#gospelofluke — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #gospelofluke, aggregated by home.social.
-
And he went on to say to them all, “Watch out and guard yourselves from every kind of greed; because your true life is not made up of the things you own, no matter how rich you may be.”
Then Jesus told them this parable: “There was once a rich man who had land which bore good crops. He began to think to himself, ‘I don’t have a place to keep all my crops. What can I do? This is what I will do,’ he told himself; ‘I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, where I will store the grain and all my other goods. Then I will say to myself, Lucky man! You have all the good things you need for many years. Take life easy, eat, drink, and enjoy yourself!’ But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night you will have to give up your life; then who will get all these things you have kept for yourself?’”
And Jesus concluded, “This is how it is with those who pile up riches for themselves but are not rich in God’s sight.”
εἶπεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, Ὁρᾶτε καὶ φυλάσσεσθε ἀπὸ πάσης πλεονεξίας, ὅτι οὐκ ἐν τῷ περισσεύειν τινὶ ἡ ζωὴ αὐτοῦ ἐστιν ἐκ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων αὐτῷ.
Εἶπεν δὲ παραβολὴν πρὸς αὐτοὺς λέγων, Ἀνθρώπου τινὸς πλουσίου εὐφόρησεν ἡ χώρα. καὶ διελογίζετο ἐν ἑαυτῷ λέγων, Τί ποιήσω, ὅτι οὐκ ἔχω ποῦ συνάξω τοὺς καρπούς μου; καὶ εἶπεν, Τοῦτο ποιήσω, καθελῶ μου τὰς ἀποθήκας καὶ μείζονας οἰκοδομήσω καὶ συνάξω ἐκεῖ πάντα τὸν σῖτον καὶ τὰ ἀγαθά μου καὶ ἐρῶ τῇ ψυχῇ μου, Ψυχή, ἔχεις πολλὰ ἀγαθὰ κείμενα εἰς ἔτη πολλά· ἀναπαύου, φάγε, πίε, εὐφραίνου.
εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ θεός, Ἄφρων, ταύτῃ τῇ νυκτὶ τὴν ψυχήν σου ἀπαιτοῦσιν ἀπὸ σοῦ· ἃ δὲ ἡτοίμασας, τίνι ἔσται; οὕτως ὁ θησαυρίζων ἑαυτῷ καὶ μὴ εἰς θεὸν πλουτῶν.The Bible (The New Testament) (AD 1st - 2nd C) Christian sacred scripture
Luke 12: 15-21 [GNT (1992 ed.)]More info about (and translations of) this quote: wist.info/bible-nt/78720/
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #bible #jesus #gospelofluke #avarice #greed #mortality #riches #selfishness #treasure #wealth #worldliness
-
Not for Law But for Love
“‘Dear Lord God, I wish to preach in your honor. I wish to speak about you, glorify you, praise your name. Although I can’t do this well of myself, I pray that you may make it good.’”[1]
Introduction
What, in our lives, brings God glory? I’ll say two things up front: 1. It’s not what you think; and, 2. It’s harder than you think.
Luke 13:10-17
Luke tells us that Jesus was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath (v10). Luke gives us a location that Jesus hasn’t been in a while—not since chapter 4, when he was teaching on the Sabbath about bringing “good news to the poor” and “release the captives.”[2] Therefore, given this new scene and its corresponding component parts, Luke is providing his audience a reminder about how Jesus spoke of and understood his mission from God: liberation of the people from oppression. (This is our backdrop.) Also, since he’s in the synagogue on the Sabbath, we can safely assume that another conflict will emerge between Jesus and the religious authorities[3] as human tradition and power is confronted by divine love and mercy. [4]
Luke then tells us, And, behold!, [there was] a woman having a spirit of frailty for 18 years—she was bent double and not able to lift toward the uttermost (v11). Another character is introduced: a woman who was bent over so severely she could not stand up straight for 18 years. She is “burdened” by a spirit that is causing her to suffer, she is doubled-over under the weight of its presence, she is oppressed by evil and the demonic and this evil spirit has refused her the vitality and dignity of divinely created human life.[5] She was minding her own business, going about her task, and was not seeking either attention or healing. However, Jesus saw her[6]—God of very God saw her and cared about her. Then, Now, after perceiving her, [he] called and said to her, “Woman, you have been released from your malady,” and he placed his hands on her, and instantly she was restored/straightened again and she as giving glory to/glorifying God (vv12-13). The healing Jesus brings to this humble and burdened woman is one of “release” and restoration: she is not only released from her malady of being doubled-over but also from the spirit causing the burden; she is also returned to community (Jesus calls her to him in the midst of the people).[7] In a word, Jesus rebukes the evil spirit by declaring she is no longer oppressed and follows it up with laying his hands on her. The word of God spoke, the hand of God touched, and she was liberated, loosed from/set free from her captivity (ἀπολύω). Jesus’s word and touch bring God glory because God’s praise is found on the lips of the one liberated.
