William Lane Craig on Youtube

Reasonable Faith, the ministry of William Lane Craig, now has an official Youtube channel.  You can find this channel here and you will find hours of great resources for Christian apologetics.

Bart Ehrman vs Richard Carrier

Bart Ehrman, who is normally a critic of Christianity and the Bible, recently wrote a book defending the existence of Jesus against the claims of the Jesus mythicists.  Richard Carrier, an atheist and a scholar who supports the Jesus myth, has harshly criticized Ehrman and his book.  You can find some of Carrier’s comments at his blog here.  Bart Ehrman has responded to Carrier and I believe his comments are worth sharing.  You can find his response here.  I had mixed feelings about Ehrman’s response.  As an opponent of the Jesus myth theory, I appreciated his comments and fully agreed with him.  However, reading this and being reminded of Ehrman’s scholarly ability and rhetorical skill only highlights the challenge he is to traditional Christianity when it comes to other issues.  What is important here is what is the truth.  I believe that when it comes to the truth of the existence of Jesus, Bart Ehrman has presented a clear case.  If you want to pick up Ehrman’s book, you can get it here.

Teaching Romans

During July and August 2012, I will be teaching a course on Romans at Tyndale University College as part of their modular program.  This is a great undergraduate program that allows students to complete their degree through intensive courses in the evening.  It is worth checking out and you likely will find courses of interest.  Come and join us this summer for Romans.  It is an important book that is valuable both for theological reflection and practical Christian ministry.  You can find the syllabus for the course here.

Down Syndrome and a Father’s Heart

I recently posted this picture on my Facebook wall and had an interesting response.  I generally do not post much on abortion, although I am very pro-life.  I have no desire to condemn mothers who have terminated pregnancies.  However, as a father of two special needs children, I am very concerned with the trend of removing special needs from society through abortion.  It was in that spirit that I posted this.

In the conversation, my friend Bob Davies shared some of his thoughts as a father of a son with Down Syndrome.  I appreciated his thoughts and wanted to share them here.  So here is our guest post by Rev. Bob Davies.

I’m the father of Owain, my little man with Down Syndrome – and am a pastor with firm convictions about separation of church and state. This is a longer post, if you read it, I hope it proves useful to you :-)

Let me say that the rights of the child are never really taken into account unless the parents own that responsibility. And they do own that responsibility. Whether they come to terms with that responsibility in the course of their hard decisions, or later on in life afterwards, they will own that decision. Whatever the state does, ultimately, it’s a mom and dad who’ve been entrusted with that child, and no moral or right choice really comes under duress. Only they, really, can protect that child’s rights – even if the state did have the kinds of structures that they should which actually reflected equal protection and rights under law. Laws against abortion are totally about that question – the protection of individual freedoms – in this case, of course, the child’s.

Let’s avoid the politics here, though, and I hope you’ll bear with me here ultimately in terms of the question of sensitivity to people who’ve ended their pregnancies.

I think that the harder things in life are unavoidable realities: having a child with a special need, certainly handling the tension of what to do if it’s discovered during pregnancy, but maybe more the question of dealing with the decades of guilt and remorse and self-doubt and grief that can come after having terminated a pregnancy. I’m not sure the role of the church is to help someone find a reality where they don’t have to face this stuff. Having that child will be hard. I think aborting that child will be a lot harder down the road. 

It’s not as though there were some sanctuary of ambivalence that could free someone from facing the decision in question for what it is, nor the consequences for what they are. I do believe in the church as a place, a sanctuary, of safety and grace and gentleness and kindness and healing and forgiveness. But not of simple ambivalence where murder is understated and the destruction of a child is shrugged off as the sad consequence of a difficult time. 

It’s in the hard thing – whether having the child, or struggling with our own grief over the depravity of our sin – that we’re driven to cry out for God. 

