What It’s All About

As I’ve gotten older, I’ve come to appreciate some surprising things. In my twenties, I finally “got” Shakespeare. How many people, like me, loathed him at first meeting, usually in high school? I guess there are some things you just have to be old enough to understand. And some people never do.

By my thirties, I suddenly found I had a feel for non-fiction reading. In my forties, I developed a taste for comparative religions and philosophy, then for apologetics. Now, in my fifties, I suddenly discover that some of the music styles of songsters more celebrated by my parents’ generation have started to speak to me with very strange poignancy. Again, I guess sometimes you just have to reach an age.

Lately, I’ve found myself strangely compelled by the work of Burt Bacharach.

Christmas Dreams, White or Otherwise

I had a dream.

No, not like MLK. That’s more of what we call a vision than a dream. Mine was nothing inspiring or quotable. Just a regular dream, the ordinary kind where your mind drifts randomly.

The Grand Entrance

In my dream I went to Hallowby Hall. I had heard that it had the most amazing Christmas decorations on the planet. Everyone said so. And I couldn’t wait to see them.

So I went there. And even as I approached I must say I was impressed. Rich, red carpets led the way up the front stairs. Gold gleamed from towering archways. Tall trees of blue and green framed either side, and from beneath each bough multi-coloured lights winked mischievously. Banners of satin crowned the entranceway, and from underneath gleamed the golden light of a dozen shining chandeliers. Such a glorious sight I had never seen.

Subverting or Perpetuating

There is a good reason I try not to do a lot of speculating. Hypothetical situations are like tar babies: touch them, and you will not get free of them easily. It’s the old “What would you do if” question about a situation that, for you and me at least, will almost surely never arise. Whatever answer you come up with will not satisfy, and you’ll never apply it in real life in any case.

Call me crazy, but I suspect scripture was not written to address amusing fictions. Nevertheless, here we are. Journey with me if you will to postmillennial fantasyland once again.

Anonymous Asks (385)

“What does the Bible say about the three wise men?”

The Christmas story as we know it is a composite of information passed on by the writers of two of our four gospels. (Mark and John begin the story of Jesus Christ roughly thirty years in, with John the Baptist.) Matthew’s gospel is where we find the only references in scripture to the wise men.

First things first: the popular formulation in the Christmas carol about them (“three kings of orient”) turns out to be incorrect in as many as three respects. It is certainly wrong in one.

A Flipped Script

“I, Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles …”

This might seem a strange statement if the book of Acts did not familiarize readers with the circumstances that led to Paul’s imprisonment in Rome. Moreover, the 12 verses that follow it in Ephesians 3 might seem even stranger to Gentiles raised as supersessionists in the Reformed tradition if they were to pay them serious attention and consider their implications.

The script has most definitely flipped over the last two millennia.

No King in Israel (38)

Abraham gave Isaac to God and ended up the father of eight sons by three different women. He received Isaac back as well. Hannah dedicated Samuel to God, afterwards conceiving three more sons as well as two daughters. Rebekah was barren until her husband prayed for her, after which she conceived not one son but two, both of whom became fathers of nations. Mary said, “Let it be to me according to your word”, and conceived not only the Lord Jesus but also four other sons and unnumbered sisters.

Short version, you cannot out-give the Lord. We will see that again shortly.

Too Hot to Handle: The Gospel Meeting

In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more volatile than usual.

On the subject of the gospel meeting, Mike Willis has dug in. Gospel meetings, Willis says, used to accomplish a lot of good when America was a rural nation and non-Christians would visit the meetings.

Now, he concedes, not so much.

Yet despite a significant decline in their effectiveness (according to Willis, “Fewer non-Christian visitors are attending gospel meetings than at times in the past” and “We are not baptizing people any more”), he’s determined to revitalize the form. Willis says, “Reminding ourselves of the legitimate goals of gospel meetings and refocusing our aims on those goals should help us to have more effective gospel meetings.”

