can make such judgments?

Richard – Sure, human beings make such judgments all the time. That guy driving the car – he sucks. [laughing]

Sundar – Well, I agree with that, but how are you making that judgment? Afterall, maybe that guy likes running into other people’s cars and smashing up their property? Who are you to judge that he is wrong, or an evildoer?

Richard – I’m going to law school so I can be a judge you know [smiling]. Oh, by the way, I smoked my LSAT. Can almost pick my school now.

Sundar – I knew you would.  Get back to my question. By what standard do you judge something good or evil? If you have no other standard other that the almighty opinions of Richard the future judge of the universe, I think I’m a little nervous.  Are you familiar with the 1948 BBC debate between Bertrand Russell and Frederick Copleston?

Richard – Yes, I listened to a portion once with you dumb-dumb.

Sundar – Oh yeah, I forgot. [laughing] In that debate Copleston presses Russell on this issue and I don’t think Russell ever answers. He simply says he tells the difference between good and evil by “his feelings.” Without an objective standard we are stuck in a bog of cultural relativism. Afterall, you might say forcing women to wear Burkas in Afghanistan is oppressive and evil while the Taliban says that it is right and even holy.

Richard – But they are wrong Sundar!

Sundar – Says who? I agree with you by the way, but who are we to say? Unless there is a real standard, outside of human opinion, we are stuck in moral and cultural relativism. I think you believe there is a moral law to which we can appeal Richard. How you find that without the existence of God is quite difficult.

Richard – Ok, maybe I do think there is such a standard, but why does it have to come from God? Why can it not simply be the rational thing is the good thing?

Sundar – Yeah, evvvveryone agrees on what is rational. If something is right or wrong whether anyone believes it or not, if something is actually evil then this is something outside of ourselves and even our rationality.  We might recognize it rationally but it is not a creation of our rational processes.  We recognize the evil and the good because they are real and they transcend us. These are not the subject of mere human opinions or popularity of vote or force of the powerful. Might does not make right, nor does a popularity contest.

Richard – Well when I see evil in the world I know it is real, it is more real to me than the good on most days. And as I said, suffering causes me to disbelieve in God. I do acknowledge that I am sort of mad at God or at the idea of God when I see so much suffering.

Sundar – Being that mad at an idea sounds a bit psychotic. [laughs] Just admit it you are mad at God but you know that God is real.

Richard – Man, just leave that alone bro.

Sundar – Ok, not trying to be pushy, but all of us have to deal with the suckiness or the world and even the suckiness of ourselves.

Richard – I work really hard on my own crap man, you know that.

Sundar – I actually respect that about you. But you also aren’t winning that battle [both laugh].  No, what I mean is that everyone, no matter what their philosophy or view of the world, has to come face to face with suffering and God. Atheists deny that God is real and forfeit any sort of ontological goodness outside of ourselves. They only focus on their frustration with suffering. Suffering is bigger to God to those who choose to disbelieve in God. It also leaves them in a relativist bog that they don’t even believe in. Pantheists, like my uncle, believe that suffering is either an illusion (maya)  or simply the other side of the same coin as goodness – you know that yin-yang tattoo you white dudes love to get.

Richard -  Hahahahahahaha…white girls too. I vote we outlaw all lower back yin-yang tattoos!

Sundar – I have a really hard time believing that good and evil are part of the same divine oneness and that if I get enlightened I’ll be like Yoda and see past good and evil. 

Richard – Maybe you are just not worthy Daniel-son. But I see what you mean; I can’t go with “evil is an illusion” either – no way man.

Sundar - Those who believe in God try to hold suffering, God and humanity together somehow. It is tough to do but it might surprise you that those who suffer can cling closely to God in those times. The Christian story is unique though.

Richard – How so?

Sundar – In the story of Scripture, the suffering and evil of the world is taken on by God himself.  Jesus, who is God become man, actually bears suffering on behalf of suffering people. Jesus was called Immanuel, God with us. He is also God suffering with and for us. Jesus’ death for sin is the ultimate sacrifice where God himself takes the sting of evil and death to forgive us and transform us.  Jesus’ resurrection displays that the ultimate enemy and bringer of pain, death itself, is and will be defeated by Jesus. The cross reflects God’s judgment upon sin and his reconciliation of people to himself. In Jesus we find grace, love and relationship.  In relationship with Jesus we have one that is familiar with suffering, who can sympathize with his people and who is present with us in our grief. The gospel places Jesus in the middle of suffering to redeem a sucky world through his own sacrifice and pain.