But Jesus isn’t the only one who perceives and calls. Luke tells us that the ruler of the synagogue—being indignant because Jesus healed on the Sabbath—answered and was saying to the crowd, “There are six days on which to toil; therefore on these days come and be healed and not [on] the day of the Sabbath” (v14). The religious leader isn’t wrong, it is his job to faithfully keep and study the law[8] and he’s referring to scripture here (but not quoting it (Dt. 5:13)).[9] The Sabbath was a divinely instituted law of God, what “ought to be done” was rest and not work. Here Jesus finds himself confronted by the evil Spirit in the woman, and the evil spirit[10] deeply embedded in the atmosphere around him personified by the ruler of the synagogue: law has privilege over the people.[11] This ruler of the synagogue—privileging the law over the person thus participating in the evil embedded in the atmosphere[12] —would’ve added “another umpteen centuries” to this woman’s burden rather than “break” the law to release her. Jesus, however—privileging the person over the law and thus confronting the evil embedded in the atmosphere[13]—liberated and released her even on the Sabbath. Which action caused God to be praised?[14]
Not only is Jesus’s ministry being characterized as one of “release,”[15] the very laws of God, God’s word, God’s son, God’s mission in the world is also being so characterized by “release.”[16] Luke tells us that Jesus, the lord, answered and said [to the ruler of the synagogue and the crowd], “Hypocrite! Do not everyone of you releases their cow or donkey from the manger and after leading it away gives it water? But this woman—being a daughter of Abraham—Satan bound her ten and eight years, was it not necessary [for her] to be loosed from this imprisonment on the day of the Sabbath? (vv15-16). Luke emphasizes Jesus’s authority to challenge the authority of the ruler of the synagogue. Even though the ruler of the synagogue tried to challenge Jesus and reassert his authority,[17] Jesus returns the favor. He also quotes scripture, but highlights the hypocrisy in that, according to the text, not even animals are supposed to work, thus Dt. 5:14 goes ignored.[18] Here Jesus becomes the one who has the authority to both interpret the law and scripture and God’s will and purposes in the world and opts to break the law to liberate a daughter of Abraham.[19] Here the ruler and the crowd are exposed as the ones who do not know God’s will and who do not understand the law and it’s purpose.[20] Here Jesus responds to the ruler’s “ought to be done” with his own “ought to be done”: healing, release, restoration, liberation for all humanity,[21] especially those who are a [children] of Abraham. She not only has some place in the children of Israel, but has a significant place marked by being one of the people of God who has dignity and deserves to receive God’s mercy and liberation[22] and is given a voice to glorify God which is the characteristic of the people of God.[23]
Luke closes with telling us that not only did the woman praise God, but so did the people who witnessed the deed and the subsequent exchange.[24] Luke writes, and all the crowd was rejoicing because of all the glorious things that were happening through him (v17b).
Conclusion
So, again, I’ll ask the question: What, in our lives, brings God glory?
I mentioned earlier that it’s not what you think. By this I mean that it’s not by adhering to some austere and severe way of life, it’s not embedded in some form of self-harm/mutilation (either spiritually or materially), it’s not at the end of a pilgrimage or fast or bible-study/reading, it’s not the pot of gold at the end of being strong and powerful, it’s not in our success no matter how much we give God the credit, it’s not about perfect worship and excellent doctrine, and it’s not even by clinging to the law (either human or divine) and upholding it without fail. Why? Because none of those deeds puts God and our neighbor first, and it, frankly, devalues human life to the point of being unimportant and down-right disposable, only any good by ho it serves some law. In any of these actions, as good and holy as any of them sound, there is no room for God and for our neighbor.
