What is the Image of God in Humanity?

One of the great questions of Jewish and Christian theology is how humanity is made in God’s image.  We know humanity is, it says so in Genesis 1:26-27—“ Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” 

But in reading this passage, many have become confused.  HOW are we created in God’s image?  What exactly is the “image” of God?

Of course, the first thought anyone would have by looking at the word “image” is physical appearance.  After all, when we see our image in a mirror, all we are saying is that the image looks like us, not that it has any other characteristic, even so our image in a statue or a photo.  However, this idea causes a number of difficulties.  First of all, it is both the male and the female that was created in God’s image—so which one would God look like?  Is it a general appearance?  And the passage is saying that God created all humanity to be in His image—how can we all look like God when we all look so differently?  What color, size, shape is God?  These questions seem nonsensical, but I think that the problem comes in assuming that the image of God must, in some way, be physical.

Many Trinitarian theologians declare that humanity, in one’s nature, is Trinitarian, just as God.  This also poses a difficulty in determining what that Trinitarian nature is.  Many theologians say the three parts of humanity are: body, soul, spirit.  But Aquinas said that it was the memory, the understanding and the will.  What we need to recognize is that humanity is exceedingly complex and that counting only three parts lessens the creation of humanity.  It assumes that the divine nature in humanity is based on a number, rather than a nature.  This seems to be poor theology.

Some would say that humanity is like God in the manner in which humanity is superior to animals.  In other words, the divine nature of humanity is found in that which animals lack.  Thus, some have put forward intellect, long term memory, self awareness, or other features.  The problem with just stating this is that as animals are studied, it is clear that animals have many of the characteristics that humans have, just in a more minor capacity.  Some animals can be trained in language, are very creative and can learn as much as humans.  Certainly humans are unique in the animal kingdom, but it might be difficult to determine in exactly what way.

Often, when we have a puzzle in Scripture, it is best to go back to the text, to see if there are clues we have missed.  And in the midst of the text about God’s image there is a description of humanity’s function: to rule over the animals of the earth.  It seems a curious placement unless the description of the rule pertains to the idea of being made in God’s image.  And if we think about it, the main characteristic of God, as given in the Hebrew Bible is that He is in charge.  There is no being—god, angel, human, animal, cosmic force—that is above God.  And it seems that Genesis 1 is actually all about God’s superiority over the powers that the ancient world found significant and frightening and awe-inspiring.  God is above the ocean, because He divided it.  God is above the sun, moon and stars and established their authority.  God is above all powers, and even though there may have been others who participated in His creation, it was His command that made it happen.

Given this understanding of God, then it would make sense that if humanity is to be in God’s image, it is in the area of sovereignty.  Humanity is like God in the area of having a huge realm to rule.  Humanity has great authority, to determine the shape and purpose of the earth, as well as all the animals.  Humanity is granted god-like powers of sovereignty. 

And, in fact, Psalm 8 is a hymn to exactly that nature.  “What is man that You take thought of him?... You have made him a little lower than God.”  And a description of humanity’s rule over the earth is given.  Even little children have power to rule, the psalmist says.

And every single human does rule.  It seems, at first, that some humans rule and some do not.  But that is simply over other humans.  Although, most humans do rule over other humans—every parent rules over their children, every pet owner rules over their pet (although cats think it is the other way around).  Yes, governments are the big rulers, but every human has an aspect of rule, a sovereignty to rule over.  And, in fact, humans are different from animals in that they rule over themselves.  They are responsible for their actions, and recognize themselves as responsible.  And this completely natural, powerful tendency is our godlike nature.  We are like God in that we are in charge of ourselves, our environment, those below us.  And humanity, as a whole, is in charge of the earth as a whole.

Many would like to deny human sovereignty, especially over the earth.  “Humans don’t deserve rule over the earth.  All they do is exploit it and ruin it.”  This cannot be denied. There have been five periods of time in which mass numbers of species disappeared from the earth, and we are living in one of those times. However, that idea only proves that humanity IS ultimately in charge of the earth.  If humans can cause such mass extinction, it means that humans are the determining factor.  The fact that humans are sovereign has nothing to do with the fact that they are moral in being sovereign. And the environmental movement and animal rights groups are just more proof of human rule over animals.  No one considers themselves the equal of animals, otherwise we would not use moral reasoning with each other to change our actions.  We all recognize not only that we rule, but that there are principles by which we should rule.

So, if we rule, then we should consider HOW we should rule.  What is the ideal state that humanity should establish?  There are three basic moral ways of ruling, according to Scripture.  We can rule in a manner of judgment and law.  One breaks the law, one dies.  For instance, should a tiger or wolf kill a human, the animal dies—that’s the principle found in Genesis 9.  This is the moral rule of judgment—it is fair, but it is harsh.  This is the moral rule of vigilantism, which is softened and controlled by government forces, but is still the basic moral rule of government.

There is also the moral rule of self interest.  This is the idea that resources are to be exploited for the self-interest of the ruling.  Children are there to support their parents, the earth is there to be used for wealth and power of those who can grab it.  This is the principle of business, where profit is the bottom line.  This is also called “pride” by the Bible—taking that which truly doesn’t belong to you.  Jesus specifically spoke against this kind of rule in Luke 22, and Paul in Ephesians 5.

Finally, there is the kind of rule Jesus supported.  This is the sovereignty that holds authority for the sake of those under them.  It is a rule to provide benefit, not for the ruler, but for the ones ruled.  This ruler would sacrifice his or her own good for the good of the one ruled.  It is a mother’s rule for her infant.  And it is the kind of rule environmentalists have as an ideal for the earth, and the main characteristic of all “good” rulers. 

Thus, there are two ways of being in God’s image.  Surely, ruling in any way is god-like.  And humanity, both individually and collectively is certainly god-like in changing the surface of the earth and ruling over all creatures—whether they know that is what they are doing or not.  But the other aspect is a moral aspect.  And to be like God IN our rule is to be merciful, to be forgiving, to act in the benefit of those rules, to use our power for the benefit of all, even our enemies.  In this way, we show how truly divine we can be.

The Weakness of Humanity

1. Humans are physically weak

God specifically made humanity physically weak, at least compared to the spirit world.  In the Bible, “spirit” doesn’t mean ethereal, but supernaturally strong.  An angel is some kind of superman who can turn invisible and transport to another place instantly.  Humans, individually, are weak—easy to kill, quick to get sick, weak when young and weak when old.  Humanity is just a weak species.  Which is why it is amazing what humanity has done.  They have created mountains out of steel and glass.  They have changed the surface of the world in ways only God has done.  Individually, humans are weak, but collectively, humanity is a god—creative and powerful.  For this reason the God says, “Nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible to them,” and then He limits human capacity for community (Genesis 11:6-7).  Humans are made to be weak so that only through God’s strength can they accomplish great things.

2. Humans are mentally weak

The human brain is an amazingly adaptive creation.  If a person is blind, the brain takes the cells used for sight and uses them for other tasks, strengthening other senses.  However, our minds are somewhat too adaptive, able to adapt to imaginary structures, thus becoming maladaptive to real situations.  It requires a strong mind to respond appropriately to the unbelievably complex physical, social, and intellectual environment we find ourselves in.  Society is more complex than ever—and our brains adapt, somewhat.  But more often than not, our minds confuse reality with a lie, confuse what is with what we’ve been told, confuse our thinking with what is real.  More and more people are mentally and socially incapable of functioning in our society.  But even the functional will make grave mental mistakes. We trust that which we ought not and distrust that which we can rely on.  And in the simplest of tasks, we find ourselves in error. 