Richard – You are preaching again.

Sundar – Sorry man, when I first heard that God would suffer with and for us…it kinda answered a whole lot of questions for me. It really makes me thankful.

Richard – So when I see suffering and evil I shouldn’t be mad at God, I should be thankful to God for it? That makes noooo sense.

Sundar – Not exactly, but I am saying that suffering is not meaningless; it does have some purpose in our lives. The gospel is wonderful to me because it brings good news to those who suffer. In the gospel we see that we need not deny the existence of God, or the existence of suffering. We face both. The gospel tells us that we can be saved. This means we can be rescued and spared from the disaster of this world. Plus, you are forgetting an important thing. The evil and suffering isn’t just caused by some cosmic goo “out there” – it is in us. Remember what you said “people suck.”

Richard – Well, we do bad things from time to time, but some people are worse than others. Hitler, Osama and Yo Mama! [laughing]

Sundar – Don’t you say nothin about my Moma! [laughing as well]. Sure, I’m not saying that all people’s actions are the same, or even that all sins are the same. Only that we are all guilty of sin and evil doing to some degree. Really guilty…guilty before God.

Richard – So Jesus must take our sins away?

Sundar – And your guilt and his right judgment for our sins. Do you think God is happy about the evil we do here to one another and against him?

Richard – If I were God, I would be pissed.

Sundar – Jesus’ teaching is devastating. He said that the junk people do actually comes from the heart and the intention of the heart is what matters.  He also taught that out of the heart flow all matter of evil stuff. So WE are kind of the problem, and he is about forgiving and changing US. If God is pissed, he is pissed at us taking all he has given us and turning away from him and doing evil with it.

Richard – I really think you should consider being a preacher and not an engineer.

Sundar – But I love packet switching, information transmission and reducing signal noise! [haha]

Richard –Nerd. But I wouldn’t mind a little less noise in this world.

Sundar – I really think you should consider following Jesus.

Richard – I like him and some of his teaching. I just don’t get the whole worship God thing. So the idea of forgiveness and change is cool. But I don’t get why a god demands to be worshipped.

Sundar – Do you get love?

Richard – No I don’t get love.  And I’m NOT talkin about that. At least not today. Gotta go to class.

Nobody's Perfect - Richard and Sundar Discuss the Perfect and the Good

Richard is a philosophy undergraduate student with ambition toward a career in jurisprudence. He likes banter and debating but can be impatient and at times unsympathetic to the questions of God. Sundar is a student in electrical engineering with hopes of working in the field of wireless communications. Both young men enjoy each other’s company and discussion even though one is an atheist and the other a committed follower of Jesus and the Christian way.

Nobody’s Perfect?

Sundar: What’s good today Dick?

Richard: Not much. And don’t call me that. It’s what my Mom calls my Dad so cut that out. Not in a good mood. I’m really stressing out about law school and getting ready for my LSATs.

Sundar: You’ll do fine man, you’re the smart guy remember?

Richard: But if I don’t get in to the right school, it could affect everything. I worked my butt off for the last eight years to get to this point. I’m just a little stressed.

Sundar: What if you screw it all up now?

Richard: Not an option man. My dream has always been to become an attorney. All my focus on grades these past few years, learning how to think clearly and make good arguments was for getting into law school. If I don’t get in… [Sundar interrupts]

Sundar: What? What then? You are worthless? I mean, I think you’ll smoke the LSAT and have your choice of schools. But you need to chill out or this sort of thing is going to ruin you.

Richard: What, wanting to be the best? Not a thing wrong with that.

Sundar: Not what I’m saying. I’m trying to do the best I can do as well. This idea that you can’t make mistakes, mess up at anything.

Richard: It keeps us going though…the striving for perfection is part of what makes us human.

Sundar: But what does “perfection” even mean?  I don’t know anyone who thinks they are perfect. Do you?

Richard: [After a long pause] No, not really…I mean, who could claim that…to err is to be human

Sundar: And what is “perfect”?

Richard – I’ve actually thought about this some when I was taking early modern [philosophy] It seems dumb to say nobody IS perfect if there is no perfect to be found.

Sundar: Agree, but we are not saying nonsense here. It seems we all know we fall short of something.

