R.P. Nettelhorst's Blog, page 126

Structure of Biblical Narrative

Admittedly this is a long post, and somewhat technical, but I think it can help you make sense of some parts of the Bible that otherwise might be a bit confusing. One of the mistakes we make all too often is in some of our assumptions, or the things we take for granted. That is, when we hear the word “earth” we picture a blue ball spinning in space. We forget that the authors of the Bible would never have had this image in their heads. Likewise, even such basic concepts as how to tell a story don’t necessarily work the same way in all cultures, anymore than you’d expect the same elements and approach in a play verses a novel, or a short story versus a movie–or even what to expect from a romantic comedy versus a science fiction epic.

So, the authors of the Bible often don’t tell stories like we do. We tend to use the chronology of events to serve as the basic framework holding our tale together. Not so much in the biblical narratives. Chronology is not, in fact, the overriding structural principle in Hebrew writing (and this would include the New Testament as well, because, though written in Greek, it was not primarily composed by Greeks). Rather, chronology is subsumed by what to the ancient Jewish people (and their neighbors in the Near East) were more important principles, at least in Hebrew thought: namely, theme and content.

While chronology is not lacking, it is not the only, most important or overriding sequencer of the material. Rather, other things can become more important, thereby skewing the chronology in unexpected ways. Perhaps this is not so surprising. After all, the very nature of the Hebrew verbal system is suggestive of the possibility; instead of tense, ancient Hebrew (unlike the modern language that is today spoken in Israel) has aspects which describe action in terms of completion or incompletion, rather than in terms of past, present and future. This outlook cannot have avoided having an impact on narrative techniques. Yet, in the teaching of the language, the true nature of the aspect system in Hebrew is commonly obscured. For instance, Menahem Mansoor, in his first year book Biblical Hebrew Step by Step, states:

Strictly speaking, Biblical (i.e. Classical) Hebrew has no tense similar to those used in English, French, or German. The action is regarded as either complete or incomplete. Hence most scholars prefer to call a completed action perfect and an incompleted action imperfect….

The use of the Hebrew tenses is relatively easy to learn….Thus, many different types of past action are expressed by the Hebrew perfect tense. This reductionism is largely true of the Hebrew imperfect tense in expressing various types of future (and sometimes also present) action.

Rather than stressing the peculiarity of the Hebrew verbal system, the attempt is made in most language courses to simply force it into a familiar mode, so that students are invariably left with the impression that the imperfect is present or future and perfect is past tense, with no awareness of the non-chronological character of the verbal system. Rather than adjusting minds to the Hebrew mold, ancient Hebrew is all too often pressed into a Western European mold — thereby obscuring what is actually transpiring in the text.

Hebrew narrative structure contains what can be called a thematic expansion of topic — a format that commonly replaces chronology as an organizational principle even in straightforward narrative. This structuring can be illustrated in various portions of the Bible, both Old and New Testaments, and is especially illuminating when it comes to certain passages that otherwise would be problematical.

Examples:

Jonah 3:5-9

5The Ninevites believed God. They declared a fast, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth. 6When the news reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, took off his royal robes, covered himself with sackcloth and sat down in the dust. 7Then he issued a proclamation in Nineveh: “By the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let any man or beast, herd or flock, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. 8But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence. 9Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.”

Jonah displays an example of this thematic structuring–a structuring that plays havoc with chronology. Jonah 3:5-9 is a description of Nineveh’s reaction to Jonah’s preaching. 3:5 gives a summary of the response of the city to Jonah’s preaching, while 3:6-9 gives specific details about what happened and how. If an attempt is made to read this as strictly a chronological description of what occurred, a certain confusion results. Verse five recounts how the people repented and wore sack cloth. If verses 6-9 follow chronologically, then why does the king order his people to do what they’ve already done?

