Resurrection in Jewish Literature
The Dead Sea Scrolls: The Messiah Apocalypse-dated between 100 and 80 B.C.E:
"He [God] frees the captives, makes the blind see, and makes the bent over stand straight…for he will heal the sick, revive the dead, and give good news to the humble and the poor he will satisfy, the abandoned he will lead, and the hungry he will make rich.”
In Mishnah 10.1, it says, “All Israelites have a share in the world to come; ... and these are they that have no share in the world to come: he that says that there is no resurrection of the dead prescribed in the Law.”
Moses Maimonides was a Jewish rabbi and was also a medieval Jewish philosopher who influenced the non-Jewish world. He said:
The resurrection of the dead is one of the cardinal principles established by Moses our teacher. A person who does not believe this principle has no real religion, certainly not Judaism. However, resurrection is for the righteous. This is the earning of the statement in Breshit Rabbah, which declares: “the creative power of rain is both for the righteous and the wicked, but the resurrection of the dead is only for the righteous.” “Our sages taught the wicked are called dead even when they are still alive; the righteous are alive even when they are dead (Bab. Talmud Brakhot 18 b). 3 points are made: 1. Resurrection is a cardinal principle taught in the Torah which all Jews must believe 2. It is for the righteous alone 3. All men must die and their bodies decompose.
As we approach the New Testament, Joachim Jeremias comments:
Ancient Judaism did not know of an anticipated resurrection as an event in history. Nowhere does one find in the literature anything comparable to the resurrection of Jesus. Certainly resurrections of the dead were known, but these always concerned resuscitations, the return to the earthly life. In no place in the late Judaic literature does it concern a resurrection to doxa [glory] as an event in history.
The reasons that were behind the Greek’s general denial of the resurrection were : (1) the low value they placed on the human body, and (2) their firm belief in man’s inherent immortality, i.e., that his soul was naturally imperishable. We one day lose the “bad body,” but we retain the inherently imperishable soul.
Biblical view of body:The body is good because God made it. When Adam led the human race into sin, this sin affected his body, just as it affected every aspect of his being (Genesis 3:16-19). Man’s body succumbs to illness and death because of sin, but this is not what God originally intended.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Resurrection
Defining Resurrection
Resurrection is completely different from reincarnation which is a many-times event. Reincarnation is also categorized as a rebirth of a soul into a new and different but still physical and mortal body. Resurrection is a one-time event where the believer receives not a second body but a transformed body.
In resurrection, there is continuity between our present bodies and the transformed body to come.Resurrection is not resuscitation. There are three resuscitations in the Gospels: Luke 8:49-56; John 11:38-44; Luke 7:11-15. Lazarus was resuscitated. He went on to live on in his old mode of but still had to face a second death. However, Jesus was not resuscitated, but resurrected, he was changed. His body was transformed into what Paul calls a glorified body. He never died again.
Therefore, it is important to remember that Jesus is not the only one in human history that has been raised from the dead ( if we call it resuscitation), but he certainly is the only one that has ever been resurrected!
Resurrection is not Translation/ Elijah and Enoch did not die but were simply translated to heaven (2 Kings 2:11; Genesis 5:24). Translation is defined as the bodily assumption of someone out of this world into heaven while resurrection is defined as raising up of a dead man in the space-time universe.
Resurrection is not the same as paganism- a vague, shadowy semi-self or ghost survives and goes to the place of the dead, the dark, gloomy underworld. The myths of dying and rising gods in pagan religions are merely seasonal symbols for the processes of nature and have no relation to historical individuals.
We as believers now live in a resurrection state. For after noting that God “made us alive together with” Messiah (this is a past event), Eph 2:5 says: “by grace you are now in a state of salvation” (indicating a present resurrection state).
Under Plato’s influence, the Christian church has often affirmed the “immortality of the soul” in the sense that the soul of every person, by divine fiat, will survive death and exist forever. Although the concept behind these phrases is biblical, that is, that human beings do not cease to exist, either at or after death, there is no biblical precedent for attaching the terms “immortality” to the word “soul.” Immortality is never predicated of the “soul”; “this mortal body” is destined to “put on” immortality (1 Cor 15: 53-54). It is not by birth, but by grace and through resurrection that immortality is gained.
Resurrection is completely different from reincarnation which is a many-times event. Reincarnation is also categorized as a rebirth of a soul into a new and different but still physical and mortal body. Resurrection is a one-time event where the believer receives not a second body but a transformed body.