3. Humans are self-oriented

In the womb, every human being is alone.  For nine months, there is no one else in the universe.  Then we are born and we have the stark reality of others thrust upon us as a stark reality.  However, in our minds, the Other does not exist.  There is simply those who provide for our needs.  Eventually, we recognize other human beings who might even be equal to us.  But the habit of thinking of ourselves as the only individual in the universe is hard to break.  Perhaps in general we see others as equal to ourselves, at least philosophically, but when it comes down to it, when stressed or in severe crisis, we take care of ourselves first, or only. 

            This does not mean that humans cannot be altruistic.  They can, although it is rare, and requires a severe form of discipline.  But the same firefighter who was willing to sacrifice himself for a victim of a fire might also beat his wife.  The philanthropist could ignore her children for her work, and then excuse her wrong as “necessity.”  In the end, we put energy into that which we feel compelled to focus on, not because it is right or because it helps the most people, but because we have some innate drive to do so. 

Humans wear strange clothes

            It is fascinating to hear people talk about “love”, meaning erotic or romantic attachment.  This love more than any other is driven by inner need, yet it is spoken of at times as altruistic, as focus on the Other.  Another person is involved in erotic love almost by default, but erotic love does not in any way necessitate the benefit of the other.  Rather, erotic love is driven exclusively by inner desire, and when that desire acts in opposition to the other’s need, then the other is sacrificed on the altar of Love.  Romeo and Juliet were perfect examples of the inner selfish drive ignoring the needs of the Other.  Yes, they loved the object of their desire, but ignored the needs of everyone else and allowed their families to be destroyed for the sake of their desire.

            Another kind of love is often confused with selflessness, which is parental love.  Again, this is a love that is based on an inner drive, not necessarily focused on the needs of the other.  We can see this in the abuses of parental love.  How often does fatherly love—the love of provision and discipline—turn into the narrow-focused selfishness of a workaholic or an abuser?  And motherly love—the love of empathy and benevolence—can easily turn into co-dependence or depression, if the love is driven by inner need instead of the need of the other. 

All too often do we call our selfishness “love” and then excuse all the wrongs we do because they were done out of “love”.   “Love” is only a benefit when it is done out of knowledge and true concern for the Other, not due to single-minded adherence to our inner drives.

It's all about the meat

4. Humans are survival-oriented

Human beings are wired to be survivalists.  This doesn’t mean that we can necessarily be dropped in the middle of any wilderness and figure out how to live in harsh conditions.  I know that I would die, and quickly, if stuck in that kind of a situation.  Rather, we are wired to focus on the things that pertain to our own needs, and to help us attain those needs.

            I am not just talking about food, clothing and shelter, although this is part of it.  But most of us live in a society in which these foundational needs are provided for, even to those who are unable to obtain them on their own.  Once the basic survival needs are taken care of, then we focus on other aspects of survival.  We focus on security, so we are protected from harm, whether that be from wild dogs or from the threat of terrorists.  We focus on social connection, because we know that there is strength in numbers.  We focus on inner peace, because we know that excessive stress can kill us (or others if we tend to be an angry type). 

            And there is nothing wrong with trying to survive in these ways.  The problem is, even when we have our needs met in these areas, we tend to do more than our survival necessitates, and when we overcompensate, our ability to survive actually goes down, not up.  Our need for security easily becomes anxiety, which causes excessive stress and we tend to overreact to others—causing destruction to both ourselves and others.  We can eat to survive, or we can eat to self-medicate our mental instabilities which causes us physical problems.  We can work to maintain enough money to live on, but if money becomes a matter of societal honor, we can horde money for ourselves—money we don’t need or use—until we become dependent on an obscenely high salary, and that becomes our level for survival.  And society can become obese as well until they make it a legal necessity for others to live according to their high level of normalcy, where they end up punishing those who do not live with electricity or a certain kind of housing. 

            Because of our tendency to focus on survival, humans tend to over-survive.  We see certain levels of lifestyles as the “basics”, but we very much overcompensate for what we actually need.  Paul said, “With food and clothing we shall be content”, yet try to find a single follower of Paul who agrees with this statement.

5. Humans are oppressed

If we take as a basic definition of freedom “the ability to do what is right without punishment”, then there is not a single human being that is free.  

We are controlled by our fears, which force us to do actions to alleviate that fear.  We fear losing our jobs, which give us the money to live our lifestyles, so we do whatever the jobs necessitate, even if we know it’s wrong.  We fear confrontation, so we stay away from relationships that would cause us to grow to avoid that which we find unpleasing.  We fear those who are unlike ourselves, so we avoid all those who are in greater need than ourselves, and make up stories about why we shouldn’t connect to them.  We fear punishment from the government, so we keep ourselves from doing good things that would get us punished.  We fear being shamed, so we try to fit into our society, even when our society is wrong.  We fear death and pain, so we don’t do the good things that cause these things.  And because we do not want to face our fears, we make excuses for why following our fears is the right thing to do.

            But we do not live by our fears absolutely—we not mice, scurrying away from every hint of monsters.  We also have drives.  We are driven by our addictions—that which we know harms us but makes us feel better or normal.  We are not afraid of our addictions, but we know that they should be feared.  They are too close to who we are to allow us to be fearful.  We are driven by our pleasures—our need for excitement or relaxation or to forget our normal life.  We are driven by need for family and community, and we will face our fears of meeting the opposite sex, of having a baby, of going to a new meeting full of strangers, just so that we can find or create that community that meets our drive. 

            But we are forced to do these things, either by ourselves, or by others.  Some of these things are good, some are not.  But the ethics or spirituality of the situation is almost never what drives us.  Rather we are like magnets, either pulled toward or driven away by this or that force.  We may claim independence, but rarely do we make a decision based on our own free will, on what is good.  We are led by others, by the context we live in.  This is oppression.  We are not free.

"I wear my sunglasses at night... so what?"

6. Humans focus on the wrong solutions

We recognize our oppressions, our tendency to over-compensate, and the fact that we tend to do things that are not helpful to ourselves or others.  And so we try to find solutions.  “If only I lived somewhere else,” we say to ourselves, not realizing that the next place will be just as full of oppressions as this place.  “If only I met the right person,” we say, not realizing that the next person is just as imperfect as we are, and just as much in need, driven by their own desires.  “If only I had more money,” we say, not realizing that money doesn’t change who we are, it only magnifies who we are, causing our problems to increase, not decrease.  “If only I had the right job,” we say, not realizing that jobs are not about the needs of the employees, but the needs of the owners or customers, so employees always get the short shrift, no matter what the context (this isn’t always the case for professionals—the only workers who are treated as full human beings).  “If only I had more pleasure,” we say, but pleasure only requires more pleasure, creating a cycle of oppression. 

            What we really want is an easy solution that will meet all of our needs.  Of course, part of the problem is that we don’t actually want what we need.  We need to work hard to become the best of who we are.  We need to face our fears to be free of them.  We need to refuse our desires at times in order to obtain our true desire.  The most amazing thing is that at times we need to be still and do nothing, allowing others to provide for us completely, just as if we were a baby, in full trust.  Of course, none of us are wise enough to know when is the time to do one or the other.

7. Humans are sinful

Sin is the destruction of relationship, disloyalty, the harm of the Other.  Sin is disloyalty to God who created us, who loves us and provides all good things for us to meet our needs.  We tend to think much more of ourselves than God.  And even though our relationship with God is much less complex than our relationship to government or family, and much more central to our needs, we gravitate toward the latter relationships rather than the former. 