I also mentioned, earlier, that it’s harder than you think. By this I mean that even though it’s not about the deeds mentioned above it doesn’t mean that we bring God glory by just going along with the crowd and adhering to the kingdom of humanity and its rules and structures without question. It’s also not as easy as just choosing to be nice and people pleasing. It’s hard because we must find our identity not only in Christ but also find ourselves empowered by the Holy Spirit to be as Christ in the world and this means, in many ways, participating in the mission of God as Jesus did. Thus, it’s hard because we must be curious; we must be willing to be the fodder for challenge; we must find our voice to ask questions—specifically against the powers that control the narratives and institutions of the kingdom of humanity; we must locate the gumption to call out lies and falsehoods knowing that it might/will cause our social, political, ecclesiastical, occupational, and (even) physical demise. We must allow our faith and love of God and others to determine our posture in the world, and we must do so daily and without foreknowledge. Why is it harder than you think? Because to bring God glory caused Jesus to lose his life.
So, what does bring God glory? Jesus forever sets the answer to the question for us: by making sure people are liberated from oppression (both spiritually and materially). This means, quite frankly, that we participate in the divine revolution of love, life, and liberation, being willing to break the law as necessary to make sure our neighbors—burdened by the evil of the age that weighs them down and prevents them from having fully life—are released from their captivity within the kingdom of humanity. As Christians who have been liberated by Jesus to love God, let us also love our neighbor in and through the love that God has loved us in Christ and by the power of the Holy Spirit, and let us bring life where there is death, and sweet divine release and liberation where there is captivity. Love releases and sets free; therefore, beloved, let us love as we have been so loved by God through Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit.
[1] LW 54:157-158; Table Talk 1590.
[2] Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 520-521. “There, when teaching in a synagogue on the Sabbath, Jesus proclaimed ‘good news to the poor,’ ‘the good news of the kingdom of God’…Recalling that well-established script, we may assume that Luke has chosen at this fresh point of departure in the narrative to remind us of a the central concerns of Jesus’ ministry and, thus, to present Jesus engaged in the characteristic activity by means of which he fulfills his divine mission.”
[3] Justo L. Gonzalez, Luke, Belief: A Theological Commentary on the Bible, eds. Amy Plantinga Pauw and William C. Placher (Louisville: WJK, 2010), 173. “This well-known passage is a further sign of the growing controversy between Jesus and the religious Leaders of his nation.”
[4] Gonzalez, Luke, 173. “For in this text we have not just a miracle of healing, but the convergence of ancient and seemingly invincible powers, all coming to meet that Sabbath day in that synagogue.”
[5] Gonzalez, Luke, 173-174. “The point is that the woman cannot stand up straight, and that is demonic…With that woman there comes into the synagogue what we religious folk often try to forget: the reality of the power of evil, the reality of human suffering.”
[6] Green, Luke, 522.
[7] Green, Luke, 522-523. “When Jesus sees her, he does not go to her but calls her to him, thus inviting her to join him in front of those gathered and so to join him at the focal point of this scene. Locating this woman of such low status thus is not unrelated to the healing moment, but is directly relevant as a symbolization of her restoration within her community.”
[8] Green, Luke, 523. “The role of the synagogue ruler was to maintain the reading and faithful teaching of the law…”
[9] Green, Luke, 523. “He does not even cite the relevant texts, but grounds his view in what ‘ought to be done’—that is, in the divine will.” The woman can be healed tomorrow.
[10] Gonzalez, Luke, 174. “The confrontation points to the always lurking possibility that very good religious principles may be turned into allies of the powers of evil.”
[11] Gonzalez, Luke, 174. “On the one hand, in that woman’s suffering Satan himself confronts him. On the other, in the entire atmosphere around him, in the very law of Israel, in the leader of the synagogue, the weight of tradition seems to say that there is nothing to be done.”
[12] Gonzalez, Luke, 174. “The leader of the synagogue was defending religious principles derived from the very law of God. Yet in that very defense he was siding with the powers of evil that held the woman bent.”
[13] Green, Luke, 521. “From this ethnomedical perspective, the, this woman’s illness has a physiological expression but is rooted in a cosmological disorder. Because Luke has presented Jesus as the divine agent of salvation in whose ministry the kingdom of God is made present and in whose ministry the domain of Satan is rolled back, Luke’s depiction of this woman’s illness prepares us for a redemptive encounter of startling proportions.”
[14] Gonzalez, Luke, 174. “Jesus faces the bent-over woman, oppressed by the weight of Satan himself. To her oppression of eighteen years the religious leaders would add another of umpteen centuries: It is the Sabbath! It is a day for religious matters! Jesus saw the woman, and he called her, and he spoke to her, and he laid his hands on her, and immediately she stood up straight and began praising God.”
[15] Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 518.
