Certain 4.25.2024

We wrap this month up with a discussion about certainty. What is it? Why do we need it? How do we get it, and once we’ve got it what is it for?

Certainty is one of those words that we need to clearly define by context, or we might be confused by the very fungibility that the term seems to dismiss. Example. My wife and I are driving through the country to a destination we both know. We each have a route in mind, slightly different from the others. Both eventually get to the same location. Each of us is certain that we are correct, yet without some other objective criteria our differing certainties are nothing more than opinion. Other external stimuli might clarify the issue. Perhaps on the route I choose of which I am certain, there is a bridge out. The “route” technically is still correct, yet today, my certainty will not help us to arrive at the destination. I am certain and wrong.

What if we add other delimiting criteria to the discussion. Perhaps we should qualify the question by saying “Each of these routes will certainly get us to the event, but my route is longer, and we want to get there as quickly as possible. We go her way. Still certain of the route, I have changed my mind because of additional input, our desired time of arrival.

This month we talked a bit about the Eclipse. There was a certain event for you! Mathematically certain, the path of totality was quantified, mapped, and qualified by the chance of cloud cover.  Everyone in that path was certain to see the event unless they were prevented by overcast skies. It still happened whether any one individual saw it or not.  Someone whose vision was obscured by clouds or even sleeping late may have missed it, but it was certain. When we use the word certain, we need to be clear on context and specific in intent. The nature of the term requires external qualification. In fact, from basic observation there are at least 4 ways we use the term:

 

•   To state a “fact.” (I’m certain.)

•   To state a belief. (I’m certain, I’m right,)

•   To question someone else’s belief. (I’m certain you have misunderstood or are misinformed.)

•   To state a counterfactual. (I am certain you are wrong.)

 

That’s an awful lot of weight for one word to bear! Let’s review the rest of this month’s essays and draw some conclusions. After the eclipse, we took a couple of weeks to discuss details (one might have used the word facts) and the necessity for balance in reasoning about both our world and our faith. With respect to our present topic, the details certainly matter when we consider whether my wife or I are correct in our certainty about our proposed route of travel. All things being equal each of us may be right. As the saying goes “the devil is in the details.” Details like that bridge being out, a newly oiled road to be avoided, an accident, or people pulled off the road to view an eclipse, these details determine the context in which certainty either rises or falls. What is a man to do in such an epistemological standoff with his beloved?

Balance. Balance and symmetry allow us to factor in all those contextual clues that permit us fallible humans to adjust what we might call our “certainty meters” to external reality. So, if my wife and I get into the car to go to the nearest town. We are each certain of the correct route. To make a responsible decision about which way to go we discuss possible details of each route that may determine the best way to make the trip. A symmetrical trip takes the least amount of time needed for the intended destination. One of us foolishly insisting that our way is the only way, might even result in one of us throwing up our hands and abandoning the trip altogether. The facts do not change. People do. Contexts do.

Conclusions. Faith is a certainty that takes into account the available details We need to be less certain about more things than we generally are. The person who believes things in the absence of confirming details or balanced reasoning is called gullible. We need to recognize that many of our certainties are actually contingent on context, and details. Asserting something with passion does not make it so. Our certainty then is not in the actual state of affairs but in our own belief. Certainty should be a balancing act of what we know, what we believe, and what is possible given the context in which we are living and making decisions. A Biblical example might help, consider this text:

“Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came.  So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe.”        Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!””                                 (John 20:24-28 ESV)

In the first paragraph, Thomas expresses in his “doubt” two certainties. “Jesus is still dead. You did not see Him.” What happened to change his mind so much that he went from one set of certainties to a new set? 1. The context changed. He was there with the rest of the Apostles. 2. The facts changed. He, himself saw Jesus. Now, his certainty is of faithful devotion. Some might call Thomas a doubter. Perhaps rather we should think of him as the pioneer of faithful certainty driven by a full appreciation of the facts.