Richard: I’m not really sure. Maybe. What if by “perfect” we mean qualities we know about in people that are good and we just see them maximized. A “perfect” person need not exist for us to imagine one. For instance, unicorns are simply combinations of known realities but the totality of a horse with a horn does not exist. I actually think people create the idea of a god as a bundle of known human qualities. We just say a being possesses love, goodness, happiness, etc. in an “infinite and perfect” manner…and presto, you have a God.

Sundar – You are kind of missing something. Imagining a perfect being is an exercise of conceiving something/someone who is good, but in every way. If this does not exist we are imagining no-thing. Plus, just to say that goodness can be discussed in varying degrees means that there must be a sort of “goodness scale”, some reality by which we could judge such so called progress. Of course we can create imaginary things like unicorns but saying “I’m not a unicorn” has meaning. I’m not an animal with horse-like and rhino-like qualities. Of course, we only know horse-like and horns because they are real.

Sundar – My point is the infinite and the good are real concepts. If they are not real we sure speak of them as they are.  When someone says “Nobody is perfect” they are saying something rational and coherent, it is not a meaningless statement. My contention is the concept and category of “perfect” is not empty – there is someone who actually is infinitely good.

Richard – couldn’t we simply mean by saying that “I know I could be better” and ditch all this “perfect” talk as nonsense?

Sundar – No, because it is not nonsense at all. You just demonstrated that.

Richard – Wha? How? I just said “better.”

Sundar – Right. But what do we mean by “better.” You ever read Nietzsche?

Richard – Of course, it is required reading for guys like me! We love us some Nietzsche in the free thought club.

Sundar - Remember his parable The Madman? He asks: Is there any up or or down? What is better if you are not moving towards some sort of limit? If we wipe away the perfect and deny that it is real, we then have no way of knowing how anything is “better” than another. Not objectively any sense. It would only be a manner of preference to say Hitler or Osama are worse than someone else. This is why Nietzsche had to say timid and cowardly things like “we must move beyond good and evil”

Richard – How is that cowardly, some say it is very bold, you know step outside of the herd of dumb humanity and live your own way, on your terms, with your own idea of morality? I think he means we can be courageous to live the way we want and not be bound by society and its dogmas; particularly the arbitrary assignment by those in power of what is “good.”

Sundar - But isn’t that all a bunch of junk Richard? Just hiding behind metaphors? Listen to what my man GK Chesterton said on this [Sundar pulls out his iPhone and does a search]

Richard – You love that dude…ease up on that man crush…

Sundar – Here it is [begins reading]: Nietzsche, whom some are representing as a bold and strong thinker. No one will deny that he was a poetical and suggestive thinker; but he was quite the reverse of strong. He was not at all bold. He never put his own meaning before himself in bald abstract words: as did Aristotle and Calvin, and even Karl Marx, the hard, fearless men of thought. Nietzsche always escaped a question by a physical metaphor, like a cheery minor poet. He said, “beyond good and evil,” because he had not the courage to say, “more good than good and evil,” or, “more evil than good and evil.” Had he faced his thought without metaphors, he would have seen that it was nonsense. So, when he describes his hero, he does not dare to say, “the purer man,” or “the happier man,” or “the sadder man,” for all these are ideas; and ideas are alarming. He says “the upper man,” or “over man,” a physical metaphor from acrobats or alpine climbers. Nietzsche is truly a very timid thinker. He does not really know in the least what sort of man he wants evolution to produce. And if he does not know, certainly the ordinary evolutionists, who talk about things being “higher,” do not know either.

Richard – But can’t we get better without having an upper limit like “perfect.”

Sundar – How do we know we are not getting worse?

Richard – Why can’t we be moving towards a mean or balance? Even as far back as Aristotle we have known that in terms of human virtue that there seems to be a golden mean…we neither love or hate too much, we find a balance to the force in the middle, in moderation.

Sundar – Because we are talking about “better” not “average” unless you want to say “average” is somehow the same thing as good and getting more average means you are getting better

Richard – My logic prof doesn’t think so, but you see what I’m saying right? Virtue is found being balanced not in going to extremes.

Sundar – On some things yes, I do agree, but on other things, no.  We might say moderation is good on some things but not on others.  Moderation in evil would not be good at all. We would not want a balanced approach to abusing people would we?

Richard: Of course not, but that person would not be balanced. She would be extreme in anger, or selfishness or lack of temperance in her basic impulses.

Sundar: But it seems we do not simply want a balanced view of justice and injustice right? Or love? Or truth telling? And this still doesn’t tell us why we think we can actually improve or even more interesting, that we fall short or why such falling short is actually lacking/flawed, even bad.