[16] Green, Luke, 519. “…Jesus’ encounter with this woman and his ensuing interpretation of her liberation as a necessary manifestation of the divine will, an outworking of the presence of the kingdom, on this day, the Sabbath. That is, the intrusion of the indignant synagogue ruler into Jesus’ encounter with the women bent over (v 14) provides Jesus the opportunity to interpret that healing as a fulfillment of God’s purpose ,and, thus, of Jesus’ mission (vv 15-21).”
[17] Green, Luke, 523. Ruler of the Synagogue addresses the people and not Jesus, “In this way he publicly challenges Jesus’ authority as a teacher and reasserts himself as the authorized interpreter of Scripture.”
[18] Green, Luke, 524. Ruler of Synagogue’s allusion to Deut 5:13 causes Jesus to return to that text “in order to remind this debate partner that the prohibition to work extends not only to human beings but also to oxen and donkeys (Deut 5:14).”
[19] Green, Luke, 520. “…Luke introduces Jesus as ‘Lord,’ then presents him as one with authority to interpret God’s salvific purpose. Directly or indirectly, both synagogue ruler and Jesus appeal to the Scriptures, but Jesus is represented as the divinely sanctioned hermeneut.”
[20] Green, Luke, 524. Setting up a series of parallels with ref. to Deut 5:14, “From this exegesis of the Deuteronomic law and contemporary practices based on it, Jesus is able to expose the ruler of the synagogue and those who think as he does as ‘hypocrites’—that is, as persons who do not understand God’s purpose, who therefore are unable to discern accurately the meaning of the scriptures, and therefore, whose piety is a sham.”
[21] Green, Luke, 524. “On a deeper sense, though, Jesus seems content to engage the argument just as the synagogue ruler had left it, with reference to the devein will. What ‘ought’ to take place, he insists, is this: This woman out to be set free from satanic bondage on the Sabbath.”
[22] Green, Luke, 525. “…Jesus’ God’s covenantal promise and the extension of God’s covenantal mercy to Abraham….She is ‘a daughter of Abraham,’ and appellation that might signal heroic faithfulness in some other literature, but with a profoundly different significance in the Lukan narrative. She is thus presented as one of those persons denoted by others has having no place among the people of God, normally excluded from social intercourse and certainly not highly regarded for their fidelity, and yet raised up by God as children of Abraham in the sene of becoming the recipients of the mercy reserved for Abraham by God.”
[23] Green, Luke, 525-526. “She and other children of Abraham in the Lukan narrative evidence how God’s promise to Abraham is fulfilled through the activity of Jesus and how the recipients of liberation through Jesus’ ministry are thus confirmed as Abrahm’s children.”
[24] Green, Luke, 526. “He had attempted to shame Jesus but, in the end, he and those with him who oppose Jesus are shamed as the crowd sides with Jesus This also means that they side with the narrator, attributing to Jesus the status of authoritative teacher and recognizing in the ‘wonderful things he was doing’ the gracious hand of God…”
#BringingGodGlory #DivineLiberation #DivineLife #DivineLove #Encounter #Gospel #GospelOfLuke #Jesus #JesusTheChrist #JoelGreen #JustoGonzalez #Liberation #Life #Love #SeenByGod #SpiritualLiberation #TemporalLiberation #TheGloryOfGod #TouchedByGod
-
Alas for you when the world speaks well of you! This was the way their ancestors treated the false prophets.
[οὐαὶ ὅταν ὑμᾶς καλῶς εἴπωσιν πάντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι· κατὰ τὰ αὐτὰ γὰρ ἐποίουν τοῖς ψευδοπροφήταις οἱ πατέρες αὐτῶν.]The Bible (The New Testament) (AD 1st - 2nd C) Christian sacred scripture
Luke 6: 26 (Jesus) [JB (1966)]Sourcing, notes, other translations: wist.info/bible-nt/18525/
#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #jesus #bible #newtestament #gospelofluke #admiration #applause #approval #fame #publicopinion #reputation
-
Does #Mary Consent to Her #Conception in #Luke?
#Jesus #Christianity #BibleStudy
Does Mary actually consent to her divine pregnancy in the #GospelofLuke—or is that a modern lens we’re applying to an #ancient text? In this episode, we explore the original Greek, the social world of the ancient Mediterranean, and how common themes of divine conception show up across #myth and empire.