However, if the thematic arrangement is recognized, the problems evaporate, and the narrative is perfectly clear and consistent. Look at the pattern:

  A The Ninevites believed God (3:5a)

      B They declared a fast (3:5b)

         C They put on sackcloth, from the greatest to the least (3:5c)

         C’ King puts on sackcloth (3:6)

      B’ Proclamation that no one is to eat or drink (3:7)

         C’ Man and beast covered with sackcloth (3:8a)

  A’ Let them call urgently on God and repent (3:8b-9)

Proverbs 1:10-19

(10) My son, if sinners entice you,

do not give in to them.

(11) If they say, “Come along with us;

let’s lie in wait for someone’s blood,

let’s waylay some harmless soul;

(12) let’s swallow them alive, like the grave,

and whole, like those who go down to the pit;

(13) we will get all sorts of valuable things

and fill our houses with plunder;

(14) throw in your lot with us,

and we will share a common purse”–

(15) my son, do not go along with them,

do not set foot on their paths;

(16) for their feet rush into sin,

they are swift to shed blood.

(17) How useless to spread a net in full view of all the birds!

(18) These men lie in wait for their own blood;

they waylay only themselves!

(19) Such is the end of all who go after ill-gotten gain;

it takes away the lives of those who get it.

  A My son, if sinners entice, (1:10a)

      B do not go (1:10b)

  A’ 1:11-14 How sinners entice (1:11-14)

      B’ Do not go with them (1:15-19)

The first line of the pericope establishes the structure for what follows; the first half of the line, dealing with the enticement of sinners is expanded upon in the next four verses. At that point, there is a shift, and the second half of verse ten, about “not going” is then expanded upon for the same length of time.

Joshua 15:16-19

The book of Joshua can present significant problems for the average reader. Consider this episode from Joshua 15:16-19:

And Caleb said, “I will give my daughter Aksah in marriage to the man who attacks and captures Kiriath Sepher.” Othniel son of Kenaz, Caleb’s brother, took it; so Caleb gave his daughter Aksah to him in marriage.

One day when she came to Othniel, she urged him to ask her father for a field. When she got off her donkey, Caleb asked her, “What can I do for you?”

She replied, “Do me a special favor. Since you have given me land in the Negev, give me also springs of water.” So Caleb gave her the upper and lower springs.

It shows up again essentially word for word in Judges 1:12-15:

And Caleb said, “I will give my daughter Aksah in marriage to the man who attacks and captures Kiriath Sepher.” Othniel son of Kenaz, Caleb’s younger brother, took it; so Caleb gave his daughter Aksah to him in marriage.

One day when she came to Othniel, she urged him to ask her father for a field. When she got off her donkey, Caleb asked her, “What can I do for you?”

She replied, “Do me a special favor. Since you have given me land in the Negev, give me also springs of water.” So Caleb gave her the upper and lower springs.

Which probably wouldn’t be a problem except for the chronological issue. You see in the book of Joshua, the story of Caleb and his daughter show up in chapter 15–and then in chapter 24, we have Joshua’s final words, followed by his death and burial. But in Judges 1, the book opens with the statement that Joshua is dead–and then the story of Caleb is given. So the order of events is different in the two books. This is puzzling–but only if you fail to recognize that theme takes precedence over chronology rather frequently in Hebrew narrative.

In the final chapter of JoshuaThe book of Joshua falls into six parts easily enough:

  I. The Entry into Canaan 1-6

  II. Incident at Ai and renewal of the covenant 7-8

  III. Conquest of the South 9-10

  IV. Conquest of the North 11-12

  V. Division of the Land 13-22

  VI. Farewell and Death of Joshua 23-24

Section V is devoted to the distribution of the land among the tribes. The story of Caleb and his daughter appears in 15:13-19. This same story is repeated near the beginning of Judges (1:1-15), which explicitly informs us that Joshua died before the incident with Caleb occurred. Yet in Joshua, we do not see the death of Joshua until the end of the book (Joshua 24:28-30).

There is no difficulty, however, if it is understood that theme will override chronology in the arranging of a narrative, even a story, because the incident with Caleb is described in a section of the book devoted to the theme of the conquest. Caleb’s story of the conquest of Hebron fits in perfectly at that point thematically, although certainly not chronologically. But chronology was subsumed by the theme.

Judges

The structure of Judges, likewise, is probably not chronological — especially chapters 17-21. The last chapters of the book do not necessarily follow chapters 1-16; instead, they perhaps offer a snapshot of what transpired in the land during those times when there were no judges. They illustrate the phrase “there was no king; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”

  I. The Time of the Elders 1:1-2:10

  II. The Time of the Judges 2:11-16:31

  III. A Picture of Anarchy 17-21.

2:11-3:6 is a summary of the entire period of the Judges, with 3:7-16:31 expanding upon 2:14-3:6 and 17-21 being an expansion of 2:11-13, creating a chaiastic structure for the book.

  A 2:11-13

      B 2:14-3:6

      B’ 3:7-16:31

  A’ 17-21

It is interesting to notice the common phrase used four times in 17-21: “Israel had no king”. It appears in 17:6, 18:1, 19:1 and 21:25.

Besides the importance of recognizing the structure of Joshua and Judges, this knowledge then has implications for when the book of Joshua was composed. Perhaps later than many might otherwise think. Review the information in yesterday’s blog post, Human and Divine.

Matthew 5:3-11

This structuring principle, the thematic expansion of topic, continues in the New Testament, and not infrequently. For instance, it is how Jesus arranges the beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-11: “the poor in spirit” begins the narrative in 5:3; the lines beneath (4-11) are simply expansions and details of who and what the poor in spirit are.

Once you recognize this structure in the Bible, some of the stories and poetry may begin to make more sense. Consider that the order of events in the Gospels is not always the same. John’s gospel, especially. Overall, you’ll discover that the importance of theme over chronology will help John’s gospels and letters begin to make greater sense. It has a huge effect on making sense of Revelation, even; for instance, notice that words that seem to describe the end of the world are repeated in 6:12-17, 11:15-19, and 16:17-21, not to mention 18-22. This is not strange, if a thematic rather than a chronological arrangement is recognized, however, with the repetition inherent in the process.

Human and Divine

As a younger Christian I used to be afraid of the Bible. What I mean by that, is that I was afraid that in reading through it I would discover something that challenged what I’d been taught to believe.

Of course, I eventually realized that, given the Bible is our authority for faith and practice as Christians, if something in it did challenge my beliefs, well then, they needed to be challenged!

Accepting that I should follow truth wherever it might go has taken me to some of the most peculiar places. The consequence is that some people find me sort of strange or alternatively, exasperating: I don’t fit easily into theological categories or many other boxes, for that matter.

For instance, there is a segment of Christianity that is terrified of discovering flaws in the Bible; this becomes obsessive to the point that there is almost a knee-jerk reaction against anything that might suggest the Bible is something other than a dictation from the very mouth of God. Most of Christianity recognizes instead that the Bible is the product of God reaching out to human beings, who then recorded their experiences and the words they heard. The Bible is not just Divine. It is also human, the product of human actions and human minds. But just as some people are troubled by the thought of Jesus being human (and thus having body odor, burping, flatulence, hunger, thirst, a need to relieve himself, sleepiness, joy, sorrow, and anger), so too many Christians seem troubled by the human aspect of the Bible’s creation.

But it is important to understand the human component and not flinch away from some obvious things that demonstrate just how human it is. Because of what are viewed as attacks on the veracity of Scripture, many Christian refuse the suggestion that some books may not be as old as tradition has suggested, and that the traditional authors might not actually be the real authors.

As an example, tradition tells us that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, known as the Pentateuch or the Torah (Genesis-Deuteronomy). To suggest otherwise must mean that you’re a godless liberal who hates God. However, it needs to be noticed that nowhere in those five books does it ever say who wrote them. Certainly we are told that Moses wrote things, that he received the Ten Commandments from God on Mt. Sinai—but as to who put the actual five books together? The text is silent. I want to suggest—based on the text itself—that Mosaic authorship seems improbable.