Richard – If we are honest, we can all agree that we fall short of our own ideals.

Sundar – Agree my friend, agreed.  The only thing I want to add is that we fall short of something, or more accurately, someone, that is real, a standard of good we did not invent, and who transcends us.

Richard – What if that standard was among us? In the human community? That the virtuous man defines goodness for us? I think Aristotle got this right. We see and experience virtue in people and we can aspire to that.

Sundar – Yeah, I really like that as well. Except for one thing, it is kind of like saying “What is good?” and then answering “The good man is good.” It still leaves the question at hand undefined. I do believe we see and recognize goodness in others as we have a conscience that allows us to “see” good and evil. And if you take the concept of “perfect” would we have to say “The perfect man is perfect?” We both agree we have never seen one of those amongst our college buddies. [both laugh]

Richard: I suppose this is what makes Jesus a really interesting figure. If he is who you say he is then we might have Aristotle’s virtue man on the scene in actuality. It is just that someone claiming to be all that on earth is a bit much. Hi, I’m Jesus, I’m perfect, I’m god. That sounds like a guy that wouldn’t be much fun to hang with.

Sundar: But what we see of Jesus in the gospels is profoundly this. He is super present with people. People loved to hang with him. He loves folks, serves others, teaches patiently, hangs at the parties and makes people feel completely at home with him. Part of perfection we see in Jesus is that he was not arrogant, but humble. He was not looking down on people who were far from perfect. He loved and forgave them. In fact, because he embodies goodness and perfection, people around him knew they did not have to fake anything with him. They knew in one sense that they were OK to not be OK. They knew if they flunked out on the LSATs that he would not just kick them to the curb.

Richard:  Hey, don’t get personal man [laughs] – I think we all want to know that we are enough so that we can actually be free to live without all that pressure and burden. To do what we love to do without feeling guilty, without feeling we suck, without some external pressure to make ourselves perfect in the eyes of society or friends or parents…even god.

Sundar: But we do suck. We are not perfect and do some really jacked up mess to one another. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God [Richard abruptly interrupts].

Richard: Christians can have such a low view of humanity. I really don’t like all that sin talk.

Sundar: I really don’t like sin. You didn’t let me finish – and I really don’t like how you jump on me when you get pissed about something.

Richard: Ok, apologies, finish your thought.

Sundar: All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and are justified by his grace as a gift. The message about Jesus is that you don’t have to be perfect…he is…and our own suckiness can be forgiven and we can be made right with God. Because he is perfect he’s not down with us sucking – we were made for more. We can be more. Because of his love and grace he forgives us and then begins to transform us; to be more like him.

Richard: I will think I really suck if I don’t do well on that LSAT.

Sundar:  And then what?

Apologetics Series - Summary

Why are we building Altars? Richard and Sundar Discuss Religion

Richard is a philosophy undergraduate student with ambitions towards a career in jurisprudence. He likes banter and debating but can be impatient and at times unsympathetic to the question of God. Sundar is a student in electrical engineering with hopes of working in the field of wireless communications. Both young men enjoy each other’s company and discussion even though one is an atheist and the other a committed follower of Jesus and the Christian way.

Richard: hey man, you get a good workout in?

Sundar: yeah, working stuff out by hitting the Muay Thai pads a bit

Richard: Man, what’s with that face, did someone do something bad in your corn flakes?

Sundar: My Mom is wearing me out again.

Richard: What’s going on? Man you are in college, she needs to chill and realize you are not her little boy any more. 

Sundar: No, my mom is cool, she really does treat me like a grown up for the most part [smiles thoughtfully]. It’s actually a little complicated.

Richard: Well, my next class is in an hour and a half. I mean, I don’t want to hear you whine for an hour but if it helps to talk about it, I’m good to listen.

Sundar:  She is wanting me to do some Diwali celebrations with the family.

Richard: Nice!!! Bollywood dancing!?! [awkwardly stands, screws in light bulb and pets the cat]

Sundar: no, Hinduism…it kinda creates some tension for me. I mean, I love my family but they worship before these statues and get so superstitious about everything, and…[Richard interrupts him]

Richard: so chill out, can’t you just join in for the food and dancing [laughs a bit]

Sundar: yes and no…I told you it is sort of complicated…especially after becoming a follower of Jesus. I can hang, enjoy the festiveness but my Mom really wants me to join in with all the pujas

Richard: poojawhat?