    Christian faith has always and will always exist in a hostile culture. Like Mrs. Beckman and I, human beings are on a journey (life) to a certain destination (death). There are different ways to make this journey, all arriving at the inevitable. Virtually all humans also believe that after that destination there is something to experience. Call it eternity, heaven, or nirvana. Someone is right about the journey, and someone is right about the aftermath. I am certain that making this journey with Jesus, the risen Lord is the right path. I invite you to jump in and travel along. If you choose not to, you may be certain, but will you be right?

Details 4.18.2024

     Last week we spoke about symmetry or balance. The next step is to link that symmetry with a solid respect for the details. Hermeneutics is composed of several related disciplines.  We want to do a thorough exegesis of the text. This requires familiarity with grammatical, syntactical, and discourse concepts of the original languages. Understanding languages, particularly ancient languages, is undergirded by a preliminary examination of the cultural, social, anthropological, and micro-historical processes that produced the society whose language is being studied and the specific people-group or organization (in our case, the earliest Church) that used that language.  And ultimately, we want to preach a message in recognizable colloquial English to our congregation.  The Hermeneutical task is not finished until the truth we learn is communicated to our congregation.

    This requires many detailed questions and accumulates a lot of data. For example, we ask questions like “How is the use of the term ἐκκλησία in the NT similar and different from the ways it was used in secular Greek?” This can be a daunting question. Here is a simple table taken from a Logos Word Study on ἐκκλησία.

Corpus                 Date                          Results

LXX           3rd/2nd Century      100 in 96 verses

New Testament     1st Century             114 in 111 verses

Apostolic Fathers     1st/2nd Century     89 in 77 verses

NT Apocrypha                                1 in 1 verse

Greek Classics                                  950 in 869 verses

     appreciate all that data, but it comes with risk. The risk of getting so buried in the details that one loses grasp of the forest whilst examining the trees. We have to become very good at determining as quickly as possible which of the details are relevant. Using the above table; The Classic citations are historically interesting but most come from materials that fall outside of the period of the “koine” or “common Greek.” There is only one citation from Apocrypha, not enough to draw any conclusions. So, we have eliminated 951 uses of the term without turning a page. The relevant questions that help determine how one wades through these details are: 1. Did the LXX use of the term “determine” how NT authors used it? 2. Did the Apostolic Fathers use the term the same way the NT authors did, along with the sub-question, how many of the citations in the Fathers are quotations, or allusions to the New Testament? In the end, the detailed work that needs to be done is comparing the LXX with the NT to determine the level of influence that the LXX exerts on the NT. 

    And there’s more! Consider this secondary issue. The papyri. There is a vast amount of data, from the same era in which the New Testament was written that is difficult to catalog and compare. You can do it. Most likely not by Sunday. This is where our lexical tools come into play. Now, for NT lexicography BDAG (Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, Walter Bauer, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.)  is the star of the show. And, as one would expect, the article is large, 7 pages. Yielding the following (I generalize) uses, Regularly summoned assembly, casual assembly, congregation, local assembly, and the universal Church. That is a lexical summary of the NT and early Christian literature. Another useful tool is Moulton & Milligan (Moulton, James Hope, and George Milligan. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1930.) This lexical tool defines NT terms in light of the usage in the Papyri. In other words, it solves the data overload problem. For the word in question, ἐκκλησία, M&N also adds the specific nuance that in the first century the Latin-speaking West did not translate the term—they adopted it as their own. This detail is significant. At the time the NT was written everyone knew what ἐκκλησία meant: an assembly. The LXX and the NT seem to follow common usage until it is invested with specific Christian meaning. 

    The ultimate question then, in the context of preaching.“What does the Bible say about the assembly of God’s people?”  With the follow-up,  "How much of what the Bible says about the Church is merely organizational minutia, and how much is “theologically laden?” The details matter because they contribute to our understanding, not just of a term, but the use of the term in context. We don’t merely preach words and their definitions. We preach the text which is constructed out of those linguistic pieces. 

