Quranology

In Christian theology, the theology of the Bible is called bibliology.  Some call the theology and study of the Quran, the Islamic holy book, quranology.

In orthodox Islam, the Quran is an eternal book, written from the foundation of the world, and then revealed, word-for-word to prophets.  It has never changed and is an eternal word for the ages.

However, if you read the Quran, it seems clear that it isn't an "eternal book" at all.  Rather, it was given to a particular people in a particular place and to read the Quran isn't to read an eternal volume for every time and place, written before the foundation of the earth.  This doesn't mean the Quran doesn't have eternal principles that one could glean from it.  But it is not for everyone.

Let's take Sura 54 as an example.

1. Arabic
Orthodox Quran students declare that the Quran isn't properly understood outside of it's original language, Arabic.  I think that there is a strong case to be made for that, as the poetry and tone of the book cannot be grasped in any other language than the original.  However, this also points to its cultural and linguistic limitations.  Arabic was, for a time, used as a kind of lingua franca amidst the Middle East and North Africa for a historic period of time, but it was never a majority language, even in the Muslim world's most extended empire.  And can it really be said that Arabic is the language before the foundation of the world?  There was a form of Arabic before Muhammad and a form of Arabic after, and the Quran is written in one form of Arabic.  But can we really expect Moses, Jesus and David to have spoken Arabic, or spoken to the people in a language they could not have known?

Sura 54 begins with a discussion about the splitting of the moon

2. Stories
The Quran makes reference to many stories also found in the many books that make up the Bible.  Sura 54 mentions Pharoah of Moses' time, Noah, and Sodom's destruction.  But it also makes mention of stories that only the people of Muhammad and those after him would know, like the 'Ad people.  Would Noah or Moses have spoken of events that would not have occurred yet?  Would Jesus have spoken a reference to an event that is not known among his people?  Or worse, would they have spoken of prophets that did not yet exist-- would Noah have spoken of Moses?

This is not a problem with the Quran, but with the theology that has developed about the Quran.  And I must admit that there are such problems about theologies that have developed around the Torah and the Bible.  Some insist on the Bible's truth to such a degree that they deny truth that has been proven without question, even if the Bible isn't explicit about the subject.  Some speak of the Torah as being eternal, denying it's proper place in the history of humanity.

"I speak for myself!"

As in almost all literature, we need to allow books to speak for themselves.  A clear, lightly critical read of a book, any book, whether holy or mundane, will often give us an idea of what the book claims for itself.  The Bible is clearly not a single volume, but a collection of many books, many of them not written by a single individual, but a collected volume of many documents.  The Torah-- whether of Moses or Rabbis-- are collections of ancient wisdom, some of which is contradictory.  And the Quran is a collection of beautiful religious poetry written by and for Arabs of the seventh century AD.

That is not denying any of the eternal truths found in any of these books.  To say that Surah 54 was written for a particular people in a particular place does not deny the eternal truth of coming judgment.  All I am saying is that we "people of the book" need to take care that we do not put our holy volumes, written, compiled and transcribed by limited humans, above God who truly is eternal and unchanging.

Is Muhammad Just Repeating the Bible?

Sura 111-- This is a judgment on an enemy of the Quran.  It isn't really that different-- and certainly no worse-- than the curses in the Psalms (see 109:6-20!) or the curses of the prophets.  We don't know why this man was so cursed, but that is often the case in ancient poetry.

Sura 87-- This has some basics of the Quran.  God is a God of order, not chaos. What God wants of us is to live according to His Path.  This Path is not complicated, but easy to follow.  This Path is revealed, bit by bit, in the process of revealing the Quran. Those who oppose the path will be destroyed on the day of judgment.  Note that this is really no different than a good portion of Jesus' claim.  He said that the "gospel" or his teaching was essential for entering the kingdom and those who lived it would live and those who didn't would be judged (see Matthew 7:21-27).

In seeing these claims from different people, we need to ask these questions:
a. Are these claims contradictory?  In other words, is it possible to follow both sets of teachings?
b. Which one, if either is speaking for God?  How could we know if one is or is not?

Surah 92-- Again, a summary of The Path:

So he who gives (in charity) and fears ((Allah)),
And (in all sincerity) testifies to the best,-
We will indeed make smooth for him the path to Bliss.
And gives the lie to the best,-But he who is a greedy miser and thinks himself self-sufficient,
We will indeed make smooth for him the path to Misery;
Nor will his wealth profit him when he falls headlong (into the Pit).