Sin is harming other people, who were made in God’s image, because of our own fears and desires.  It is acting out destruction against others because it is better for us.  It is not acting for the benefit of others, even though it is in our power to do so, because of our own fears and drives.  It is listening to that which oppress us rather than God’s Spirit who leads us to do what is good for all.

We do not sin because of Adam’s sin.  Rather, each and every one of us enacts Adam’s sin ourselves.  We believe in our independence more than we believe in our relationship with God.  We rely more on our sense of fear and our sense of need rather than our more obvious factual knowledge of another’s need. 

Why are we sinful?  Because we are weak.  Even our displays of strength—our technology, our ability to travel in space, our ability to fly around the earth in hours, our communication with each other no matter where we live, our growth of amazing amounts of food, our ability to control the atom, our ability to crush diseases—are paired directly with our weaknesses—the multiplication of diseases, the ability to destroy innocents at the push of a button, two billion people starving, a thriving porn industry and slavery associated with that, an epidemic of homelessness, diseases that ravage a continent although they can be stopped, millions of people drinking contaminated water.  The internet is used to gossip and dishonor much more than uphold the good.  Television is used to encourage fear instead of provide social benefit.  Knowledge of the Bible is used to destroy people’s morality instead of building up people’s love of God and others. 

But I can’t really blame anyone.  I do the same things, although I try not to.  I am weak.  I am human.  Lord, let me dive into You so Your love drowns my desires and fears.  Let me come out a new creature of purity and new hope.

Humanity

“Bible believers sometimes take refuge behind defensive positions not supported by the Bible itself.  The Bible does not teach that the world is flat, or that it was created in the year 4004 BC, or that the earth, or the solar system, or our galaxy is the center of the material universe.  Adhering to non-biblical positions in a dogmatic “religious” spirit has created unnecessary problems for biblical faith.” –J. Oliver Buswell, Jr.  The Origin of Man

The meaning of humanity is ultimately tied into the making of the earth.  All traditions, whether religious or secular, see a connection between humanity and all the other species on earth, ultimately connecting humanity to the earth and how it was made.  This is one of the reasons that the evolution debate persists, because the philosophy of how we see humanity hangs in the balance.  If humanity is a result of a series of random events, then humanity has no purpose, no meaning and all we do is of no import.  If humanity was created based on principles of power, then humanity is about power.  If humanity was created in the image of God, then humanity is purposed to act like God.  This is all very heady and conceptual, but the fact is, we have little actual evidence to help us understand the purpose of humanity, so conceptual ideals is all we have.

The evidence: The current debate between evolution and creation philosophies are based on a couple different bodies of evidence.  First, on the evolution side, we have the fossil record.  And then we have various philosophies that popped up from an interpretation of the fossil record.  On the creation side, we have the biblical text.  But we also have various theologies that developed from interpretations of the biblical text.  And most of the arguments between the evolutionists and the creationists have occurred from the philosophies, not the evidence.  It comes down to the interpretation we want to believe just as before we read the evidence and what conclusions we come to after.  It also depends on what community we belong to, as to what kinds of interpretation we will allow ourselves to have. 

Let’s talk about the evidence for evolution.  Evolution has been seen by human eyes, and recorded.  It is shown that birds, who have a variety of colors, will tend toward colors that keep them camouflaged in the environment that they live in.  This only makes sense, for predators will capture the birds that are not camouflaged well.  And this means that within that species, there will be changes over time.  No problem, for any breeder or horticulturalist well knows that you can remarkably change the appearance of an animal or plant to suit one’s purposes—whether on purpose or by accident.  Changes happen.

For evolution there is also the fossil record.  The fossil record shows that over a long period of time, species have changed remarkably, and that most species that existed in the early times of earth no longer exist.  And that humanity is a young species compared to the many varieties of species over time.  The fossil record also shows, in general, that species develop in complexity over time.  Species with fewer cells consistently exist earlier in the fossil record, and systems develop and then are included consistently later on in the fossil record.  This indicates development over time.

However, the mechanism of that development is not clearly seen.  To understand that, there must be interpretation of the evidence.  Darwin was a marvelous interpreter, but many seculars who honor his findings, also find that his interpretation has need of exam and re-interpretation, not least of which is Stephan Gould.  Thus, “survival of the fittest” is simply a principle which could interpret the findings, but not the only one.  In fact, scientific interpreters find, the facts are much more complex than “fittest” could explain.

As to the biblical facts, these come from what the text of scripture actually says.  It says that God created all things, and that a creation took place in six days. It says that God created humanity in a special creation, not naturally, for his own purposes.  It also says that all the earth’s creation was handed over to humanity to be under humanity’s rule.

What is remarkable is what the textual record does not say.  Not only does it not indicate that the earth was created at approximately the same time as humanity, but it says that the earth, heavens and oceans already existed before the six day creation began.  Thus, there is actually biblical evidence that counters a young earth theory along with all the interpretations that go with it.  Also, the order of creation is not clear in Scripture, for while Genesis 1 is clear, the parallel creation account in Genesis 2 discusses a different order.  Thus, the order must not be significant. There is little biblical evidence for a canopy of ice, dinosaurs existing at the same time as humans or other creation speculations.  Certainly there is no evidence of this in the fossil record, and in fact the fossil record clearly speaks against a young earth, the Genesis 1 order of creation (in which day and vegetation exist before the sun), and dinosaurs and humans existing at the same time.

What exactly is the source of the conflict?  Well, the evolutionists look at their evidence and see the interpreters of biblical text ignoring what seems clear to them: a long progression from simple life to more complex.  And the biblical interpreters see the secularists ignoring what is obvious from their evidence: God’s creation and a special human creation.  And these two evidences ARE difficult to reconcile.  After all, if one believes in a single creator, all knowing and all powerful, then it makes no sense that there would be a progression of creation over time.  And if one believes in a natural progression, when why should human creation not be a part of the same progression, and if the process can be seen as natural, why claim that God is involved in the process at all—it simply is not necessary to determine the facts.

Is there a way to pull together these claims?  Yes, if one looks at both sets of evidence, but doing so requires some release of favorite interpretations.  It means that we, as theologians, must look at the fossil record fairly for what it says.  That the earth truly is old, and that there is a progression.  Is there any hint of this in the biblical text?  And, in fact, there is a hint, although not easy to find. 

Psalm 74 says:

God is my king from of old, Who works deeds of deliverance in the midst of the earth.

 13 You divided the sea by Your strength; You broke the heads of the sea monsters in the waters.

 14 You crushed the heads of Leviathan; You gave him as food for the creatures of the wilderness.

 15 You broke open springs and torrents; You dried up ever-flowing streams.

 16 Yours is the day, Yours also is the night; You have prepared the light and the sun.

 17 You have established all the boundaries of the earth; You have made summer and winter.

This is an ancient interpretation of Genesis 1.  It describes the creation event as being an act of war against Leviathan and sea monsters, which the earth had to be delivered from.  This indicates not only that the earth already existed, but that some kind of creatures already existed on it.  That there may have been a creation before the Genesis 1 account.

And this makes sense.  After all, the Genesis 1 creation begins with the earth already existing and it being covered with ocean.  Interestingly enough, this is the same state of affairs in Genesis 8, after the flood in which God “delivers” the earth from the mass of humanity who had become too violent.  Thus, a creation event could very well be a wiping of a previous creation and the creating of a new one.  The biblical record, then speaks of two of these events.

It just so happens, that the fossil record also speaks of a “wiping out” of species.  In fact, there are indications of five mass extinctions in the fossil record, followed by a heightened period of new species being developed.  The complexification of species does not exclusively in this period, but it certainly increases.  Thus it is possible that both science and theology can agree upon various periods of destruction and re-creation.