In resurrection, there is continuity between our present bodies and the transformed body to come.Resurrection is not resuscitation. There are three resuscitations in the Gospels: Luke 8:49-56; John 11:38-44; Luke 7:11-15. Lazarus was resuscitated. He went on to live on in his old mode of but still had to face a second death. However, Jesus was not resuscitated, but resurrected, he was changed. His body was transformed into what Paul calls a glorified body. He never died again.
Therefore, it is important to remember that Jesus is not the only one in human history that has been raised from the dead ( if we call it resuscitation), but he certainly is the only one that has ever been resurrected!
Resurrection is not Translation/ Elijah and Enoch did not die but were simply translated to heaven (2 Kings 2:11; Genesis 5:24). Translation is defined as the bodily assumption of someone out of this world into heaven while resurrection is defined as raising up of a dead man in the space-time universe.
Resurrection is not the same as paganism- a vague, shadowy semi-self or ghost survives and goes to the place of the dead, the dark, gloomy underworld. The myths of dying and rising gods in pagan religions are merely seasonal symbols for the processes of nature and have no relation to historical individuals.
We as believers now live in a resurrection state. For after noting that God “made us alive together with” Messiah (this is a past event), Eph 2:5 says: “by grace you are now in a state of salvation” (indicating a present resurrection state).
Under Plato’s influence, the Christian church has often affirmed the “immortality of the soul” in the sense that the soul of every person, by divine fiat, will survive death and exist forever. Although the concept behind these phrases is biblical, that is, that human beings do not cease to exist, either at or after death, there is no biblical precedent for attaching the terms “immortality” to the word “soul.” Immortality is never predicated of the “soul”; “this mortal body” is destined to “put on” immortality (1 Cor 15: 53-54). It is not by birth, but by grace and through resurrection that immortality is gained.
The Resurrection
The Importance of the Resurrection: What if Jesus had not been resurrected from the dead?
There cannot be an atonement without it (1 Cor 15: 1-17)
There could not have been an ascension without it (Acts 1: 9-11)
No Ascension means there is no foundation for the local congregation (Eph 4: 10-13)
There is no sending of the Holy Spirit by Yeshua (John 7: 37-39;14:26;15:26;16:7).
There is no new birth/ supernatural regeneration (John 3: 3-7)
Jesus cannot fulfill the role of priestly Messiah (1John 2:2; Rom 8:34).
Jesus is a false prophet (Deut 18:22; Matt 12: 38-40).
Jesus could not be installed as Son of God (Rom. 1:4), as universal Lord (Rom. 14:9; Eph. 1: 20-21; Phi. 2: 9-11), and judge of the living and the dead (Acts 17:31).
There is no return without it (Zech 14:1-21). Just as Yeshua ascended in a physical sense, he will return in the same way.
There cannot be an atonement without it (1 Cor 15: 1-17)
There could not have been an ascension without it (Acts 1: 9-11)
No Ascension means there is no foundation for the local congregation (Eph 4: 10-13)
There is no sending of the Holy Spirit by Yeshua (John 7: 37-39;14:26;15:26;16:7).
There is no new birth/ supernatural regeneration (John 3: 3-7)
Jesus cannot fulfill the role of priestly Messiah (1John 2:2; Rom 8:34).
Jesus is a false prophet (Deut 18:22; Matt 12: 38-40).
Jesus could not be installed as Son of God (Rom. 1:4), as universal Lord (Rom. 14:9; Eph. 1: 20-21; Phi. 2: 9-11), and judge of the living and the dead (Acts 17:31).
There is no return without it (Zech 14:1-21). Just as Yeshua ascended in a physical sense, he will return in the same way.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
What Ever Happened to the Christian Mind?
Some suggestions in restoring the Christian mind
1. In order to restore the mind within the local congregation, there needs to be a stronger emphasis on critical thinking and apologetics. As Christian philosopher Douglas Groothius says:
Since we as Christians are called and commanded to have a reason for the hope within them (1 Peter 3:15), it is the responsibility Christian teachers, pastors, mentors and educators of all kinds are remiss if they avoid, denigrate, or minimize the importance of apologetics to biblical living and Christian witness.