That’s been the gift of Owain to us. The miracle of a child who’s very nature cries out for more of us, who cries out for us to let go of our motives and prejudices and even the designs of our parental dreams, so that we’re taught to love and receive the child that is. Not even taught, God help me, Owain’s presence makes that love erupt from us not because we’re good parents, but because in the gift of Owain we’re driven to the feet of Christ for his love and help. It’s in the hard things that we cry out God and find him. It’s in the scuttling of my dreams and designs that I’m finding some of God’s. No one should be spared this kind of gift if it’s offered – the most wonderful gift, so quickly refused because our cultural bull of success and independence and personal freedom from any kind of hardship. 

The appropriate grief and regret and remorse that follow the murder of a child like Owain is like a second chance at the same gift. 

I don’t think we need to whack people with guilt – I expect they’re already doing that to themselves. And the church is the place for hope for them. But that hope is not necessarily, “oh there, there, we know that was so difficult, but don’t worry that decision was ok.” Maybe in some circumstances, sure. But the real hope we offer is about those times when we know for certain that we’ve blown it; that we’re frigged, and that we’ve frigged someone else. It’s for those times when we know it not because some mean legalist beat us with his Bible, but because we know that whatever we’ve done is dissonant with God. That it is clear evidence that our selfishness, perhaps, or at least that our refusal to receive the gift of the hardship and suffering of caring for that child, drove us to murder. It’s in that confession, in that painful truth where our brokenness has been revealed – maybe not to anyone else – but to ourselves. There, we may find God’s grace for us has meaning as we’re left with no hope but to cry out to him for our very souls. From that brokenness, if they can experience it for what it is, they might cry out to God in grief for their sin and be healed. That’s what our brokenness does for us. 

No church that intentionally spares us the fact of our brokenness, or which mitigates its severity, is doing anything ultimately worthwhile for others at all. That would be almost worse than a church that could point out every sin in the book and say nothing about the grace of God that can restore and forgive us! It’s certainly not better.

Think of it this way. If I post the picture above, and someone who was or is faced with the terrible decision of ending their pregnancy reacts with pain and sensitivity – then that’s saying something. It’s saying they are not at peace with that decision. It’s saying they’re still wounded and in pain. They are not ok as they are. They will own that decision inside like a tumour or outside like a scar. It’s the truth about what they’ve done, and so frighteningly hints at who they fear they might actually be. Now we can have a world where we all go around trying not to touch the sore spots – but isn’t our role also about seeing people healed as they’re reconciled to God? There is no healing for us outside of the grace and forgiveness of Jesus meeting the truth of who we are and what we we’ve done. I’m not really in the business of going around hitting people to see who’s sore or to prove that their bad (or that I’m better, God help us) – that’s devilish in its design. But I’m not sure avoiding the matter altogether is any better for them. It might actually be worse. God’s been consistently kind to me as he comments on who I actually am. But at the same time he’s been speaking, as painful and shameful as that can be. With grace and love, isn’t that what he’s asked us to do?

Introduction to Cosmology

I continue to believe that it is important to have a wide range of learning and I am thankful for the resources available at iTunes University.  As someone long interested in astronomy, I found the course Introduction to Cosmology by James Bullock from UCIrvine very interesting.  While not from a Christian perspective, I do think many Christian will find it interesting.  You can get it at iTunes U here.