But what about God’s participation?  This requires a little speculation, but it is possible to reconcile theology and science in this regard as well.  It is clear in the biblical text that God had “helpers” in creation.  Some of these helpers are metaphorical, such as “wisdom” in Proverbs 7, but some are considered to be literal, such as the Word in John 1 and Jesus in Colossians 1.  And Elohim in Genesis 1 calls himself “we”, which is rare in the Bible text. 

My speculation is this: that God created the earth much in the way that a CEO of Microsoft creates programs.  The CEO orders the programs made, but the actual creation is done by underlings.  This is not that the CEO cannot do the programs himself, but that he is teaching his underlings to create.  Thus, there is a progression in creation, and it happens over time, while an all powerful, all knowing creator would do it all at once.

My speculation goes further: A computer program is not actually made by a single person, but later programmers actually borrow pieces of earlier programs in order to quickly develop their programs, without having to re-invent the wheel.  Thus, if one looks at computer programs over the whole of the invention of them, it looks as if they “evolved”, that is, developed in a natural progression.  This is because a single program develops a useful set of text, which is then found after in many other programs.  However, we understand that there were many designers involved that made that progression possible. 

Again, this is speculation, but it is this sort of speculation that might help there be a new kind of creationism that, like the intelligent design philosophy, would take a fair look at both the biblical text and the fossil record and try to determine God’s plan from that.

From the fossil record, and from looking at other creatures, we can determine that the parts of humanity were compiled from other creature’s collections of cells.  However, the whole of humanity remains unique.  Humanity truly is a special creation.

It seems difficult to justify self-consciousness from an evolutionary standpoint.  What possible benefit can self-consciousness provide any species?  I am not saying that other species besides humanity cannot have self-consciousness.  It is clear that other animals can have this possibility.  But what is the benefit of it?  It only leads to speculation and failed attempts to control ones environment.  On a survival basis, self-consciousness is decidedly unhelpful.

The beginning of a human relationship with the Creator is to know ourselves as creatures.  Humanity is dust—one with the world—yet created in God’s image.  Earthiness and divinity in one neat package, multiplied by billions.  Weakness and strength; bound to both the physical and the spiritual; fallen yet eternally linked to God.  Humanity is the perfect bridge, between heaven and earth, yet fundamentally warped.

Power Horses

In Sura 100, The Coursers,  a comparison is made between war horses and humanity.  And, well, humanity doesn't come out well.

The horses are seen from the perspective of their masters, and they are magnificent. They labor hard, and not for their own purposes.  They run with all their might, simply because their master commands them to. They sacrifice themselves in the midst of battle, even though they don't know what the purpose of the fighting is for.

How do humans look from the Master's perspective? Ungrateful and selfish.  It isn't that humans don't work-- they can accomplish some amazing deeds.  But they don't work for their Master, but for themselves.  They don't work for the needy, or for building up God's goals.  Rather, they work for their own glory, their own influence.

The Sura ends with an important question-- What will happen when the Lord opens up the heart of each person to everyone?  When we see the true motivation of all people, who can possibly stand? 

What Do We Really Believe?

Who Am I, Really?
It is often quoted, “You are what you eat.” But I am not a tuna sandwich or a quesadilla. Perhaps what we eat gives us the energy to be who we are, but it is not who we are. Rather, it is our thoughts and beliefs that make us who we are. We do not name ourselves according to our culinary preference, but we proudly tell others the names that display what we believe. Our church group (what we believe about God), our political leanings (what we believe about how to help our country), our sports team (what we believe about that team—namely, they are great)—these are the things we talk about to indicate who we are (as well as other things, like occupation)

However, our beliefs are as complex as our thinking, and at times we say we believe something that contradicts what we believe about something else. And we also will say that we believe one thing and do another. I can say that I believe that people should be nice to one another, but if I found out my neighbor took my television without my permission then I might not be so nice to him. My wife would then point out the contradiction between what I say and what I did, and I will explain it to her: “You see, I think that we should generally be nice to each other, but if someone takes something from me, then I don’t have to be nice.” The reasoning may or may not be valid, but I only came up with the reason to excuse what I did. The reality is, what I said I believed originally—“People should be nice to each other,”— is different from what I really believed— “I will be nice to others as long as they are nice to me.”

Given that what we say we believe is so often contradicted by what we do, how do we know what we really believe. I say I believe in Jesus—but do I really? And how do I know? I think that if I make statements of belief—“I believe that Jesus is Lord”, that will be enough. If I know something, “Jesus rose from the dead” or “Airplanes are safe,” does that mean I believe in it?

Evaluating What We Really Believe In
Jesus recognized that often what we say and what we believe are two different things. This is why he gave us a test to find the true character of a person—what they really believe in, whether they are really good and bad. Jesus said, “We know a tree by its fruit. We know that a tree is an apple tree because it bears apples. And we know that a fig tree can’t produce pears. Even so, we know what a person is really like by their actions and careless speech.” (Matthew 7:16-20 and 12:33-36). Thus, we know what people really believe by how they behave in certain areas in life.

Below are six areas that, according to Jesus, indicate what we really believe. If we follow God in these areas, then we can say we believe in God. But if we do not, then we must believe in something else—for our actions are a mirror of our hearts.

Actions
As shown above, what we do with our lives—our work, our response to stressful situations—that’s what really shows who we are. We can say that we love God, but the question is, how do we show it? Sometimes the best way to determine our character is to imagine that a stranger who has never seen us before is presented with a videotape of our whole lives, with the sound off, so they can’t hear our own explanations of our lives. How would that stranger evaluate us? What would characterize us? If we stole, we would certainly be characterized as a thief. But we more often than not excuse ourselves, not wanting our actions to determine who we are—“Sure, I get drunk occasionally, but that doesn’t make me an alcoholic.” “Yes, I have hit my child in anger, but that doesn’t make me a child abuser.” Yet Jesus said that a person shows truly whether they believe in him as to whether they do what he says (Luke 6:46-49)

Wealth
Jesus says that what we do with our money and possessions indicates where our heart is, thus who we are (Luke 12:34). A person can say, “I believe that God will heal me,” but then why does he spend so much money on medicine? A person can say, “My comfort will be in heaven,” but then why does she surround herself with comforts on earth? If we want to see what a person really believes in, we can look at how they spend their money—that will indicate what they think to be most important in life. Jesus said that if we want to show that we believe we will get to heaven, then we need to take a substantial amount of our wealth and give it to the poor—not necessarily the church, unless they are serving the poor (Luke 12:33; Acts 4:34-35)

Words
As we said above, a person can say one thing and do another. But Jesus said that we should pay attention to people’s careless words—the statements they make when they didn’t have time to plan it out. Often that’s when people’s pride and anger and selfishness flare up. If we are planning a statement, that can be one thing we say, but the statements we use when we are being thoughtless and carefree—those are the words by which we will be judged, for those are the words that show what we really believe and so who we really are. (Matthew 12:35-36)

Security
At times we all feel insecure. We are often struck by anxiety and we don’t know where to turn. Where we do turn in those moments of crisis indicates what we trust in or who we think will pull us out of our fear. Perhaps we will turn to a family member—especially if they are wealthy—or a friend. Perhaps we have a habit or addiction that we think will make us feel better. Perhaps we have nothing we can rely on but our anxiety, but we say, “How I wish I had this or that”. That is what we really rely on, the person or object we truly believe in. But Jesus tells us that in our time of crisis, the one we can always count on, the dependable one who we can trust in is God. (John 14:1; Luke 12:30-32). To “believe in” God doesn’t mean to have the correct doctrine, it means that you will count on him in a time of crisis. So whatever we turn to in crisis, that is our real god.

