Thoughts on the Cross

This was an essay written for one of my classes last semester. I'm trying to keep this blog alive, so I thought I'd post it here.

The Cross. In almost every Christian church, it occupies a central position in the worship space. It is one of the most common pieces of jewelry, adorning many devout followers, some casual believers, and even a few agnostic seekers and superstitious spiritualists. It is even cut into the doors of many of our homes, which is an easy thing to miss. It wasn't until High School that I realized the pattern on my bedroom door was more than just a configuration of four indented rectangles (two small on top, two long on the bottom), but also a symbol intended to bless the space.

The popularity of the Cross is an odd thing when we realize what it really is: an ancient Roman means of torture and execution. It's like an electric chair or a noose, although less humane than both. And yet this instrument of death has become for many a symbol of life, hope, and forgiveness. Why? When one considers all the death and suffering that has occurred throughout history, why is one man's death on a cross 2000 years ago such a big deal? And what relevance could that death possibly have for those of us alive today?

Movies, Morals, and God

I have always loved stories: books, movies, television shows. I like experiencing them and I like sharing them, and I know I'm not alone. The ever-rising price of movie theater tickets – even in a bad economy – shows that we can't help but be drawn to stories. Good stories grip us. They stir our emotions. They make us laugh, cry, or cheer – and the best can make us do all three. 

I think the reason we tend to be moved by stories is because they appeal to our intuitive moral senses. We sense that things like self-absorption, dishonesty, excessive pride, willful ignorance, and cruelty are wrong and evil. Likewise, we sense that things like love, friendship, bravery, loyalty, perseverance, and mercy are right and good. The best stories engage our emotions by playing off these intuitive senses.

My Top 10 Songs of 2012

Well, it's that time of year again. The rule is the same as last year: songs on the list have to have been released in 2012. It was harder for me to make the list this year because I didn't listen to very much new music in 2012. Not that I'm complaining about the quality of 2012 music - I just wasn't paying real close attention. Anyway, in no particular order, these are the songs released this year that had the most impact on me:

Two Mysteries: One Way of Viewing the Calvinism v. Arminianism Debate

I think a lot about the Calvinism vs Arminianism debate. For the uninitiated, Calvinism and Arminianism are paradigms for interpreting the Biblical Scriptures. There is a lot of overlap between them in terms of what they affirm and what they deny, but the reason they are typically viewed in opposition to one another is because of their differing views over the issue of predestination.

Both paradigms affirm that Heaven and Hell are realities, but disagree over the role of human decision in determining who goes where. Calvinists believe the Bible teaches that God has chosen who will go to Heaven and who will not prior to the creation of the world. Some people have been chosen for salvation, others for condemnation. Those who have been chosen for salvation will manifest their chosen-ness by coming to faith in Christ at some point in their lives, whereas those who have been chosen for destruction will never come to faith. Arminians, on the other hand, believe that God has chosen to make it possible for all people to come to faith. People, then, have some actual power of choice to say "yes" or "no" to the love, grace, and revelation that God offers (whether this is precisely what classical Arminianism argues I can't say for sure, but it is what most people who call themselves Arminian today actually believe).

Seminarian Musings

From what I've noticed, Calvinists tend to affirm three ideas:

(1) God is loving and good
(2) Some people will go to Hell
(3) God is completely sovereign over salvation

In my opinion, Calvinists need to choose which one of these three ideas to get rid of. They try to affirm all three, but they can really only affirm two of them at once. If God is truly loving and yet some people will still go to Hell, then God must not be completely sovereign over salvation (in other words, He must allow human beings some say in the matter). If God is loving and completely sovereign over salvation, then no one should end up going to Hell (Calvinists really should be universalists, in my opinion). If some people will go to Hell and God is completely sovereign over salvation, then God must not be really be loving.

In other words...

If (1) and (2), then not (3).
If (1) and (3), then not (2).
If (2) and (3), then not (1).

I'd be interested in hearing any ideas anyone has as to how to reconcile all three, because at this point I can't do it.

It seems to me that the one Calvinists are most willing to jettison first is (1) – the idea that God actually loves everyone. That disturbs me. That is the LAST one I'd be willing to stop affirming. The one I think it makes the most sense to let go of – or at least the one that we need to have a more nuanced understanding of – is (3).

Thoughts?

Thoughts: John 14:5-11

Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?” Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”

      *      *      *      *      *      *     *

In the verses preceding this passage, Jesus said that he was going “to prepare a place” for his disciples. He told them, “you know the way to the place where I am going,” which I assume meant, “you know I am about to die.”

But, in these verses Thomas reveals that either (a) he doesn't really know that Jesus is about to die or (b) he doesn't want to admit it. In what appears to be an attempt to get Jesus to speak more plainly, he says, “Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?” It is in this context that Jesus delivers his oft-quoted line, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Koine Greek

So, today I had my first Greek class at Gordon-Conwell. I've got a lot of work ahead of me.

I'd always heard that the New Testament was written in "Koine Greek," but I never really knew what that meant until this morning. "Koine Greek" basically means "Common Greek." During Jesus' day, there was Common Greek and there was Classical Greek. Common Greek was, of course, the language of the common people. Classical Greek was the fancy language of the erudite.

The difference between Common Greek and Classical Greek is something like the difference between conversational English and, say, what you would read in a King James' Bible.

Isn't that interesting? God could have used the fancy language, but He chose the common one.

If you've ever viewed the KJV Bible translation as more holy or pleasing to God than the "dumbed down versions," then you need to think about this.

Also, if you've ever complained about "The Message" paraphrase, you also need to think about this.

I'm not saying the KJV is a bad thing or that The Message is a great paraphrase. I'm not qualified to answer those questions. But I will say this: it's more important for you to understand the Bible than for it to sound fancy.