Is this really different from Jesus' teaching?  Jesus said:



Beware, and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions.
The land of a rich man was very productive.
And he began reasoning to himself, saying, 'What shall I do, since I have no place to store my crops?'
Then he said, 'This is what I will do: I will tear down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods.
And I will say to my soul, "Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years to come; take your ease, eat, drink and be merry."'
But God said to him, 'You fool! This very night your soul is required of you; and now who will own what you have prepared?'
So is the man who stores up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God."
And He said to His disciples, "For this reason I say to you, do not worry about your life, as to what you will eat; nor for your body, as to what you will put on.
For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing.
Consider the ravens, for they neither sow nor reap; they have no storeroom nor barn, and yet God feeds them; how much more valuable you are than the birds!
And which of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life's span?
If then you cannot do even a very little thing, why do you worry about other matters?
Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; but I tell you, not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these.
But if God so clothes the grass in the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, how much more will He clothe you? You men of little faith!
And do not seek what you will eat and what you will drink, and do not keep worrying.
For all these things the nations of the world eagerly seek; but your Father knows that you need these things.
But seek His kingdom, and these things will be added to you.
Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has chosen gladly to give you the kingdom.
Sell your possessions and give to charity; make yourselves money belts which do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near nor moth destroys.
For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
 (Luke 12:15-34)


Both are basically saying: Have faith in God and don't be greedy.  Jesus' teaching perhaps applies more broadly than most of us are comfortable with (as he paints a businessman as being judged and he says "sell your possessions and give to the poor"), but are not Muhammad and Jesus saying basically the same thing?

The Problem With Paul

Paul the Apostle has always been a controversial figure since the time he was very young.  As a young man, he persecuted the small group of Jesus disciples that grew up after Jesus' death.  He considered himself a "zealot" at that time, or one who does violence for the sake of God.  Then he claims to have seen Jesus face to face after Jesus had died, and Jesus helped him realize how wrong he was and gave him a commission: to bring Gentiles to Jesus.  That certainly didn't do much for his reputation, for either the Jews or the Jewish followers of Jesus.

Today, Paul isn't in much better shape.  Sure, he's really honored by many, especially evangelical Protestant Christians, but anyone who isn't of that fold seem to consider Paul a real problem.  He's been accused of creating Christianity, of stealing Jesus' religion away from him.  Paul has been considered a misogynist, an anti-Semite, a religious hypocrite, a bigot, and many other nasty sounding things.

The biggest part of the problem with Paul isn't what he himself did or said, but how he has been interpreted over the years. Peter summarized it the best:  "In them (Paul's letters) there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures."  (2Peter 3:1).  The fact is, Paul is difficult to understand.  Perhaps this is because Paul wasn't a really great writer-- I mean, sentences that go for ten or more verses?  A good portion of the problem is because Paul was writing letters: thus, he was speaking to a particular context, and without that context some of his writings can be used for anything.  And Paul occasionally uses some strong language, which need to be taken in their own context.

Paul himself was a pretty simple person, and his whole theology can be summed up in the experience he had with Jesus, which is described three times in the book of Acts and referred to in Galatians 1.  There are two things that really shook Paul's thinking in that experience, that can summarize his entire approach to theology.

1. Jesus is Lord.  What Paul realized, immediately, is that Jesus is a great spiritual power.  This isn't the same as saying Jesus is God (although Paul might as well have said that in his statement on creation in Colossians 1), but that Jesus is worthy of being followed and obeyed and honored as king of creation.

2. Gentiles are accepted to be followers of Jesus.  Because Jesus commanded Paul to go to the Gentiles to make disciples (which Paul refers to many times), his outlook on the gospel was different than most of the other followers of Jesus.  He demanded that Gentile believers could have their own customs and traditions because they were not under Moses' law.  He also demanded their equality in the Jesus synagogues that were popping up.

If this is Paul, he sounds more like a Christian civil rights leader than a bigot.  And if he is pointing people to Jesus, then how can he be creating a new Christianity?  This is because it isn't Paul, but people who use Paul who are the  problem.

The problem began with Marcion, the first Christian heretic.  His understanding of Paul's letters is that there were two gods: the Old Testament God and the New Testament God and that Jesus defeated the OT god.  The idea of the OT presenting a "wrathful" God and the NT presenting a "merciful" God continues to this day.  The fact is, all throughout the OT, God is presented as "compassionate, forgiving, slow to anger."  The NT helps us realize that WE need to act that way as well.

Patriarchalists also make use of Paul.  They take passages that seem to say that Paul is refusing women leadership in the church and to remain submissive (interpreted as "under their husband's thumbs") and ran with it.  In doing this, they had to ignore all the women who Paul praised in the church's leadership (Romans 16, I Corinthians 16), and the fact that they didn't understand the context in which Paul wrote (in I Cor. 14:34 Paul is quoting a letter from the Corinthians, not presenting a personal view, which he strongly disagrees with immediately after).

Antinomians, who oppose the use of any law, also make use of Paul.  Paul does oppose the specific use of Mosaic law to the Gentiles, but he certainly approves of many laws in the church, including sexual purity, no vengeance or violence, caring for the needy, and no greed, all in accordance with what Jesus teaches.