Attitude
God makes it clear that he wants us to treat everyone according to their well-being. He wants us to do what is good for everyone we meet—whether that person is an evil person or a good one (Luke 6:27-36; Galatians 6:10). We can make a list of who we actually show care for and who we do not. “Yes, I try to help this person whenever I can. This person, though, is a dolt and so I avoid then when possible. I like to assist this kind of person, but this kind I detest and wouldn’t even give them the time of day.” By this test, then, we can often see what limits we place on our belief in God. We believe in God and in his ways when we are around certain people or situations, but in other ones we do not. If people respect us, that’s fine, we can believe in God in that situation. But if someone cusses us out, then we find it difficult to believe in God. For we know that we will be rewarded according to our love, not our doctrinal beliefs.

Promises
We often make promises and commitments, from appointments to projects we agreed to work on. Sometimes we do not even have a promise to do something, but we have a “social contract” with our family, in which our behavior is determined. And there are many things that we “believe in” that we commit to do, whether it be prayer or a favor for someone at church or visiting a sick person in the hospital. But what we believe in is not found in the promises we make, but in the promises we actually keep. We may “believe in” prayer and make a schedule for us to wake up a bit early to do it. But, when the time comes, we find that we actually believe in sleep more than prayer because the snooze button is hit until the prayer time has vanished. We may “believe in” visiting the sick, and so promise to do it, but when the time comes we find the television too alluring, showing that we believe in our comfort and rest more. Jesus said that we must fulfill our promises and so display our faithfulness, for what we do shows what we believe. This doesn’t mean that we are able to keep all our promises. Sometimes emergencies come up. But we must remember this, whatever we chose to do, that is what we really believe in. (Matthew 21:28-31)

Repentance
One last thing to note—Jesus is a firm believer in changing one’s ways. We know he believes in change because he forgives people their sin. He displays his belief of changed behavior by accepting those who have repented. Even so, if you evaluate your true beliefs and determine that you haven’t really believed in Jesus, it is not too late to change! Jesus said he will give you his Spirit and he will help you repent from your old life and begin to believe in Him anew! Pray for God’s grace and you will begin to truly believe in Jesus, not just in words, but in your whole life. In that way you will be a new creation, created by God to do actions in light of Jesus!

Evaluate your actions, and determine
what you really believe!

Who We Really Are

Sura 96 of the Quran is considered to be the first poem Muhammad received from the angel Gabriel.  You can read it here.

The story goes like this:

Muhammad was born the son of a middle class merchant. He never learned how to read or write. He married a wealthy widow, and spent much of his time away from people, seeking the true God.  Muhammad determined already that Allah, the God of Abraham, was the God he should seek.

Then, out of the blue, he received a message from the angel Gabriel, in the form of a poem.  The beginning of this poem was the command "Recite!" or, otherwise translated "Read!".  Muhammad was confused, as he couldn't read, but as he received the words of the poem, he found that he had become literate.

However, all of that isn't what the Sura is about.

Instead, it is about  secularists, or people who are practical secularists.  It says, "Men think they are self-sufficient, and so transgress all bounds."  The true path, however, is the path of God.  The one who denies others the right to seek God will be judged by God.

When this was spoken, it was not spoken about atheists or agnostics.  Rather, it was about people who believed in their god or gods, and prayed at the right time, but lived their lives the way they wanted to, thus denying any real belief in God.

To believe is to act.  We know what a person truly believes by how they treat others, how they act when no one is looking, how they spend their money.  God will judge every human according to his or her deeds, so says Jesus and the rest of the NT.  Every deed, especially the hidden ones.  Make no mistake, God is not mocked, He knows who we really are and our eternity is determined by our true self. 

The 'T' in TULIP: Depravity

John Perry of Stanford University recently said, "Original sin is the most factual contribution of Christianity."  While this may or may not be true, certainly the idea of original sin is a concept that has caught the imagination of most Protestant believers.  The basic idea is that every person is born with evil already in their genetic code.  Some have more serious sins they are bound to do, but all have corruption in their bones.

The idea of total depravity is not just that sin exists in the soul of every person, but that every action that every person does is founded in base motives.  This means that even a good action is done with evil motivation.  In other words, a person who saves an infant from drowning may be doing it simply from the glory he or she might get from doing it and a mother sacrifices for her child because it is her progeny, her future existence on earth.

What the Bible actually says is that every person sins.  It doesn't actually describe how this is so.  It could be completely environmental-- that the fact we are raised in a sinful society that keeps sin going.  It could be because of how we are raised.  It could be that sinning is at first an accident that we find works. Personally, I lean toward the idea that our society connects with genetic factors which encourage us to act in evil ways, even when our thinking is right.  Have you ever seen someone speak all the right words about helping and hope and love but still do things that harm others?  This self-deception has to be learned, I think.

The total depravity concept is that we are born with self-deception.  It is in every person's basic nature.  This also means that no person can tell the truth.  For if we are all self-deceived, how can we possibly tell the truth to another?  How can we even tell any truth from a lie?  

Total depravity seems like an unnecessarily negative viewpoint of human nature.  Sure, all humans are sinful.  We all screw up and we all hurt others on purpose on occasion.  A few of us make a habit of it.  But is the main characteristic of humanity sin and evil?  Isn't it an equal part of humanity that we want to see our motives as good?  Are we such complete failures as a species?  Isn't it possible for us to improve?  It says in Scripture about humanity, "They can do anything they set their hands to" Genesis 6.  I agree that our track record is spotty at best, and that as a group we only can respond in the most Neanderthalian of ways.  But we intend to do good.  We may not know what the good is, but we try.  That's not total depravity.  Total stupidity, maybe.

BTW, The Human Centipede is shown simply because it was the most depraved movie I could think of. 

Jesus' Answer to Original Sin

Continuing from the previous post, Original Sin

Thus does Jesus divide the entire world between the merciful and the judgmental. There is way, Jesus says, to get out of Adam’s system of judgmentalism, but it only happens by resting on God’s mercy. God is the author of mercy, and this mercy comes from His own nature. Thus, if we are to learn mercy, we must rest in God’s nature. How is this done? After all, we are all stuck in a system of rules and judgmentalism? It happens through the work of Jesus.

1. Jesus taught us what the problem is
Jesus came to earth first to inform us of the problem. Every system, especially the system that was supposed to represent God, ended up becoming long lists of rules that ended up condemning everyone. Jesus wasn’t antinomian—He wasn’t trying to say that we should do away with rules as a principle. Rather, He said that every rule should be based on the principle of love—the principle of acting for the benefit of others and all. Jesus said that any rule that stands against love is a rule that is begging to be broken and that one cannot hold the ones who break such a rule cannot be held guilty. Jesus taught us that religious systems created by people who invent rules and claim they are God’s rules is demon-possessed and must be delivered. Or it must be scrapped to allow a new system to be created.

2. Jesus told us to repent
Jesus said “Repent for the kingdom of God is near.” But this repentance wasn’t primarily about the petty sins we commit against our religious system or against our own sense of ethics. Rather, Jesus clarified that we needed to repent of our lack of mercy, we needed to repent of imposing ourselves on others, we needed to repent of seeing other people as extensions of ourselves, ways to meet our own needs and desires. He also told us that if we did not repent, that we could not enter into God’s kingdom, where we could actually and finally have all of our needs met.