    A preacher who is exegeting Matthew 16.18, or any other text that deals with the Church can summon the needed linguistic detail in minutes. This little exercise took about 15 minutes with professional-grade Biblical Studies Software. Saving time in this part of one’s study allows for other avenues of investigation. Doing fast what can be done fast is essential for symmetry. Once we are overwhelmed by the details it is very difficult to get “un-overwhelmed.” It is far better to approach our task with intent. The goal is a solid Biblical sermon. I want to balance my workload so that I know all I can about the details that best inform my trajectory through the text. Our study of the text undergirds our preaching of that text. We are teaching, exhorting, encouraging, and at times correcting. We teach what the text directs us to teach. A solid Biblical hermeneutic takes us from the study to the pulpit with as much transferable information as possible. 

    A word is in order, about the preaching trajectories we choose as we move through a text. Last Sunday I preached from Acts 2.14-36. I noted upfront, in the introduction to the sermon that this was the first text I preached as the resident of this pulpit and that I had, in total preached this text 5 times since coming to Grayville. How is that even possible? Did I simply use the same message every time? Wouldn’t someone notice? Yes, they would, I did not use the same message, and it is possible. The text tells a single story, but that story has different nuances, characters, applications, points of emphasis, and degrees of engagement. The story is always the same but our choice of which details to emphasize defines different arcs or trajectories we can take through the text in preaching. To do so you must know the details of the text. 

    A preacher needs to become proficient at moving, so to speak, in and out of the forest. Sometimes examining broader structures, other times focusing on individual trees. When we learn to do that, when we can both delve into the details and grasp the larger structures then we are able to preach with balance, not only within an individual sermon but also throughout an entire year—even an entire ministry.

Symmetry 4.11.2024

    Symmetry is not a word that we generally use in describing the contents of Christian thinking. The model for Christian thinking we have been considering focusing on Biblical, Historical, and Theological reasoning is my attempt to bring a kind of balance to the reasoning process. Much Christian thought tends to be an unbalanced reaction to the fallen reasoning that we find in the culture around us. Because human reason is corrupted by the fall many Christians have concluded that a part of our reasoning process is to correct these real or perceived imbalances. 

    The consequences of this intellectual move can have at least two results. First, it results in a pendulum effect with Christian thinking oscillating between extremes. Secondly, it results in skepticism regarding other domains of knowledge, and skepticism is another word for doubt. The issue here is that Christians advocate the position that God is the creator of everything. Consequently, He has a stake in all domains of knowledge—even those (say quantum mechanics) not mentioned in Scripture. This puts Christians in the untenable position of trying to defend one belief (creation) at the expense of or in ignorance of another (an ordered universe.) 

    The complications of the twenty-first century do not allow us the luxury of embracing extremes when a basic understanding of other relevant knowledge may be essential for contextualizing the message in our current environment. Balanced Christian thinking privileges the Bible as the source of information for those matters the Bible directly addresses, uses it as a filter in considering other related concerns, and critically examines other domains of knowledge where the Bible is silent. Yes, silent. The Bible was ultimately written to speak to the Church throughout its generations, but it was written in specific times and places, (in history) far different from our own. 

    Consider an example. Our culture depends on science and technology to expand knowledge. There are certainly technological concepts in play in the Biblical text. In the book of Judges for example we are told specifically that Sisera, who commanded the Canaanite army had at his disposal 900 iron chariots, the implication being that his iron-age army was stronger than Deborah and Barak’s bronze-age army. However, the velocity of technical change in Canaan was certainly not on par with the global technopolies we face. As a New Testament example, Paul was certainly able to take advantage of Rome’s advanced transportation system, which was still not so complex as contemporary air, sea, and land travel between modern nations situated on then-unknown continents. So yes the Bible describes certain events, concepts, or trends that have some commonality with what we experience. That does not mean that we can turn to Judges 4 and use it as a model for navigating technological change in the twenty-first century. 

