Dewayne Bryant's Blog, page 4

If You Ever Steal a Bike …

A popular meme in social media says, “I asked God for a bike, but I know he doesn’t work like that, so I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.” It appears in different incarnations, sometimes as a yearbook photo with the statement as an accompanying quotation. Although there are several things wrong with the statement (one of the biggest being missing the point of prayer), I’d like to focus on one aspect: the misunderstanding of repentance. 

Everyone who knows anything about Christianity understands the importance of repentance. John the Baptist preached a message of repentance (Matthew 3:2; Mark 1:4; Acts 13:24; 19:4), as did Jesus (Matthew 4:17; Luke 13:1-5; Revelation 2:5). The apostles mention it time and again (Acts 2:37-38; 3:19, 26; 5:31; 8:22; 11:18; 17:30; 20:21; 26:20). After delivering the first gospel sermon in the book of Acts, Peter’s desperate audience asks, “Brothers, what shall we do?” The first word out of Peter’s mouth is “repent.” 

Repentance is recognizing that we’ve done something wrong, but there’s more. If it ended only with a realization that we’ve sinned, it would be no different from remorse. If it only included lasting grief over what we’ve done, it would be the same as regret. Repentance includes a commitment to avoid repeating the same mistakes and to make restitution for our misdeeds. We might do the same thing again—and probably will—but it will be to our sorrow. 

Repentance is not a get-out-of-jail-free card, a license to sin, or a guarantee of absolution. Nor is it easy. And it doesn’t mean we won’t think about the past from time to time. Before his conversion, the apostle Paul endorsed Stephen’s execution (Acts 7:58-8:1) and dragged men and women from their homes (Acts 9:1-3). Paul chased Christians to foreign cities and tried to force them to blaspheme God (Acts 26:9-12). Even after the transformation following his Damascus Road experience, other Christians still feared him (Acts 9:26-27). 

Paul was humbled by his past. He refers to that part of his life several times in his letters. He says that he was among the worst of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15) and recalls his past as a persecutor of the church with genuine regret (Acts 22:1-5; 1 Corinthians 16:9-10; Galatians 1:13; Philippians 3:4-6; 1 Timothy 1:13). We have to wonder how many nights he woke in a cold sweat, his dreams haunted by the desperate pleas of the innocents he condemned. 

Before coming to Christ, Paul was a monster—something he never seemed to let himself forget. At the same time, he celebrated the blessing of God’s grace with a joy that buoyed him in the darkest hours at the end of his life. 

This is the trick of repentance: to recognize our past wrongs but be able to rejoice in God’s love and forgiveness. 

William Booth once noted, “The chief danger of the twentieth century will be religion without the Holy Ghost, Christianity without Christ, forgiveness without repentance, salvation without regeneration, and heaven without hell.” Dietrich Bonhoeffer said something similar: “Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.”

Booth and Bonhoeffer were right. We often want to have our cake and eat it too: the positive without the negative, privilege without responsibility, reward without risk. It stands to reason that we should also want forgiveness with no strings attached—a cosmic gift God showers upon us on demand.

The modern church has become so accustomed to prefacing everything with “Thank you, Lord” that we’ve forgotten the first thing we should say is, “Woe is me” (Isaiah 6:5). 

Human beings face many problems in this world. We overcome them in various ways: courage, endurance, humility, and strength. But none can solve our most significant problem: the break in our relationship with our Creator because of sin. Only one thing can begin that process of renewal: repentance. 

May we all be like Paul, remembering enough of our past mistakes to remind us of how far we’ve come in Christ, but also to propel us forward to victorious righteousness. 

Jeopardy’s Biblical Debacle

Jeopardy! has been a staple of television entertainment for decades. Hosted for most of its history by the inimitable Alex Trebek, the program has stumped viewers and contestants alike since its original iteration first aired in March, 1964. The show’s popularity is understandable—viewers are watching a game, but are also part of it as they try to beat the contestants from their living rooms at home. It has won 39 Daytime Emmy Awards in its first 39 seasons and has aired over 8,000 episodes. 

On 17 November 2022, the show aired its Tournament of Champions. The final clue was this: “Paul’s letter to them is the New Testament Epistle with the most Old Testament quotations.” The correct answer, according to the program was “What is the book of Hebrews?” , with some furiously calling for the firing of the writing team for the show. The contestant who gave the correct answer wound up losing because his response was deemed incorrect. 

Why so much controversy? Let’s walk through the final clue. Unfortunately, it’s a pastiche of misunderstandings if “What is Hebrews” is the correct response. The book of Hebrews is almost universally recognized by scholars to have been written by someone other than Paul. There are enough significant differences that very few people today agree that it belongs in the Pauline corpus. However, it is similar enough to the apostle’s writings that most people believe its unnamed author was part of Paul’s inner circle or may have been someone influenced by him. Early Christians did not know who wrote Hebrews and although they recognized similarities between the book and Paul’s letters, they often expressed doubt that Paul wrote it. 

A second problem with the clue is that the book of Hebrews is not an epistle. It lacks some of the customary features included in letters at the time, and looks more like a sermon or homily. 