3. Jesus died to create a new system
We were then in a quandary. Jesus taught us that our natural desires—to force others to participate in our system of false morality—and the systems in which we lived—which create a lifestyle of morality for everyone to fit into—are false and lead us not just away from God’s kingdom, but to hell. How can we change everything we have been taught, and how can we live separately from the world in which we live?

Jesus told us not just what we are to do, but he created the means by which we could do so. Jesus died to create the kingdom of God. This death, first of all, showed the utter failure of the system of the world. Both the system created around worship of the one true God (the Jewish cult) and the ultimate system of human organization (the Roman government) condemned Jesus—the representation of God’s mercy— and sent him to death. Thus did God declare these systems—and every human system—inadequate for accomplishing God’s will on earth.

And thus did Jesus open up the way for a new kingdom, the kingdom ruled by God and His mercy. Jesus chose people who would live their lives like Jesus did—surrendering everything so they could be God’s representatives of mercy to the world. And those few people were the mustard seed from which God would grow a mighty tree. The new system of God wouldn’t be like the old system. It couldn’t ever be contained by human organizations or policies. Every time the kingdom gets locked up by rules and traditions, God breaks it and establishes a new system which is based on His love and mercy.

4. Jesus gives the Spirit to create new creatures
Finally, in picking people to represent His mercy, Jesus did one more essential thing. If the new kingdom of God is to be run by people who acted only for the benefit of others, then something had to be done about their hearts. Because the human heart is born selfish and it is trained in selfishness. So Jesus gives every one who enters into His kingdom a new heart by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works within our selfish hearts and helps us to see other people. He gives us hearts of mercy, of compassion and He gives us wisdom so that we can know not only what others’ need, but also how to meet that need.

This is the secret of how we know who is really a part of God’s people or not. Not whether they have prayed a certain prayer, belong to a certain church or whether they are sufficiently religious enough. Rather, we know who, among all of those who claim Jesus, are the ones who are truly a part of God’s kingdom. These are the ones who have hearts of mercy and reject judgmentalism. Those who open their hearts to the poor. Those who see the need instead of the sin. Those who work at loving people instead of hating them. Anyone can claim Jesus. Anyone can say they are a child of God. The ones of the true faith, however, are the ones who display that the Spirit of love and mercy is working within them, making them new creations of gentleness and compassion.

The kingdom of God is still growing. And many of our religious systems must still be broken. When our rules cast people out instead of trying to meet their needs… when our attitudes are about rejection instead of expressing hope for someone’s future… when we refuse to be flexible to assist those in need… then it is time for God’s revolution to occur again. It is time for our systems of religion to be broken and for Jesus’ Spirit of love and mercy to open up a new people. Perhaps this new people will emerge from within the old system. Perhaps the system is so broken that the new people can only grow from without this system. But Jesus’ mercy and love can only exist in opposition to the natural order of things.

Original Sin and Our Sin

It is a commonplace in Christian thought that Adam sinned and all the children of Adam are, because of Adam’s sin, trapped in a cycle of sin. This is usually explained by some genetic explanation. That every child is born in sin, due to Adam’s sin. There is very little biblical evidence for this genetic explanation. Some point to David’s verse in Psalm 51: “In sin did my mother conceive me”, but that verse seems to be talking about the method of conception, not some inner sin that is passed from parent to child.

Certainly Scripture does speak about the fact that every human sins. Romans 3 has a lengthy section on this. The whole gospel is based on the idea of repentance, in which one must assume that anyone needing to repent must first have done something wrong to repent of. And Jesus’ ability to stand strong against temptation and remain without guilt is in contrast to every other person described in Scripture.

Is there an alternative explanation in Scripture to the idea of a sin nature that is passed from parent to child? Certainly there is a different way of looking at it. Instead of a single unified theory of individual human sinfulness, let’s see it as a number of factors involved:

a. Each human is born selfish
From the time we are conceived to the time we are born we are completely alone. No one exists except us and all we are is about ourselves and our bodies. After we are born, it turns out that the mumbles and pokes have to do with a whole world we had no concept of, but we do not yet have the capacity to see the others as people who are the equal to ourselves. Rather, life is about ourselves, our needs and our discomforts. Other people are just about us, and are really extensions of ourselves. We don’t have the cognitive capacity to see even our parents as people as significant to us because, as far as we are concerned, the whole world is about and for us.
That’s how we begin, every one of us. We don’t have any kind of empathy or compassion or mercy because, in reality, there isn’t anyone else yet. In order to become moral beings we must grow into it, and we must be taught it. Most sin, frankly, is simply seeing ourselves as something more than other people. And we are born in that state of selfishness. It is an innocent selfishness, in that we couldn’t possibly be expected to be anything else but self-centered. And this is less of a genetic state, and more of a developmental state encouraged by the circumstance of remaining alone for nine months.

b. We live in a society of sin
Now let’s go back to Adam. Certainly Adam does hold some blame for the sinfulness of the world. But that has less to do with him doing any sin and more to do with the specific sin he committed.

God gave Adam one possible sin, and this had nothing to do with sexuality, which God gave freely, nor did it have anything to do with worshipping God in a particular way. This is all to come much later. The one sin was to not eat of the fruit of the “tree of knowledge of good and evil.” This isn’t a tree of “good and evil” but a tree of “knowledge”. In other words, the tree was a class in ethics. And God didn’t want Adam to have it. Why is that? Because if Adam ate of this tree, then he would hold morality within himself, without sufficient experience or reason to develop a reasonable ethical system. Adam would be like a toddler creating a moral system in a world of grown ups. And, in the story, this is exactly what happened. Adam and his wife ate of the tree and instantly they created a first principle of their morality: nakedness is shameful. So they were hiding because their new made up ethical system declared nakedness wrong.

Note how God responds to this. At first he said, “Who told you that you were naked?” Realizing that their response was a moral outrage to the shame of nakedness, he said, “Did you eat of the tree I told you not to eat?” Why did he ask that? Because the tree creates moral outrage at items that are not necessarily morally wrong. The tree creates a system of morality of judgment. If there is a genetic “sin” that is passed from Adam to all his children, then, according to Genesis 2 and 3, it isn’t sin in general, but the sin of judging others for things that are not sin or evil in any way. It is the judgment of that which is personally disgusting. It is the rejection of the different, it is the hatred of that which we have determined ourselves is hateful.

What is the end result of this? From the time of Adam to the present day, every parent has taught his child the rules of society, about what is morally right and wrong, and this morality is made up not of sound moral principle or of God’s will but of what they had heard from their parents what is right and wrong and what they determined themselves is disgusting and what is good. Adam’s curse is that we each create our own morality and then impose it upon others.
What is the end result of this? Overbearing religious and legal systems. From Adam’s original sin comes the Pharisees rejecting Jesus because Jesus rejects their silly imposed rules for the sake of the moral principle of love. From Adam’s original sin comes churches that give people lists of sins that do not even come from Scripture. From Adam’s original sin comes a law system that includes thousands of rules and millions of policies. From Adam’s sin comes a tax code that even those who developed it cannot completely understand it.

c. We each choose Adam’s sin
Our selfish selves are born into a system of lawmakers. And, in our natural selfish state, we want to be a lawmaker ourselves, so we can be in charge, so we can tell others what to do, so we can judge others, just like our parents and grandparents and friends and teachers and heroes and saints and politicians and employers. And we train our children to be just like us—judgmental people.

And at some point, our children make their own decision. They don’t want to be self-centered anymore. They want life to be better for them than their parents. And the way they accomplish this is by choosing the same method as their parents—creating a new ethical code by which they (and by extension, everyone else) should live by. Instead of thinking about what is actually good for people around them by listening and focusing on their needs, our children decide that they need to decide for others what is best for them. Some of them grow up to be strong enough to determine what is best for everyone else, and others grow up to be malcontents, knowing how the world should be run, but no one would listen to them.

