the singularity of being and nothingness
Theology
Some Thoughts on Apologetics
Jul 21st
Recently, I’ve been visiting a variety of apologetics-focused blogs and forums (super exiting, right? :)). During my readings and interactions with the bloggers associated with these sites, I’ve started asking some hard questions about the usefulness of apologetics within the life of faith and mission or the Church.
Given my background (B.S., Pastoral Ministries, M.A. Theological Studies), I’m definitely no stranger to the “logic” of apologetics. Based on the famous Petrine passage, the ultimate purpose of apologetics, as a discipline, is to “give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have” (I Peter 3:15). From 2nd century Justin Martyr’s Apologies, to McDowell’s famous Evidence That Demands A Verdict, to Strobel’s Case for Christ, there is a long, varied, and rich tradition of apologetics within Christian theology. While motivations and level of expertise have varied in the execution, the ultimate goal of each work has been, I think, to show the Christian faith as something “reasonable,” to defend the faith on intellectual grounds.
While this is in itself a noble goal, I think something that is far too often overlooked is the interplay of philosophy, theology and biblical interpretation that happens between the apologist More >
St. Ignatius: Three Celebrated Mysteries
Jun 29th
From The Epistles of Ignatius, Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter XIX:
“Now the virginity of Mary was hidden from the prince of this world, as was also her offspring, and the death of the Lord; three mysteries of renown, which were wrought in silence by God. How, then, was He manifested to the world? A star shone forth in heaven above all the other stars, the light of which was inexpressible, while its novelty struck men with astonishment. And all the rest of the stars, with the sun and moon, formed a chorus to this star, and its light was exceedingly great above them all. And there was agitation felt as to whence this new spectacle came, so unlike to everything else [in the heavens]. Hence every kind of magic was destroyed, and every bond of wickedness disappeared; ignorance was removed, and the old kingdom abolished, God Himself being manifested in human form for the renewal of eternal life. And now that took a beginning which had been prepared by God. Henceforth all things were in a state of tumult, because He meditated the abolition of death.“
Share this: On Loving God, St. Bernard of Clairvaux
Jun 24th
“…why should not the creature love his Creator, who gave him the power to love? Why should he not love Him with all his being, since it is by His gift alone that he can do anything that is good? It was God’s creative grace that out of nothingness raised us to the dignity of manhood; and from this appears our duty to love Him, and the justice of His claim to that love. But how infinitely is the benefit increased when we bethink ourselves of His fulfillment of the promise, ‘thou, Lord, shalt save both man and beast: how excellent is Thy mercy, O Lord! ‘. For we, who ‘turned our glory into the similitude of a calf that eateth hay’, by our evil deeds debased ourselves so that we might be compared unto the beasts that perish. I owe all that I am to Him who made me: but how can I pay my debt to Him who redeemed me, and in such wondrous wise? Creation was not so vast a work as redemption; for it is written of man and of all things that were made, ‘He spake the word, and they were made’. But to redeem More >
Reformed Armour
Jun 13th
Ok, I ran across this humorous picture the other day, and just couldn’t resist spoofing it to my own ends.
Enjoy!
Share this: Quick Thought on Evolution and Original Sin
May 16th
Recently, I joined in a discussion about the relationship between original sin and evolution. I happened to like my answer :), so here’s an outtake of the salient parts of the conversation. ————————————–
Poster: The doctrine of Original Sin and evolution are by far most likely the hardest ideas to reconcile in Christian theology. Evolutionary theory refutes the notion that Original Sin brought discord, death and chaos into an initially perfect creation of harmony and equilibrium…How do we reconcile evolution and Original Sin? Or perhaps, if one accepts evolution as the underlying creative and formative process, how do we explain sin?
Me: There is nothing to reconcile as the processes which you characterize as “discord” and “chaos” are simply the way the universe is. Death is a necessary part of biology–without it, we would not be able to live, much less grow and develop as individuals and as a species.
Sin factors into the equation in that humans have rebelled against God, choosing hatred and violence to peace, mercy, and knowledge of God. In this state of dissolution, the “way the universe is” takes on an extremely negative tone because our sinfulness makes our mortality extremely poignant. In order to further justify ourselves, we pass More >
The Truth About Easter: Conclusion
Apr 2nd
In my last post , I described in a fair amount of detail what I call the “truth about Easter.” In popular, Western Christianity, there is an unconscious, mostly unthinking prejudice toward understanding the cross as a picture of God’s wrath and punishment against sin unleashed upon Godself in Christ. As I argued in my post, however, if we presume that God were not to respond in such a way to human sinfulness (that is, to punish human sin with death, destruction and hell), we can still adequately describe the nature and reality of “hell” exclusively from the basis of considerations of the “natural” consequences of human sinfulness and violence toward God and self.