A third problem with the Jeopardy! final clue is that the actual answer should be “What is the book of Romans?” This book is definitely Pauline, takes the form of an epistle, and has the most quotations of the Old Testament of any of Paul’s letters. 

Simply put, the show’s writers were dead wrong, though it should come as no surprise given the incredibly low rates of biblical literacy in the US. According to various surveys, the biblical illiteracy of Americans would be laughable if the situation weren’t so dire. Al Mohler points out that surveys have shown the following:

60% of Americans are unable to name five of the Ten CommandmentsOver 50% of one group of high school seniors believed that Sodom and Gomorrah were husband and wife. 82% believe that “God helps those who help themselves” is a Bible verse.12% of respondents in one survey thought Joan of Arc was married to Noah. 

Even writers for quiz shows are not immune, it seems. 

It’s interesting to see that a terribly-written clue on a gameshow elicited such an outraged response. The real question is how we will respond to the many other examples of biblical illiteracy in our churches and homes.

Photo Credit: Jeopardy Game Board by Kinu Panda, Wikimedia Commons: CC BY-SA 4.0 International. Picture cropped for use.  

Types of Christians

Christians come in all spiritual shapes and sizes. We have different likes and dislikes, areas of interest, and opinions about various parts of the Bible. Some may fall into clearly-defined categories or types, by which we mean “a version of Christian that looks pretty close to the genuine article, but needs a few adjustments to be a better representation of Christ.” A few of these deviations fit more closely to the pattern of Scripture; others less. Here are some of the more common types that exist in churches everywhere. 

Jesus’ BFFs. Some believers practice a trendy faith with an overly-familiar approach to God. They wear necklaces and bracelets with religious significance and apparel emblazoned with slogans like, “Jesus is My Homeboy.” Their favorite hymns stress the relational side of faith. They often downplay God’s holiness and emphasize personal experiences. They are among the least biblically-informed members of a congregation. 

Doctrinal Zealots. These firebrands often have a self-righteous, holier-than-thou attitude and believe their adherence to sound doctrine makes them morally superior to other Christians. They vigorously oppose anything that smacks of liberalism. Unfortunately, they love to argue with others and routinely use insulting and condescending language. When others disagree with their high-handed approach, zealots take pride in their “persecution” (misapplying 2 Timothy 3:12) and interpret it as clear evidence of their faithfulness to God’s Word.  

Intellectual Elitists. These believers study Scripture seriously. Many of them either have degrees in Bible or biblical studies or have spent what they consider to be a substantial amount of time studying Scripture. They take great pride in their intelligence and knowledge and believe intellectual achievement is a spiritual matter. Since they know the Bible better than others, they are not only intellectually superior but spiritually superior, too. 

Checklist Conservatives. These Christians’ adherence to the authority of Scripture is similar to that of doctrinal zealots, only without the same depth of understanding. They have a list of mandatory theological positions that identifies a person as conservative (a person’s degree of liberalism can be gauged by how many boxes they fail to check off). Members of this group know exactly what they believe but often cannot explain why because their positions have been instilled in them through tradition or preachers they respected rather than careful Bible study. 

Common-Sense Liberals. These members rarely read from or reference Scripture, using good sense or pragmatism instead and passing it off as spiritual enlightenment. Their moral compass has little to do with the Bible and is often shaped by a mix of the prevailing culture and whatever they want to be true. Ironically, they pride themselves on their spiritual maturity even though they are often among the least mature members of the congregation. 

Doctrinal Apatheists. This group is characterized by biblical ignorance. When they do happen to open the Bible, they typically focus on the question, “How does this make you feel?” If they read religious books, they choose ones that emphasize emotion and lack substantive theological content. “Faith is about how you feel” is their mantra. They rarely appear in the church building outside of Sunday morning worship. 

Nostalgics. This group reminisces about the golden age of the church in America (i.e., the middle of the 20th century). They may still insist upon antiquated cultural norms, such as forbidding women to wear pants, requiring suits and ties for men serving in any capacity, or approving only certain hairstyles. They oppose the adoption of technology and argue that the church would be better off doing things like in the good old days. Congregations with enough of these individuals (or with them in positions of influence or power) tend to look less and less like the surrounding community over time. 

Super Servants. These believers think service is the most important thing for the Christian faith. The good Christian is a busy Christian, and service indicates spiritual maturity. Unfortunately, they typically draw attention to themselves through public displays of faith, such as splashing photos of their activities across social media or in the church bulletin. They downplay doctrine as largely irrelevant, citing the need to “follow the way of Jesus.”

Justice Warriors. This newer group focuses on solving society’s ills through human efforts. They rightly oppose injustice and prejudice but do so from a firmly committed political—rather than biblical—viewpoint. They tend to be very idealistic and think that Marxism will help humanity (despite being a disaster everywhere it’s been implemented). If they cite the Bible, they do so to provide proof texts for their social/political beliefs. 