2. Christians also need to understand Christian anthropology (the study of humanity from a Christian / biblical perspective. It is primarily focused on the nature of humanity). As Norman Geisler says,
God is a rational Being, and man is made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). Since God thinks rationally, man was given the same capacity. Brute beasts, by contrast, are called “irrational” (Jude 10). The basis laws of human reason are common to believer and unbeliever; without them, there would be no writing, thinking, or rational inference. Nowhere are these laws spelled out in the Bible. Rather, they are part of God’s general revelation and special object of philosophical thought.
3. Establish a Worldview: The term worldview is used in the sense described by prominent German philosopher Wilhelm Dilthey (1833-1911). Dilthey affirmed that philosophy must be defined as a comprehensiveness vision of reality that involves the social and historical reality of humankind, including religion. A worldview is thus the nature and structure of the body of convictions of a group or individual. Worldview includes a sense of meaning and value and principles of action. It is much more than merely an "outlook" or an "attitude." Each person's worldview is based on a key category, an organizing principle, a guiding image, a clue, or an insight selected from the complexity of his or her multidimensional experience. Believe it or not, a worldview will impact our view of our vocation, our family, government, education, the environment, etc. A worldview also impacts ethical issues in our culture such as homosexuality, abortion, stem cell research etc. Remember, the issues of competing worldviews shape the past, present, and future of a nation.
4. Engage the Culture: According to a Barna study, 95% of all professing Christians have never attempted to share their faith. Out of that 5%, only 2% share on a regular basis. Now Jesus said in John 14:15 "If you love me, you will keep my commandments".Since Jesus commands His people to “make disciples of the nations” (Matt.28:19), the Christian who is not ashamed of the gospel (Romans 1:16), will desire to share the good news of Jesus with his neighbor. It is my conviction the reason that there is such a lack of interest in apologetics and critical thinking is because evangelism and outreach are neglected. Christians also have a responsibility to be aware of the issues within our culture.
My suggestion to change this problem is to challenge congregants to take a survey with five spiritual questions and engage people on a regular basis. Once they see how people respond to the questions, they will begin to see how inept they are to handle objections to the faith. By doing a survey, this allows the congregants to witness firsthand the tremendous amount of diversity in our culture. One of the reasons the Holy Spirit was able to use Paul with a variety of audiences was because Paul had a vast knowledge of the Hebrew Bible, as well as Jewish and Greek culture. If someone asks a question that cannot be answered, it allows the believer the privilege of doing research about a particular apologetic issue.
As William Lane Craig says:
It is not just scholars and pastors who need to be intellectually engaged with issues. Laymen need to become intellectually engaged. Our congregations are filled with people who are idling in intellectual neutral. As believers, their minds are going to waste. One result is an immature, superficial faith. People who simply ride the roller coaster of emotional experience are cheating themselves out of a deeper and richer faith by neglecting the intellectual side of that faith.
5. The university: From a university perspective, it is imperative that students be trained to think critically as well as apologetically. By the time Christian students leave to college, they should have a grasp of a biblical worldview as well as the ability to understand the importance of integrating the mind into all areas of spiritual life. If young college students compartmentalize their spiritual life, they will end up viewing spirituality as simply going to Bible studies, private prayer time, and congregational attendance. Classes and study time will be viewed as “secular” and something they need to get through in order to graduate. This must be corrected. How can students impact the university if they do not understand the way the culture thinks?
What about Christians who want to study philosophy in college? Should they avoid it? Groothius says:
Young Christians with an aptitude in philosophy and academic pursuits in general should be encouraged that these disciplines are just as spiritual as anything directly church-related. For example, being a Christian philosopher at a secular college or university is just as godly and spiritual than being a pastor, missionary, or professor at a Christian institution (1 Corinthians 10:31; Colossians 3:17). One may prudently apply one’s apologetic skills in these settings and extend the Christian witness.
6. Understand the proper relationship between faith and reason: As David Gill says above, "Mindless emotionalism or traditionalism, segmented fragmented lives and ignorance disguised as simple faith are all terrible deformations of Christian discipleship. But so is arid, dry intellectualism. Developing a Christian mind is but one crucial aspect of Christian discipleship." Another challenge in restoring the Christian mind is the misunderstanding of the biblical use of the word “heart.” How many times has the Christian been told, “Faith is an issue of the heart, not the head.” How can we correct this problem? Remember, biblical faith also involves a commitment of the whole person. In the Tanakh (the acronym that is formed from the first three parts of the Hebrew Bible: Torah (the first five books of the Bible), Nevi’ im (the Prophets), and K’ tuvim (the Writings), the Hebrew word for heart is "leb," or "lebad." While the word "heart" is used as a metaphor to describe the physical organ, from a biblical standpoint, it is also the center or defining element of the entire person. It can be seen as the seat of the person's intellectual, emotional, affective, and volitional life. In the New Testament, the word “heart” (Gr.kardia) came to stand for man’s entire mental and moral activity, both the rational and the emotional elements.