The truth about Easter, then, is not that God needs the cross in order to forgive humanity by punishing Christ, but rather that the cross is an expression of sinful humanity’s “gratitude” for God’s love: God in Christ comes with grace and mercy, and we respond in our hatred by nailing Christ to a cross, exulting in his brutal and violent end. Therefore, the cross is really a revelation of our true predicament apart from God, and casts a bright light on what our fundamental need is: to More >
The Truth About Easter
Apr 2nd
So if you didn’t realize it, Easter is only a few short days away. And yes, we are in the midst of Holy Week…go figure :).
Now with Easter comes some very regular and predictable things. We know that little girls all over the country will compel their parents to purchase new, spring-ish dresses for them to wear for one solitary Sunday (believe me, I know this all too well…). We know that many American children will go into certifiable sugar comas following the obligatory egg hunts on Saturday. We also know that their parents will achieve similar levels of pre-diabetic shock from eating the candy that their children “simply don’t need”… And, from most pulpits in America, you’re bound to hear something about the cross, Christ’s blood, and the drama of Atonement (and maybe even something about the resurrection, if you’re lucky).
If your church’s theology is typical of Western, Protestant thinking, the subject of this discussion will probably revolve around one particular pole: that of the cross as a picture of divine punishment. While it seems perhaps a bit harsh to the non-initiated, the often-rehearsed logic of God’s punishment of Christ on the cross seems reasonable enough. After all, humanity has More >
The Emergence of Divine Knowledge
Mar 15th
Throughout the history of Christian theological thought, a key tenet of orthodox belief has been that of divine omniscience–that God knows (infinitely) all that can be known. Notwithstanding the various caveats that need to be assigned in order to properly qualify such a statement, there are several logical and theological challenges that must be balanced in order to properly maintain not only the internal coherence of such a assertion, but also the meaningfulness of it to theological belief.
One of the challenges is related to the necessary distinction that must be maintained between the eternal nature and being of God and the ontology of that which God has created. After all, if a “strong” theory of omniscience is established that concomitantly breaks down this necessary distinction, the preservation of the doctrine of omniscience leads to, IMO, a much worse end than would otherwise be had.
So let’s start with an apparently simple statement:
“God knows that X will happen in the future.”
From a “strong” doctrine of omniscience, the answer to such a statement is an easy yes. After all, since the future is assumed to be “something” that can be known (especially in re: prophecy, et al), God must “know” the future in More >
A Quick Thought About the "Penalty" of Human Sinfulness
Feb 28th
The consequence of sinfulnesss–being cut off from the life and goodness of God–is so perpetually annihilating in and of itself that no additional “penalty” needs to be imagined in order to increase the disaster of sinfulness. If God does nothing in regard to sinfulness, the consequence to the sinner is just as terrible as if God somehow actively brings about the same end.
Why, then, do we conceive of the consequences of sin within the framework of penalty? It’s simple: because at the core we are sinful, vindictive creatures that desire a vision of God wherein God reacts along the lines that we, as sinful creatures, would act. We want God to respond with violence and hatred because these are what fundamentally characterize the neurosis of sin. If our God behaves in similar ways, we have–in a very small and neurotic way–legitimized the categories of our behavior, and God is simply the biggest and most violent one in the end.
Fortunately, the truth is that God does not pile “penalty” upon our heads, but quite to the contrary invades our sinfulness in the person of Christ to rescue us from the fear of death and dissolution (Hebrews 2:14-15) so that we might More >
Rethinking Divine Forgiveness: Postscript
Jan 15th
Based on what I outlined previously, I can imagine that a few objections might be raised to my conclusions (as unofficial as they might be…).
First, we might follow this logic:
- If God has already forgiven humanity for its sinfulness;
- and, in fact, the very coming of Christ is the great revelation of this reality;
- why, then, would we be concerned with the notion of asking for forgiveness?
That is, if our notions of “penalty” were really just confounded all along and we are not actually under any impending punishment for our sins, why the biblical injunctions to “confess” our sins?
I think this is a good question, but I also think it’s imminently answer-able within the structure I have suggested. As before, however, it requires getting beyond the notions of “penalty” and “requirement” that have plagued our thinking about forgiveness and atonement. But first, let’s take a look at what’s deficient in the other model.
In these old paradigms, the act of “asking” for forgiveness is, in actuality, a request that the presumed “laws” of justice be put on hold. After all, transgression–within a penal model–necessitates satisfaction, whether in act or consequence. Therefore, the plea for forgiveness is a hope against hope that just maybe “this More >