Sundar: it’s an act of honor or devotion to a deity or a person of honor. I’m not really down with that anymore and my Mom thinks I’m rejecting her and the whole family. I love them but they just don’t get why I no longer jump in to worshiping avatars and Hindu deities.

Richard: your family is really religious

Sundar: we are Indian bro [moment of silence and both break out in laughter] Even studying for school is expected to be an act of devotion.

Richard: religion just divides people, I’m sorry this sucks so bad for you.

Sundar: I kinda think religion connects all people in a common humanity on one level…but divides on another.

Richard: you mean all religions teach basically the same things - be good, make the gods happy, be nice to your fellow monkeys?

Sundar: I wouldn’t say something ignorant like that - the major religions are actually nothing alike.

Richard: Well, they might disagree on some minor stuff but say similar things about the big stuff.

Sundar: it’s actually the exact opposite…they disagree on things like: god, the problem with the world, humanity’s role in it, what solutions we need, what happens when we die, and our eternal destiny…

Richard: [Smiles] These are sort of biggies in god-world aren’t they?

Sundar: Yeah…it is usually secular people who say “all religions teach the same thing.” A devout Muslim wouldn’t say that. It is also imperialistic for secular people to define the religions of other people for them. Don’t you think? Buddhists don’t claim to be orthodox in Jewish faith you know. The truth claims of the religions actually make them distinct not the same.

Richard: Well, I think people in the West just want to try and point out some unity in religion so religious people will stop finding reasons to blow each other up.

Sundar: It’s more than religious people blowing stuff up. I don’t think it was First Baptist Church fighting the Vietnam War or filling Stalin’s camps, creating the killing fields of the Khamir Rouge, or creating cultural revolutions that slaughtered millions.

Richard: fair enough, can we say that it seems a human tendency is to want to blow each other up?

Sundar: man is sinful and separated from God

Richard: ok…don’t go preaching…get back to why you think there is a common humanity found due to religion. I can’t wait to hear this one [laughs in a dismissive way]

Sundar: Well, I’m not going to make some fantastic claim. I do want to simply say to be human, IS to be religious. We cannot help ourselves.

Richard: I’m not religious at all

Sundar: Except for when the political season comes around, or when your week is ruined because the NY Giants loose to the Cowboys or when you wanted to smash that guy who was saying Foo Fighters were a greater band than Pearl Jam, or when you declare your atheism superior to all views of life heaping condemnation upon religious people.

Richard: [Sheepishly] Am I that bad?

Sundar: Dude, you don’t make friends easily. But you are deeply religious – you can’t help to worship stuff either. It IS human to worship.

Richard: But I don’t worship dumb stuff like you and your parents…not meaning to offend

Sundar: Yeah, worshipping young men playing football is soooo sophisticated.

Sundar: Human beings throughout time have been very religious in every culture and every time. They seem to want to transcend themselves and circumstances, have minds that seem to be able to do so and create gods and goddesses like it’s going out of style.

Richard: Katy Perry is a goddess.

Sundar: And you’re an idiot [the two laugh, Richard stops and has a serious look on his face]

Richard: I actually get what you are saying man. The very nature of homo sapiens seems to be this way. It is hard to deny that.

Sundar: You could name the species homo adorans. Worshipping man. The really interesting question for me is WHY we are this way.

Richard: Haven’t recent brain scan studies shown that god-stuff happens in a certain region of the brain. 

Sundar: Actually other research has shown that several regions of the brain get activated by questions about god(s). That isn’t my point. My question is WHY are we this way? We don’t have to be this way you know. According to your beliefs we are only a biological monkey that evolved to survive and propagate our DNA to the next generation. But we have a species that in every environment and every time is profoundly religious.

Richard: Well, religion must have had an evolutionary advantage to our ancestors to help them make it through the day. Those creatures with this sort of tendency survived and here we are.

Sundar: But you say religious people are stupid, should get Darwin awards and are less fit than those like yourselves. The books you give me to read by the Rev Sam Harris and his posse all talk about religion as it is evil, worthless and dangerous to people. But now you say it must be awesome because evolution selected it?

Richard: We are smarter now then then so we no longer need it.

Sundar: You should record and listen to yourself sometime. In your view the religious nature of human beings is a historical accident of DNA that was AWESOME and now it is not awesome to our genes any longer? That totally makes no sense at all.