I must choose: do I follow tradition, or do I follow what scripture actually says? Sometimes there’s no conflict with those two ideas. But sometimes there is. Sometimes what we’ve always believed needs to adjust to reality, to match what the Bible actually tells us.

So consider a few points:

Most people who know the Bible are aware of the problem with Deuteronomy 34, the last chapter of the last book of the Pentateuch. It describes Moses’ death and burial. Rather obviously, it would have been tough for Moses to put that together posthumously. Many Christians probably accept that at least that chapter was not written by Moses; they may assume it was written by Joshua (which is improbable too, but perhaps I’ll talk about that in a future posting, since it’s clear from the book of Joshua itself that Joshua was dead before the book of Joshua was written).

But there are more issues with Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch than just the last chapter of Deuteronomy, which perhaps one could argue was tacked on later. Take a look at a few other passages which are problematic if one wishes to assert Mosaic authorship:

Genesis 36:31:

These were the kings who reigned in Edom before any Israelite king reigned:…

The verse is then followed by a listing of Edomite kings. The problem is in the way verse 31 is worded. It is not likely something like that would have been written by Moses, years before the advent of Saul or David. The way it is worded indicates, I think quite clearly, that it had to have been written after a few Israelite kings had reigned.

Numbers 32:40-42:

So Moses gave Gilead to the Makirites, the descendants of Manasseh, and they settled there. Jair, a descendant of Manasseh, captured their settlements and called them Havvoth Jair. And Nobah captured Kenath and its surrounding settlements and called it Nobah after himself.

Of course, by itself, there’s nothing that would jump out at the average reader as being a problem for the book of Numbers having been composed by Moses. But what if we compare it with Deuteronomy 3:13-15?

The whole region of Argob in Bashan used to be known as a land of the Rephaites. Jair, a descendant of Manasseh, took the whole region of Argob as far as the border of the Geshurites and the Maakathites; it was named after him, so that to this day Bashan is called Havvoth Jair.

Well, you say, that sounds very much like what we just saw in Numbers 32. And of course that’s correct. So again, how does this create problems for Moses being the author of these words?

Well, take a look now at Judges 10:3-5:

He was followed by Jair of Gilead, who led Israel twenty-two years. He had thirty sons, who rode thirty donkeys. They controlled thirty towns in Gilead, which to this day are called Havvoth Jair. When Jair died, he was buried in Kamon.

Yep. There’s the problem. Jair was one of the Judges in the book of Judges: he lived quite a number of years after Moses was dead and buried. So it would have been hard for Moses to have written about him.

I must mention something else. The book of Judges was written a lot later than most people probably think. Look at Judges 18:30; I’ll highlight the critical phrase:

There the Danites set up for themselves the idol, and Jonathan son of Gershom, the son of Moses, and his sons were priests for the tribe of Dan until the time of the captivity of the land. They continued to use the idol Micah had made, all the time the house of God was in Shiloh.

“…until the time of the captivity of the land.” See, that’s a reference to the Assyrian or Babylonian Captivity, when the people were taken away—you know, either during the time of Isaiah, or during the time of Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel. Given the phrasing, I’d guess it was probably composed after they came back from one or the other captivity, so that pushes the book’s composition out to the time of Ezra.

Remember something important: many of the Old Testament books are anonymous. So why be bothered if Moses didn’t write Genesis-Deuteronomy, or if it came a lot later than we used to think according to tradition? Who wrote these books of the Bible and when they were written was apparently not something that was so critical to God. Does the authorship and time of composition determine the authority and inspiration of Scripture? Is the Pentateuch only “God breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16) if Moses wrote it? Is the book of Judges no longer inspired because it was not written before the time of the prophet Samuel? I don’t think so.

If we do not know who wrote the Pentateuch (see above), is that devastating for our faith? Why? We also do not know who wrote the books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1-2 Samuel, 1-2 Kings, 1-2 Chronicles, many of the Psalms, or the book of Hebrews–and most Christians know all that and do not feel their faith is being undermined.

Some books of the Bible have multiple authorship; they are a combination that were explicitly written by more than one person—for instance, quite obviously Psalms and Proverbs. So should we freak out if we discover that book of Zechariah has more than one author? Of course not. Because the book of Zechariah does have more than one author: see the post Solving a Theological Problem for an explanation.

The human side of the Bible—looking at the nuts and bolts of how the thing was put together by human beings serving God over hundreds of years—should no more bother us or disrupt our faith than the human side of Jesus. Pointing out that the Bible was written by human beings, that it was edited and copied by human beings, that the authors did their task as authors do their jobs today, and that it was revised by editors, as editors must, does not alter the fact that the Bible is also the inspired word of God, profitable for doctrine, reproof and instruction. It’s not an either or proposition, human or divine. It’s a both proposition. Both human and divine.

Chasing Fads

The prophet Ezekiel had to act out many of his prophesies. Think performance art. This ranged from being stuck lying on one side for months at a time (Ezekiel 4:4-8), to laying siege to a brick (4:1-3), to God making his wife die, while instructing him not even to mourn, just so he could serve as an illustration of what it would be like for the Israelites when the temple in Jerusalem was desecrated by the Babylonians (Ezekiel 24:15-27). Then, you have this:

“Take wheat and barley, beans and lentils, millet and spelt; put them in a storage jar and use them to make bread for yourself.” (Ezekiel 4:9).

This verse has been ripped from its context and then employed as an excuse to sell Christians a “health food,” something called “Ezekiel 4:9 Bread”. You just know it has to be good and healthy if God told his prophet to eat it.

Um, yeah.

Of course, the rest of the passage is conveniently ignored:

You are to eat it during the 390 days you lie on your side. Weigh out twenty shekels of food to eat each day and eat it at set times. Also measure out a sixth of a hin of water and drink it at set times. Eat the food as you would a loaf of barley bread; bake it in the sight of the people, using human excrement for fuel.”

The LORD said, “In this way the people of Israel will eat defiled food among the nations where I will drive them.”

Then I said, “Not so, Sovereign LORD! I have never defiled myself. From my youth until now I have never eaten anything found dead or torn by wild animals. No impure meat has ever entered my mouth.”

“Very well,” he said, “I will let you bake your bread over cow dung instead of human excrement.”

He then said to me: “Son of man, I am about to cut off the food supply in Jerusalem. The people will eat rationed food in anxiety and drink rationed water in despair,for food and water will be scarce. They will be appalled at the sight of each other and will waste away because of their sin. (Ezekiel 4:9-17)

Clearly, the bread Ezekiel was instructed to prepare was supposed to be the worst, most horrible stuff imaginable. It was described as “defiled” food. I doubt that the manufacturer of “Ezekiel 4:9 Bread” actually cooks it over human excrement, let alone cow dung. And of course the peddlers of Ezekiel 4:9 Bread miss the whole point of what the bread really was: the dregs that desperate, starving people under siege could scrape together off the floor and bottoms of baskets and bins.

And then, as if that were not enough, along comes Genesis 1:29 Bread–apparently another attempt to pander to the faithful. This bread is supposed to be based on Genesis 1:29:

Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.

And so this product is stuffed with 18 different kinds of grains and seeds.

Yes, I’m sure making an expensive loaf of bread was the entire purpose of that verse.

Likewise, I don’t think much of the Daniel Diet, which is based on Daniel 1:8-16:

But Daniel resolved not to defile himself with the royal food and wine, and he asked the chief official for permission not to defile himself this way. Now God had caused the official to show favor and compassion to Daniel, but the official told Daniel, “I am afraid of my lord the king, who has assigned your food and drink. Why should he see you looking worse than the other young men your age? The king would then have my head because of you.”

Daniel then said to the guard whom the chief official had appointed over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, “Please test your servants for ten days: Give us nothing but vegetables to eat and water to drink. Then compare our appearance with that of the young men who eat the royal food, and treat your servants in accordance with what you see.” So he agreed to this and tested them for ten days.

At the end of the ten days they looked healthier and better nourished than any of the young men who ate the royal food. So the guard took away their choice food and the wine they were to drink and gave them vegetables instead.

Of course, the only reason Daniel and his friends ate the way they did is because they didn’t want to “defile” themselves. That is, they wanted to keep kosher! By eating only vegetables they avoided the issue of what kind of meat they might have gotten, such as pork or unclean birds, or who knew what. The reason Daniel and his friends were healthier and better off than the others who ate the king’s food is because God performed a miracle, not because they were suddenly eating “healthy.” The diet Daniel and his friends ate is no more something to practice than hopping in a den of lions or walking in a fiery furnace is to be a regular practice for modern Christians. Again, Daniel and his friends survived because God performed a miracle. You’re not supposed to “go and do thou likewise.” Sure, if you want to go on a diet, lose weight, exercise, bake organic multi-grain bread, that’s well and good. But do you have to misuse a Bible passage and paste it on your product or diet plan to make it worthwhile? Perhaps it’s simple superstition: if we put a Bible verse on it, God will have to bless it. Like wearing a lucky shirt, rubbing a rabbits foot, or wearing a specially blessed pendant will make your life turn out swell.

As I watch people chase after the latest thing, whether food or diet, new approach to church growth, God’s plan to escape debt or improve your finances in some special, fancy God way, I’m reminded of something James wrote:

So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work. (Ephesians 4:11-16, emphasis added)

One would hope that Christians, of all people, could avoid being carried along by one fad after another. But sadly, the church is filled with fads and those who chase them.

Jesus said,

I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. (Matthew 10:16)

Sadly, all too often, Christians are actually as shrewd as doves and as harmless as serpents. No wonder the author of Hebrews wrote,

We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand. In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. (Hebrews 5:11-14)

Maybe I should talk to our congregation. I’m sure we could use some more money, so maybe we can hop on the bandwagon and start our own profitable fad: First Commandment Bread!

Unfixable

Genesis 37 relates the story of Esau. In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul comments about the tale in his letter to the Roman church. There, he quotes Malachi 1:2-3 that God loved Jacob but hated his brother Esau. Does that mean that God set out to rain on Esau’s parade? To kick him when he was down? To laugh in his face? Or does it describe more what Esau felt about his fate? Is there perhaps a touch of sarcasm or irony in God’s words about Esau? A throwing back in his face the words Esau spat at God?

When God spoke those harsh sounding words through the prophet in Malachi, he was describing how Esau’s descendants–now a nation living in the hill country on the other side of the Jordan River from Israel–would suffer his judgment–due to their mistreatment of their brothers, the people of Israel, as they were taken captive by the Babylonians. But as is the case with judgment, God’s judgment on Esau had a purpose: a positive goal, a desire to correct or to redirect–as a father disciplining his children, or a coach yelling in the face of an athlete.

God will not protect us from the fate we insist on choosing, despite his warnings or the warnings of common sense. Jacob and Esau demonstrate that sometimes you simply can’t just make it all better. Not every mistake is fixable, not because God wants us to be miserable, but because all you can do with spilled milk is mop it up. You’re not going to squeeze the milk back into the jug and the pour it on your cornflakes. While God forgives us, the world may not–and if something’s broken, it might stay that way: there are always consequences to our actions. Esau had sold his birthright to his brother Jacob simply because he came home hungry one day and wanted some of the stew that his brother was making. Unconcerned about the value of what he was giving up, all he saw was the immediate satisfaction of having a nice bowl of stew.

Later, his brother by stealth steals the blessing of the firstborn by impersonating Esau. When he discovers how he’s been ripped off, Esau complains bitterly about what Jacob has taken from him: his birthright and his blessing. But for all his complaining, for all his regrets, his choices lead him down paths that are one way only. People make choices all the time; some can be fixed, others can’t. The teenager who was texting while driving and then plowed into an oncoming car cannot turn back time and make her mistake go away. If you run a stop sign and a police officer catches you and writes you a ticket–all you can do is pay the fine.