Cross of Suffering

Introduction

Good Friday is about remembering Jesus’ death on the cross.  The cross is central to the Christian hope.  But why did Jesus die and why do we consider that death good?  Many Christians would respond by saying that Jesus died so we can go to heaven.  Well, that is fine as far as it goes but I would want to clarify it a bit.  The cross is not just about giving us a more comfortable afterlife.  The cross actually reconciles us to God and that means we are adopted into his family for eternity and not just the few decades we are on this planet.  But is that the full message of the cross?  Is the cross only for the moment of our salvation, that experience of saying yes to Christ and receiving eternal life?  I spend a lot of my time talking with non-Christians and skeptics.  This might surprise you but most skeptics are not hesitating because they are trying to pick an afterlife, heaven or hell, and they are having trouble making up their mind.  Many skeptics are not wrestling with things like the divinity of Jesus or the nature of the resurrection.  Many are still trying to figure out God and if he is worth worshipping.  Is there a good God?  Of course there is.  Check out the beauty of spring, the flowers and the trees.  Check out the joy of a newborn baby.  God is good!  But change things around a bit.  Take away your health.  Lose your job.  Find out your child is disabled.  A friend is sexually assaulted.  A loved one dies a painful death.  Is God still good?  I recently was talking with a self-proclaimed atheist.  After a bit of digging, I discovered that he did not necessarily have a problem with God existing.  His real problem is with Christianity’s claim that God is all-powerful and all-good.  To affirm that and then look at the evil and suffering in the world seems to naturally lead to atheism.  Even if there is a God, perhaps he is not worthy of worship.  How should Christians respond when skeptics ask where God is in the midst of suffering?  What about the Christian who came to faith in Jesus years ago?  They know they will be in heaven when they die, but right now life seems like hell.  Broken relationships, broken bank accounts, broken body, broken mind, broken heart.  Where is God?  Does he care?  Or is God only interested in that moment when we become a Christian and the moment we die and in between is completely ignorant of our suffering?  Does the cross have anything to say about this?

Events of the Cross

Sometimes a story can be so familiar that we lose the impact of what is actually being said.  Let us briefly recount the events leading up to and taking place on the cross.  Jesus arrives in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday with his triumphal entry.  People cheer and sing and it looks like Jesus has reached the pinnacle of his career.  Things quickly fall apart.  One of Jesus‘ inner circle of twelve disciples, a man named Judas, makes a deal with the religious leaders to hand Jesus over.  The leaders are afraid to arrest Jesus in public and they need to make their move quietly and out of sight.  For thirty pieces of silver, Judas could make that happen.  The mob comes to bring Jesus in.  Judas‘ signal?  A kiss!  That which is meant for affection is used for betrayal.  Jesus is given a mockery of a trial.  The decision was already made, they just had to find some evidence and witnesses to fit the verdict.  One of Jesus‘ closest friends, Peter, is asked directly if he is a follower of Jesus.  Not once, not twice but three times Peter denies knowing Jesus.  Jesus is beaten by his accusers, whipped and tortured.  He is hurt so bad that when it is time to go to the place of crucifixion, Jesus is too weak to carry his own cross.   Jesus arrives at the place of his execution, the place of the skull.  His hands and feet are nailed to the cross.  He is lifted up and Jesus waits for his body to weaken enough that he will no longer be able to raise his body up to get the next breath.  Meanwhile, fellow condemned men as well as spectators take the time to mock him.  To make matters worse, Jesus‘ mother is there to witness his sufferings.  Not only that, because of the attitude of his half-brothers, Jesus has to use his dying moments to arrange care for his mother after he dies.  Finally, Jesus comes to the end of his physical strength and breathes his last.  That is what we call Good Friday.

A Suffering World

I want you to keep that in mind as we think about the human experience.  We live in a world full of war and crime and natural disasters and poverty and injustice.  Many people are afraid to go to the doctor because they are afraid of bad news.  The divorce rate is at epidemic levels.  Children are abused.  There is so much bad that happens.  I will share a little of our story, not because I want to focus on myself nor do I want your pity.  I simply know my story better than I know your story and it is likely you will identify with at least parts of it.  Family is extremely important for us and when my wife and I got married, I had all sorts of ideas of what that would look like.  My wife became pregnant soon after we were married.  As soon as we knew, we started to buy baby clothes and I started to do baby illustrations in my sermons.  Then one day, right before a meeting at the church, we discovered that my wife was having a miscarriage.  It was devastating.  The doctor was cold, stating that it was a miscarriage in the same way he would have confirmed that bump on your finger was a wart.  The nurse dismissed us from emerg, in her words “good as new.”  We then went on have two healthy children named Logan and Abby.  Beautiful kids and we are very proud of them.  However, they also have severe autism.  They are nonverbal and will never do many of the things that parents take for granted that their children will do.  Some genetic flaw caused a mis-wiring of the brain and all the normal dreams were dashed.  My father, a wonderful man and generous parent, suddenly stopped producing his own blood.  He had to rely on regular blood transfusions for three years until his death.  He never even met his three youngest grand children.  My mother, a godly and loving Christian woman, died a painful death from esophageal cancer.  She only knew she had cancer for a few weeks.  Again, I am not looking for pity.  I want you see, as I am sure you already understand, that there is suffering in this world.  Many people go through horrors that I cannot even imagine.  The question is: Where is God?  Does God care?  Or does God just say: “Yeah, whatever.  See you in heaven.”?  We have to wrestle with this.  The answer is found at the cross.