1. In order to restore the mind within the local congregation, there needs to be a stronger emphasis on critical thinking and apologetics. As Christian philosopher Douglas Groothius says:
Since we as Christians are called and commanded to have a reason for the hope within them (1 Peter 3:15), it is the responsibility Christian teachers, pastors, mentors and educators of all kinds are remiss if they avoid, denigrate, or minimize the importance of apologetics to biblical living and Christian witness.
2. Christians also need to understand Christian anthropology (the study of humanity from a Christian / biblical perspective. It is primarily focused on the nature of humanity). As Norman Geisler says,
God is a rational Being, and man is made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). Since God thinks rationally, man was given the same capacity. Brute beasts, by contrast, are called “irrational” (Jude 10). The basis laws of human reason are common to believer and unbeliever; without them, there would be no writing, thinking, or rational inference. Nowhere are these laws spelled out in the Bible. Rather, they are part of God’s general revelation and special object of philosophical thought.
3. Establish a Worldview: The term worldview is used in the sense described by prominent German philosopher Wilhelm Dilthey (1833-1911). Dilthey affirmed that philosophy must be defined as a comprehensiveness vision of reality that involves the social and historical reality of humankind, including religion. A worldview is thus the nature and structure of the body of convictions of a group or individual. Worldview includes a sense of meaning and value and principles of action. It is much more than merely an "outlook" or an "attitude." Each person's worldview is based on a key category, an organizing principle, a guiding image, a clue, or an insight selected from the complexity of his or her multidimensional experience. Believe it or not, a worldview will impact our view of our vocation, our family, government, education, the environment, etc. A worldview also impacts ethical issues in our culture such as homosexuality, abortion, stem cell research etc. Remember, the issues of competing worldviews shape the past, present, and future of a nation.
4. Engage the Culture: According to a Barna study, 95% of all professing Christians have never attempted to share their faith. Out of that 5%, only 2% share on a regular basis. Now Jesus said in John 14:15 "If you love me, you will keep my commandments".Since Jesus commands His people to “make disciples of the nations” (Matt.28:19), the Christian who is not ashamed of the gospel (Romans 1:16), will desire to share the good news of Jesus with his neighbor. It is my conviction the reason that there is such a lack of interest in apologetics and critical thinking is because evangelism and outreach are neglected. Christians also have a responsibility to be aware of the issues within our culture.
My suggestion to change this problem is to challenge congregants to take a survey with five spiritual questions and engage people on a regular basis. Once they see how people respond to the questions, they will begin to see how inept they are to handle objections to the faith. By doing a survey, this allows the congregants to witness firsthand the tremendous amount of diversity in our culture. One of the reasons the Holy Spirit was able to use Paul with a variety of audiences was because Paul had a vast knowledge of the Hebrew Bible, as well as Jewish and Greek culture. If someone asks a question that cannot be answered, it allows the believer the privilege of doing research about a particular apologetic issue.
As William Lane Craig says:
It is not just scholars and pastors who need to be intellectually engaged with issues. Laymen need to become intellectually engaged. Our congregations are filled with people who are idling in intellectual neutral. As believers, their minds are going to waste. One result is an immature, superficial faith. People who simply ride the roller coaster of emotional experience are cheating themselves out of a deeper and richer faith by neglecting the intellectual side of that faith.
5. The university: From a university perspective, it is imperative that students be trained to think critically as well as apologetically. By the time Christian students leave to college, they should have a grasp of a biblical worldview as well as the ability to understand the importance of integrating the mind into all areas of spiritual life. If young college students compartmentalize their spiritual life, they will end up viewing spirituality as simply going to Bible studies, private prayer time, and congregational attendance. Classes and study time will be viewed as “secular” and something they need to get through in order to graduate. This must be corrected. How can students impact the university if they do not understand the way the culture thinks?