    This may sound like a retreat from Biblical fidelity. It is not. It is a common-sense, and Biblically appropriate approach to the many areas of knowledge that, despite the claims of many hyper-literalists, the Bible does not address. The question then, once again, is how do we develop and deploy a hermeneutic, fully cognizant of the Bible, History, and Theology, that has the balance that we need to proclaim Christ within our complicated and evolving culture? 

Boundaries

    It begins with the affirmation that Biblical hermeneutics should set appropriate boundaries. These boundaries require accurate translations of the text(s), valid understandings of the social and cultural backgrounds, and relevant cross-disciplinary clarification. To vacillate between cultural ignorance and cultural surrender regarding either testament skews the result of the exegetical process. Common sense, guided by a healthy dose of reality is what keeps us balanced. This balance requires humility, a reluctance to be dogmatic where we cannot, and a willingness to refrain from drawing inappropriate conclusions. 

    The central boundary we need to respect is the temptation to absolute certainty. Yes, there are many matters that the Scriptures teach as unashamedly true. Good boundaries remind thoughtful believers that what the Bible teaches and what we think it teaches, what we insist it teaches, and what we loudly argue it teaches, is not always the same thing.  Consider a couple of old, Restoration Movement mottos. 

Calling Bible things by Bible names. 

Where the Bible Speaks, we speak, where the Bible is Silent, we are silent. 

These are basically boundary markers, reminders that we must not overstate the explicit or implicit message of the Bible. It is, unfortunately, possible to be so focused on the “truth” that our overemphasis says more than the text does. Boundaries are the beginning of balance reminding us of our own limitations and our propensity to exaggerate. 

Critical Thinking

    If people really thought, I would not need to use a modifier (Critical) to describe it. Critical thinking is asking the right questions, in context, using the appropriate tools of inquiry.  That is what all thinking should be! Sadly, it is not. I am amazed at how ignorant many people are of easily knowable information, and how lazy some are about turning information to understanding. The number of smart people who do not know accurately what they think they know is staggering. Our nation, the world, and politics are polarized because knowledge has been sacrificed on the altar of power, deployed only to marginalize, and alienate. 

    Biblical knowledge should never be intentionally divisive. The truth itself may be rejected but this should be because someone hears it, considers it, weighs it, and rejects it, not because the presentation is biased. Critical thinking allows the inquirer to look at issues from multiple perspectives. It is based on intellectual honesty and a commitment to fairness not some unobtainable sense of objectivity.

    It is imperative for Christians to engage in the broad intellectual currents of our culture, to examine both the good and the bad. To assess the ongoing damage from sin and to appreciate the amazing diversity of beauty that is created by those alienated from the very Creator who filled them with such creativity. 

    Learn. Listen, view, read, evaluate, examine, consider, and test the various domains of knowledge. Do so from a solid basis in the teaching of Scripture, do so with an understanding of the history of knowledge. And review the impact that knowledge has on theologians trying to bridge the gap between the wonders of scripture and the wonders of the created world. 

Breadth

    We are all the offspring of specific times and particular places. Transcending the limitations of our culture and context must be intentional. You need to have that intent. Each of us needs to expand the scope of our media and information intake. Each of us tends to like the music we grew up with, read books that affirm what we already know, and enjoy visible media that creates a sense of comfort. The materials we read, the music we listen to, and the films and programs we watch can become echo chambers and the seedbed of confirmation bias. In other contexts, this kind of insularity is called ghettoization. Ghetto’s trade homogenous comfort for reality. When we live in intellectual ghettos we become narrow, standoffish, boorish, temperamental, and arrogant. Just to be clear, Jesus was none of those things. 

    Broadening our horizons equips us to understand the various contexts in which we will be called to preach and teach the Scriptures. A broader appreciation for unfamiliar cultural expressions and  understanding other people and their native culture is not natural and requires us to be humble and accepting of others. If we remain in intellectual ghettos we eventually become ever narrower, to the point where we are insular, blind, and bigoted. Once again, Jesus was not insular, blind, or bigoted. Be like Jesus. 