Anti-Semites have used Paul (and John) to speak against "the Jews".  However, when Paul was speaking about "the Jews" in I and II Thessalonians in negative, even harsh, terms, he was speaking of a certain kind of Jewish person (of which he was himself). More accurately the term "Jew" in the NT should be translated "Judean", or one who holds to a Judea-centric form of Judaism.  These are nationalists, who opposed and persecuted Paul because he was decentralizing Judaism.

Others, such as Augustine and Calvin, used Paul to create a new orthodoxy, and a new vision of God, who not only rules the universe, but has control over every single event.  This is not the teaching of Paul, who claimed that God controlled certain aspects, but also recognized that God gave rule to human beings, who made their own decisions.

All this to say, we should allow Paul to speak on his own, within his own culture.  Let's not put on Paul all the misunderstandings and mistakes of Christianity, simply because people want to use the ancient writings for their own purposes.

I Am Adam

There has been a discussion about the historicity of the Adam and Eve story in Genesis 2-3.  While I think that there is a case to be made for its occurrence in real life, I don't think we should fail to see that Adam's story is our story as well.  Every part of the story is a part of our lives, our experience:


Adam and the woman are all of humanity, including each individual.

Humanity is granted authority/responsibility over the created earth. But he is told not to make ethical decisions on his own (the tree of knowledge of good and evil), but to rely on his relationship with God.

Satan (the serpent, the power that judges humanity) convinces humanity to take authority on their own, because if they were to make their own ethical decisions, apart from God, then they would be all-powerful.

Humanity makes the decision to separate their idea of good and evil from God's. God abides by their decision and determines to separate himself from humanity. Humanity is now devoid of God's wisdom and must depend on their own wisdom.

However, humanity is also devoid of life. Because humanity is like a toddler with the power of a king, God doesn't allow humanity the opportunity for eternal life (the tree of life)-- humanity would just be too dangerous. Instead, God puts humanity under the power of Death who limits humanity through suffering and hardship and who shortens humanity's lifespan.

That's how I see it. Again, I don't have a problem with a historical read of the story, but we need to recognize ourselves in this story as well.

First posted on the Aletheia Forum:http://aletheia.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=science&thread=3350&page=2#ixzz1QOh5M0Io

Scripture Summary

A summary of my view of Scripture:

Truth is all around us, in every book that has ever been written. And every book is written by humans, thus open to human truth and fallacy. No book has ever been written by God. Some have written about their experiences with the spirit world. Some have written about their personal experiences with God, and others have had people writing for them. All of these are helpful.

However, there is only one person who has proven to represent God perfectly in love and miracles and resurrection, and that is Jesus. Jesus appointed apostles to memorize what he said which were later written down. Others wrote of their experiences and knowledge of Jesus-- this is what is called the New Testament. Jesus himself affirmed the Hebrew scriptures and their truth, although that truth, he said, is necessarily interpreted by love.

Every Scriptural text (no matter which religion) as well as our own experiences could be interpreted through Jesus' focus on love of God and humanity and we can find the greatest truth. In the end, however, Scripture only leads us to the truth. It does not become real until we apply Scripture and we live it.

A Parable of the Kingdom

Once there was a king who had three sons. He was determining who should rule after him, so he gave them each a portion of his vast kingdom, and told them to rule well. As good sons, they came to him and said, "Father, you are the great king, all wise and just. Please tell us how to rule as you have done."

The Emperor looked at each of them from his throne and said, "Write down what I say and you will know all that is necessary to rule: Sovereignty. Justice. Mercy. Sacrifice. Love. Peace. Understand these words and you will rule well." The three sons were a bit mystified, but all were confident that, given time, they would be able to understand the meaning of the Great King, and rule well.

After a year, the King called his sons back and asked them how they ruled.

The first son said this: "After some time of considering your words and spending time with your subjects, I realized that they were faithless and stupid. Then I understood your words. I am the sovereign and I must rule strongly. I must deliver justice to the people, punishing them for their sins. However, I must remind them that you, O King, are merciful and do not want them all to die. However, they must learn to sacrifice their wills to Yours, and thus learn to Love each other by loving the Law of the land. Only then there will be Peace."

The King replied, "And I understand that you punished all, for all were unworthy in your sight. This is not my rule of mercy. You are dismissed."

The second son said, "I, too, considered your words, my King, and applied them to my rule. I realized that I am not the sovereign, but You are, O King. I am only here to dispense your justice and mercy to the people. Thus, I sought to apply your law precisely, punishing the wicked and rewarding the obedient. I taught them to sacrifice their possessions to me, so that I might re-distribute them in love. And then we achieved the peace of having all needs met."

The King replied to the second son, "Because you took all land and all possessions from my people, you made them all poor, grudgingly giving back to them. This is not my rule of justice. You are dismissed."