-
The Unforgettable Legacy of #Paul the #Apostle | Dr. Robyn Faith Walsh
https://youtu.be/mn2-QESI5l8?si=tfZMCOJP5ySUqKaJ
#robynwalsh
#robynfaithwalsh
#newtestament
#academia
#academia
#gospelofmark
#gospelofmathew
#gospelofluke
#gospelofjohn
#paultheapostle -
The Unforgettable Legacy of #Paul the #Apostle | Dr. Robyn Faith Walsh
https://youtu.be/mn2-QESI5l8?si=tfZMCOJP5ySUqKaJ
#robynwalsh
#robynfaithwalsh
#newtestament
#academia
#academia
#gospelofmark
#gospelofmathew
#gospelofluke
#gospelofjohn
#paultheapostle -
The Unforgettable Legacy of #Paul the #Apostle | Dr. Robyn Faith Walsh
https://youtu.be/mn2-QESI5l8?si=tfZMCOJP5ySUqKaJ
#robynwalsh
#robynfaithwalsh
#newtestament
#academia
#academia
#gospelofmark
#gospelofmathew
#gospelofluke
#gospelofjohn
#paultheapostle -
The Unforgettable Legacy of #Paul the #Apostle | Dr. Robyn Faith Walsh
https://youtu.be/mn2-QESI5l8?si=tfZMCOJP5ySUqKaJ
#robynwalsh
#robynfaithwalsh
#newtestament
#academia
#academia
#gospelofmark
#gospelofmathew
#gospelofluke
#gospelofjohn
#paultheapostle -
Calming the storm (Storm 🌪️)
Calming the storm is one of the miracles of Jesus in the Gospels, reported in Matthew 8:23–27, Mark 4:35–41, and Luke 8:22–25. This episode is distinct from Jesus' walk on water, which also involves a boat on the lake and appears later in the narrative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calming_the_storm
#CalmingTheStorm #Storm #GospelOfLuke #GospelOfMark #SeaOfGalilee #GospelOfMatthew
-
I never thought I would be writing a post like this. Before I became a Christian, I never cared enough about the Bible to write such a post, and after I became a Christian, I quickly became convinced that it was inerrantly inspired, so that any errors that may exist in particular copies or particular translations were the results of human sloppiness, not part of the original Bible. I knew that there were some difficulties with the text (e.g. 1 Samuel 13:1: how old was Saul when he became king?), but those were obviously not the original state of the text. I remember seeing other peoples’ lists of “errors in the Bible” and thinking that most of them I could explain rather readily, but that I could supply a more challenging list if I were motivated to do so. I wasn’t.
But now I am writing such a post, for a different reason. This post isn’t motivated by any animosity toward the Bible itself, nor to those who believe what it says. But in the context in which I now find myself, a context in which the group of people most likely to spread lies, to oppose public health measures, and to advocate violent responses to unfavorable election results are also the group of people most likely to say that they believe the Bible, I have been struggling to maintain my faith that the Bible is true. Certain passages to me have come to seem false, not passages about historical facts (for which we rarely have contrary evidence) so much as assertions about spiritual realities. And I have no one with whom I can discuss these issues (I know only one person willing to discuss them, but she can’t discuss them without damaging her health), so I am posting them here hoping that perhaps there is someone out there who can talk some sense into me. I welcome correction on any point, though I can no longer ignore the realities of the society around me, namely that conservative white Christians are the deadliest group in my society. And while I can readily acknowledge that there is so much we don’t know, I can’t pretend that the evidence, such as it is, favors what I used to believe about the Bible.
Of course, in arguing that the Bible contains errors, we must recognize the complexities of interpretation. It is obvious that many interpretations of a particular text may be erroneous without the text itself being in error. Indeed, John 21:23 calls attention to this, as some early Christians were interpreting John 21:22 as implying that the “beloved disciple” would not die (an interpretation maintained today by Mormons, apparently), but the following verse indicates that that is not a necessary interpretation of Jesus’s words. So for someone to conclude that the Bible itself is in error, one must consider all plausible interpretations, and weigh the unlikelihood of progressively less plausible interpretations against the unlikelihood of the Bible being false. (Since some people believe that it is impossible for the Bible to be false, then they will believe interpretations that strike me as very implausible. I will refer to some below.) Nevertheless, there are some places where I cannot come up with any plausible interpretation of the biblical text, and therefore where it seems to me, from my limited perspective, that there are spiritual errors in the Bible.
Christians do not continue to sin?