Sharing in Suffering

Ravi Zacharias tells the story of Elie Wiesel, Nobel Prize winner and survivor of the Holocaust, when he was forced, along with a few others in a concentration camp, to witness the hanging of two Jewish men and one Jewish boy. The two men died right away, but the young lad struggled on the gallows. Somebody behind Wiesel muttered, “Where is God? Where is He?” Then the voice ground out the anguish again, “Where is He?” Wiesel felt the same question irrepressibly within him: “Where is God? Where is He?” Then he heard a voice softly within him saying, “He is hanging there on the gallows, where else?”  Hanging on the gallows.  As Christians, when the question is asked: “Where is God in my suffering?” we can say that God is hanging on the cross.

One of the most annoying things is when you are going through a very difficult time and someone says “I know exactly how you feel” and you know they have never experienced anything like this.  Does God know how you feel?  Of course God knows how you feel, God knows everything.  Does God know what it is like to commit adultery?  God understands the emotional and spiritual conditions that lead up to it, he understands the impulses in the brain and all the physiological aspects of adultery, but God does not understand adultery from experience.  He is only an observer.  But does God understand your suffering?  That is a different story.  God, in Jesus Christ, understands your suffering not just through a comprehensive knowledge of the facts but through the experience of suffering.  Betrayed by a friend?  Done that.  Worried about a family member?  Done that.  Treated unjustly?  Done that.  Abused physically and emotionally?  Done that.  Experience tremendous pain?  Done that.  Death?  Done that.                                Jesus Christ, God incarnate, knows suffering.  God does not ignore human suffering.  God comes to earth and experiences human suffering.  One of the most powerful moments on the cross is when Jesus cries out “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34 ESV)  This is the first verse of Psalm 22.  Many see Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus.  There is definitely many points of contact between the words of David and the circumstances of Jesus.  We should see a prophetic role for this Psalm.  However, should we see David as consciously writing about future messianic events?  Or should we see David as speaking of his own experience, his own suffering, his own feeling of God-forsakenness?  There are many Psalms that contain similar messages, cries of abandonment and fear and pain.  While keeping the prophetic element, what if we saw Jesus as citing Psalm 22 not just as a proof text for his messianic identity, but as reaching out to this picture of suffering humanity and embracing it rather than avoiding it?  Maybe Jesus wanted us to know that he was entering into our experience.  You may not be convinced.  You may be thinking, forget the fellowship of suffering, Jesus died as a sacrifice for sin.  Period.  That’s it.  Let’s run with that for a minute.  Jesus is indeed the sacrifice for our sin.  There is no need for animal sacrifices because Jesus is the ultimate sacrifice.  The animal sacrifices of the Old Testament point forward to Jesus.  The book of Hebrews goes into detail on this.  But take a moment to think about how those animals were sacrificed in the Temple.  Do you think they were beaten and tortured and then killed slowly and painfully?  No, they were quickly and painlessly slaughtered without panicking the animal in any way.  If Jesus is only our sacrifice, then he could have had his throat slit and that would have been enough.  But we don’t look at the suffering of Jesus as just an extra add-on, in addition to the necessary death.  If you have seen Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, you will know that the suffering Jesus experienced leading up to and on the cross is emotionally moving and in an instinctive way, we know it is important.  The suffering of Jesus matters.  That means that our suffering also matters to God.

