Loosen Up? Rob Bell & Cries of “Pharisee!”

One of the accusations that seems to be continually leveled against the critics of Rob Bell (the emergent church fellow who has recently made headlines for teaching universalism in his new book) is that they are being Pharisaical for holding him to what Scripture says.  Doctrinally sound Christians are just being too technical in how they understand the Bible.  Why can’t they just loosen up?  Jesus, I keep hearing, was always condemning the Pharisees for being so rigid in their interpretation of Scripture.  But is this really an appropriate characterization of the oft-cited conflict?  Should Bell’s critics really see themselves on the wrong side of this conflict?

As it turns out, this understanding of Jesus (like so many others) is severely at odds with the actual record of his teachings.  After going through the Gospels, I found no less than 19 instances (13 unique events) in which Christ explicitly condemned the Pharisees for not being strict enough in their adherence to Scripture.  I found only 2 where Jesus implies they are being too rigid in how they understand the Bible.  Even in the two examples of excess rigidity, Jesus condemned a superficial understanding of what was said, not specifically over-zealousness in trying to be Biblically sound.  The more characteristic Pharisaical error (by a wide margin) is to ignore half of what Scripture says while adhering to an amalgamation of the other half of Scripture and the traditions of men (you know, kind of like ignoring everything the Bible says about Hell and the reality of people going there in order to maintain our own culture’s views about tolerance and judgment.)

Click here for the full list of citations.

Posted in Theological Liberalism, Theology, Tradition, Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Scary Independent Women?

The Boundless blog is once again considering the difficulties of singles who are unable to find spouses.  This time, they discuss whether men are scared of women who have careers, secure finances, homes, and whatnot–too scared, in fact, to date and ultimately marry such women.

I’m not sure why women so often perceive fear in this disinterest.  Being independent generally means that you can meet your own needs.  When someone claims to be “an ‘independent woman’ who desires ‘to get married and have babies,'” it places husband and children in the category of wants instead of needs–they become mere consumer goods.  Most men need to be a more significant part of a marriage.  This need puts men in an impossible dilemma if they want to marry an independent woman:  to either be a mere accessory she’d like to have around or to put her in a position where she makes herself less than she is–to make her put on a show of needing him even though she really doesn’t.  Neither of these options are good, and a man is wise to avoid the dilemma.

The problem is one of categorization.  For those who are not called to singleness, marriage is a need–not just a want.  More common is the error of elevating a want to a need and pursuing it to the detriment of other, more-important things.  However, there is an opposite error of demoting a need to a want.  Sometimes we do this in order to spare ourselves suffering–to make our lack less cutting than it is.  We can certainly survive without marriage more than we can survive without other needs like water or food.  However, human living is not just about physical survival;  those called to marriage really need it.  That’s why it hurts so badly when we don’t have it.  That is why we are so deeply tempted to seek out counterfeits like illicit sexual relationships.  That is why we are tempted to minimize its importance.  Unfortunately, this minimization only masks the need rather than solving it, and it makes us less than we were called to be.

Where does that leave the independent woman?  Her alternative is become more than independent–to expand her horizons and set her sights on accomplishing higher things that she’s incapable of doing on her own.  Most people can sit in a cubicle and make Power-point presentations on their own without much trouble.  Freely sharing a life and raising the next generation of humanity is a little tougher.

Of course that would mean that she’s no longer independent–her needs render her dependent on a man (or on God if she’s called to celibacy). She might have money and shelter in her single years, but her deepest needs would be unfulfilled until she finds him. That would, of course, lead to intense suffering. The longer those single years are, the more suffering there would be.  That would cause a lot of people to shy away from it, but I’m not sure when suffering in pursuit of doing good became something Christians avoided instead of embraced.

It’s risky, sure, but what’s romance unless you’re helpless against your partner? Love & marriage is no place for self-achieved safety. After all, it wasn’t exactly safe for God to love us.

Posted in Chastity, Feminism | Tagged | Leave a comment

Incarnate Faith

A great difficulty with which American Christians need to struggle is the separation of religion and “real life” into airtight compartments. Religion is accepted as a purely subjective idea, but is not considered either true or false in an objective, public way. As a Lutheran interested in apologetics, this situation has always posed a special challenge. I am not altogether surprised that Kierkegaard—the philosopher often credited with introducing this separation into modern thought (though he no doubt would reject the extent to which it is now taken)—was raised nominally Lutheran. Of course, neither Luther’s own thought nor our confessions necessitate such separation; they express real salvation from real sins through a real Savior. Nevertheless, the central doctrine of the Christian faith—justification by faith alone apart from works—and many of its corollaries such as the fact that we cannot believe “by our own reason or strength” make strong distinctions which can be easily perverted into utter separation of faith from a daily life which inevitably involves our works and reason. Luther’s comments on “incarnate faith” in his Galatians commentary (AE 26: 265-70) represent a beautiful way of expressing Christianity in the realm of “real life” without in any way betraying its most essential doctrines.

Read More

Posted in Apologetics, Lutheranism, Sanctification, Theology | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Singularity

I’ve been hearing a lot of people talking about The Singularity (recently popularized in this article from Time).  What struck me most about the article wasn’t the concept itself (consciousness becoming immortal through some kind of fusion with highly advanced computing technology is old hat to sci-fi fans), but rather the evenhanded treatment that Time provided to a fairly outlandish concept.

One wonders if Time would provide such open-minded coverage to other outlandish concepts which nevertheless have better evidence.  Somehow I can’t see them writing:

“The difficult thing to keep sight of when you’re talking about the Resurrection is that even though it sounds like fantasy, it isn’t, no more than the Gallic Wars are fantasy. It’s not a fringe idea; it’s a serious hypothesis about the events in Palestine 2000 years ago.  There’s an intellectual gag reflex that kicks in anytime you try to swallow an idea that involves the dead rising to life, but suppress it if you can, because while the Resurrection appears to be, on the face of it, preposterous, it’s an idea that rewards sober, careful evaluation”

Or

“If you can swallow that idea, and Jesus of Nazareth and a lot of other very smart people can, then all bets are off.”

Posted in Apologetics, Culture | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Rules for Posting

Rules are usually the result of someone doing something they shouldn’t have.  That warning on your chainsaw about not stopping the chain with your hands?  There’s probably a stupid story behind that.

Since this blog is too young to have any stupid stories, let’s just keep it simple for now:

Rule #1:  Don’t be a jerk

I’ll elaborate on this as necessary, but let’s try not to make this a hall of shame.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment