Christ in the Crucible

Every community of faith has its lunatic fringe. Some years ago, ‘the fringe’ was out in force on the St Louis streets surrounding an international gathering of my Protestant Christian denomination. I tried to accept all information they offered, as I can learn something from just about anyone with the courage to present his or her point of view. One 24-page booklet thrust into my hands was entitled ‘The Omega Apostasy: A History of the Development of Deadly Heresies’. Not wanting to be part of any ‘deadly heresies’ I launched into this booklet, searching for the not-so-apparent apostasy. Near the center-fold of this booklet I discovered it – belief in the Trinity. Well, this was a shocker. It felt like reading a statement that baseball was un-American. What could be less controversial in Christian belief than the Trinity?

More recently my Saudi client challenged me to consider whether I really was a mono-theistic believer in the God of Abraham, given that I believe in the Trinity – which he (mis)characterized as a belief in three gods.

In studying Jesus’ Gethsemane crucible this week, it matters whether God was making Jesus suffer or whether God’s suffering was Jesus’ suffering. If you believe that God’s suffering was Jesus’ suffering, review Matt 26:36-56, Mark 14:32-51, and Luke 22:39-52, and consider what it means to be God-like in suffering.

Similarly, in studying Jesus’ crucifixion, it matters whether God was exacting suffering or suffering Himself. Review Matt 27:27-56, Mark 15:21-41, Luke 23:26-49, and John 19:17-37, and consider how your conclusions differ with your beliefs about the nature of the so-called Trinity.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Waiting is the Crucible

As a teenager I attended a prayer seminar with hundreds of people gathered in a “big top” tent to share their testimonies to the power of prayer. One man stood up and tearfully recounted how his son had an aneurysm burst in his brain. As his son lay unconscious in hospital, a prayer network mobilized 3,000 praying Christians across the city of Melbourne, Australia. His son recovered completely, … a miraculous outcome given what his son had experienced. I got to my feet and asked,
“What would have happened if only 2,999 Christians had been praying?”

Totally insensitive, I know, but as a teenager I wanted to know what this experience said about God. Is there a tipping point with God, where 2,500 requests aren’t enough, but 3,000 independent requests for intervention are enough? I imagined God up in heaven with an ‘angst-ometer’ saying, “OK, now I’d better do something.”

Later in the seminar a woman recounted how she had prayed daily for her son who had rejected God. After 34 years of daily prayer, some 12,400 prayers by my reckoning, her son reached out to reestablish relationship with God. One of life’s more trying crucibles must be the daily knowledge that the most important thing in a parent’s life is nothing to their beloved child – that their child is choosing eternal separation from them and God. But this woman had prevailed in this crucible through the power of 34 years of prayer. Again, this insensitive teenager got to his feet and asked,
“What would have happened if you had missed a day?”

While patience like this woman displayed is indeed a virtue in the crucible of life experiences, it does raise questions regarding God’s character. Luke 18:1-8 recounts Jesus’ parable of the persistent widow seeking justice from a heartless, Godless judge. For some time he ignores her pleas, and then eventually declares,
“… because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t wear me out with my coming!”

This week it is worth considering not only whether patience is desirable in the crucible, but why? Is it because God is as heartless as the Judge in Luke 18? Or does our continued plea for His deliverance bring glory to Him in the heavenly courts? Read on in Luke 18.
“… will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly.”
© Alister L Hunt PhD

The Morality of Meekness

I often recall my father’s treasured sayings with which he sought to convey wisdom to the next generation. Some of Dad’s sayings are discarded and some treasured. For example, after I gave Angela flowers soon after we were married, my father told me, “No use chasing a bus once you’ve caught it.” He was joking … I think … and fortunately that is not a saying I live by. However, a saying that does stick with me is “Never trust humble people.” Or, relatedly, “Humility is the worst form of conceit”, a maxim that French writer François de La Rochefoucauld had recorded some 300 years previously. So, humility and its cousin meekness were vices that my father avoided with religious fervor, and he encouraged us to do likewise. Meek people did not have the courage to stand up for right, and apparently humble people are the most likely to seek their own good while you drop your guard.

The problem with this piece of Hunt family wisdom was that we also took the Bible fairly seriously as a guide to daily life, and it upholds humility and meekness as virtues, not vices. Examples include Matt 20:27,28; Luke 22:26; 1 Peter 5:6; 2 Cor 12:9,10; Phil 2:5-9.

Years ago Yusuf Khan challenged Angela and I to consider whether winning at squash was most important. “If you always want to win, its simple”, he said. “Just make sure that you always play people who aren’t as good as you.” It’s the same with having a lowly opinion of oneself – just make sure that you are worse than the people you compare yourself to. Just act awfully, make poor choices, and you will be sufficiently full of self-loathing that you will have no trouble with humility. Of course, this is just as silly as always playing poor squash players, and is simply inconsistent with “life, and life abundant”.

I believe that my life, and the lives of my family, has been tremendously blessed by seeking to live in accordance with the principles of the kingdom of heaven. Our lives are better as a consequence. Of course, people who have chosen to live by God’s principles have also experienced heartbreak, torture and a martyr’s death, but the general reality we observe is that living God’s way blesses our lives. You may see this as a shocking admission, but I often finding myself involuntarily praying from my soul, “God, I thank Thee that I am not as other men are.” Luke 18:11. I find myself praying the words that are iconic of arrogance – the Pharisee’s prayer – and meaning it. I am so grateful that God has delivered me at least partially from the fate of life lived without love or meaning. I pray that this realization will make me ever more reliant on God, rather than tempt me to self-sufficiency.