What about Christians who want to study philosophy in college? Should they avoid it? Groothius says:
Young Christians with an aptitude in philosophy and academic pursuits in general should be encouraged that these disciplines are just as spiritual as anything directly church-related. For example, being a Christian philosopher at a secular college or university is just as godly and spiritual than being a pastor, missionary, or professor at a Christian institution (1 Corinthians 10:31; Colossians 3:17). One may prudently apply one’s apologetic skills in these settings and extend the Christian witness.
6. Understand the proper relationship between faith and reason: As David Gill says above, "Mindless emotionalism or traditionalism, segmented fragmented lives and ignorance disguised as simple faith are all terrible deformations of Christian discipleship. But so is arid, dry intellectualism. Developing a Christian mind is but one crucial aspect of Christian discipleship." Another challenge in restoring the Christian mind is the misunderstanding of the biblical use of the word “heart.” How many times has the Christian been told, “Faith is an issue of the heart, not the head.” How can we correct this problem? Remember, biblical faith also involves a commitment of the whole person. In the Tanakh (the acronym that is formed from the first three parts of the Hebrew Bible: Torah (the first five books of the Bible), Nevi’ im (the Prophets), and K’ tuvim (the Writings), the Hebrew word for heart is "leb," or "lebad." While the word "heart" is used as a metaphor to describe the physical organ, from a biblical standpoint, it is also the center or defining element of the entire person. It can be seen as the seat of the person's intellectual, emotional, affective, and volitional life. In the New Testament, the word “heart” (Gr.kardia) came to stand for man’s entire mental and moral activity, both the rational and the emotional elements.
Atheism Article
This is interesting- written by former atheist Alister McGrath,
http://www.rzim.org/GlobalElements/GFV/tabid/449/ArticleID/6640/CBModuleId/881/Default.aspx
http://www.rzim.org/GlobalElements/GFV/tabid/449/ArticleID/6640/CBModuleId/881/Default.aspx
Atheism
Atheism
With the publishing of biologist Richard Dawkin's,The God Delusion, Sam Harris's The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason and Christopher Hitchens's How Religion Poisons Everything, atheists are becoming more vocal about offering a viable alterative to Christian theism and faith in general. Debates between theists and atheists have been growing. There have also been several responses to the "new atheists." Interestingly enough, one response that has been offered is called The Devil's Delusion by Jewish author David Berlinski.
If you have not noticed, when it comes to epistemology (the study of knowledge), the standard for religious knowledge is always higher than anything else.
To read more about this issue, see James Beilby and David K. Clark: A Brief Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge at http://www.rzim.org/resources/essay_arttext.php?id=12.
For a review of The God Delusion, see Alvin Plantinga's article here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/1.21.html
Is the God of the Old Testament a moral monster? To see an extensive treatment of this issue, see Christian philosopher Dr. Paul Copan's article here: http://www.epsociety.org/library/articles.asp?pid=45&ap=1
To see a critique of atheism by former atheist Alister McGrath, click here:
http://www.rzim.org/GlobalElements/GFV/tabid/449/ArticleID/6640/CBModuleId/881/Default.
aspx
With the publishing of biologist Richard Dawkin's,The God Delusion, Sam Harris's The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason and Christopher Hitchens's How Religion Poisons Everything, atheists are becoming more vocal about offering a viable alterative to Christian theism and faith in general. Debates between theists and atheists have been growing. There have also been several responses to the "new atheists." Interestingly enough, one response that has been offered is called The Devil's Delusion by Jewish author David Berlinski.
If you have not noticed, when it comes to epistemology (the study of knowledge), the standard for religious knowledge is always higher than anything else.
To read more about this issue, see James Beilby and David K. Clark: A Brief Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge at http://www.rzim.org/resources/essay_arttext.php?id=12.
For a review of The God Delusion, see Alvin Plantinga's article here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/1.21.html
Is the God of the Old Testament a moral monster? To see an extensive treatment of this issue, see Christian philosopher Dr. Paul Copan's article here: http://www.epsociety.org/library/articles.asp?pid=45&ap=1
To see a critique of atheism by former atheist Alister McGrath, click here:
http://www.rzim.org/GlobalElements/GFV/tabid/449/ArticleID/6640/CBModuleId/881/Default.
aspx
Science and Faith
Science and Faith
Unfortunately, a good majority of people in our culture see no relationship between faith and knowledge. In other words, “faith” is viewed as “private and subjective” which has no objective basis to it. One of the contributing factors to this problem is the impact of scientism on our culture. While the Christian worldview is not opposed to science, it does recognize the limitations of science in relation to the discovery of human knowledge. After all, academic disciplines such as logic, ethics, history, and art cannot be shown to be true utilizing the scientific method.