Finally came the primary servant of the third son, and he said, "I regret to tell you, my Lord, that your son is dead. This is what occurred: He also, considered your words and he realized that he himself was given sovereignty over your people, which was a noble task, of which few are worthy. He saw the poor of your land being oppressed and the wealthy squandering their power on their own indulgence and distractions. But rather than punish them, your son remembered your word, "sacrifice" and realized that he must sacrifice himself for all the people. So he took all the power and wealth you gave him, traveled around the country and taught all the people how to share possessions, how to see with compassion and how to love each other with one's own heart. In this way, he created peace among all who listened to him.

"I wish that were the end of the story. His brother, the first son, came to his land and stirred up the wealthy, claiming that the third son was not obeying your will. They lied about him and persecuted him gladly, for he was telling them the only way to follow your will was to sacrifice their possessions and power. Because he threatened all power, the other king spurred the powerful to kill your third, innocent son."

The King bowed his head and tears came to his eyes. "Yes, I have heard all of these tidings. My son," and he turned to the first son, "You are cast from my presence. I never want to see you again. You were never interested in my will, only in punishment." Then the King turned to the servant, "Little one, because you have loved my son, my son who followed my heart of compassion, then I proclaim you to be King over all of my lands."

The servant declared, "But my Lord, I am not worthy!"

The King chuckled, "Of course you are not. But anyone who has my heart at least deserves the chance to become worthy. Worth isn't in correct interpretation, nor in delivering justice. Worth is found in seeing others' needs and doing all you can to meet them."

This parable is not about Christianity, per se. Nor is it about the atonement and how it works. Rather, it is about how one interprets the Bible. The Bible is confusing and difficult. There are a number of things that don't make sense. The one who understands the Bible correctly is the one who has the heart of the Father, following the example of His Son.

Is the Jesus Story Plagiarism?

Tough Question #31—Made Up By Satan
Watch It Here

This is a common question, but that just means it needs to be answered. AZ claims that there are a number of characteristics of Jesus that are also characteristics of mythical figures in the ancient world, written down hundreds of years before the gospels. Among these characteristics is birth at the winter solstice, attacked by tyrants, grew up to perform miracles, death by violent means and raising from the dead. Thus, AZ asks, is the story of Jesus embellished by these details, or simply invented completely? (The “made by Satan” part comes in the church father’s response to why these similarities existed. Their supposed answer is that they were “made by Satan” before Jesus was born to deceive the world.)

First of all, most of the similar characteristics exist in the birth narrative, not in heart of Jesus’ life. Let’s talk about those first. If God wanted to communicate that one baby in particular was special, to a limited and select group of people, why wouldn’t He use cultural ideas that already existed? It is simply a matter of communication, even as Genesis 1 and other portions of Scripture are similar to previously written texts. Just because a form is similar and it borrows characteristics, that doesn’t make it untrue.

Secondly, most of the things about Jesus’ life is unique. There are few in ancient history who is a miracle worker on the level of Jesus. Perhaps Elijah and Elisha, but apart from pagan gods, you don’t see people walking around doing miracles, including Heracles, or other ancient humans. And even so, Jesus is the only one making rules for how his miracles work or why he was doing them. Jesus’ miracles isn’t about “Wow, aren’t I great?”, but about helping those in need and following God’s will.

Another unique aspect about Jesus is his death. Not the fact that he died a violent death, which, as AZ says, is pretty common among ancient heroes. His death is unique because the one thing that was emphasized is that his death is not simply punishment, but it was a. punishment for a crime he was innocent of and b. it emphasizes his rejection by the nation. This rejection is what is most unique. Jesus was an outcast, which made him uniquely UN-qualified to be a savior. And yet Jesus’ teaching and NT theology continually claim that this DISqualification is, in fact, the true qualification. This is thinking outside the box in the ancient world.

And another unique feature is Jesus’ resurrection. Life after death isn’t really amazing. In the ancient world, everyone assumed there was life after death—that people’s empty spirits went to Hades to live. Not only did Jesus return from Hades, but he returned to his own body, which was restored, better than before. This is the unique aspect that most people who look at ancient myths don’t understand. You see, Osiris, Hermes, etc, all were already eternal. They were in their spiritual bodies—the interesting part of the story is that they escaped from Hades. Heracles became divine. But Jesus’ restoration is different—He is still perpetually human in an eternally human body. Resurrection in this manner—life after life after death—was a unique concept. It was talked about in Daniel and hinted at in Isaiah and Psalm 22, but Jesus’ story is the only one that actually talked about it actually happen.

So AZ and others can deny the historicity of Jesus’ life if they wanted to, but it can’t be done on the basis of Jesus’ similarity to others’ lives in myth. Jesus’ situation was completely unique, unparalleled by other myths unless you squint so much that they all look the same in that blurry fashion.