If we identify too closely with one of these groups, we might want to reevaluate our spiritual commitments. They typically form when a person over- or under-emphasizes one or more essential aspects of the biblical worldview. These include service, genuineness, love, compassion, sound doctrine, and biblical authority, among other things. The Christian life is one of consistency and balance with a high view of Scripture. Anything less, and we risk becoming a type of Christian rather than a man or woman of God.  

Be Careful Who You Marry

Marriage is a divinely-ordained institution created by God for the well-being and flourishing of men and women. In looking at examples in the Bible, we see that the ideal relationship is probably found in Eden – before sin got in the way, that is. The Bible tells us that Adam and Eve “were naked and not ashamed” (Genesis 2:25). This verse tells us more about the couple than they weren’t embarrassed to be unclothed in front of one another. This language doesn’t merely mean that they were okay with being naked – it seems to use this as a summary statement of togetherness and oneness, speaking about a much deeper connection between the two. I wish all marriages were like that. 

It seems the media is rife with examples of marriages gone wrong. Hollywood is an obvious choice. And we’ve seen some spectacular examples recently. In his defamation suit against Amber Heard, Johnny Depp has shown the world what a vile person his former wife is (he’s no shining knight, as evidence presented in court has amply demonstrated). 

Then there was the infamous slap heard around the world when Will Smith struck comedian Chris Rock at the Oscars for making a joke at Jada Pinkett Smith’s expense. Smith found the joke humorous and even laughed until he saw his wife’s response, after which he took the stage and slapped Rock across the face. The media predictably rushed to defend Smith as either a chivalrous hero worthy of respect or a broken man deserving our pity. They cast his wife as an unfortunate victim, apparently forgetting that hosts are paid to lightly roast members of the audience (and that they probably had more than a few laughs whenever someone mocked or insulted someone with whom they disagreed on social or political issues). 

Exercising wisdom in choosing a wife is of paramount importance. The opposite is also true, of course. We’d be remiss if we didn’t include the many examples of terrible husbands in Hollywood history. Award-winning actor Sean Penn was charged with felony domestic assault while married to Madonna; Josh Brolin was an alcoholic and was accused of physically abusing Diane Lane; Dennis Hopper’s marriage to Michelle Phillips lasted only eight days until he “punched her out.” Hopper later divorced his fifth wife (of 18 years) on his deathbed and cut her out of his will. I’m not sure it’s possible to find polite language to describe the fiendish villainy of such sorry excuses for men. 

The levels of intimacy, connection, and even vulnerability in marriages are considerable. I believe this is why we find so many verses on marriage in the Bible. Here are some important points to keep in mind.

The Bible Teaches the Oneness Between Man and Wife. This is God’s plan from the beginning (Genesis 2:24) and includes the purity of intimacy in marriage (Hebrews 13:4). A marriage partner is a trusted ally and confidant, defender, and protector. It should be noted that the image that God uses for spiritual infidelity in the Hebrew Bible is adultery – arguably the most potent and devastating form of betrayal of which a person can be guilty. 

The Bible Stresses the Importance of Spiritual Unity. Paul indicates that spouses must be on the same page spiritually (2 Corinthians 6:14). Research has shown that the more similar two spouses are in their spiritual outlook, the less likely they will divorce. Further, the odds of divorce are inversely proportionate to the level of religious activity and commitment to spiritual development in marriage. Research indicates that the spiritual closeness of a husband and wife serves as an indicator of the health of their relationship. 

The Bible Highlights the Importance of Treating Each Other Properly. Various passages in the New Testament indicate that marriage partners are to treat each other as equals. While Paul is often criticized for saying that wives should submit to their husbands (Ephesians 5:22), some readers miss the fact that he commands husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church (Ephesians 5:25)—imitating perfect love and sacrifice is no easy task! Peter offers a brief but scathing warning to husbands in particular. He says that God will not hear the prayers of any man who doesn’t honor his wife (1 Peter 3:7). Although men and women may have different roles, there is no question that they are of equal worth and importance—and both deserve to be treated as special creations of God.

The Bible sets a high standard for marriage. There is an incredible blessing in having a partner who safeguards our privacy as fiercely as they would their own, who is a balm in times of trial, a fortress in times of trouble, and a source of encouragement in the valleys of life. Such a gift requires careful thought, evaluation, and concern.

The Importance of Sound Doctrine

The apostle Paul tells Titus that he must “hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine” (Titus 1:9). Later, he says, “teach what accords with sound doctrine” (Titus 2:1). Paul’s words are typically translated as “sound doctrine” but might be more accurately rendered as “healthy teaching.” This isn’t merely a set of abstract beliefs but teaching about theological truths that leads to the transformed lives of believers as they enter the kingdom of God and become increasingly spiritually mature. 

Modern culture either downplays the importance of doctrine or rejects it altogether. Some see it as divisive; others view it as problematic or unappealing. Those who see doctrine as relatively unimportant point to the explosion of denominations in the last few hundred years as proof that insistence on particular interpretations creates division. 

There’s no doubt unity is essential. Jesus prayed that his disciples would be unified (John 17:21). This is God’s plan. Paul gives the Corinthians some fundamentals about the gospel message (1 Corinthians 15:3-4) and even cites specific points of theological concern that should unify believers in their beliefs (Ephesians 4:1-6). But Paul also warned that the time would come when some people would not tolerate sound doctrine but divide over it instead (2 Timothy 4:3-4). Those who choose to follow something else have separated themselves from the truth. They have voluntarily departed, not created a new, legitimate branch of the faith. They have become something else (see 1 John 2:19). 

Ultimately, we have to ask, “Does it really matter what I believe—or what anyone else believes, for that matter?” The short answer, according to Scripture: it does. But why? 

The primary reason sound doctrine matters is because God specifically instructed his messengers to teach it. The Bible teaches a specific, unalterable message (Deuteronomy 4:2; 12:32; Proverbs 30:5-6; Revelation 22:18-19). However, people have been tweaking the Bible to suit their tastes for a very long time. For example, Paul clearly states, “I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4), claiming that this message is “of first importance” (v. 3). But classical liberal theologians turned the substitutionary atonement into a good example, wrecking the gospel message. They claimed that God would never kill his own Son and that Christ’s death was not required but was instead an example of sacrifice and a model of service. 

The biblical authors—and even Christ himself—make it clear that sound doctrine is vital to the health of the church and must be defended:

Jesus used the illustration of wheat and tares to distinguish between those in God’s kingdom and those outside it (Matthew 13:25). He also warned of wolves who would camouflage themselves (Matthew 7:15-16; see Acts 20:29). Paul advised Timothy to “Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 1:13).Paul also told Timothy to keep a close watch on what he taught (1 Timothy 4:16). He said that sound teaching was something to be guarded (2 Timothy 1:13-14) and that those who believed in something other than sound doctrine should be refuted (1 Timothy 1:3; Titus 1:9) and shunned (Romans 16:17).The Bible warns about false prophets and tells us to test teachers to determine whether they should be heard or rejected (1 John 4:1-6). Jude said that the faith was something worth fighting for (Jude 3). 

Why is sound doctrine so important? Here are some things to consider.

It is the Foundation of the Church. Sound doctrine comes from God as he reveals his will in Scripture. Not only is sound doctrine the foundation of the church, but Paul also describes it like an anchor that keeps people from being blown about (Ephesians 4:14). Any glance at a religious programming channel like TBN will amply demonstrate the importance of Paul’s illustration. 

It Tells Us Who God Is. When we say that we love God, what do we mean? Furthermore, what about Jesus? Many people say, “I don’t need doctrine; I just need Jesus.” Who is this Jesus, and why do they need him? Once the person begins explaining who he is, why he is essential, and what it means to follow him, this is where doctrine starts.  

It is a Blueprint for Christian Life and Worship. After Christ’s resurrection, he instructed his disciples to teach others to obey all of his commandments (Matthew 28:20). This includes how we live our daily lives and the manner of our worship when the congregation assembles. 

It Helps Us Mature Spiritually. Doctrine isn’t just about specific beliefs—it also impacts character formation. Sound doctrine leads to spiritual maturity (Ephesians 4:11-14), often expressed as the imitation of God and his Son. The converse is also true: false doctrine leads to spiritual immaturity. We could look to the prosperity gospel as one example. It fosters greed and dissatisfaction, and feeds the material gluttony of those who profit from it. Legalists are another example. The arrogance and condescension with which they treat others are wholly opposed to the gospel of Christ. False doctrine often gives us what we want rather than what we need. 

It Encourages Holiness. Paul tells Titus that the truth “accords with godliness.” In other words, sound doctrine leads to a particular way of life. One of the most important ways we imitate the divine is by adopting a fierce love for good and a righteous contempt for sin. But this must also be lived out in the real world, meaning that our love for good must manifest as qualities like kindness, patience, mercy, and generosity. Likewise, we demonstrate our contempt for sin by fleeing temptation and showing concern for others when they are caught up in wrongdoing (Galatians 6:1).

Sound doctrine sounds like something that might only appeal to a limited number of people in the church. Some do eschew doctrine in favor of emotionalism and sentimentality. But if we’re going to live out our lives as God intends, we can’t neglect the basic instructions he provides in the Bible. Sound doctrine is a non-negotiable aspect of that plan. 

Who’s Your Daddy?

It seems to have become popular for some believers to refer to God as “Daddy God.” This title appears on religious apparel and in prayers and contemporary worship music. One blogger even said, “we believe that there is no greater way we can honor God, than by calling Him, Daddy God.” This might strike some as a little weird. Is this an appropriate way to refer to him? 

If we ask someone the question, “What does God look like?” we would get various responses. Some see him as a King, sitting high and holy on a magnificent throne. Others might think of him as the Creator, fashioning the universe with artistic flair. Other people might think of him as a judge or a parental figure. While a handful of verses describe God in motherly terms (Deuteronomy 32:18; Isaiah 66:13), the dominant parental image of God is as a father. This is reinforced by the parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32). 

We often refer to God as Father because of the teachings of Jesus (Matthew 6:6, 9). Many Christians may not realize that psalmists and prophets alike used this kind of imagery for the God of Israel (Deuteronomy 32:6; Psalm 103:13; Isaiah 64:8-9). The prophets also describe Israel as a son (Jeremiah 31:20). In the New Testament, various passages refer to Christians as children of God (Romans 8:14-15; 1 John 3:1). This idea also appears in extrabiblical Jewish books (Tobit 13:4; Wisdom of Solomon 14:3; Sirach 4:10; 23:1, 4; 51:10). 

Three verses in the New Testament refer to God as “Abba” (Mark 14:36; Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6). We’ve all probably heard this word defined by someone as “daddy.” This comes from teachers and interpreters who, though they may be well-meaning, aren’t quite getting the real sense of the word. Abba wasn’t a child’s word for father. It’s used this way by Jewish children today, but this meaning would have been foreign to people in biblical times.  

The misunderstanding appears to have come from the German scholar Joachim Jeremias (1900-1979). He wrote that the word abba connoted intimacy—it was something that a little child would call his father. The word abba is Aramaic and is related to the Hebrew word ab, which means “father.” Despite his stellar reputation as a scholar of early Judaism, Jeremias’ understanding of the word may have been conditioned by the amount of time he spent in Jerusalem during his childhood—where the modern Hebrew word abba does mean something like “daddy” or “papa.” But words in modern Hebrew don’t always have the same meaning as the same words in biblical Hebrew. The meaning of words can change over time, precisely what has happened with abba.

Although the word abba probably signifies a close relationship, it also connoted authority and respect in a way that the word “daddy” does not. Noted biblical scholar James Barr stated,  

“If the New Testament writers had been conscious of the nuance ‘daddy’ they could have easily expressed themselves so: but in fact, they were well aware that the nuance is not that of ‘daddy’ but of ‘father’.”  … The semantics of itself [based on various evidences] all agree in supporting the nuance ‘father’ rather than the nuance ‘daddy’ …. It is fair to say that abba in Jesus’ time belonged to a family or colloquial register of language, as distinct from more formal and ceremonious language…. But in any case, it was not a childish expression comparable with daddy: it was a more solemn, responsible, adult address to a Father.

“Abba Isn’t Daddy” in Journal of Theological Studies (39): 38, 46.

It is difficult to find a good translation for abba. The word means “father,” which typically sounds very formal in English. On the other hand, the more familiar term “daddy” is commonly spoken by children and connotes intimacy—something foreign to the biblical use of the word. Perhaps the best choice would be something like “Dad”—not too formal, and not too childish.

The word “daddy” almost trivializes God, bringing him down to a level more manageable for human beings. This is especially true with the now-popular trend of referring to God as “daddy God.” This one-dimensional and cringeworthy practice makes God overly familiar. Ancient Jewish people would probably be shocked to hear how some Christians refer to God with such language. 

Some might object, saying, “What’s the harm in calling God “Daddy,” or “Daddy God,” or Papa, or any other similar name? What does it hurt?” For starters, the Bible does not use this language. Second, it sounds childish. Third, Greek had a way of expressing such words, called diminutives. The word for “father” was pater, while the word for “daddy” was pappas. The biblical writers chose not to use the latter, and Jesus did not use it. If they avoided it, maybe it was for a good reason. 

While God is our Heavenly Father, he is also a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29), a righteous judge (2 Timothy 4:8), and a majestic lion (Hosea 5:14; 11:10; 13:8). He is also dangerously glorious (Exodus 33:19-23). All of these images demand respect, awe, and caution—and perhaps even distance—the very opposite of what is connoted by the word “daddy.” This means that our view of the divine must be nuanced and multilayered. Yes, he is our loving father. But he is also an awesome God. 

Easter and Secularism: Our Call to Action

That our nation is becoming more secular is clear. The evidence is all around us. One example is the rise of the “nones” (those who claim no religious affiliation). Another is how our culture is increasingly defining “justice” in human-centered ways, where each brand of justice tends to reflect the individual identities of its proponents. We could say something similar for those seeking to redefine human sexuality and personhood (including a recently-confirmed Supreme Court justice who thinks only a biologist can tell the difference between males and females). 

One of the clearest examples of the growing problems of secularism has to do with our culture’s basic religious illiteracy, especially regarding Christianity. We can see examples of that in how media organizations define Easter, which for some is one of the most important religious holidays of the year. In 2018, NPR issued a news article that described Easter as “The day celebrating the idea that Jesus did not die and go to Hell or Purgatory or anywhere at all, but rather arose into Heaven.” The error was caught and corrected shortly after its publication, and NPR published a slightly defensive article three days later titled, “NPR Catches Hell Over Easter Mistake.” The author blamed the mistake on a lack of “editing oversight.” 

This wasn’t the first time Easter had been improperly defined. The New York Times made a similar mistake back in 2013 when an article identified the holiday as the celebration of Jesus’ resurrection into heaven. A correction quickly appeared, defining it as “the celebration of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead.” 

It should be worrying that authors graduating from journalism programs at respectable schools can get jobs at the premiere institutions in the United States and not know what Christians (who comprise a significant percentage of their readers) believe. This includes both the authors and the editors who proofed the articles before publication. 

We should point out that these mistakes were not made about some specialized doctrinal point, like explaining the precise details of Roman Catholic belief in transubstantiation or the difference between infralapsarianism and supralapsarianism in Reformed theology. This was the basic definition of Easter, which anyone can find in a 15-second Google search. 

The misunderstanding of Easter is not just a problem in itself—it’s a symptom of our world’s much larger spiritual condition. It’s most obvious when you stop to consider the types of things that make the headlines, like war, riots and looting, the growth of militant atheism, and the radical redefinition of essential aspects of human identity. But the little details matter, too. And that is why you and I are needed more than ever to bring spiritual clarity to a world gone mad. 

At the end of Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus tells his disciples (and us), “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” These words are no less authoritative now than they were then. 

In some ways, they’re needed now more than ever. 

Is the Invasion of Ukraine a Sign of the End Times?

Many people have an intense interest in biblical prophecy. They scour the Scriptures to find warning signs that the end is near. A month ago, Russia—always a popular player in end-times prophecy—invaded its neighboring country of Ukraine. A few days after the Russian invasion, popular pastor Greg Laurie said that it was a sign of Jesus’ imminent return:

We’re all aware of what’s happening over in the Ukraine right now. They’re under attack from Russia, and people have asked the question, “Is there any significance to all of this prophetically?” Let me pull the camera back and say this: I believe we’re living in the last days. I believe Christ could come back at any moment. 

There are signs of the times the Bible tells us to be looking for. And in fact, Jesus likened it to labor pains in a woman who’s ready to give birth, the idea being the closer they get together, the closer you are to the birth. And as we see more signs—more things happening—they’re reminding us Christ is coming back again. Let’s go to Matthew 24. 

What did Jesus say? “And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars” (Matthew 24:6 NKJV). So this is war at a scale we have not seen in a long time. But let me look at another thing in Matthew 24. It talks about plagues being around us in the last days (Matthew 24:7). If the coronavirus is not a plague, I don’t know what it is. It’s a global plague.

Laurie reads from the New King James Version, which adds “pestilences” in the text. Other translations do not have this word because it isn’t there in the oldest manuscripts. However, Jesus does mention it elsewhere (Luke 21:11), so it’s safe to assume that at times Jesus did say that plagues would be part of the picture. But there’s a problem with saying that COVID is a “plague.” What about other rampant diseases and illnesses? The flu is almost as widespread. Ebola, rabies, and HIV are much more deadly. Prophets tend to highlight the latest and greatest evidence to support their interpretations of the Bible. 

But we have to ask another question: where are the famines? Jesus clearly says that there will be wars and plagues, but what about the catastrophic lack of food? This isn’t something that happens on a broad scale often in the modern world, thanks to advances in agriculture and humanitarian aid to impoverished areas. Laurie is leaving out a massive piece of the puzzle.

What about all these things occurring together, like the labor pains speeding up when a baby is about to be born? We’ve seen them before, and worse. Look at the early 20th century around the time of World War I. This was the first truly global conflict, lasting from 1914 to 1918. But the world saw its fair share of famines, too. They occurred in Mount Lebanon (1914-1918), Germany (1914-1919), German East Africa (1917), Iran (1917-1919), and Rwanda and Burundi (1918-1919). But millions suffered from epidemics/pandemics of encephalitis lethargica (1915-1926), polio (1916), the Spanish flu (1918-1920), and Russian typhus (1918-1922). The casualties caused by all of these events total somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 million people (a conservative estimate). Compared to what went on in the second decade of the 20th century, the coronavirus and the invasion of Ukraine look like small potatoes. This is not to minimize the horrendous suffering taking place right now; it is only to put things in perspective. 

Let’s look at one more example. Going back to the Byzantine Empire, the bubonic plague ravaged Europe, the Middle East, and North/West Africa from the time of Justinian (c. AD 541) through the middle of the eighth century. And there were plenty of wars, from Justinian’s attempts to recapture lost parts of the Roman Empire (535-554) to the battles fought by Muslim armies across the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe (c. 634-751). There were famines because of the volcanic winter of 536, as well as shortages in Gaul (585), Arabia (639), Islamic Spain (639), and France (779, 792-793). Again, if you want to see one catastrophe after another in rapid succession, the early Medieval period is the place to look. 

Jesus said that his arrival would be like a thief in the night (Revelation 16:15). Paul says the same thing (1 Thessalonians 5:2-4). Christ also claimed that no one knows the day or hour of his return other than God the Father (Matthew 24:36). Considering this, it’s impossible to determine when Christ will return. Every generation thinks he will come back during their lifetimes. And one day, they will be correct. But until then, no one can know for sure—and it’s surely more profitable to look around to see where we can help in the here and now. 

Our job isn’t trying to figure out when Jesus will return. It’s trying to help people to be more like him so that they will be ready when he arrives. 

President Bartlett and the Bible

The television show The West Wing first aired in September 1999. It depicted life in the West Wing of the White House, with Martin Sheen playing the role of President Josiah Bartlett. Despite being a bit unrealistic in many ways, the popular show garnered a number of awards, including nine Emmys. Critics regularly praised it for its scriptwriting and cinematic elements. 

In the episode “Midterms,” which aired on 18 October 2000, the President publicly admonishes a talk show host named Dr. Jenna Jacobs (modeled after Jewish radio personality Dr. Laura Schlessinger). Jacobs calls homosexuality an “abomination,” citing the Bible in support. Bartlett proceeds to lambast Jacobs by quoting several passages from the Bible and asking the host how she would respond. Predictably, the character just shuts her mouth and sits in stunned humiliation. 

The highly contrived nature of the encounter is obvious. President Bartlett’s fictional history includes a deeply religious background and a degree from Notre Dame. He can recall exact chapters and verses for several specific offenses, yet throughout the show, he refers to the final book of the Bible as “Revelations.”

Many people may not know that Bartlett’s speech was partially lifted from a letter J. Kent Ashcraft wrote to Dr. Laura Schlessinger. It’s a bit more substantial than Bartlett’s speech, so I’d like to offer some commentary on the letter instead (either text is readily available through a Google search). The reason why is simple: people use the same arguments today. I’ll identify the original letter by putting the text in red:

Dear Dr. Laura,

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

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

According to the Bible, the sacrificial system no longer effective. The book of Hebrews explicitly states that Jesus offered a sacrifice once and for all (Hebrews 9:28), and animal sacrifices are no longer required (Hebrews 10:12-14, 18). Therefore, animal sacrifices are no longer efficacious. He goes so far as to state that outside of Christ, there is no salvation—a warning issued to synagogue members who were considering a return to Judaism (see Hebrews 10:19-39; cf. Acts 4:12). Maybe you should try reading the New Testament. 

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

The New Testament states that the Mosaic covenant is no longer in effect (Hebrews 7:11-12); therefore, it is impermissible to sell your daughter into slavery. Also, Paul makes it clear that slavery isn’t acceptable, particularly among Christians (cf. Philemon 17). 

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

See the answer to the previous two questions. Also, you may want to read the book How to Win Friends and Influence People to help you avoid embarrassing social gaffes in the future. Most of us worked through this stuff by the time we finished middle school, but maybe you’re a late bloomer.

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

Because the Mosaic Law was given to Israelites who lived in the ancient Near East. The Israelites could own servants from Canaan or neighboring peoples who lived in the Bronze Age. So if you look at a globe, neither Canada nor Mexico is near where the Israelites lived. Also, because you’re a 21st-century American. And then there’s that whole thing—again—about the Mosaic Law being obsolete. This is your second question about slavery. You seem to have a thing for human trafficking, which is frowned upon by civilized people (and is a capital crime in the Mosaic law; Exodus 21:16). 

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

Next verse same as the first. Keeping the Sabbath is a feature of the Mosaic Law. It is no longer commanded as the law is no longer in effect. Read Jeremiah 31:31-33 for a bit of background on this—as well as Hebrews 8:1-13, which reveals why the first testament became obsolete. And, no, you shouldn’t be killing anyone. That’s a federal crime. 

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?

While prohibitions against homosexuality remain in the New Testament age (Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:10), the dietary restrictions of the Mosaic Law no longer apply because Jesus pronounced all foods clean (Mark 7:19; cf. Luke 11:41), as did God (Acts 10:15; 11:9). To quote a homeless meth addict who wandered into our church services one Wednesday night, “You wanna eat that pig? Eat that pig!” Or eat shellfish. Or anything else, for that matter. You know, because the Bible says so. Maybe you should try reading something outside of the Pentateuch for a change.

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

This law probably only applied to Levites who were blind or who had significantly impaired vision—but there are other considerations. More specifically, are you Jewish? Because this law wouldn’t have applied to you unless you are (context is important). Oh yeah, and a priest, too—specifically a descendant of Aaron. Seeing as how 1) there are no sacrifices today, 2) you’re not a Jewish priest, and 3) the Mosaic Law is no longer in effect (I hope you’re starting to realize this by now), there are many reasons why this is a rather silly question. Creative, but silly. 

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

I’m glad that your friends keep it looking professional, but this law is likely about cutting the hair because of pagan customs. Unless your friends are 2,500-year-old Baal-worshippers, this law doesn’t apply. Also, you seem really intent on killing someone, weirdo. Did you torture animals as a child? You might want to see a licensed therapist who can help you with this before you do something that nets you life in prison without the possibility of parole. 

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

Seeing as how footballs are made of cowhide, you can play football even without gloves. But if you don’t believe me, I’m sure you can contact a local sports equipment supplier to verify.

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

If you’ve made it this far with my responses, you already know the answer to this question. You seem to be the perfect example of “zeal without knowledge” (Romans 10:1-3). To use a Southern colloquialism, “you know just enough to be good and ignorant.” 

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

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

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.