Furthermore, apart from a Judeo-Christian worldview, there would be no science. Have you ever noticed why science did not originate in China, Russia, or Eastern cultures such as India, etc.? The reason is because these countries never embraced theism as a worldview. In order to embrace theism as a worldview, one must embrace the God of the Bible as the First Cause and Designer of the universe, life, and the laws of nature.
Anyway, here are some of the first scientists who were theists:
Johann Kepler (1571–1630), celestial mechanics, physical astronomy
Blaise Pascal (1623–1662), hydrostatics
Robert Boyle (1627–1691), chemistry, gas dynamics
Nicholas Steno (1638–1687), stratigraphy
Isaac Newton (1642–1727), calculus, dynamics
Michael Faraday (1791–1867), field theory
Charles Babbage (1792–1871), computer science
Louis Agassiz (1807–1873), glacial geology, ichthyology
James Simpson (1811–1870), gynecology
Gregor Mendel (1822–1884), genetics
Louis Pasteur (1822–1895), bacteriology
William Kelvin (1824–1907), energetics, thermodynamics
Joseph Lister (1827–1912), antiseptic surgery
James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879), electrodynamics, statistical thermodynamics
William Ramsay (1852–1916), isotopic chemistry
In Ian Barbour's book Religion in an Age of Science, Barbour describes scientism's exalted view of the scientific method.
As Barbour says:
Science starts from reproducible public data. Theories are formulated and their implications are tested against experimental observations. Additional criteria of coherence, comprehensiveness, and fruitfulness influence choice among theories. Religious beliefs are not acceptable, in this view, because religion lacks public data, such as experiential testing, and such criteria of evaluation. Science alone is objective, open-minded, universal, cumulative, and progressive. Religious traditions, by contrast, are said to be subjective, closed-minded, parochial, uncritical, and resistant to change.
In his book The Limits of Science, Nicholas Rescher offers a helpful comment about this issue. Rescher says,
The theorist who maintains that science is the be-all and end-all –that what is not in science textbooks is not worth knowing-is an ideologist with a peculiar and distorted doctrine of his own. For him, science is no longer a sector of the cognitive enterprise but an all-inclusive world-view. This is the doctrine not of science but of scientism. To take this stance is not to celebrate science but to distort it.
Unfortunately, a good majority of people in our culture see no relationship between faith and knowledge. In other words, “faith” is viewed as “private and subjective” which has no objective basis to it. One of the contributing factors to this problem is the impact of scientism on our culture. While the Christian worldview is not opposed to science, it does recognize the limitations of science in relation to the discovery of human knowledge. After all, academic disciplines such as logic, ethics, history, and art cannot be shown to be true utilizing the scientific method.
Furthermore, apart from a Judeo-Christian worldview, there would be no science. Have you ever noticed why science did not originate in China, Russia, or Eastern cultures such as India, etc.? The reason is because these countries never embraced theism as a worldview. In order to embrace theism as a worldview, one must embrace the God of the Bible as the First Cause and Designer of the universe, life, and the laws of nature.
Anyway, here are some of the first scientists who were theists:
Johann Kepler (1571–1630), celestial mechanics, physical astronomy
Blaise Pascal (1623–1662), hydrostatics
Robert Boyle (1627–1691), chemistry, gas dynamics
Nicholas Steno (1638–1687), stratigraphy
Isaac Newton (1642–1727), calculus, dynamics
Michael Faraday (1791–1867), field theory
Charles Babbage (1792–1871), computer science
Louis Agassiz (1807–1873), glacial geology, ichthyology
James Simpson (1811–1870), gynecology
Gregor Mendel (1822–1884), genetics
Louis Pasteur (1822–1895), bacteriology
William Kelvin (1824–1907), energetics, thermodynamics
Joseph Lister (1827–1912), antiseptic surgery
James Clerk Maxwell (1831–1879), electrodynamics, statistical thermodynamics
William Ramsay (1852–1916), isotopic chemistry
In Ian Barbour's book Religion in an Age of Science, Barbour describes scientism's exalted view of the scientific method.