1 John 3:9 says, “No one who is born of God will continue to sin.” This is a famous verse indicating the incompatibility of Christian life and continuing sinfulness. But it is tricky to reconcile with reality, and comparing different versions indicates numerous small variations in interpretation. Of course we all know that Christians do sin (as affirmed, for example, by 1 John 1:8 and 10!), so this must be saying something else. That is why it is important to interpret the present tense verse as “continues to sin” rather than a simple present “ever sins.” But even so, we see lots of Christians continuing to sin, for example, by continuing to spread lies that extensive voter fraud changed the outcome of the 2020 US presidential election, or by continuing to oppose life-saving public health protocols. One might be tempted to defend this verse by saying it refers only to Jesus, who was sinless! But that is impossible in context: the following verse says, “By this (i.e. lack of sin) it may be seen who are the children of God and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not do what is right is not of God, nor he who does not love his brother” (1 John 3:10). We are clearly talking about plural people, more than Jesus alone. Well okay, someone might say that this makes clear that the election deniers and public health opposers are not of God, not really children of God or begotten by him. I’m open to that view. But if so, then we run into difficulty with 1 John 5:1: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.” This sets a rather low bar for people to count as born of God. So in a society where the most consistently evil people are those who believe Jesus is the Christ, it is not possible for both 1 John 3:9 and 1 John 5:1 to be true. Either 1 John 3:9 is false, and people “born of God” do continue in sin, or such people are not “born of God” at all (as per 1 John 3:10), despite believing Jesus is the Christ, and 1 John 5:1 is false. If such a society exists, these verses are not universally true in all contexts. And such a society does exist, where I live.
Ask and it will be given to you?
Matthew 7:7 famously reports Jesus encouraging prayer by saying, “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.” This is not my experience. I have asked for certain outcomes in prayer and not received them. There are various tactics to try to defend the veracity of these verses. For example, it is often noticed here, as in 1 John 3, that the imperative verbs are present tense, implying a continuing aspect: “Keep asking… keep seeking… keep knocking.” The idea is that if you haven’t received it yet, you just need to keep on asking. Such an approach seeks to make the verses unfalsifiable, since there is no point at which one can claim to have asked enough, but unfortunately the idea can still be falsified by certain changes of situation that preclude further asking. I remember when a pair of very premature twins were born, and we were praying for both of them to recover, and one did while the other died. The end. When Donald Trump caught Covid in September 2020, I prayed that he would recover from the disease and repent of his Covid-minimization. He recovered from the disease, but never repented of his minimization of the disease, and his post-election-day rallies to spread his election lies led to the biggest spike in Covid deaths to that point in the pandemic. And it’s not just me: Paul prayed for healing from some affliction, and was reportedly told by God to stop praying (2 Corinthians 12:8-9).
Some people try to rescue verses like this by claiming that “if you pray, you will get an answer, but that answer might be no.” But in fact this verse and the many others like it (e.g. Matthew 18:19; 21:22; John 14:13-14; 15:7, 16; 16:23-24, and others not by Jesus) are not saying “every prayer will be answered.” They are consistently saying “you will receive what you ask for.”
Some people, no doubt reflecting some of the “if” statements in the parallel promises, suggest that if prayer is unanswered, then there is some defect in the prayer. For example, James 4:3 says, “You ask and you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, so that you can spend it on your pleasures.” Mathew 18:19 suggests that people who agree on prayer will receive what they agree about, although it doesn’t say that a single person praying will therefore not be heard. John 14:13-14 and 16:23-24 suggest asking in the name of Jesus, hence that addendum to many Christians’ prayer. Matthew 21:22 suggests praying in faith, and John 15:7 and 16 suggest “abiding in Christ.” None of these are mentioned in Matthew 7:7, but perhaps they are taken to be implicit. The problem for me is that even when I have prayed in ways that agree with all of those requirements, I still have not received what I prayed for. Either the promises are false, or there is some further requirement not revealed in scripture. But if this promise of granted prayer is never actualized due to some nitpicky defect in every fallen human prayer or person, then it is not a meaningful promise after all. It does not defend the truth of the promise to make it irrelevant.
One last approach may be more successful, after a fashion, and it is that in fact ancient Christian authors like Augustine and John Chrysostom did not understand this verse to be a promise for prayer to be fulfilled in general. Perhaps they took their clue from a gospel parallel. Matthew’s report of the Sermon on the Mount continues, “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!” (Matthew 7:9-11). Yet in the parallel passage, Luke identifies the “good gifts” more specifically: “If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” (Luke 11:13). Whatever their inspiration, Augustine and Chrysostom interpreted Matthew 7:7 to apply only to requests to God for a Christian character (cf. James 1:5). On this reading, these verses are not a general promise that prayers will be answered, but only prayers for godliness will be reliably answered. This might make the verse true (although I must say I have observed many Christians who seem to have prayed to God for a godly character and not received it!), but in any case it does not mean what most Christians today think it means. On this reading, if true, the verses are not a general incentive to pray, and one would have to take a similar deflecting defense to all the many promises of answered prayer. Yet this type of redefinition of the scope of the promise does not seem to me successful with Jesus’s parable of the persistent widow (Luke 18:1-8), which Jesus interprets as promising that God will “bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night” (v. 7). Yet we see injustices perpetrated against Christians (especially Black American Christians) that are never redressed (the Tulsa Race Massacre and the lynching of Emmett Till, for example). So I don’t think that this approach, despite its prestigious patristic pedigree, can rescue these promises of answered prayer from being simply false. I would vastly prefer to believe that promises ascribed to Christ were always true.