    If you know the Bible, your own History, and are Theologically certain you should be comfortable rubbing elbows with those from different cultures and alternative religious traditions. Without balance, there is a good chance you will be an iconoclast whose certainty functions as a weapon. It is difficult both to “own” someone and serve them, to insult them and invite them to hear the Gospel. 

Conclusion. 

    Well, we all survived the Eclipse on Monday. I’m not actually surprised. There was a very vocal minority on the wackier side of the broader Christian community that used this beautifully creative act of our God to peddle conspiracy, mendacity, and…lunacy. Those who predicted the end or who vilify those who disagree with their narrow, egotistic, and nationalistic understandings of the Christian faith are a prime example of why we need balance. 

    Most of the Christians on the planet are not like us. Many of the most faithful in the broader Global flock come from different local and national traditions. They don’t speak English, they don’t read the King James Bible, and their traditions are 1,200 years older than our own. More than anything else symmetry is a matter of getting over ourselves. 

    You might be thinking, “What if I come into contact with something or someone that tempts me? What if I am shocked? Won’t this give Satan a toehold in my life? What if younger, more vulnerable people look at your plea for balance and find an excuse for heresy or immorality?” 

    To those questions, I offer this answer, versions of which I have used many times in many contexts. “Grow up, Get a job, and get over yourself.”  I’m sure that if Jesus had been around on Monday, He would have enjoyed the whole experience. I can imagine Him down by the Wabash, eating a sandwich and wearing those ridiculous glasses. I can hear Him asking where people came from and how they possibly found this little town. During His life, Jesus laughed and cried. He was filled with joy and anger. He spoke with kindness to the hurting and chastised the powerful. He knew the Bible. He understood His people’s history. He was able to debate theology. Above it all He was loving, kind, and good. Jesus lived a balanced life, and which changed the world. Perhaps it is time for us to look for the same kind of balance that Jesus demonstrated along with the grace, compassion, and love he had for every one of us. 

         

Eclipsed 4.4.2024

    It will be a big day one way or another. People all over Illinois are preparing. Most of us have known for months exactly how deeply we are embedded in the “path of totality.” Now we wait to execute our plan. 

    It is not uncommon to pray for sound weather. Generally, the prayer is not about the social and economic consequences cloud-cover on the day of a full solar eclipse. In the little town where I live hotel rooms are going for $1,000.00 a night. These are not suites! These are basic overnight, motel accommodations. This is more than 10x what they usually go for. The schools will be closed. Some businesses will be shuttered due to traffic issues. Even bare-bones camping sites in our public park are being rented for a premium. It just goes to show you that when the unusual occurs the usual is out the window. 

    It is at least an opportunity for the Church to be hospitable. While many clearly see this as an opportunity to cash in, we at the Grayville First Christian Church decided to be hospitable. If you don’t know what a pork burger is, suffice it to say that the description is accurate. In addition to giving away sandwiches we are giving away bottled water and have a good supply of eclipse glasses. The box does not say “single use,” which would be redundant considering how seldom such a thing is needed. 

    Any time there is a big, unusual event the Church needs to look for opportunities to be hospitable. It is almost like God has given us this opportunity to treat people with love and respect. In a world filled with stress and anxiety people need to know that the Church takes seriously Christ’s command to be neighborly and to extend His love to everyone. 

    The word eclipse has another use. As a verb, eclipse means that someone or something has been overshadowed, transcended, or become obsolete. Don’t get me wrong I think this whole eclipse thing is going to be a hoot. But this past Sunday we celebrated an event that eclipsed every other event. Nothing is as significant as the resurrection of Jesus. He eclipsed sin, He eclipsed death, He eclipsed the grave. So, just maybe whilst you are gazing through your protective eyewear next Monday you should give a brief word of thanks for our risen Lord who has eclipsed our every fear.