Sundar: The religious sense that we all have, this desire to worship, can be explained by an accident of biochemistry or it could be that we are worshippers by nature, by our very make up and design. We were made to worship.  One of the leaders of the European Protestant Reformation called this the sensus divinitatis, the sense of the divine.  It seems to me that this sense can either correspond to something real or it is an illusion without any sort of explanation.

Richard: OK, let me grant that for a second. There is something real “out there” that we were made to worship. Man, it seems like we don’t have a clue what that is.  Look at how many gods there are just in Hinduism let alone all the world’s religions. Then you add to that all the other religions and their deities: Jesus, Allah, Tom Cruise.

Sundar: hahahaha – don’t even get me started on Scientology – I’m reading a great book on that right now – had it on my iPhone while hitting the pads just a few minutes ago. Have you seen that song “Tom Cruise, is Tom Cruise crazy” – classic.

Richard: [laughing]  Don’t change the subject though, it seems that this religious sense only gets you so far. It launches you into a loony world of gods, goddesses, demi-gods, weirdos and confusion. So if I grant you this religious sense in us, for whatever its cause, you still don’t get to “I believe in God the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth?”

Sundar: Well, I did say it unites us in a common humanity as worshippers…but I never said that “all religions are the same” or “all are equally true in all aspects” or “all gods worshipped are real.” I consider much religion a misguided fiction because we seem to have bad aim in our religious devotion and worship. I mean, you mentioned Katy Perry, there are better things to worship.

Richard: I’m not so sure about that [goofing off again]

Sundar: I believe that we are made by our creator to know and worship him. Yet we choose to worship everything but him. The biblical terminology is idolatry.  This is precisely why I have this dilemma with my Mom. I love her; I want to be with her. But I think it is wrong to worship avatars and statues and concocted deities.  I think it is as misguided as you would think and more because I do believe we should worship God.

Richard: Well, you could just fake it, go through the motions of the…what did you call it

Sundar: Puja

Richard: Just cross yourself and light some candles like we do when we go to Mass with grandma.

Sundar: There is too much faking in the world already Richard. I really don’t want to put on a show, particularly falsely posing to worship idols. Come on, I want to have integrity – we have too much lying and fake crap in the world for me to join in that dance. Plus, I really believe the gospel and I’m not down with religion.

Richard: You just tried to convince me that we are all religious! Just about worked too. Now you say religion ain’t no good? Hey, welcome to my team!  [laughing]

Sundar: No, I think religion is a human creation to try to please god, gods or connect with ultimate reality. It depends upon our effort, typically depends on the ability to keep some rule and it usually crushes the human spirit

Richard: You are on my team!

Sundar: There is a third option between my Mom’s worship of the gods and your atheism. A couple of years ago I became a follower of Jesus. He did not claim to bring a religion to the world but to bring good news. He taught that God loves and pursues people, forgives their sin and rebellion…[pause]…even our idolatry. He died for our sin to bring us into relationship with God and rightly fulfill our desire for worship. One theologian said this way long ago “You have made us for yourself and our hearts are restless until they find rest in thee” Jesus said he came to seek and save people and bring them into a living relationship with God. He makes them worshippers in spirit and in truth.  So the desire to worship can be aimed not at Katy Perry but the one who created and sustains all things.

Richard: [long pause] – that’s not the thing I heard from Father Joe growing up. He was always telling me about how sinful I am and how I needed to make up for that by doing good stuff. I got sick of that and wanted to be free of that noise.  

Sundar: Sin is real, but there is more than one sort of way to be free…

Richard: Dang, I gotta go get some food and get to class.  I sort of miss Aquinas after gargling on Kant for a few weeks now. Seriously man, I understand why you feel in a pickle with your family. If I was a praying dude I’d pray for you. But, since I ain’t, hang in there [gives a man hug to Sundar]

Finding God in Our Questions - Essay Bibliography and Recommended Resources

…continued from Part 8

he entire introduction to Apologetics Series is linked here for your convenience as well.

Essay Bibliography

Ariew, Roger. “Pierre Duhem.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  (2011). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/duhem/ [accessed 9/14/2011].

Bauer, Walter, Frederick W. Danker, William Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Behe, Michael J. Darwin’s Black Box : The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. New York: The Free Press, 1996.

Boa, Kenneth D., and Robert M. Bowman Jr. Faith Has Its Reasons, an Integrative Approach to Defending Christianity. Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2001.

Budziszewski, J. How to Stay Christian in College. Colorado Springs: Nav Press, 2004.