Of course, as you have probably already worked out, humility is not the same as self-loathing. It is the source of power and transformation in the Christian life. I read a wonderful book this Fall that was given to me by Gary Brown, principal of Columbia Adventist Academy. It is Andrew Murray’s 1895 book, ‘Humility: The Journey Toward Holiness’. Murray says it better than I can:

“Here we have the nature of true humility. … We must learn of Jesus, how He is meek and lowly of heart. He teaches us where true humility begins and finds its strength – in the knowledge that it is God who works all in all, that our place is to yield to Him in perfect resignation and dependence, in full consent to be and to do nothing of ourselves. This is the life Christ came to reveal and to impart – a life to God that came through death to sin and self. If we feel that this life is too high for us and beyond our reach, it must but the more urge us to seek it in Him; it is the indwelling Christ who will live in us this life, meek and lowly. If we long for this, let us, meantime, above everything, seek the holy secret of the knowledge of the nature of God, as He every moment works all in all; the secret, of which all nature and every creature, and above all, every child of God, is to be the witness, -- that it is nothing but a vessel, a channel, through which the living God can manifest the riches of His wisdom, power, and goodness. The root of all virtue and grace, of all faith and acceptable worship, is that we know that we have nothing but what we receive, and bow in deepest humility to wait upon God for it.”

Chapter 3, http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/murray/5f00.0565/5f00.0565.01.htm

© Alister L Hunt PhD

A Life of Praise

I'm probably not the best person to be commenting on a life of praise. Those vocal "Praise the Lord" type of Christians actually bother me! I suspect that Christians like that are hiding behind a happy facade in order not to deal with the bitter pill of reality.

A number of years ago I called to console a fellow pastor for the loss of a stillborn son. I was more than a little unsettled by his "God-be-praised" lack of grief! I think there is definitely a "time to mourn" and that to be happy during such a time might be a sign of psychosis rather than spiritual maturity. So I'm more than a bit suspicious of "Be Happy" and "Praise the Lord" theology!

But then I did like the movie Pollyanna, well, sort of. I especially enjoyed watching the "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" preacher become a "happy texts" man in the end. If you don't get the reference then you'll just have to watch the movie! And of course the holiday classic, "It's a Wonderful Life" always moves me. And the Bible is full of moving stories of people that refused to succumb to despair but instead found a way to praise God in the darkness.

So in spite of my natural pessimism it is nearly impossible for me to totally discount the power of praise. But what is it that makes praise such a force for good in our lives? In reading the story in 2 Chronicles 20 it hit me that when we praise we are liberated from fear. Praise is evidence that our lives are no longer bound by the fears that paralyze and control us.

Praise is the natural outgrowth of our trust in the love of God in all circumstances. Like king Jehoshaphat in the story we move from absolute fear (vs. 3) to confident praise (vs. 21) by trusting the Spirit that says, "Do not be afraid nor dismayed" (vs. 15) Praise is a sign that we are not merely animals dominated by instinct. We are not like Pavlov's dogs in that our responses are not always determined by external stimuli.

The good news of God is that we don't have to be determined by the negative external forces around us. From a psychological point of view Christians can have an "internal" rather than an "external" locus of control. Our emotions do not ultimately have to be dictated by our circumstances. Obviously we will respond to our circumstances with appropriate emotional reactions. If someone we love dies then we cry! If our lives are threatened we will react with fear. However, beyond these immediate reactions we have the possibility of praise.

Praise is a form of protest against the status quo! In our praise of God we imagine a world beyond what we now see and feel. In praise we enact a world in which God reigns. Praise is an eschatological act. It brings God's beautiful future into our very painful present.

Praise is our way of saying "No" to the present world and "Yes" to the coming kingdom of God. Praise makes the kingdom of God present in the here and now! Like faith, and hope, and love, praise is a piece of eternity that becomes flesh and dwells among us. Praise is our witness to the reality that God is with us, even here, even now!

© Paul Fisher

To Carry All Our Worry

I have faced machine guns, hit a Mack truck head on, and been stuck up a glaciated mountain overnight in inhospitable circumstances.

But I have also experienced bad stuff. Like times when my relationship with Angela was not what it should be and life almost seemed not worth living. In reviewing the 'crucible experiences' of my life, it is clear that the greatest challenges don't arise out of physical circumstances. I confess that Alister's bad experiences are laughable to most, as God has blessed me with exceptional relationships with my wife, children, extended family, professional associates and friends.

However, it is also clear, in reviewing the 'crucible experiences' of my life, that life's most mundane experiences can become trying beyond comprehension, as the following story illustrates. They say that the best and worst days of a man's life are the days his wife buys a travel trailer (a "caravan"). And the day she acquires the replacement trailer. And the day she acquires the second replacement trailer. Our correspondence with the travel trailer manufacturer is an inch thick, and I wasn't writing to tell them how pleased we were.

We finally got to the point where for sanity's sake there was nothing we could do but "let go and let God", as they say at Alcoholics Anonymous. We finally got to the point where we had no choice but to "carry all our worry" to God and wait for His deliverance (Wednesday's study, 1 Peter 5:7; Psalm 55:22; Matthew 6:25-33).

Here's an excerpt from Angela's prayer journal.