“There is no peace, the Lord said, for the wicked” (Isaiah 49:22; 57:21)
Jared Kushner, Roger Stone, and Michael Flynn might provide evidence to the contrary. Indeed, complaining about the peaceful state of the wicked is a theme elsewhere in the Bible. Jeremiah complained to God, “Why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why do all who are treacherous thrive?” (Jeremiah 12:1). Job complained that the poor “glean the vineyard of the wicked man” (Job 24:6). Psalm 73 complains, “I was envious of the arrogant, when I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For they have no pangs; their bodies are sound and sleek” (Psalm 73:3-4), among many other benefits of being wicked. So I have no idea what these verses in Isaiah could mean, when so many other parts of the Bible testify to the opposite.
Is hell eternal?
I used to believe that hell was eternal. I took no pleasure from the idea, since I was a convert to Christianity who has not been followed into the religion by almost any of my relatives. But it seemed to me that the biblical testimony is clear enough (thinking especially of Isaiah 66:24, quoted by Jesus in Mark 9:48 and parallels, but also Matthew 25:46), and I believed the Bible to be inerrant. I had and have no use for the wishful thinking of people who believe to be true what they wish were true, regardless of the evidence. But I was convinced.
My conviction on the matter has been shaken, in part because of the reality that in a society where the churches are the most evil people around, if God welcomes the churches to eternal life and condemns the non-Christians to eternal hell, then God is participating in wickedness. And if God sends people to hell who have not received revelation (the problem of “those who have not heard”), I now see that that makes God simply unjust. To use an analogy from my line of work, if I as a teacher give students a test at the end of the semester, and some of them I gave instructions and others I did not give any instructions, and those who did not get instructions get an F when they fail the exam, there would be complaints to the school, and rightly so! God is a better teacher than I am.
But reasoning by analogy can easily be faulty. Spurred by such considerations (which I blogged about here), I then reexamined the biblical evidence, and found a plurality of views on what happens to people after death in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. The clearest contradictions are the passages in the Old Testament which assert that the dead are not raised (Job 7:9; Psalm 88:10; Isaiah 26:14 but see v.19), and the debate over whether the dead are conscious (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10; Psalm 6:5; 115:17; Isaiah 38:18-19 vs. Ezekiel 32:22-32; Job 26:5; Isaiah 8:19). And it is possible that the punishment place is permanent without every individual experiencing it eternally, which may suggest that the problem is not the falsity of the text but instead the interpretation. Only “the beast” and “the false prophet” of Revelation are explicitly said to be tormented “day and night forever and ever” (Rev. 20:10), though Isaiah seems to include “those who rebelled against me” among those suffering eternally (Isaiah 66:24). I think that sending most of humanity to eternal punishment would make God unjust and sadistic. I don’t know what to think instead; universal salvation, to my mind, seems equally to founder on statements that God is just. So it seems to me that the Bible is wrong when it speaks of unending torment of the wicked (or wrong when it speaks of God as just, I suppose, but I hope not).
Are God’s Attributes Obvious?
Paul wrote to the Romans, “Ever since the creation of the world [God’s] invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20). It is important to his thought that people who do not believe in God are without excuse, because otherwise God would be unjust for condemning the faithless, which is the flip side of Paul’s message of salvation by faith. Now, I have above average education in the philosophy of religion, and there are long debates about whether any argument can demonstrate that God even exists, much less what attributes God might have. Indeed, it seems to me, as someone who wants the existence and attributes of God to be obvious, and who is smarter than the average bear, that I am still unable to frame a convincing argument without simply presuming the conclusion (circular reasoning). The closest I can come is an argument that a powerful personal entity seems to exist and/or intervene sometimes and much of the rest of the time pay no attention or not exist. What is obvious to someone is largely a function of the culture they grew up with, and I did not grow up in a Christian household or Christian culture. Paul did grow up in a household that believed in the God of the Bible, and he (like most ancient people) never seems to have given much thought to the possibility that no god exists. I’m not saying that Paul and the Bible are wrong for asserting that God exists, but it seems clear to me that divine attributes are in fact not universally obvious, as required by Paul’s line of argumentation in Romans 1.