Does God Hate Disabled People?

Tough Questions for Christians #21—God Hates Disabled People
Tough Question #21

AZ changed the format on the questions, and I have to say, I don't care for it. I don’t like the new music, and the new format is longer. But I’ll keep answering the questions. This question begins at 12:30. Please ignore all the ignorant, bitter preamble in the video.

AZ quotes Leviticus 21:17-23 where God says that he doesn’t want people who are handicapped or injured or who have a skin disease to enter into the sanctuary because it would “profane” the sanctuary. He doesn’t mention that the sanctuary is also off limits to children under 13, all non-Israelites, anyone with a Canaanite ancestry and all women. They would also “profane” the sanctuary. So, AZ asks, how does a disable person make the sanctuary profane? What’s wrong with them?

First of all, the idea behind this has nothing to do with sin, but has to do with laws of cleanness. This is ritual cleanness that has to do with culture, not with what is good or bad in the sight of God. Just like we don’t consider a person “clean” if they haven’t washed their hands after using the bathroom (even if they didn’t touch anything dirty), the fact of them being actually dirty isn’t the problem. The problem is if it were known they didn’t wash their hands they would be known as “dirty”, just as a person who might be very clean but has lice is considered that. No one wants to be around them because they have a cultural uncleanness. The way the Law deals with this issue is to just exclude those who are culturally “unclean”, even as any public building might exclude people who have lice. No one else wants to catch it, even if it doesn’t hurt anyone.

It is interesting that Jesus denied most of the laws of cleanness. He said that God isn’t as interested in a person being clean on the outside as He is on the inside. Actually, the prophets and psalmist agreed with this as well, when they denied that sacrifice without repentance is less than meaningless. This is one of the areas the New Testament clearly saw the problems with the Law and sought to correct it. They denied all the ritual laws, because the implications of them were not according to God’s true nature, His love and mercy.

Why Didn't God Conquer Palestine Himself?

Tough Question for Christians #18—The Promised Land
Tough Question #18

AZ asks a new twist on an old question. Israel was supposed to kill off the Canaanites to get the land. But rather than asking the usual question about genocide, AZ puts a different twist on it: Why did the Israelites have to kill them themselves? Why didn’t God do it for them?

At the end of this video, AZ is grinning with glee, and I can only figure this is because he knows he’s got a killer question here.

This is a good question and I have to say the whole subject makes me uncomfortable. One of the themes of the Bible is how the Canaanites shouldn’t exist, and how their sin was so horrible that they deserved to be destroyed completely. Then God rescinded his command to have the Israelites kill the Canaanites in Judges 2, and Jesus actually welcomed at least one Canaanite into the kingdom, claiming that faith redeems everyone (Matthew 15).

I’ve got a lot of answers for this. First of all, I don’t hold to the commands of the law, but I follow Jesus, who commands us to love our enemies, so I don’t have to defend commands to do war or genocide or anything else. Also, in the NT, warfare for Christians is supposed to be spiritual, not physical, and the only enemy we battle against is Satan (Eph. 6).

I’m satisfied with this on a moral basis, but AZ is really asking about consistency within the Bible. God can take these people out, He’s taken people out before—see, Sodom and Gomorrah, Genesis 19—so why not do it here?

The fact is, God promised that He WOULD do it. Exodus 23:20-23 says that God will send an angel ahead of them and destroy the Canaanites. And certainly there is a hint of this at Jericho. God did the hard work—getting rid of the walls—but nevertheless the Israelites had to do the actual work of killing.

I honestly don’t have a good answer for this. Not one that makes sense of Scripture. Anybody else want to give it a shot?

Human Weakness-- A Scriptural Guide

Psalm 8:3-4
When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon and the stars, which You have ordained; What is man that You take thought of him, And the son of man that You care for him?

Isaiah 40:21-25
Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. He it is who reduces rulers to nothing, Who makes the judges of the earth meaningless. Scarcely have they been planted, Scarcely have they been sown, Scarcely has their stock taken root in the earth, But He merely blows on them, and they wither, And the storm carries them away like stubble. "To whom then will you liken Me That I would be his equal?" says the Holy One.

Genesis 3:17-19
All the days of your life both thorns and thistles shall grow for you. You will eat the plants of the field—By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, till you return to the ground because from it you were taken. For you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

Psalm 90:3-12
You turn man back into dust And say, "Return, O children of men." For a thousand years in Your sight Are like yesterday when it passes by, Or as a watch in the night. You have swept them away like a flood, they fall asleep; In the morning they are like grass which sprouts anew. In the morning it flourishes and sprouts anew; Toward evening it fades and withers away. For we have been consumed by Your anger And by Your wrath we have been dismayed. You have placed our iniquities before You, Our secret sins in the light of Your presence. For all our days have declined in Your fury; We have finished our years like a sigh. As for the days of our life, they contain seventy years, Or if due to strength, eighty years, Yet their pride is but labor and sorrow; For soon it is gone and we fly away. Who understands the power of Your anger And Your fury, according to the fear that is due You? So teach us to number our days, That we may present to You a heart of wisdom.