Right now I feel like the case is hopeless. I feel like I’ve tried so hard – maybe that’s the problem though? I’ve been doing the trying instead of letting go and letting God. But then I wonder if God thinks I am presuming on Him if I do nothing. Does God need my help? Does He expect me to do something? I find it hard to know what is patience and what is doing nothing. What is putting in an effort and what is doing it myself? I am going to leave it with God today – that’s extremely difficult for me to do. I so desperately want to pick up the phone and find out what’s happening. But I’m going to stop myself from doing that ... Maybe that’s patience because I’ve done my part in calling them.

I don’t know but I pray I’ll learn soon!

10 minutes – later
I just felt like something would happen when I finally wrote this down. And sure enough, 10 minutes after I finished the above, I got a call from [the company] saying they would tag the [best trailer they make] for us, and someone would be calling me later today re the final price...

2 hours – later
This is incredible isn’t it? Several journal entries on the same day within hours and even minutes of each other. When I finally hand it over to God, it all just happens. We need to give up on trying to make it happen!

Just got a phone call from [the company] to tell me the final price. He goes through the, “Well, this is a 2008 model whereas the last unit was only a 2006; this is obviously a much better trailer" (yes, we know that ...) and I think, 'just tell me the price!' Then he says, “how about you pay $[x]?” I tried not to sound ecstatic. That’s just over half of what we would have been willing to pay for the upgrade.

"What’s more", he said, "[the company] would take care of [other stuff]."

So there you have it – unbelievable answers to prayer – and I did nothing!

That’s just the point though. ...

This whole story has taught me so much about God, my faith and trust in Him. At one point I found myself saying, ‘Why can’t I plan my life like other people? Some people plan what they’re doing for Christmas or next year, we don’t even know what we’re doing next week!’ But I realized, that’s where the blessings come in. If we’re totally in control the whole time, how can God have any input? How can we be led by God when we do all the planning? I know we do need to plan, (another, where’s the balance type thing), but I guess it’s ‘make plans but be willing to be flexible and go with the flow’, because it was only when I let all of it go, and said, ‘I can live with whatever’, that God had a chance to do something wonderful for us.

I'm looking forward to hearing your experiences of "casting all your anxiety on Him". Because He cares for you.

http://www.absg.adventist.org/2007/4Q/TE/ETQ407_08.pdf

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Indestructible Hope [2]

It is seldom that an entire book of the Bible is just one scripture passage within a week's study. So I took the opportunity to read the book of Habakkuk several times this week. What a cogent distillation of the questions thinking people have had through all ages about God, suffering, violence and injustice. I highly recommend reading it this week.

I have recently heard Habakkuk quoted repeatedly;
" ... the LORD is in His holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before Him."
I had presumed that it was Biblical liturgical guidance, in support of the idea that worshipping God in church should be a fairly dreary affair, orienting the worshipper toward God's awesome detachment from this world and our lives. Minimal participation in church worship ... just silent awe as a liturgical elite intercedes between Almighty God and man.

So it was liberating to discover that Habakkuk was not providing liturgical advice at all. Lets look at the context of this well-known text (Hab 2:20). Habakkuk is comfortable enough in his relationship with God to say to Him,
"God, if You are truly 'all good', how can You stand by and watch idol-worshippers prosper as they plunder those who worship You, the true God. Something is very wrong."
And God answers Habakkuk by saying,
"Habakkuk, you have no idea what is in store for the wicked. The apparent riches they are amassing are just more fuel for the eventual fire of their own making. Their theft will multiply their enemies. Violence will rebound with unspeakable violence. And grand parties will lead to drunken disgrace. "

Then we get to God's punchline - a very clever juxtaposing of two things.
"Habakkuk, notice that these evil idol-worshippers that appear to prosper are actually doing all the work, and their idols just sit there doing nothing and saying nothing. But My relationship with My people is the opposite. I am asking you to trust Me enough to let Me deliver you. It's the opposite with Me. In our relationship, you just sit there ... as idle and silent as those idols while I deliver My people. I am working in My heavenly sanctuary on behalf of My people, so enter My Sabbath rest and watch My deliverance.

Angela and I are learning each week to trust more fully in God's deliverance, and to silently wait on God's intercession on our behalf. It is not easy, but every experience strengthens our resolve to trust God more fully and rely on our own efforts less.

Next week I'll share a personal story of God's recent deliverance as we kept silence before Him ... after, of course, trying everything else including letters, calls, negotiation, threats, etc. : )
Happy studying.
http://www.ssnet.org/qrtrly/eng/07d/less08.html

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Indestructible Hope [1]

Hope has more to do with the present than it does with the future. Hope is not simply the ability to see a bright light at the end of dark tunnel. It is more than just a toughness of soul that helps us to hang on until things get better. Hope may include all of these things but from a theological point of view it is much more.

Maybe the starting point for hope is given in Job's experience, "Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said: Now prepare yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer Me" (40.6-7) To be addressed by God is to be treated as an "I" rather than an "it" and that is a very hopeful beginning. Especially in an imperial world that often treats persons as "objects" with even less value than other material things. An example of this is in Revelation 18 in which the "bodies and souls of men" are listed at the bottom of a list of "merchandise" that starts with "gold and silver." Empire attempts to enslave the mind (psyche) as well as the body. Thus the liberation that God offers from the "principalities and powers" that govern human life is as much psychological as it is physical and spiritual. Hope is thus the liberation of the mind from the oppressive power of empire that seeks to diminish human worth and disempower human beings.