The Book of Revelation
Some parts of the book of Revelation take a lot of explaining to make it not false, not so much for the passages that are obscure, but for the ones that are too clear. In Revelation 22:7, Jesus says, “I am coming quickly” (cf. 1:3; 12:12). It has been almost 2000 years. It seems to me that the only possible way for this to be held true is through a move like C. S. Lewis wrote in the voice of his Christ-character Aslan: “I call all time soon.” But if that is the case, then “quickly” or “soon” simply becomes meaningless, and the only reason to include the term is deceptive. There’s also the clear problem that the numeration of the twelve tribes of Israel in Revelation 7 has both Joseph and Joseph’s son Manasseh, which can be explained by understanding Joseph with reference to Ephraim, but then there is also Levi, so Dan gets left out of the list, with no meaning ascribed to that omission. If “the time is near” (so Rev. 1:3), then the drying up of the Euphrates never happened (Rev. 16:12). There never was an army of two hundred million cavalry, and now horses are not used in warfare, so there is never likely to be such an army in the future (Rev. 9:16), unless I suppose there is somehow a major technological collapse without a demographic collapse but with a horse-breeding explosion (that would be a miracle). “The great city which has dominion over the kings of the earth” (Rev. 17:18) was clearly Rome and Rome’s empire, but there were many more emperors of Rome than the seven or eight anticipated in 17:9-11, nor indeed was pagan Rome destroyed until after it had converted to Christianity (Rev. 18:4-8). While Rome, after Christianization, has been captured, it’s “smoke” does not “go up forever and ever” (Rev. 19:3), nor did the destruction of Rome signal the beginning of the reign of God, in any discernible sense (Rev. 19:6). Nor could there be a city fifteen hundred miles square at Jerusalem, to say nothing of fifteen hundred miles high (Rev. 21:16). For all these reasons, it looks like the book of Revelation was simply a false prophecy.
Conclusion
I welcome correction and pushback on any of these points. But it seems to me that the easiest explanation is simply that the Bible contains erroneous theology and spiritual claims at certain points. Nor can one rescue the situation by finding an infallible canon within the canon: one might note that I think there are errors in both the Old Testament and the New Testament, in the words ascribed to Jesus as well as the words of Paul and the catholic epistles and Revelation. There is no portion of the Bible that I think is simply true in all that it teaches.
And if that is the case, then believing the Bible simply because it says something is foolish. The theological claims of the Bible need to be evaluated. But this leads to a major difficulty, in that most theological claims in the Bible are not able to be verified from any other source. The bulk of the Bible’s teaching about God and human spirituality therefore exists in a limbo where it is neither falsifiable nor verifiable. In such a framework, it is all too easy for individuals to take the parts they like, and in the absence of a solid anchor which can be reasoned about, most Christians’ theology is reduced to wishful thinking. I don’t like this conclusion; in fact, I find it horrifying. But at present I see no escape from it.
https://theophiletos.wordpress.com/2023/12/03/spiritual-errors-in-the-bible/
#1John #1Samuel #2Corinthians #Augustine #Bible #BookOfEzekiel #BookOfIsaiah #BookOfJeremiah #contradictions #Ecclesiastes #electionLies #GospelOfJohn #GospelOfLuke #GospelOfMark #GospelOfMatthew #Hell #inerrancy #injustice #Jesus #Job #JohnChrysostom #LetterOfJames #LetterToTheRomans #logicalFallacies #NewTestament #OldTestament #prayer #Psalms #RevelationOfJohn #SermonOnTheMount #truth #wishfulThinking
-
Happy #Easter! Taking the long way around (again) in Driftwood #Christianity this week, I start with Andrew the Apostle. It's time to step aside, Andrew.
-
But the Lord said to him, “Now you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness.” Luke 11.39 NET.
What a thing to say to your host!
-
Kudos to Washington University in St. Louis for their excellent decision to have YDS Prof. Michal Beth Dinkler give their annual Weltin Lecture tomorrow. Title: "The Wild Edges of Character: Creation in the Gospel of Luke." Offered via Zoom as well as in person.
#YDS #YaleDivinitySchool #WashingtonUniversity #Luke #Gospel #GospelOfLuke