When you suffer the consequences of your bad choice, no matter how often you cry out to God–the consequences are likely to remain: you’re paralyzed, you’re out a few hundred dollars, or you lose your birthright and blessing. Cry all you want: it doesn’t change reality. What can change is how you face your reality: what are you going to do with your next choice? And will you choose to be bitter and angry, or will you choose to rely on God and trust him to see you through whatever your consequences might be–and allow him to take the evil that has become of your life, and pervert that evil for good. God is in the business of transforming us, of taking the ugly and making it beautiful, of taking the broken and sweeping it away to build something new. God will walk with us through the thickets and swamps of our mistakes and problems. He’s focused on fixing our hearts and minds–not so much our spilled milk.

Paul’s Approach to Other Religions

Paul’s approach to the pagans in Athens serves as a good ex-ample for the contemporary Christian to follow as he or she considers other religions. In Acts 17 the following is recorded:

The men who escorted Paul brought him to Athens and then left with instructions for Silas and Timothy to join him as soon as possible.

While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was greatly distressed to see that the city was full of idols. So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there. A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with him. Some of them asked, “What is this babbler trying to say?” Others remarked, “He seems to be advocating foreign gods.” They said this be-cause Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection. Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, “May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? You are bringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we want to know what they mean.” (All the Athenians and the for-eigners who lived there spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas.)

Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as some-thing unknown I am going to proclaim to you.

“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. And he is not served by hu-man hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’

“Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by man’s design and skill. In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with jus-tice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.”

When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said, “We want to hear you again on this subject.” At that, Paul left the Council. A few men became followers of Paul and believed. Among them was Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman named Damaris, and a number of others.

After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth.

It is instructive to note that although the Athenian’s idol worship disturbed him, when Paul talked to them he did not condemn them. Instead, he found a point of agreement and moved from that point to a presentation of the Gospel without condemning them or overtly criticizing their religious beliefs. Why? Because he knew that once a person accepted Christ, the Holy Spirit would enter them and that such a transformation, such an encounter with the living God, would take care of their paganism once and for all. He also knew that criticizing someone for their beliefs was a quick way to stop a conversation.

Burying the Blessing

Jesus liked to teach by telling stories. One such lesson was about a wealthy man who gave three of his servants money for investing on his behalf while he was away. The first servant he gave five talents; the second two talents, and the last received one talent. What’s a talent? A talent of silver weighed nearly 94 and a half pounds; if it was of gold, it would be double that. The passage does not specify which sort of talent is involved, but of course that doesn’t really affect the point of the story. The first servant took the five talents and doubled his investment. Likewise, the man with two doubled his. But the third servant simply took the single talent and buried it for safekeeping.

Not surprisingly, when the wealthy man returned, he praised the first two servants and rewarded them, commenting, “You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!” (Matthew 5:23) But the last servant, who had merely buried the talent, was condemned without mercy: “You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.

“Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the ten talents. For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 25:26-30)

How often are we afraid to make use of what God has given us? Do we think negatively about our abilities? Do we find a way to talk ourselves out of grabbing an opportunity? I can’t count the number of Christians who wish they had more chances to share their faith with someone–but when the Jehovah’s Witnesses show up at their door, they pretend they’re not home. How much easier does God have to make it? Like a Dominoes Pizza, God has delivered a pair of people to your very door who want nothing more than to have a conversation about God. Talk about an easy opportunity! But too often, for whatever excuse we dream up, we’d rather bury whatever God offers us than invest it.