Chang, Curtis. Engaging Unbelief : A Captivating Strategy from Augustine & Aquinas. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2000.

Collins, Francis S. The Language of God : A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. New York: Free Press, 2006.

Craig, William Lane. Reasonable Faith - Christian Truth and Apologetics. 3rd ed. Wheaton: Crossway, 2008.

Dembski, William A. The Design Revolution : Answering the Toughest Questions About Intelligent Design. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2004.

Dempski, William, and Jay Wesley Richards. Unapologetic Apologetics. Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2011.

Fernando, Ajith. Acts, the Niv Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998.

Groothuis, Douglas. Christian Apologetics - a Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. Downers Grover: IVP Academic, 2011.

Keller, Timothy J. The Reason for God : Belief in an Age of Skepticism. 1st Riverhead trade pbk. ed. New York: Riverhead Books, 2009.

Lennox, John C. God’s Undertaker : Has Science Buried God? 1st ed. Oxford: Lion, 2007.

Markos, Louis. Apologetics for the 21st Century. Wheaton: Crossway, 2010.

McGrath, Alister. A Fine-Tuned Universe: The Quest for God in Science and Theology. Louisville: Westminter John Knox, 2009.

Nash, Ronald. Faith and Reason - Searching for a Rational Faith. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988.

Plantinga, Alvin. God, Freedom, and Evil. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.

________. Warranted Christian Belief. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Pollard, Nick. Evangelism Made Slightly Less Difficult - How to Interest the Uninterested Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1997.

Schaeffer, Francis A. Francis A. Schaeffer Trilogy: The Three Essential Books in One Volume. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1990.

Recommended Books

Comprehensive

Kenneth D. Boa and Robert M. Bowman Jr. Faith Has Its Reasons, an Integrative Approach to Defending Christianity. Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2001.

William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith - Christian Truth and Apologetics. 3rd ed. Wheaton: Crossway, 2008.

John Frame, Apologetics to the Glory of God, Phillipsburg, P & R Publishing, 1994.

Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia for Christian Apologetics, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic, 1998.

Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics - a Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. Downers Grover: IVP Academic, 2011.

For the thoughtful lay person

GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy, Various editions – also can be found online and in a fantastic new audiobook version read by John Lee.

Paul K. Hoffman (Editor), Norman L. Geisler (Editor), Why I Am a Christian: Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe, Grand Rapids, Baker Books, 2006.

CS Lewis, The Complete C.S. Lewis Signature Classics – Includes Mere Christianity, The Screwtape Letters, The Great Divorce, The Problem of Pain, Miracles, A Grief Observed, and The Abolition of Man. New York, HarponeOne 2002.

Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, Wheaton, Crossway, 2004.

Francis A. Schaeffer, Francis A. Schaeffer Trilogy: The Three Essential Books in One Volume, Wheaton, Crossway Books, 1990.

Popular Level

William Lane Craig, On Guard, Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision, Colorado Springs,  David Cook, 2010)

Timothy J Keller, The Reason for God : Belief in an Age of Skepticism. 1st Riverhead trade pbk. ed. New York, Riverhead Books, 2009.

Gregory Koukl, Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions, Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2009.

Recommended web sites

As always, we do not hold to or support every single thing written on sites which we did not produce etc. The following have helpful resources on various subjects related to the answering questions and defending the faith. I do stand by what is on Power of Change.

Christian Apologetic and Resource Ministry – www.carm.org Christian ministry dedicated to the glory of Christ and the promotion and defense of the Christian Gospel, Doctrine, and Theology.

Power of Changewww.powerofchange.org – this is my web site where I have written on various subjects theological, philosophical and apologetic. Use the categories and search box on the right to find that which you seek.

Reasonable Faith www.reasonablefaith.org  is the web site of Christian philosopher and apologist William Lane Craig.

Stand to Reasonwww.str.org  - Stand to Reason is a ministry founded by Greg Koukl which equips Christian ambassadors with knowledge, wisdom, and character to be effective ambassadors for the Christian faith.

The Content of Apologetics

…continued from Part 7

The Historical Faith and Central Doctrines

Good arguments have been and continue to be developed in service of major Christian teachings and tenants.  The following are but a few essential doctrines.

  • The existence, character and nature of God including his power and goodness in permitting suffering and human evil
  • The fully deity and full humanity of Christ
  • The bodily resurrection of Christ
  • Humanity’s fallen state and guilt before God
  • Salvation is by God’s grace through faith in Christ, by the substitutionary atonement of Christ
  • Belief that Jesus is the promised Messiah - great prophet, high priest, coming king.
  • The Scriptures as the Word of God which reveal to us the gospel and the aforementioned doctrines.