A Platonic Christian Worldview

Most people think that there is simply one church, under the one leader, Jesus Christ. Why, do these idealists say, doesn’t the church just get unified? Apart from the different governing bodies that distinguish one denomination from another, there is another significant issue—there is more than one Christian philosophy. Within each denomination there exists a variety of different philosophies—all claiming the name of Christ, but in many ways incompatible. In this series of articles, we will explore different Christianities and try to understand them from an Anabaptist viewpoint.

In the third and fourth centuries, Christianity was coming into its own as a force in the Roman empire. Paganism was beginning to wane as the primary belief system, and it was getting competition from the revised Hebrew religion. But there was another belief system that was gaining popularity as well—Platonism. Platonism was begun by the philosopher Plato in ancient Athens, and held that the spirit world was the prime reality on which all of our physical reality was based.

Some platonic philosophers of this time —such as Ignatius and Augustine— saw quite a bit of compatibility between Platonism and Christianity, and came to believe in Jesus as the human face behind the platonic philosophy. Then these teachers began defending their platonic form of Christianity against those whom they saw as “heretics” and “unbelievers.” These became the strongest defenders of Christianity of the third and fourth centuries. Their idea of Christianity became enormously influential and their concept of Christianity continues to this day. Below are some of the main beliefs of a Platonic form of Christianity:

Spirit World is the Real World
According to Plato, there is an alternative universe which holds all the reality of the physical universe we see and feel. It is the Spirit world, and it is not less real than the physical world, but more real. In the spiritual universe, there is the real, pure Apple and all apples of our world are just poor copies of the original. Even so, the real Human exists in that universe, and all of us are simply copies of the true Human—and we are only trying to become like that Real Human.

God is the Primary Cause—Pure Spirit
Aristotle, Plato’s student, followed in this logic concerning God. He said that all things have a source, a cause. If creation came from the earth, then the earth came from somewhere, as did the sun and all of our universe. However, at some point one must arrive at the First Cause, because if there is no origin of all things, then nothing could exist. The platonic Christians hold that the Prime Cause is God, who is pure spirit, being made up of nothing physical, of this universe. God is the perfect being, complete Spirit, completely good, and the originator of all good, pure, spiritual things.

Flesh is Corrupt, Spirit is Good
Because God and the Spirit world is where all good comes from, then spiritual things are the only things that are good. This also means that the physical universe we live in is automatically crippled, automatically prone toward weakness. This weakness is called by the platonic Christians the flesh. The flesh is corruptible, able to drift further and further from the Spirit, which is pure good. Fundamentally, the more physical—the flesh—the more corruption and evil. The more Spirit, the more purity and good.

Humanity is part spirit, part flesh
Every human born, according to the platonic Christian philosophers, is part spirit and part flesh. The flesh, they say, is the body, which is corruptible and imperfect. But every human also has a spirit, which is the human’s connection to God. Between the flesh and the spirit is the soul, which is the basis of the mind and will. The soul is the fundamental part of humanity—neither pure flesh nor pure spirit—which determines the moral direction of the person, whether toward the spirit or toward the flesh.

Morality is based on the control of the flesh and motivation
To be a good human, therefore, we must constantly choose the spirit as opposed to the flesh. The flesh leads us to physical desire, to sexuality, to gluttony, to greed, to anger—all of the seven deadly sins are sins of the flesh, created by the platonic Christians. However, ultimately, humans are judged not on their deeds, but their motivation—that which their souls determined. If a soul chose the good, even though it lead them to corruption, then the soul may be saved though the body is corrupt.

Jesus was God Incarnate
Platonic Christians speak of Jesus as the Son of God, the human who was God from birth. Since Jesus was born as God incarnate, thus he was not human as we are human. Yes, Jesus was human, he had flesh and he had spirit, but his soul was already committed to the spirit, and so he constantly rejected the corrupt flesh. Thus, he never sinned. In this way, he had perfect faith and lived perfectly before his Father. Because of this, Jesus’ life could not really provide us with a proper example, because he had a different make up than we. So if we fall short of Jesus, that is only because he was God and we are not. Jesus died to give humanity the opportunity to be pure spirit. All of humanity has been corrupted by their flesh, but Jesus died so that such corruption could be left behind with one’s body, while the spirit and soul rises to God.

The highest Christian act is spiritual contemplation
Those of us who are Christians are those who have entered into Jesus death through baptism and the Lord’s supper. As we partake with Jesus, according to platonic Christians, we find ourselves being led by Him to act in the Spirit, and to set aside the flesh. Thus, as we find gluttony, drunkenness and sexuality set aside, we will also partake more and more in the Spirit realm through contemplation of the Pure Spirit—God himself. We can focus on God through meditation, through praise, through singing or through quoting the Scripture. But the focus is to transport oneself out of this world and into God.

The Church is Invisible
Because morality is a completely internal process, we cannot know who is more spiritual than another. While it is true that the most fleshly people would not be spiritually minded, for the most part we cannot tell. Some are spiritually minded and some are not. But the true people of God are invisible—only God knows who they are. The rest of us cannot judge.

Heaven is Living in Spirit
The ultimate goal of every platonic Christian is, therefore, the stripping away of our bodies—our corrupt flesh—and living in spirit in the presence of God. This is heaven—a pure spiritual existence. In heaven God is the continuous focus, and all who enter heaven take full satisfaction and pleasure in adoring and contemplating God, the Pure Spirit, the Source of all Things.

An Anabaptist Critique of Platonic Christianity
Platonic Christianity has tried to walk a wall that borders Platonism and the Bible—and so there are many aspect of their philosophy that reflects the Bible. Jesus himself said that God is Spirit and that we are not to worship him based on the physical. Jesus also recognized that the Spirit world is more powerful than the universe we live in, and that he himself is from the Spirit world. Jesus did die in order to help us enter God’s kingdom. And the flesh can corrupt us into doing evil.

However, the Bible takes a more balanced view of the physical world than the Platonists do. The physical world is created by God who called it “good” not corrupt. The perfect humans, Adam and Eve, were both flesh and spirit, and completely pure that way. There is no evidence in the Scripture that Jesus was not fully human, even as we are, and pure and innocent in that humanity. While the flesh can corrupt, as Paul said, it is not the flesh alone that corrupts us, but our determination to live out of balance with the flesh—to be obedient to our corrupt desires instead of God. God created sex, he created grapes, he created food, and he wants us to live in pleasure with these things. God also created limits so that we can live in the flesh, but in purity—through marriage, sobriety and moderation.

The physical world is the source of our good acts, as well as evil. It is in the physical world that we give to the poor. It is in the physical world that we love our families. It is in the physical world that we bow down and worship God. But most of all, the paradise that Jesus promises us is not a world of pure spirit. Rather, the cornerstone of his future promise is that we will be resurrected from the dead—we will not remain spiritual, but we will become physical again in God’s perfect utopia. In that time, our bodies will be incorruptible, pure, holy and completely physical.

Jesus also made it clear that what our bodies do is a reflection of our spiritual life. Thus, our moral life is not just in our minds, but equally in our actions. It is not enough for us to have the right motivation, even if we do the wrong actions. Rather, our motivation is shown by our actions. Our morality is based on the life of Jesus. Jesus’ life is not just the pie-in-the-sky ideal, but it is the paradigm for our physical life. We can—and should—be as willing to obey God, as willing to trust in God, as willing to surrender ourselves for the needy as Jesus was. This is our goal, and the purpose of our lives.