Romans 3:9-18
We have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin. As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one." "Their throat is an open tomb; With their tongues they have practiced deceit"; "The poison of asps is under their lips"; "Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness." "Their feet are swift to shed blood; Destruction and misery are in their ways; And the way of peace they have not known." "There is no fear of God before their eyes."

Ecclesiastes 7:20
Indeed, there is not a righteous man on earth who continually does good and who never sins.

Romans 1:18-32
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man -- and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

Psalm 103:13-18
Just as a father has compassion on his children, So the LORD has compassion on those who fear Him. For He Himself knows our frame; He is mindful that we are but dust. As for man, his days are like grass; as a flower of the field, so he flourishes. When the wind has passed over it, it is no more, and its place acknowledges it no longer. But the lovingkindness of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear Him, And His righteousness to children's children, to those who keep His covenant and remember His precepts to do them.

The Jesus of One's Imagining

"All theological statements about the divine revelation must begin with Jesus Christ, as the Word of God Incarnate, and that we are not bound by any biblical passages taken in isolation, and certainly not by isolated sections of the Old Testament." -Emil Brunner, "Man and Creation" from The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption.

I am in complete agreement with this statement. However, after this, Brunner then claims a theology for Jesus without any support from Jesus himself. This means that Brunner's theological "Jesus Christ" is one of his own imagination, where the basis of his theology is not the Jesus of the Bible, but the Jesus of theology. And when one creates one's own intellectual starting point, then one also lacks the humility of actually being led by God toward and understanding of God's will.

But I Need A Canadian Slave!

I received the following email from a friend. It's spam, but it's got a good point. How can we pick and choose parts of the Bible we believe in?

In her radio show, Dr Laura Schlesinger said that, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:


Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your adoring fan.

James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

A Final Note On The Bible (for a while)

I do not believe that everyone who claims the Bible is inerrant is wrong-headed about the Bible. But the far majority of people—no matter what theological disposition—fail to read the Bible for what it says.

Some claim that the Bible cannot be read objectively, because of the cultural context in which we live. The Bible is not just a book, a text, nor even simply communication from God. It is the cultural center for so many people, that everyone is going to insist that it states THEIR truth. Because, from our self-centered perspective, All Truth is Our Truth, the “facts” and biases that we already accept. Thus, if the Bible is true, then we do not need to agree with it, but it needs to agree with us. For this reason, no one can read the Bible for what it says, nor can one communicate what it clearly says without being rejected by the mass of people. Because they see the Bible as their book, not God’s.

What Michael Card said is right: If God truly came in flesh, then those talking to him would be of the opinion that he was insane. And if the Bible is truly God’s communication, then the mass of humanity must reject its message.

But there are a variety of ways of rejecting. You could say, “That’s just wrong”, but when a bunch of people will reject you when you reject God, you’ve got to be more nuanced. So you say, “It doesn’t mean that.” You say, “Let me explain what God says.” And pretty soon, when you have enough people looking at God’s word, and they are all seeing that it says that which it does not say. And so they can be led into lies, further and further away from God. It is hilarious that when agnostics and atheists argue against God, they are arguing against the false perception of God and a false perception of righteousness that have been given to the masses by religion rather than what any holy book actually says.

This is why I think that every person who believes that the Bible is communication from God must be obsessively careful to only speak of what the Bible actually says and not to use theological language, or to add their own idea of “wisdom” to it. I know it’s popular to do that, but it drives the truth of God further into recession. We must have God’s pure word, the pure communication without adding to it. We must insist that God has given us enough communication through His Son and not reject Jesus by insisting upon theological layers that Jesus didn’t proclaim. We must insist upon objectivity, not orthodoxy. Only then can we truly proclaim the “insane” message God has given to us.

Seeing But Not Perceiving

I am truly disturbed, actually, by the use of the Bible by people who claim to have Jesus as their Lord and the Bible as true. These very people disregard the words of Jesus with an ease and a dismissal that the critics of the New Testament—heck the critics of any piece of literature—cannot match. I find myself unimpressed by those who have a high theological regard for Christ or for the Bible, because their “high” regard tend to be translated into already knowing who Jesus is and what the text says before they ever come to the text. And if anyone points out that their understanding of Jesus or the Bible doesn’t match what is actually stated, they will claim one of a few statements that throw doubt on the one questioning them:
“I interpret the Scripture by the Spirit”
“All of the church fathers understood this.”
“I follow sound hermeneutic principles.”
“This scholar (usually from a hundred and fifty years ago) agrees with me”

Interpreting Scripture is difficult, and changing someone’s mind is almost impossible. I’ve frankly given up convincing anyone of my point of view of Scripture if they strongly hold to another point of view. I just give my reasons and move on. And, frankly, I hope that others do the same.