#1– In an Obscure Subcategory on Amazon

What Would Satan Do? The Devil’s Theology hit #1 for the Kindle today–in an obscure subcategory. At 10:30 Friday night I took at look at the book to see how it was doing–it went on a three day free promotion starting on Friday around midnight:

As you can see from the screenshot above, the red arrow points to the best seller rank for my book. #1 in an obscure subtopic, but still…NUMBER 1! …in something, anyhow. People going to Amazon and looking for a book on Angelology (doubtless massive hoards) for their Kindle–the first thing they’ll see is my book. And just think, you too can own this bestseller for the utterly amazing low, low price of FREE (through Sunday, January 27–then it returns to its normal price of $7.99; still a bargain).

Narrow Gate Now Available

The novel Narrow Gate is now available for the Kindle. The blurb about the book on Amazon says

Alex Hammond invents a way of linking distant places through a sort of doorway making instantaneous transportation possible. Meanwhile, Steve Cornman leads researchers to a medical breakthrough: immortality.

Powerful forces will stop at nothing to destroy them both.

The novel tells the interlocking story of two inventions: instantaneous travel through gates or doorways that link widely separated locations, and a cure for old age and death. Alex’s eventual sister-in-law is involved with the immortality drug. The story has murder, the threat of murder and physical harm, time travel, and a Toyota van that can travel to the moon, among other places.

What Would Satan Do? The Devil’s Theology

In other writing news, my nonfiction book, What Would Satan Do? The Devil’s Theology will be available for FREE from Friday through Sunday (January 25-27).

This is the blurb on Amazon describing What Would Satan Do? The Devil’s Theology:

If the Devil were to write down his theology, what would he write? What exactly does the Devil believe about God, humanity, and sin? What motivates him? What drives his thoughts? He has a point of view. He has a philosophy of life. He has a theology.

So what is it? In what ways has his theology been influenced by, or perhaps influenced that of human beings?

Others have done the theology of John, the theology of Paul, or the theology of the Gospels. There are Old Testament theologies and New Testament Theologies. Here at last is the theology of Satan.

Reunited

In John 20:1-18 we see Jesus and Mary Magdalene reunited in a cemetery. Sometimes when all seems lost, when we’ve given up all hope and don’t even know we can hope, when it seems obviously too late–that’s when God can surprise us the most. Mary Magdalene had been among the early disciples of Jesus, and she had been one of the women who had helped bankroll the ministry of Jesus. She was also among the handful of disciples that had witnessed the crucifixion. Together with some of the other women, she had planned to finish the embalming of Jesus that Joseph of Aramathea had begun late Friday afternoon. Early Sunday morning, together with the women who had agreed to this task, she had been shocked to find that the tomb had been broken into and the body of Jesus apparently stolen. Heartbroken after having seen Jesus die a horrible death, now she couldn’t even care for his body. Crying, beside herself with grief, through her tears she sees a man in the garden around the tombs and confronts him, “Do you know what happened to his body? Did you take him somewhere? Take me to him, please, if you could…”

Then the man looked at her and spoke only her name: “Mary!”

And at that instant, she suddenly recognized him and fell into his arms, clinging to him so as to never let him go again.

Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15:20-23:

 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him

Thus, the picture we see in Jesus’ resurrection, the reunion between Jesus and Mary, is a snapshot of what our resurrection will be like. Come the resurrection, we’ll never again have to let anyone go.

Another Novel

I’m planning on putting up several more of my novels as e-books on the Kindle in the coming months. About four of my novels need only a bit of proofreading before they’ll be ready to go. But I have another handful–perhaps eight or so–that will require more work before I’ll be ready to let them appear in public.

So I’m nearly done with the proofreading and formatting of my next novel which had the working title, In the Shadow of Prometheus, and before that Prometheus Gate. Neither of those titles appealed to my first reader and frankly, I’ve been dissatisfied with both for quite some while myself. Now I think I have a title that fits the story better: Narrow Gate.

What’s the book about?

Alex Hammond invents a way of linking distant places through a sort of doorway making instantaneous transportation possible. Meanwhile, Steve Cornman leads researchers to a medical breakthrough: immortality. Powerful forces will stop at nothing to destroy both men and their projects.

I expect to release the e-book before the end of this week. I’d appreciate comments and/or criticism of the title, book cover design and story summary.