The heart of President Bartlett still beats in the chests of men and women today. Critics often think they can paint Christians into a corner and force believers to reveal their supposed inconsistencies in following some parts of the Bible but not others (ironically, this is similar to what the critic does himself). Sadly, all this does is expose the ignorance of the critic, who likely peruses websites for material to use in “gotcha” questions and knows next to nothing about the Bible or what it teaches.

President Bartlett may have known something about the Bible, but his scriptwriters didn’t. 

Do We Breathe the Name of God?

A popular meme making the rounds on Facebook claims that every human being literally breathes the name of God. The name Yahweh is two consonants, one that sounds like inhaling, the other exhaling. The covenant name of God—YHWH, also called the Tetragrammaton—is the sound of human breathing. This means that a baby’s first breath speaks the name of God. Every sigh in frustration or despair is an appeal too deep for mere human language. Even the atheist, with each breath, bears testimony to his or her Maker. Our final breath is the last time that God’s name fills our lungs. 

This idea seems to have been popularized by Rabbi Stuart W. Gershon in his book, YHWH: God’s Name is a Breath of Life. A musician named Jason Gray even wrote a song about it called “The Sound of Our Breathing.” Before one performance, he explained, “For hundreds of years there have been people who’ve said that the name of God is so holy that we dare not speak it because of how unworthy we are. How generous of the Lord to give himself a name that we can’t help but speak every moment we’re alive.” 

What a wonderful and beautiful commentary on our Creator. 

Unfortunately, it’s a load of total malarkey. 

People have always had a craving for secret or esoteric knowledge. We like secrets, but we love deciphering them even more. Why do you think the most popular television shows tend to be police procedurals where the viewer races against time to unravel the case before the detectives in the show? Because we like looking for clues, solving puzzles, and exploring the mysterious. 

The same goes for Scripture. The history of biblical interpretation is filled with attempts to discover hidden truths in the Bible. Unfortunately, they are little more than the products of overactive human imaginations. We can see one example in gematria, the practice of assigning a numerical value to a letter in the Greek or Hebrew alphabet and determining what deeper meaning they signify. Greek and Hebrew letters did have a numeric value (a little like Roman numerals), but the key is seeing what these numbers mean. One example involves the Fifth Commandment: “Honor your father and mother” (Exodus 20:12). So, how does a person honor his or her parents? Gematria will tell you how! 

You simply add up the numerical value of the letters in the word honor (kabed, which comes to 26). You compare that to the similar word for love (’ahavah, which adds up to 13). So, because “honor” is twice the numeric value of “love,” you fulfill this commandment by giving your parents a double portion of love (whatever that means). The subjectivity here should be pretty obvious. 

We’ve seen other examples, like the infamous “Bible Code,” which was a fad that began in the mid-1990s. It supposedly predicts future events by examining the arrangement of words in the biblical text. Some of the most famous include the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin of Israel. If the Bible Code were genuine, then every government on earth would have a task force scouring the biblical text for clues about the future. 

The illegitimacy of the Bible Code is easily seen in its application to non-inspired texts with equally-successful results. This includes the deaths of Martin Luther King, Jr., Abraham Lincoln, and Princess Diana encoded in Herman Melville’s Moby Dick and a preview of the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001 in the lyrics of rapper Vanilla Ice’s music.

As I said, people want to find hidden or secret knowledge. It isn’t just fun; it’s exciting. And when it comes to the Bible, uncovering these kinds of things can be spiritually exhilarating. It really is quite moving to think that God’s name is like our breath and that every time we breathe, we speak the name of our Creator; that every time the atheist says, “There is no God,” he or she has to affirm the existence of God even while denying it; that the newborn baby’s cry is a testimony to the divine hands which fashioned that child in the womb. 

It may be disappointing for some people to find out that there is absolutely no substance behind this popular claim, especially when bloggers try to sell it with officially-sounding phrases like “biblical scholars” and “aspirated consonants.” But there is something extraordinary about God’s name, isn’t there? Let’s take a look at the Hebrew. 

The name YHWH was not written with vowels originally. A later group of Jewish scholars known as the Masoretes added the vowels in the early Medieval period. Scholars disagree about the name’s meaning and origin. Our best guess is that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb hawa, meaning “be” or “become.” We see the name referenced in Exodus 3:14-15, where God says, “I AM WHO I AM,” which could also be rendered as “I WILL BE WHO I WILL BE.” This is the God who is, and who causes things to be. He is Creator and sustainer. But most importantly, he is more real than anything else in creation. That, I think, is a more appropriate understanding of God’s name. 

YHWH is who causes things to be, who gives them the power of existence. Everything we have, we owe to him. Every atom in creation, the tiny intricacies of living things, the twinkling nighttime stars all play their part in a beautiful, constant symphony praising their Creator.

But God is also the God who is real. He IS. That makes him more real than any of the bogeymen you fear, than any of your hurts or broken dreams, or any physical malady that will perish when this life is over. In a world of impermanence and illusion, God is the true rock of reality who cannot shift or change. 

There are so many profound truths in Scripture waiting for us to explore them. We don’t need to create any on our own when God has already given us so much. All we have to do is dig.