Notice the way that God addresses Israel in Isaiah 41.14, "Fear not, you worm Jacob, You men of Israel! I will help you, says the LORD And your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel." Why does God call Jacob a worm? Because the people of Israel had been in captivity in Babylon for decades and they had internalized the Babylonian's negative image of their nation. And that was a big part of the problem when the time came for them to return to their own land and rebuild their nation. The prophetic task involved energizing and empowering Israel for the hard task of nation-building that lay ahead of them. Internally, they were in no condition to do this because their social inferiority to Babylon during the long capitivity had become an inferiority complex for the nation. But God addresses the "worm Jacob" as the "men of Israel" and thus restores the dignity needed for the worms to become men again.

God is always working to empower those that have been disempowered by the violent and imperial powers and empires that have dominated history since nations were formed. The names may change (Assyria, Babylon, Rome, Germany, Russia, Iraq, Iran, America) but the underlying reality is the same. And Christians in all times and all places are called to struggle against the forces that constantly seek to colonize and control both minds and bodies. And in this struggle hope is the power that subverts the powers that be.

Hope ultimately has a christological focus because Jesus is the center and source of our hope, "For consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls" (Heb. 12.3). Such hope gives us strength to resist and courage to confront the external forces that make people feel less-than-human and worth nothing. The One that died on an imperial cross says, "Do not be afraid; I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore."

© Paul Fisher

Struggling With All Energy

I've often thought that the story of Jacob's struggle with "the Man" in Genesis 32 gives a new meaning to the old hymn, "He Touched Me." Jacob experienced the divine presence not as a healing touch but as a crushing blow that brought great agony. Carl Jung (Freud's most brilliant and wayward disciple) said that if the Bible (particularly the story of Job and the book of Revelation) teaches us anything it is that "though God can be loved, he must be feared."

As in so many other stories in the Bible, in Genesis 32 we again encounter the image of a violent God. But then as Alister suggested last week maybe these stories reveal more about the human misperception of God's character than anything else. Maybe our struggles with the God-that-crushes is really a struggle with our own internal violent demons. Maybe we project our own violent tendencies into the external world and especially onto God. I wish I had more to offer on this but "maybe" is the best I can do right now.

As much as the story troubles me on one level it also deeply inspires me on another. For example, I absolutely love Jacob's defiance, even after having his hip disclocated (or whatever the exact physical injury might have been). The "Man" says, "Let me go" and Jacob says, "I will not." That reminded me of God saying, "Let my people go" and Pharoah responding "I will not." The human will really is an imperial power. This is why tyrants and dictators of all stripes attempt to break it with violent force. So I applaud Jacob for refusing to submit to what he perceived at the time as divine violence. Somehow his faith recognized that behind what he experienced as the divine-power-to-crush was ultimately a divine-will-to-bless.

To me, the most profound moment in the story is the question in vs. 27, "What is your name?" The last time that Jacob had heard that question was when asked by his old and dying father Isaac. At that time Jacob had lied and said "Esau" in order to get what he wanted. As I see it these are the two defining moments in Jacob's life. In both instances the question is "What is your name?" I think Jacob spent most of his life pretending to be what he wasn't (Esau) in order to get the blessing that he desperately wanted. But he finally realized that it was enough to simply be Jacob. And the irony of it is that when he stopped trying to be something he wasn't (Esau) he became a new man and received a new name (Israel). How much of our lives do we spend trying to take what can only be received as gift?

Interestingly, the story itself does not name Jacob's assailant. Jacob even asks, "Tell me your name" but rather than an answer gets a probing question instead, "Why is it that you ask about my name?" Why is naming so important to us? Maybe it gives us a sense of control in that what we name we somehow think we know. By naming our children we indelibly place our stamp upon their lives. Giving something a name defines it and limits it and signifies our mastery over it (like Adam naming the animals and then his wife, which might have been an even bigger mistake than eating the forbidden fruit!). But in this story God is the nameless One. We can encounter but never control God. Every god that can be named is an idol of our own making. God will never comfortably fit in our small mental boxes.

I like the final image in our story: Jacob limping out into the bright light of a new day. He may not look like much of a hero but he has wrestled with (his perception of God) and prevailed! As the hymn says, "Now I am no longer the same. He touched me, . . . and O the joy that floods my soul!"

© Paul Fisher

Extreme Heat

Of all life's difficult experiences, none would compare to experiencing God and discovering that he is as bad as you had been told or had feared. Hardship and sorrow is for a season, but living with your Creator is forever. Even suicide is no escape to the "giver of life" if you believe that He created you immortal and does not respect your free will choice of mortality. In the Eagles' words, "You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave!"

Imagine living through an experience that leads you to conclude that God:

• is not faithful and forgiving (1 John 1:9),
• does delight in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11),
• does not keep His covenant of love to a thousand generations (Deut 7:9), and
• is pleased by acts of child sacrifice
  (Jer 7:30,31; Jer 32:35; Lev 18:21; Lev 20:2-5).

Of all life's crucibles, such an experience defines extreme heat. Is it possible that God would place His chosen, covenant people in such circumstances so as to bring us face to face with our misconceptions of His character?

Now, consider the anguish of soul that Abraham experiences when he perceives that God is quite happy destroying the evil people of Sodom and Gomorrah, without regard to the righteous people living there -- the so-called "collateral damage" of warfare. Abraham politely and respectfully reminds God that He is the upholder of truth and justice, and surely He has a responsibility to do right (Gen 18:25). In this experience, Abraham is led by God through an experience where he confronts his misconception of God; that God might not be good and just. But a chapter later, Abraham has seen the depravity of Sodom directed at Lot's household, has seen the deliverance of his nephew's household, and is overlooking the smoking remains of Sodom and Gomorrah, settled in his understanding of God's goodness.