As Barbour says:
Science starts from reproducible public data. Theories are formulated and their implications are tested against experimental observations. Additional criteria of coherence, comprehensiveness, and fruitfulness influence choice among theories. Religious beliefs are not acceptable, in this view, because religion lacks public data, such as experiential testing, and such criteria of evaluation. Science alone is objective, open-minded, universal, cumulative, and progressive. Religious traditions, by contrast, are said to be subjective, closed-minded, parochial, uncritical, and resistant to change.
In his book The Limits of Science, Nicholas Rescher offers a helpful comment about this issue. Rescher says,
The theorist who maintains that science is the be-all and end-all –that what is not in science textbooks is not worth knowing-is an ideologist with a peculiar and distorted doctrine of his own. For him, science is no longer a sector of the cognitive enterprise but an all-inclusive world-view. This is the doctrine not of science but of scientism. To take this stance is not to celebrate science but to distort it.
Jesus and Judaism
The Jewishness of Jesus
As Philip Yancey says, “Is it possible to read the Gospels without blinders on? Jews read with suspicion, preparing to be scandalized. Christians read through the refracted lenses of church history. Both groups, I believe would do well to pause and reflect on Matthew’s first words, “a record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham.” The son of David speaks of Jesus’ messianic line, which Jews should not ignore; a title without significance for him.” Notes C.H. Dodd,"The son of Abraham speaks of Jesus’ Jewish line, which Christians dare not ignore either."
As Jaroslav Pelikan says:
"Would there have been such anti-Semitism, would there have been so many pogroms, would there have been as Auschwitz, if every Christian church and every Christian home had focused its devotion and icons of Mary not only as Mother of God and Queen of Heaven but as the Jewish maiden and the new Miriam, and on icons of Christ not only as Pantocrator but as Rabbi Jeshua bar-Joseph, Rabbi Jesus of Nazareth?" (1)
The Jewish Aspects of Jesus’ life:
Jesus participated in Mikvah: (Matt 3:13-16)
Circumcision (Luke 2:21): Jesus’ parents are obedient to Mosaic Law by having him circumcised on 8th day
Mary’s Purification (Luke 2:22-24): Mary follows purification law (Leviticus 12)
Jesus’ family went to Jerusalem every year at Passover: (Luke 2:41)
Jesus’ model prayer” bears resemblance to typical Jewish prayers:(Matthew 6:8-13)
Jesus wore “tzit-tzit” or fringes: (Matthew 9:20)
Jesus revered the Temple and ceremonial worship: (John 2:16)
Much of Jesus’ teaching is done in context of Jewish Holy Days: Sabbath (Matthew 12); Feast of Tabernacles (John 7); Feast of Passover (Matthew 26); Hanukkah (John 10)
Jesus taught in the synagogue: (Luke 4:14-20; John 18:20)
Jesus gathered disciples:(Matthew 8:23)
Paul says Jesus became a servant to the Jewish people: (Romans 15:8)
Jesus settled disputes: (Mark 9:33-37)
Jesus debated other rabbis: (Matthew 12:1-14)
Jesus viewed His mission to lost sheep of Israel: (Matthew 15:24)
Jesus commissioned the seventy to go to the lost sheep of Israel: (Matthew 10:5-6)
Jesus viewed himself as being revealed in the Torah, the Prophets and the Psalms, (Luke 24:44); (John 5:39)
Jesus taught Scripture was authoritative: Jesus quotes passages from the Torah in the temptation in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1-11)
Jesus discussed how Scripture (The Tanakh) is imperishable in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:2-48)
Jesus also discussed how Scripture is infallible: (John 10:35)
As Philip Yancey says, “Is it possible to read the Gospels without blinders on? Jews read with suspicion, preparing to be scandalized. Christians read through the refracted lenses of church history. Both groups, I believe would do well to pause and reflect on Matthew’s first words, “a record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham.” The son of David speaks of Jesus’ messianic line, which Jews should not ignore; a title without significance for him.” Notes C.H. Dodd,"The son of Abraham speaks of Jesus’ Jewish line, which Christians dare not ignore either."