But it truly disturbs me when someone will hold to a high theological view of Scripture but deny what it clearly says in black and white. People who think that Jesus claimed that it’s okay to go to war. That the law of Moses can be fully lived out today. That the United States upholds the ten commandments (although that may be a misreading of the Constitution, not the Bible). That suicide is an unpardonable sin. That Jesus spoke parables to "clarify" His truth. If the Bible really is God’s word, then we need to believe it for what it says, and not try to impose our own beliefs and traditions upon it. This means we have to open our eyes without the theological/philosophical lenses and just let it speak to us, not us to tell it what it should say.

The Most Important Reason The Bible Is Important

It is about Jesus.

The clearest, most accurate communication about God is Jesus himself. And the Bible is the only place that has the most historically accurate information about Jesus. The Gospels are the best books about Jesus ever written, collecting together eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ life and teaching. The rest of the New Testament considers the basic implications of Jesus to those who follow Him. And the Hebrew Scriptures are the very books Jesus quoted from, using it to definitively describe what God is like and what He wants from humanity. Jesus is still the most important person influencing the world today—perhaps in this last century more than ever! If we want to know about Him, about his most correct representation of God, then we need to go to the Bible.

Yes, there may be contradictions, but the most important aspects of Jesus are clearly communicated. Jesus teaches us about love and humanism and inclusion and all that is communicated clearly not just in the gospels, but in the whole of the New Testament. It talks about freedom from sin and oppression. It talks consistently about what is really good and rejects what is not really good, or only looks good. The fact that all institutional churches of all ages have rejected what is true in the New Testament doesn’t mean that it is any less true. The fact that theologians have rejected the true Jesus and his true teachings for the sake of their own security and worldly hopes doesn’t make Jesus less true or his philosophy less significant.

The New Testament is the most accurate statement about how we can relate to God ever written. There is history to be found there, and there is philosophical truth. But that’s not what it’s about. It is about being plugged into the greatest power of the universe.

Why Else is the Bible Important?

It is about Humanity’s Connection with God
The Bible’s single theme is the relationship between humanity and God. It speaks of how God relates to men through individuals and government, through judgment and mercy, through prophets, philosophers, kings and everyday people. It speaks of how people relate to God through ritual, though prayer, through reading, through mystical experiences, through everyday life, through childbirth, through eroticism, through mourning, through exile and through work. It is the broadest explanation of spirituality and spiritual life that exists.

It Gives a Common Story for Believers
For those who believe in God, the Bible gives what might be the only common element between them all. It is the storybook for all believers, where examples of all things occur. It also gives a common language, full of quotes and unique turns of phrase which is used by many cultures, whether they believe or not. The Bible is the basis for all of our discussions about God, letting us know who God is and how He relates to humanity.

It is God’s Communication about Himself
The Bible is God’s word. This means that it gives us God’s communication. To be honest, if we read it carefully, we can see that contains God’s word, as it does not claim for itself that God is speaking through every verse. But it does give us God’s words, within colorful, varied contexts. God speaks to individuals, He speaks to nations, and more importantly, He speaks to us. In this book alone God tells us what He thinks it is most important for us to know. He tells us how we ought to live, how we can relate to Him, how we can gain His best. The Bible is the only book that clearly and definitively answers these questions.

Why Is The Bible Important?

Some might question my interest in the Bible. After all, if the Bible isn't inerrant, then why do I have such intense interest in it? And I want to make it clear, that my interest in the Bible is not simply scholastic, nor is it limited to the New Testament. The Bible-- as a whole-- is the most important artifact in my life, and it has changed me more than any other person or thing. I have read commentaries on almost every major book in the Bible and I dearly love almost every detail of the Bible. It is unbelievable important to me personally. And not just me.

The Bible is the best selling book in the world, perhaps 2.5 billion copies sold. It is the most printed book, with 6 million copies printed—the second being Mao’s Little Red Book at 900 million (The most popular Harry Potter book sold about 100 million copies). It is also the most translated book in the world— at least portions have been translated into 2454 languages. Clearly, it’s important to somebody.

But why is it important? And does it deserve its reputation and acclaim?

It is one of the oldest books in the world
The Bible, more than any other book, reflects a wide spectrum of ancient life, customs and thought. It is a sourcebook of ancient history, spanning a period (at least) of a thousand years.