Again, consider the anguish of soul that Abraham experiences when both he and his son perceive that God is pleased by acts of child sacrifice. Now, Hebrews 11 tells us that Abraham reasoned that his son would pass through this experience of death to life again, but that is not fundamentally different to the pagan belief that the child would "pass through the fire to Molech". Either God likes this sort of thing or he doesn't, and this crucible experience brings Abraham face to face with his incorrect conception of God as a being who likes this sort of sacrifice. By the end of the chapter an Angel has verbally stayed his hand and a voice from heaven has re-established God's covenant with Abraham.

Moses describes this experience as a test of Abraham's character, rather than a test of his understanding of God's character. However, an observation leads us to consider other explanations for this experience. That is, God knows the end from the beginning, so we know that God didn't put Abraham through this experience so that He, God, could learn something about Abraham. Perhaps it was so that Abraham could learn something about God?

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Seeing the Goldsmith's Face

The Power of Our Pain
The idea that God needs our pain to make us pure is more than a bit sadistic. Christianity is here dangerously close to the bloodthirsty god Huitzilopochtli that demanded human sacrifices in exchange for victory and prosperity for the Aztec people.A bloodthirsty god-image stands behind all "this is for your own good" theology (the writings of Alice Miller and Eugen Drewermann have opened my eyes to this twisted theology). Such theology is similar to a kind of thinking that is actually characteristic of abused children.Abused children tend to internalize their abuse by blaming themselves and excusing the abuser. Sadly, a lot of theology has this same effect in a spiritual sense by teaching that pain is the punishment for our sins and the means by which God purifies us from evil. Such an idea is really no better than the twisted logic of the abused child that says, "Daddy beats me because I am bad."Although I am more than a bit suspicious of the idea that suffering makes us pure I also see some therapeutic value in it. In a positive sense suffering actually motivates the quest to understand life. If I can make some sense out of what I am going through then the pain becomes more bearable.Maybe the belief that suffering can purify us is a way that we attempt to regain power in a situation that terrifies us because it reveals our powerlessness. If I can't control the situation then at least I can maintain my psychological mastery by figuring out what is happening and possibly even why it is happening.On a theological level I see an even deeper link between pain and purity in the Exodus story of the liberation of Israel from imperial oppression in Egypt. Exodus 2.23-25 says that "The Israelites groaned in their slavery and cried out, and their cry for help because of their slavery went up to God. God heard their groaning and he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac and with Jacob. So God looked on the Israelites and was concerned about them."In this text we see the power of voiced pain to get God's attention. It is not the shout of the victor but the cry of the victim that elicits a response from Yahweh. Scripture gives a loud voice to human misery because our pain attracts God's presence to our lives. I don't think that God needs suffering to make us pure but our pain is like a magnet to the divine power. Ironically, that which most exposes our weakness is the very thing that attracts God to us!

© Paul Fisher

The Birdcage

As we bumped across 3,000 miles of Quebec and the Atlantic Provinces of Canada over recent weeks, our family listened to the 'Your Story Hour' dramatization of the Advent Movement's beginnings. New Zealanders don't generally have much time for history, largely because we don't have much to speak of. Our idea of history is what we had for breakfast. It’s all about the future. But these audio CDs were fascinating. I had read much of the so-called 'Great Disappointment(s)' of 1843 and 1844 without internalizing what it really meant to have experienced the 'Great Disappointment'.

Imagine experiencing an intense sense of God's revelation of undiscovered Biblical truth, simultaneously with many others around the world. Clear. Simultaneous. Compelling. Imagine how much more devastating the 'Great Disappointment' was to the Advent believers in that it followed what unmistakably appeared to be God's leading.

I had not really taken the time to consider the depths of despair that the early Advent believers would have experienced. They had truly sacrificed everything. Twice. They dealt with unbelievable ridicule. Twice. Just hearing of the oppressive darkness and deep depression that the Advent believers experienced is hard to bear, so imagine what experiencing it would have been like. As the actors decide to not plant crops or to sell the farm, I want to shout back through time, "No, don't be rash. You'll regret it. I know how this story ends."

God knew how the story would end. He knew the early Advent stories before the foundation of the Earth. Assuming that God was leading men and women who loved Him to ignore His clear statements recorded in Matt 24 and Mark 13 that "... of that day and hour knoweth no man", why would God do that? Why would God provide so much evidence of His leading of a movement that resulted in seemingly insurmountable disappointment, adversity and suffering? Why would God choose to establish a movement based on clearly incorrect Biblical interpretation? Surely if He wished to see His champions of truth flourish in the market for ideas he would not have saddled them with such ridicule for apparently no reason. Why didn't he kick off the Advent movement through revelation of Biblical understandings that led to spectacularly fulfilled prophecy? Why didn't God reveal the future to His followers and thus lead them to widespread fame and influence, like Twain's Hank Morgan achieved in King Arthur's Court?

Why would God speak in Revelation 10 of a Divine revelation that would turn its recipient's stomach sour? Why would Daniel use words like "deeply troubled", "exhausted", "ill" and "appalled" to describe his experience after Divine revelation?

Could it be that God chose to establish the Advent movement, of which we are a part in some way or another, by leading people into experiences that he knew would include disappointment, adversity and suffering? If God led them through such intense darkness so that they would learn to sing, what is that song? And how was it perfected in disappointment and derision?