The Mythical Native

So you’re speaking to someone about the gospel. And suddenly he gets that ironic glint in his eye. He folds his arms, steps back and says, “Well, what about the people who have never heard? What about people not born in Christian cultures, or even in cultures with some other religion? Hey, what about the native on some remote South Sea island, who has never even seen a white person and knows nothing about Western culture? If you have to believe the gospel to be saved, then isn’t that poor guy going to hell? And how is that fair? After all, he never even had a chance.”

He smiles smugly at you, confident you won’t be able to field that one. And you stumble.

Sound Advice from a Secular Source

Consider the source, but not too much.

The word of God is full of good advice. So full, in fact, that many of us regularly take biblical advice that was given to other people entirely; advice that has no obvious direct connection to us.

Sometimes that works out all right anyway, provided the instructions are general enough to apply more broadly. For example, God told Cain, “If you do well, will you not be accepted?” That piece of wisdom came in a specific context to a specific person and had a specific historical meaning, but that doesn’t mean we’re crazy to say to ourselves, “You know, things will probably go better for me if I approach God the same way as others with whom he says he is pleased.”

Just like Cain ought to have done … and didn’t.

The Best Possible Place

There is a time-honored tradition in Old Testament oratory of addressing one’s enemies from the safety of a nearby hilltop.

Jotham called out his family’s murderers from Mount Gerazim. The Philistines hurled their insults at the Israelite army on one side of the Valley of Elah from the mountain on the other. Even David appealed to Saul from atop the hill of Hachilah.

Not too bad a strategy, really, before the invention of megaphones and loudspeakers: just stand far enough up and back to avoid the enemy’s arrows and occasional javelin toss while staying close enough to remain audible.

It was the best possible place, especially if things went south and you had to beat a hasty retreat down the far side of the hill.

Anonymous Asks (384)

“What does it mean that a friend’s wounds are ‘faithful’?”

The line comes from one of Solomon’s later proverbs. In full it reads, “Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy.”

The wounds of a friend are not injuries he incurs on your behalf or in the process of defending you from others, though that might be your first thought, as it was mine. Taking a major hit for a pal is definitely a confirmation of friendship, but I don’t think that’s what Solomon was talking about.

Timing is Everything

God’s timing is always impeccable.

The gospel spread like wildfire in the first century precisely because God had put all the pieces in place centuries prior. As James noted when the apostles and elders gathered in Jerusalem to discuss the issue of imposing the Law of Moses on Gentiles, “from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues”.

Ironically, the fact that the whole world of James’ day had access to an obscure set of Jewish laws was a function of Israel’s disobedience.

No King in Israel (37)

Truth is objective and its importance paramount. Technical precision is one aspect of truth and its importance situational. On several occasions the Lord Jesus was technically precise in quoting the Old Testament. On many others it would not be outrageous to say that he wildly paraphrased.

The standard for quoting a conversation as evidence in a court proceeding is not the same as the standard for reporting dialogue that took place during historical events for which the author could not possibly have been personally present. The former ought to be as close to word-to-word as possible. The latter permits or even necessitates some stylistic license, and everyone but a pedant makes allowance for it. Expecting an author to recount a conversation that took place a hundred years ago with the technical precision of a legal transcript is manifestly unreasonable; a paraphrase or summary in his own words is frequently more than adequate.

Well-constructed prose often makes for a better story anyway.

Too Hot to Handle: The Correct Church

In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more volatile than usual.

In 2002, Julie Staples (for the Protestant side) debated Apolonio Latar (representing Catholics under the initials ‘AL’).

At one point in their exchange Latar said this:

“Sola Scriptura leads to doctrinal anarchy, which is further reason why you need an infallible authority. Look at all of these Protestant denominations, 30,000 of them the last time I checked. How do you know you’re in the correct church?”

Now it turns out the “30,000” is vastly, wildly overstated, as others have since demonstrated. Regardless, everyone would certainly agree that there are lots of denominations and lots of different beliefs within Christendom.

Tom: So my question is, how would you personally have answered Latar? How do you, Immanuel Can, today, know you’re in the correct church?