Conclusion

How do we bring this all together?  Some people claim that the problem of suffering is the achilles heel of Christianity.  I disagree.  Of all the worldviews out there, Christianity is the only one that gives an adequate response to suffering.  Rational reasons for suffering are not enough, especially if you are the one going through the suffering.  What we really need to know is where God is when we suffer.  Christianity has an answer.  God was on the cross.  Jesus Christ, God incarnate, suffered on the cross.  His death paid the price for our forgiveness of sins.  But his suffering offers us hope in this life.  One of my favorite passages is this: “Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.” (Hebrews 4:14–16 ESV)  Jesus knows.  He knows suffering by experience, he knows like no human being can.  But he knows something else.  Jesus knows that suffering is not the end.  On the third day, Jesus rose from the dead.  Sin and death were defeated.  Not only did Jesus rise from the dead, he promises that we will join him in the resurrection.  Here is the miracle of Christianity, Jesus invites himself to join in our suffering and then invites us to join in his resurrection.  As theologian Jürgen Moltmann said “God weeps with us so that someday we can laugh with him.”  I think that gives us a great reason to call this a Good Friday.

Psalm 22, Christ and Humanity

As we approach Easter, we are drawn to the New Testament accounts of the crucifixion and the Old Testament texts that seem to point to the passion.  One of the most frequent is Psalm 22, the first part of which Jesus quotes while on the cross (Mark 15:34).  Many Christians look at Psalm 22 as a straight forward prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus.  And it may be.  Or perhaps there is another way to look at it.

The problem with pulling Psalm 22 out from the rest of Psalms is that it contains many of the same themes found in the others.  The Psalmist describes the feeling of God forsakenness, expresses the pain of suffering, cries out to God and states a trust in God apart from the circumstances.  If Jesus did not quote it and if the Gospel writers did not record some of the surrounding events that touch on Psalm 22, we would not look at this passage as a prophecy.  Of course, Jesus did and the Gospel writers did and so we must connect them.  But what if the purpose of Psalm 22 was not to point toward details of the crucifixion of the Messiah but rather to express the suffering of God’s people and the need to trust God no matter what?  What if Psalm 22 was primarily about the human situation?  It certainly fits with the other Psalms that do that.

If so, what do we do with the allusions to Psalm 22 at the crucifixion?  What if Jesus was gathering up all our fear, anxiety, sorrow and separation from God, and was joining us in the human situation, not just to observe it but to overcome it? In that case, we would look at  “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Psalms 22:1 ESV) not just as a pointer toward Jesus but as a statement of our own experience, one that Jesus chooses to join us in.  Neither the Psalms nor the Gospels are limited to providing interesting biographical information (although the Gospels are ancient biographies) but also show us the point of contact between God and humanity.  In Jesus, our suffering and fear was taken up on the cross and was overcome.  When we look to the cross, we see not just Jesus, we also see our own suffering  and God forsakenness being crucified.

Ethics of Evangelism

What are your thoughts on proselytization?  Most people have strong feelings, few just don’t care.  Many evangelicals strongly emphasize the sharing of their faith (although they would prefer the term evangelism to proselytization).  Some Christians have sincere personal beliefs but do not think that it is fair to share those with others, respecting people’s existing religious beliefs.  Some people are deeply offended by any proselytization and would like it banned by law (it already is in some work contexts).  Even many evangelicals dread the sight of Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses on the doorstep.  What do we make of all this?