This gives us something to ponder as we consider examples where God led his people into circumstances in which they experienced disappointment, hopelessness and apparently insurmountable adversity. I look forward to insights borne of our shared experience of God's leading in our lives.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

The Crucibles That Come

This introduction to this study (pg 5) noted that: "Our lessons are not a theodicy, the justification of God in the face of evil."

Rather, their intended objective is "...to help us work through the inevitable suffering we all face here in a world where sin is as easy as breathing."

Yet, it is all but impossible to seriously study the role of pain, suffering and loss in the Christian life for many weeks without tripping over issues that challenge our concept of God's character.

One such challenge occurs in the study guide (pg 15).
"Many of us are surprised about suffering because we often have an oversimplified view of the Christian life. We know there are two sides—God, who is good; and Satan, who is bad. But often we then automatically put everything that feels good in the box with God and everything that feels bad in the box with Satan. But life is not so simple."

I like simple. I am a Christian at least partially because I recoil from the Eastern perceptions of a complex god, neither fully good, nor entirely bad. I can't pursue a relationship with God if I believe him to be just like me - neither fully good, nor entirely bad - but with the power of life and death.

We have a great study here, which makes it clear that some of the Christian life's 'other experiences' are at the very least allowed by God, or not removed by Him. Do you believe, as you read this email, that you have been given a thorn in the flesh? (2 Cor 12:7) What is your thorn in the flesh? Where did it come from, who caused it, and who "gave" it?

I will never forget visiting a doctoral colleague in the hospital, covered in burns that would take a lifetime of surgery, corsets, pain and disfigurement ... and muttering something ill-advised about "God sending us trials to refine us". This strong, resolute Christian man, who was willing to face death to save his child from the flames of their burning home, burst into uncontrollable sobs, and continued crying until I shuffled my way out of his hospital room. I wanted to cry with him, wracked with the pain of my own insensitivity; wracked with the pain of my inability to articulate God's role in suffering in a vaguely plausible, rational, comforting way.

My bedside sensitivity has improved somewhat over the years with greater glimpses of God's goodness and a greater understanding of my limited comprehension of what is truly transpiring in the Great Controversy between Christ and Satan. But I have a lot yet to learn, not only from this week's study and discussion, but from the lessons to come. Perhaps we can all learn together and from each other?

© Alister L Hunt PhD

The Shepherd's Crucible

Thanks for the invitation to comment on the first lesson of this quarter’s Sabbath School lessons. I always read your comments and follow the discussions of your group with great interest!

As I see it Psalm 23 is one of those Bible texts that suffers from overexposure! It has been quoted so frequently and memorized so routinely that it is difficult to even hear what it has to say because we are overly familiar with it. The old saying might apply here that “familiarity breeds contempt.” But let me take a stab at it from what I hope might be a fresh point of view.

The fact that Yahweh is referred to as a “shepherd” is very interesting. I see this as a counter-cultural statement of Israel’s faith. In the surrounding cultures deities were often depicted as kings and warriors (an example of the inferior status of shepherds in imperialistic cultures like Egypt can be found in Exodus 46.34). And even in the Hebrew Scripture we find the same imperial images applied to God.

To call the God of Israel a shepherd was a profound and subversive act of the religious imagination. It represented a new way of conceiving of Israel’s relationship to God. I think it would be similar to the effect on our spiritual lives of beginning to refer to God as “our mother in heaven.” It would create an entirely different sense of our relationship to God and would alter the way that we experienced God in our lives.

In a modern context the image of shepherd is probably not so helpful for us because we have no real living connection with shepherds. But I think it is an example of how the Scripture communicates to people within the context of their own culture. Israel was after all, in its origins, simply a humble nomadic people. Maybe in our context we might say that the Lord is our “Dog Whisperer” (for those that don’t watch as much TV as I do that is a reference to a popular dog trainer show).

I also find the progression within the text quite fascinating. We move from “green pastures” and “quiet waters” (vs. 2) to the “valley of the shadow of death” (vs. 3) to a “table” in the presence of enemies” (vs. 5) to the “house of the Lord” (vs. 6). The dark part of life is sandwiched between two highly desirable parts. This reminds me of the words of Jesus in Revelation 1.18, “I am the living one; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever!” Death is surrounded by affirmations of life with the emphasis on unending life. Often in the crucible of life’s miseries it is only memory and hope that can sustain our spirits!

Psalm 23 ultimately leads us from a comfortable place through pain and fear to the presence of God. Honestly, I wish it could be different and that the text would lead directly from the “green valleys” and “quiet waters” to the “house of the Lord.” But as Freud taught wishing does not make it so.

Let me encourage you to share your “valley” experiences with each other. I know it can be difficult to be vulnerable and real with each other but it is well worth it. My own valley right now is financial insecurity. I’m in the mortgage industry that has taken a real hit recently and as an independent contractor the work is hard to find. I’ve seen much greener pastures and I really long for the house of the Lord where there will always be plenty for everyone!

May God’s grace and peace rest on each of you!

© Paul Fisher

Hosea and Gomer: Forgiving the Unfaithful

It is interesting to look at Hosea 1 through 3 from a family relationship perspective, rather than as just allegorical of God's relationship with His 'adulterous' people. Specifically, how would (should?) we respond to the loss of trust in family relationships? In any relationships? If children are involved, how are they affected?