Spirit and Flesh

“ ‘A good man cannot be harmed by a bad one.’ In other words, Socrates’ answer to the big question of evil, Why bad things happen to good people, is that they never do.” -Peter Kreeft refering to Plato

Peter Kreeft concludes correctly that Socrates (at least Plato’s interpretation of him) is saying that it is the eternal, unchanging soul of a person that cannot be harmed by bad people. It is interesting that Jesus makes a similar statement. “Do not fear man who can harm the body, but rather fear Him who can take both body and soul and throw it into hell.” Note, though, that Jesus is not saying that bad men cannot hurt a good man. Rather, he is saying that the harm God could do is greater. To take Socrates’ position is to say that torture does no harm, while the fact is we all know that starvation, beatings and death are certainly acts of harm. The main point that Jesus makes in his teaching, however, is that whatever harm a good man receives, it is only temporary. Jesus is always pointing to the fact that the final state is greater than the present state. And that whoever is persecuted due to their faithfulness to God will receive greater reward in the end than the suffering they endured.

Platonists see a divide between the spirit and the flesh. Jesus sees a divide between the present and the future.

Authority Matters

Tough Questions for Christians #36—Collateral Damage
Watch it here.

AZ gives us a Bible theme—when one person makes a decision, other people get punished for it. So he asks, “Why does God punish people for actions they did not participate in?”

This has to do with the principle of authority. Anyone who has authority over others—a parent, a king, a church leader—has power over the other’s lives and how they are responded to. Thus, Adam’s decision causes the rest of us to suffer because we are all born children of Adam. David’s sin caused his people to suffer because his action related to his responsibility to the people.

This principle continues on today. If Congress passes a law, we are all responsible to obey it and we will be punished if we don’t. If our father is an addict, that effects his children severely. If our mother has AIDS when we are born, that effects the rest of our life. The actions of those who have authority over us effect us, even if we don’t want it.

This is true even if we didn’t choose the authority over us. Everyone born in the U.S. is a citizen of the U.S. even if we wished that were not so. This means that whatever the leaders of the U.S. choose, that effects our lives. If they decide to enact war against another country, then it is our sons and daughters who will die in that war, and also we will all suffer the moral and mental damage of them killing others in that war. A slave in a household is stuck in the system of his master, even if he didn’t want to live in the household. When it is a choice between stealing from a master’s enemy’s or dying under the master’s whip, the choice to the slave seems clear.

This is why if we have a choice of authorities to live under, we should choose carefully. To join up to the military is to accept the military as one’s master, and they train one to kill if they say kill. That effects everyone’s life. If we choose to be a citizen of a nation, we accept their laws and accept the consequences of the decision of their leaders.

This is why Jesus is so important. He is offering us citizenship in the kingdom of God. He offers to be our King, our Lord. If we choose Him, and release the ties to all other kingdoms, all other masters, then we receive the consequences of His actions and not the weak leaders we have around us.

Authority matters.

Is Adam Stronger Than God?

Tough Questions for Christians #30—Adam v. Jesus
Watch It Here

AZ’s question is pretty complicated this time, so let me try to simplify it. Adam, though his one action, caused the downfall of all humanity—we all sin because Adam sinned. Jesus, on the other hand, saves some of humanity through his sacrifice. But Adam was a finite human and Jesus is divine. How can it be that Adam’s action is stronger than Jesus’?

This is a pretty insightful question. Just as a sidenote, I just want to say that I appreciate AZ’s work. Most critics of Christianity have such a sparse concept of Christian theology that it is easy to dispute with what the theology actually is. AZ has a clear idea of Christian theology (most of the time) and then takes the theology to its logical next step. This is helpful and smart. This is a great service to the Christian church. So I want to just give a ‘thank you’ to AZ for his hard work for our benefit. It’s too bad he seems so bitter against the church that he can’t hear the real answers.

Back to the question. The basic problem is that Adam is father of all humanity, so he had a head start. Again, God gave humanity the opportunity to rule the world as they pleased and He refuses to take that away from them. Adam took that opportunity and led himself and his children away from listening to God’s wisdom. We are not sinners born. I believe we are primarily sinners taught. Taught by society and by example to do as we please, except where we displease our human authorities. We are not taught to love, we are not taught to do justice, except the most rudimentary kind. And if we do learn justice, we quickly learn that justice doesn’t exist in the adult, “real” world. So whatever expectations we had, they are soon taken away from us. Adam’s way, his leadership style, is the norm.

Jesus is the one leading us to go against the grain. To act out in mercy, no matter what the consequences. To be just, no matter what the consequences. To listen to God and ignore all other counsel. To love God with all my heart, no matter what else is tempting me to stray. This is true rebellion, to act in this way.

And humanity, for the most part, is a traditional society. We exist in entropy. That which was is what is and what will be. Jesus’ truth is not just a story. It’s about a new life. And this new life is not traditional—not even among the church.

This week I have been butting my head against Adam’s traditionalism. Others and I are struggling as to the proper use of a church facility. I want to use it for the poor, the immigrants, for peace in the community. But another church leader is saying that that path is too legally dangerous, too full of liabilities. That is the way of fear, the way of self-service, the way of retaining that which was built even though it is doing no one any benefit. The way of Jesus is radical mercy. It is having the courage to face death, persecution and yes, even court and insurance companies, for the sake of doing benefit for those who truly need it.

If we persist in fear, we are in the way of Adam. But it is only natural to do this. That’s the way of the world. Jesus’ way, although divine and divinely powered is ultimately too scary for the majority of humanity.

Was Creation Perfect?

Tough Questions for Christians #29—The Fallen World
Watch It Here

AZ speaks on a common point of Christian theology, that God created the world without violence, including the animal world, and that all the wrongs in the world occurred after Adam’s fall. That, basically, humanity caused the downfall of animals as well as that of humans. AZ then points out that humanity can’t change the genetic structure of animals and never could. Perhaps we will in a little bit, but we haven’t. So how can anyone say that humanity caused carnivorous creatures or violence?

AZ makes a good point. Christian theology goes too far in their assumption of a peaceful creation. Creation worked, but it wasn’t perfect. There was a snake in the garden trying to kill humanity off, after all. The fossil records show that as far back as there were creatures there has been violence.

Rather, Scripture says in Genesis 1 that humanity was created violent in order to violently take over creation. God says “fill the earth and subdue it” in verse 28. The term “subdue” (in Hebrew, kabash) means “take by force” or “enslave”. It is an inherently violent word. If creation is peaceful, why should God command violence right at the beginning?

Because creation wasn’t perfect. Our future is not to take the earth back to it’s created glory. God created humanity to help the earth be BETTER than the creation. And the fact is, we have already done part of this.

Because AZ is wrong. Humans have been genetic manipulators for a long time. We have taken wild grass and turned it into wheat, corn and lawns. We have turned small lions into housecats and wolves into lap dogs. We have tamed and even eradicated diseases. This is genetic manipulation. We’ve been doing it for millennia. In this way we have been enslaving the earth, forcing the land to do what we want, turning mountains into valleys and valleys into mountains. We have been gods on the earth. And we have been doing it for our own benefit.

The real problem is not the manipulation of genetics, but how we’ve been doing it. We’ve been working for personal benefit and not for the benefit of humanity or the earth, as any just rulers would have done. The fact is, we SHOULD have eradicated violence. We could have. But we are so busy with our own violence that we can’t make the world a better place. We are so self-focused that we can’t see how we can use what knowledge we have to benefit all. As a unit, humanity is certainly god-like. If only we were as merciful and just as God, changing creation for the benefit of all.