It Expresses Human Experience
Because the Bible is written by forty different authors, as well as a number of editors. And it tells the stories of hundreds of people, who lived over a period of time of 2000 years (from Abraham to Jesus). All these stories cover the broad spectrum of human experience: joy, love, guilt, anger, lust, hope, sorrow, sacrifice, selfishness, murder, piety, hypocrisy, power, humility, farming, building, ruling, slavery, visions, butchery, and so much more. In all of these experiences, the Bible invites each reader to experience all this, and to see it all from the perspective of the ancient Hebrews. No book, novel or otherwise is such a masterwork.

More to come...

The Good Side of Contradictions

Contradictions have one other benefit—the proof of its eyewitness accounts. This is especially true of the New Testament. All the stories claim to be from eyewitnesses, giving their stories. Some of these stories are opposing to one another, offering different details, even disagreeing about details. But this proves that the texts weren’t manipulated by someone trying to establish consistency. Rather, we truly do have eyewitness accounts—along with their contradictions, their inconsistencies and the different details. This is a greater evidence of historicity than a completely consistent account, for if you have ten human beings witnessing an event, you have ten different and sometimes contradictory accounts of a single event.

So what is the benefit of accounts that are sometimes contradictory? The benefit is in what they agree in. If you have ten people who see a car accident, and they disagree as to the color and make of the cars, but they all agree that the larger car was hit by the smaller one. Then one can disregard the eyewitness account of the color or make of the cars, but one can rely on the fact of the accident and who hit the other. The same with the Bible. We may not know how many angels were at the tomb, but we have a number of witnesses who claim to have seen an empty tomb and a resurrected Jesus—on that they are consistant. Not only do we know what to focus on, but we also know that what agreement we have we can better rely on because we have unimportant details that disagree with each other.

Contradictions and Theology of the Bible

Contradictions are not an argument against the inspiration of Scripture. God could have inspired the authors to focus on what is important. The important thing, in Genesis 1, is to offer texts that show the creation of the world by God’s hand, but not necessarily to show the order or timing of the creation. The important thing in the genealogies of Jesus is to show that he is an adopted descendent of David, not to get the exact names right. The importance of Stephen’s speech in Acts 7 is to show how Judeans had always rejected God’s prophets, not to get every precise detail correct. In this way, we can see that contradictions in Scripture help us to focus on the important details—the ethics and basic facts about God, not the details of history.

Contradictions, however, do land a blow against the idea of the inerrancy of the Bible. If the Bible can be shown to have one, solid, proven error, then it is not without error, thus not inerrant. If the Bible is not inerrant—which the Bible never claims for itself—then that offers a lot of other questions about the connection between faith and science, faith and proven historical data, and whether fundamentalist faith is accurate in any way. The Bible could be about many things, but it does not have to inform science, nor does it have to inform our study of other disciplines. The Bible is good for what is shows us—the ways of God, the salvation of Jesus, the fact of a spirit world, and the ancient history of the Jews. But we should not make the Bible say what it does not say for itself.

Are There Contradictions In the Bible?

When I first began reading the Bible, I found some contradictions. I also heard about other contradictions. As I studied the Bible more, and heard more preachers, I found that these contradictions have easy explanations. Okay, so there are two angels at the tomb in one text, and only one in another—is this really a contradiction? I mean, if there are two, are there not one? And the Judeans of John deny Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem. But does this absolutely contradict Jesus’ birth there—which was not necessarily well known anyway? Many of the “contradictions” that are put forth are insignificant and not really a contradiction at all, but simply different points of view.

However, as I continued to read the Bible and really dig into it, I find contradictions that cannot be easily explained, at least if we allow the text to speak for itself. For instance, in Genesis 1, it says that plants were created before humanity, but in Genesis 2 it says that it occurred the other way around. In I Corinthians 11 it says that women should prophecy with their heads covered, but in I Corinthians 14 it says that women should stay silent and not prophecy at all (and this despite earlier in I Cor. 14 where it says that EVERYONE should have something to speak). In Matthew 1 there is a genealogy of Jesus which contradicts the genealogy given in Luke 3. While some claim that one if of Mary and the other of Joseph, both claim to be genealogies of Joseph.

Some additional contradictions are given by Dewey Beagle, found in Erickson’s Readings in Christian Theology, vol. 1.

Jude verse 14—Jude says that Enoch is the “seventh generation from Adam”, as quoted in the Book of Enoch, while the text in Genesis has many more generations between them.

II Kings 15:27—It says that Pekah “reigned twenty years”, but this is not possible, given the comparisons of other passages of II Kings.

Acts 7:4—Stephen claims that Abraham left Haran “after his father died”, but Genesis claims that Abraham’s father was still alive when he left.

Galatians 3:17—There is a strong discrepancy in the Bible to how long the Hebrews were in Egypt—was it about 400 years or a bit more than 200 years?

But these are but a few of the other serious contradictions that were discovered.

There ARE certainly some contradictions in the Bible text. But what does that mean for those of us who depend on the Bible as our main source of truth about God?