I fully expect my wife to extend no forgiveness if I were to be unfaithful to my marriage vows. Whether she would or not is another matter, but rationality would suggest that she withdraw her trust and that would be the end of marriage in any real sense. Any relationship requires fidelity at some level. From my time in Rwanda I recall a pastor who was unfaithful to his wife while serving in another country. When it became known, he apologized, asked for forgiveness, and was moved into administration. He then went on to commit an immense financial fraud, and to continue to be unfaithful to his wife. I made a mental note to myself to not extend any grace whatsoever to a person unfaithful to their marriage vows.

So, I confess that's my zero-forgiveness approach to infidelity. Its a bit like the Old Testament Jewish approach, save for the messiness of that stoning business.

Consider, for a moment, the slightly more flexible Islamic approach.

Imran b. Husain reported that a woman from Juhaina came to Muhammad and she had become pregnant because of adultery. She said: I am pregnant as a result of Zina. Muhammad said: "Go back, and come to me after the birth of the child". After giving birth, the woman came back to Muhammad, saying: "please purify me now". Next, Muhammad said, "Go and suckle your child, and come after the period of suckling is over." She came after the period of weaning and brought a piece of bread with her. She fed the child the piece of bread and said, "Oh Allah's Apostle, the child has been weaned." At that Muhammad pronounced judgment about her and she was stoned to death.

Now, consider the New Testament approach, as reflected in Jesus' response to the woman caught in adultery. 'Neither do I condemn you. ... Go and sin no more.' (John 8:11).

It would appear that I have something to learn about the redemptive power of forgiveness, and the hope against evidence that springs from [God's] intense love for those that don't live up to their covenant vows.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Ahab and Jezebel: Abuse of Authority

I vividly recall Angela and I leaving Rwanda in December 1988. As we filed onto the plane, a soldier lewdly asked whether he could have my woman. I dismissed his comment for the preposterously absurd statement that it was. No-one owns Angela, not even me. However, the fact that he was holding a machine gun made his request for 'my woman' all the more unsettling.

I recalled this experience while reading of Ahab's response to King Ben-Hadad in 1 Kings 20. Ben-Hadad's messengers tell Ahab to send over his wives and children -- and he placates him by sending some of them over. Can you imagine what sort of a family dynamic that would create! Consider what it would be like to realize that you are in the expendable category of family members. And consider what it would have been like to remain in Ahab's household. You would be constantly reviewing where you stood in the household, wondering whether you would be in the next shipment to Ben-Hadad. Would you feel protected? Would you feel that you had a husband or father that depicted God's willingness to sacrifice himself for the salvation of His household?

One thing I learned in Africa is that you never give into a threat from someone in authority, because to to do so is only the beginning of trouble, not the end of it. To give into authority abused is to mark oneself as weak and invite a series of increasingly exacting demands. As husbands, wives, parents, how do we respond when our household is threatened in one way or another by someone abusing authority? Romans 13 tells us to submit to all authority, since it has been established by God. That's one approach -- Ahab's initial response to Ben-Hadad. The other is to do whatever it takes to stand up for right on behalf of our families -- Ahab's second response to Ben-Hadad that enabled God to work a victory on behalf of His people.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Faith Without Fear

A friend loaned me an audio CD excerpt from the 'Faith Without Fear' PBS series that aired earlier this year. It deals with Islam's ability to grow in its understanding of God through dialogue and debate, and with restoring humanity and reason to Islam.

I recommend listening to the CD, as it has implications for fundamentalist Christianity -- restoring humanity and reason to Christianity. If you wish to purchase the CD, here is a link to find it on the web.

http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=2657860&cp&kw=faith+without+fear&origkw=faith+without+fear&sr=1

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Family Relationships Before and After the Fall

Let's look at what Genesis says about the male/female/family dynamic, and for the purpose of this exchange, let's look at it in two parts - the 'before-sin' and the 'after-sin' relationship.

FACTS BEFORE THE FALL

Fact 1. Before sin, Adam observed that everything on earth came in matching pairs, and he had no match.

Genesis 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

Fact 2. God, who could have made Adam's match any way he wanted to (having made Adam from the very elements), chose to use a piece of Adam, and a specific piece at that. He chose a rib - a part of the body that gives structure to a man and protects his heart (and other vital organs) -a part of the body that is located at the side of man.

Genesis 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof.

Fact 3. God delivered her to Adam - Adam didn't go looking.

Genesis 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Fact 4. Adam's response was to conclude (and declare) that his match was verily himself and that she was the perfect match - literally a part of him. For this reason - that a woman and man are a perfect match - the man would leave all that was meaningful to him up until that time and "cleave" (to cling, stick, stay close, cleave, keep close, stick to, stick with, follow closely, join to, overtake, catch) to his wife, and the two would actually become (or be as) one flesh.

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Fact 5. They were completely at ease with each other physically/sexually.

Genesis 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

FACTS AFTER THE FALL

Fact 1. Eve trusted her own judgment rather than the explicit word of God.

Genesis 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Fact 2. Adam put his love for/trust in Eve ahead of the explicit word of God.

Genesis 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Fact 3. With the introduction of putting something ahead of God, both began to be uncomfortable with who they were.

Genesis 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Fact 4. Even though they knew something was wrong, they avoided dealing with it directly, instead choosing to avoid, cover up, and deny the reality of their circumstances.

Genesis 3:7,8 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

Fact 5. When confronted with the reality of their circumstances, while they initially admitted what they had done, they immediately began blaming anyone but themselves for their circumstances. The upshot being that they were actually blaming God.