Odds are that although people have strong feelings on the issue, they have not thought deeply on it.  Much of what passes for conversation on proselytization is more emotion than anything.  That is why I am thankful for Elmer Thiessen’s Ethics of Evangelism: A Philosophical Defence of Ethical Proselytizing and Persuasion.  Few have ever considered the ethics of evangelism.  Thiessen provides a major contribution to the subject, examining the question of whether proselytizing can ever be ethical.  While acknowledging many of the abuses, Thiessen provides a solid philosophical defence.  The author demonstrates that proselytizing goes on all the time (e.g. Apple vs PC), and that religious content cannot make it unethical.  While the freedom of the person not wanting to be proselytized must be respected, so must the freedom of the religious person to proselytize.  Thiessen demonstrates that the presence of proselytization, religious or otherwise, is a benefit to society.  At the same time, Thiessen calls Christian to hold firm to ethical standards of evangelism.  Even such popular tactics as “friendship evangelism” be unethical if we pretend to be friends just to get a religious conversion.  This book is well researched, written in readable style and dealing with an issue important to both religious and non-religious people.  I highly recommend this book, especially for people actively involved in evangelistic, apologetic or pastoral ministry.

Charles MacKenzie on Karl Barth

I am a big fan of Karl Barth and enjoy reading his writings.  I came across two lectures by Charles MacKenzie from Reformed Theological Seminary, who knew Barth personally.  I appreciated what he had to say, acknowledging the good Barth has done for the church, but not afraid to disagree.  You can find the audio at iTunes University here.

The Majority Report

I was recently challenged on why I use the fact that the great majority of historians say that Jesus existed or that the majority of Josephus scholars acknowledge that Josephus said something about Jesus, although Christians expanded his bare description.  That is a fair question.  After all, critics could say that the majority of scientists say that there is no God or the majority of philosophers say the Bible is false.  The truth is not determined just be a head count.  This is a good thing to be reflecting on.  Here are some things to consider.

1) When looking at the number of scholars saying something, take note of what their area of expertise is.  A scientist says there is no God.  Is that because he has done some research that seems to point to the non-existence of God (I can’t imagine what that would be) or is that his personal opinion, separate from the fact that he is a scientist?  Does the philosopher have training in biblical studies, or does her worldview require that the Bible be false, even without examination?  The same goes for the deity of Christ.  A historian is qualified to say that the earliest followers of Jesus understood him to be divine, but cannot say, as a historian, that he was divine.  So when I say that historians say that Jesus was a historical figure, I am drawing on their historical expertise and not their religious faith.

2. Is the conclusion based on a scholarly theory of doing things or is it based on religiously or philosophically charged emotions?  Christians have reasons for wanting to believe Jesus existed.  Jesus mythicists and some atheists have reasons for not wanting Jesus to exist.  That cannot be our starting point.  Our starting point has to be about how we do history, what kinds of texts are considered useful, what standards are practical and generally how we would determine that any given figure was historical rather than a myth.  Once we have that historical method, then we can see how Jesus either meets or fails these standards.  It is based on this practice that I value the fact that the majority of historians believe Jesus existed.  If I thought it was based on the majority of historians’ religious faith, I would not use that argument.

3. Sometimes the majority of scholars hold a position because it is true.  I believe the earth is round and I believe that men landed on the moon.  The majority of people do believe this.  It is not true because the majority believe it but the majority believe it because it is true.  Sometimes the conspiracy theory is just false.

4. I talk about the majority of scholars believing that Jesus existed, not to silence objection, but to get people to think.  I understand that there is something romantic about being the persecuted minority that knows the truth, fighting the system and working against the lies of the majority.  But for a moment, ask yourself: Why is it that it is not just evangelical and Roman Catholic scholars who believe that Jesus existed?  Why is it that almost every scholar, conservative or liberal, religious or secular, western or eastern, understands Jesus to be a historical figure?  If it is not pressure from the church or nostalgic religious feelings, what is it that ties these scholars together?  Could it be their historical training, their understanding of how to use texts and investigate history?  Could it be that they are holding Jesus to the same standards that they use for other historical figures?  This may not change your mind, but I hope it will make you think.