As Jaroslav Pelikan says:
"Would there have been such anti-Semitism, would there have been so many pogroms, would there have been as Auschwitz, if every Christian church and every Christian home had focused its devotion and icons of Mary not only as Mother of God and Queen of Heaven but as the Jewish maiden and the new Miriam, and on icons of Christ not only as Pantocrator but as Rabbi Jeshua bar-Joseph, Rabbi Jesus of Nazareth?" (1)
The Jewish Aspects of Jesus’ life:
Jesus participated in Mikvah: (Matt 3:13-16)
Circumcision (Luke 2:21): Jesus’ parents are obedient to Mosaic Law by having him circumcised on 8th day
Mary’s Purification (Luke 2:22-24): Mary follows purification law (Leviticus 12)
Jesus’ family went to Jerusalem every year at Passover: (Luke 2:41)
Jesus’ model prayer” bears resemblance to typical Jewish prayers:(Matthew 6:8-13)
Jesus wore “tzit-tzit” or fringes: (Matthew 9:20)
Jesus revered the Temple and ceremonial worship: (John 2:16)
Much of Jesus’ teaching is done in context of Jewish Holy Days: Sabbath (Matthew 12); Feast of Tabernacles (John 7); Feast of Passover (Matthew 26); Hanukkah (John 10)
Jesus taught in the synagogue: (Luke 4:14-20; John 18:20)
Jesus gathered disciples:(Matthew 8:23)
Paul says Jesus became a servant to the Jewish people: (Romans 15:8)
Jesus settled disputes: (Mark 9:33-37)
Jesus debated other rabbis: (Matthew 12:1-14)
Jesus viewed His mission to lost sheep of Israel: (Matthew 15:24)
Jesus commissioned the seventy to go to the lost sheep of Israel: (Matthew 10:5-6)
Jesus viewed himself as being revealed in the Torah, the Prophets and the Psalms, (Luke 24:44); (John 5:39)
Jesus taught Scripture was authoritative: Jesus quotes passages from the Torah in the temptation in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1-11)
Jesus discussed how Scripture (The Tanakh) is imperishable in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:2-48)
Jesus also discussed how Scripture is infallible: (John 10:35)
What is Faith?
What is Faith?
Examples of Faith in Our Popular Culture:
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: starring Harrison Ford & Sean Connery as Indy’s father) – At the end of the story, Indy must retrieve the Holy Grail to save his father’s life. He makes it through a long corridor of obstacles; only to find he is standing on the edge of a deep chasm he must cross. He steps out “in faith” and finds he is actually walking on a camouflaged footbridge. Therefore, we see that FAITH = BELIEVING IN THE FACE OF CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE.
Revolutions: the third movie in The Matrix trilogy. In the final scene the Oracle is asked if she always knew that Neo was “The One”? She replies, “Oh no. But I believed. I believed.”Therefore, we see that FAITH = BELIEVING WITHOUT REALLY KNOWING.
Polar Express: The boy, who is skeptical about whether Santa Clause is real, finally is lead to say, "I believe, I believe." Just then, Santa appears to him. Therefore, we see that FAITH = BELIEVING MAKES IT REAL. (1) For that matter, can one's faith make God exist? Can one's faith make the Bible true, or make Jesus rise from the dead? Hopefully you answered NO to these questions.
As seen above, is it any wonder why our culture does not have a clear understanding of the nature of biblical faith?
Examples of Faith in Our Popular Culture:
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: starring Harrison Ford & Sean Connery as Indy’s father) – At the end of the story, Indy must retrieve the Holy Grail to save his father’s life. He makes it through a long corridor of obstacles; only to find he is standing on the edge of a deep chasm he must cross. He steps out “in faith” and finds he is actually walking on a camouflaged footbridge. Therefore, we see that FAITH = BELIEVING IN THE FACE OF CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE.
Revolutions: the third movie in The Matrix trilogy. In the final scene the Oracle is asked if she always knew that Neo was “The One”? She replies, “Oh no. But I believed. I believed.”Therefore, we see that FAITH = BELIEVING WITHOUT REALLY KNOWING.
Polar Express: The boy, who is skeptical about whether Santa Clause is real, finally is lead to say, "I believe, I believe." Just then, Santa appears to him. Therefore, we see that FAITH = BELIEVING MAKES IT REAL. (1) For that matter, can one's faith make God exist? Can one's faith make the Bible true, or make Jesus rise from the dead? Hopefully you answered NO to these questions.
As seen above, is it any wonder why our culture does not have a clear understanding of the nature of biblical faith?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)