Important Contemporary Interactions and Frontiers

In every epoch of church history Christian Apologists must answer the questions and objections of the culture in which they travel. In the second century AD Justin Martyr interacted at great length with the Logos ideology of Greek Philosophy. I have never in my life been asked about this. I have been asked and thought a lot about the following.

  • Truth as a category – in times past most believed that truth was real, external to us and discoverable. Today many think we construct our own truths and the universe will adjust and adapt to our whims. Ideas such as epistemic relativism, moral relativism, and cultural relativism must be addressed today.
  • Concept of self and identity – modern people think of themselves as constructed by their experiences and environments while Scripture teaches that we are created in the image of God and unique in our personal identity. We have to interact today with a fluid concept of “youness” as many teach “you” are not even real but rather just an electrochemical phenomena working out in a pattern of star dust called the brain.
  • Cultural view of authority – God is the author of and owner of our lives. Yeah, Americans love that stuff. Our view of authority is that it’s always suspect and bad. We are calling people to repent and trust Jesus as Lord of life. There are earthquakes that will go down here. 
  • Our view of history and the future – Do you ever watch any sci fi movies? They hardly, if ever, include anyone who believes in God. Furthermore they are many times morbid, dark and dystopia (a really bad place) views of the future being envisioned by today’s artists and story tellers. We hold that God will reign in the future and the future is bright on the earth. See a difference?
  • Science/Scripture – though a strong argument can be made that science was birthed from the Christian point of view, many today want to image a war between science and faith. Additionally, theories of micro and macro evolution and how they fit (or do not fit) with the biblical narrative must be addressed. 
  • Biotechnology, Technobiology, Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience – We are working today to engineer and re-engineer life on two fronts. First, we are working in gene manipulation and therapy to heal diseases but the possibility for augmentation looms real. Such work in “wetware” has potential ethical pitfalls and interacts with what it means to be human. Second, we are also working with “hardware” and computer systems to heal and augment using mechanical means. This also raises profound issues related to justice (why do all the rich people have “super brains”) and ethics. How will we understand robot intelligence and ever more interactive machines? Are they “human?” The final issue I’ll raise in this list is in “software” and the creation of artificial intelligence. Neuroscience today can simplistically assume that the brain is a computer and that is all we are. Such mind/brain identity can subvert many aspects of Christian theology and I have already been writing on these fronts.[1]
  • Environmental Concerns – Is technology our savior or an out of control evil which will destroy our world? Or both? Popular films like Avatar[2] are wrestling with these issues, as should a good Christian thinker.
  • Concerns for Universal Human Rights - what worldview grounds the existence of and the inalienable nature of universal human rights?

Pastoral Apologetics

Finally, many times issues regarding making a defense for the faith and caring for people times converge. This list is a small sampling we wrestle with today in pastoral ministry and care.

  • Sexual ethics – sex without marital trust and commitment, homosexuality, transgenderism, sexual abuse of children, pornography and sexual addiction. We both need to make a biblical case on these matters and defend that case in the public square.
  • Medical ethics – abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide are all on the table in public life.
  • Reproductive ethics – various forms of birth control, fertility treatments, surrogate motherhood, embryo care and lab based reproductive procedures which by pass fathers or mothers all must be addressed with care and answers.

The church as a whole must constantly do its thinking well to defend the faith and to commend the faith to people interacting with contemporary issues and problems. The above lists are by no means exhaustive but merely reading through them could seem exhausting. Thankfully, there are many in the body of Christ with deep expertise along every line above.

Furthermore, Jesus is the one who promised to build his church and nothing can prevail against it. Every culture has its challenges; every age has ideology that spews against the risen Son of God. It is to be expected and we are called to get on those walls and contend for the faith as we hold out the gospel of life for many more to be saved.

It is great to live today and belong to Jesus. May God raise up many great thinkers and apologists in our day. Maybe you? Maybe me?

Continued in Part 9 - Bibliography and Recommended Resources

Notes

[1] See two papers linked here - http://www.powerofchange.org/blog/2011/4/28/on-human-anthropology.html 

[2] See my thoughts on Avatar here - http://www.powerofchange.org/blog/2009/12/19/a-few-thoughts-on-avatar.html