Genesis 3:10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. 11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?" 12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

Fact 6. The result of all their failure to put God's word above all else (and I emphasize result) was that they were changed from the 'before-the-fall' relationship. The effect of sin on them would be a chronic tension between the forces of good and evil in the lives of all mankind. (Thankfully the ultimate resolution was promised at the same time.)

Genesis 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Fact 7. They would lose the natural oneness that had been the gift and the plan. In its place, woman would look to man for her sense of self worth rather than to God. Her life would be filled with sorrow in general, in sex in particular, and even the unfettered joy of bearing children would now be tainted with heartache.

Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Fact 8. Man would no longer cleave to his wife, but rather work would consume him. He would be so obsessed with making a living that he would have little time for his family. Because of this, life would be hard all his days, bitter to his natural end, when he would die, leaving everything that had consumed his focus for all those years to be fooled away by those who came after him.

Genesis 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; 18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Fact 9. Grown men and women would be dependent upon their parents for some of the most basic needs rather than being able to provide for themselves.

Genesis 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

Fact 10. Parents would ultimately need to put up barriers between themselves and their children for the overall good, going so far as to put them out of the house and cut them off from inheritance in extreme cases.

Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Now let's review and draw some conclusions.

Before the fall, Man craved the company of a mate. He yielded his choice to God, who then provided him with the perfect mate, rather than seeking to solve the problem for himself. Having waited upon God and having received the perfect, God-given mate, he not only cleaved to her himself, but prophesied that all mankind to follow would do the same. (Remember, he was prophesying for sinless man.)

He intuitively (in his sinless condition) recognized that Man was to leave all else and to become one with his mate (excepting God, of course). Even the name he gave her indicated by its very meaning that she was a part of him.

The fall came about because both Man and Woman put their self interest ahead of God's explicit word. (This point cannot be overemphasized, either in understanding what went wrong or in recognizing the solution to undoing the harm that was done.)

The characteristics that have plagued and destroyed families ever since, very rapidly became apparent.

1. Acting on one's own volition rather than consulting/communicating with spouse
2. Denying and covering up the results of bad choices and enabling the spouse to do the same by not making him/her accountable for their choices
3. Blaming others rather than taking responsibility for one's choices/actions
Additional problems that plague and destroy families were foretold.

For women:

1. Insecurity, lifelong unfulfillment that even childbearing ultimately can't assuage, domination by the stronger sex

For men:

1. A lifetime of all-consuming hard work and sweat that takes all his focus and energy and makes him intolerant and impatient for gratification when he gets a few minutes to relax. See anything you recognize there? :-)

In the end, it is only by aiming at the 'before-the-fall' ideal, while at the same time recognizing the 'after-the-fall' realities, that we can begin to realize the wholeness that God had and has in store for us.

God didn't make women to need a man's support in order to feel good about herself, and he didn't make man to be so preoccupied with life that he can't nurture his wife - sin did that. Our work in this, as in every area of our lives, is to offset the effects of sin insofar as is possible by seeing what God's ideal was and by His grace trying to achieve it.

© Dennis Farley

July 2007

The Bible and Happiness

"That your joy may be full."

Thus goes the well-known Christian chorus, quoting John 15:11,12,
"This is my commandment
that you love one another,
that your joy may be full."

Great song, but a tremendous simplification of Jesus' message in John 15, which is an amazing call to enter into the thought and actions and will of God, just as Jesus had experienced with God the Father.

The phrase "that your joy may be full" occurs several other times in the New Testament (John 16:24, 1 John 1:4, and 2 John 1:12). Lets look a little more closely at 1 John 1:4 in context. While it says that this scripture was written that our joy may be full, the context indicates that a specific message was being imparted to provide joy to its hearers. Both the message preceding and following this text have implications for happiness.

The verses prior to 1 John 1:4 tell us that Jesus revealed to us the Father, and that Christian fellowship is in fact to participate in the connectedness that Jesus and the Father share. This resonates with the message in John 15, our first instance of the "joy may be full" phrase. The verse after 1 John 1:4 specifically states what this message of happiness is. It is that Jesus revealed to us that God the Father is good. All good. Not Yin and Yang. Not predominantly good. All good.

"This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all."

How is that simple bumper-sticker message, "God is Good", the basis of complete human joy? Surely there is more to living a joyous life than perceiving God's character? Perhaps God's gift of marriage helps us understand this truth? True joy in marriage is not in things, money or circumstances, but in knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt that one's life partner is a good person.

Lets ponder the linkage, if any, between an understanding of God's goodness and complete human joy.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

The Bible and Health

If we surveyed people, asking them to list religions and spiritual writings in rank order of their linkage to a healthy life, where would Christianity and the Bible come? Top of the list? Dead last? Or, somewhere in the middle?

Christian faiths have not developed traditions of breathing, stretching, exercising, concentrating, meditating, etc. Other religions have stolen the march on the concept of spiritual enlightenment as a path to health. Bible-believing Christians stand wide-eyed, flat-footed, and with mouths gaping as the Western world launches headlong after Chi, Chakras, Ayurveda, the Noble Eightfold Path of Buddhism, and the whole nine points of the Bahai'i star.

Deepak Chopra is working on his 30th book on spirituality and health, long after the Christian New England Memorial Hospital, from which he launched his spiritual health career, has closed its doors. Christian Science churches are empty, save for a few appreciators of fine music. Mary Eddy is not resonating with the populace. When the world seeks healing through spiritual insight, they read the Dalai Lama, or Chopra -- not the Bible.

Why is that?

Worse than scoring a big, fat zero for health outcomes, Christianity is often cited as the source of the guilt and work ethic that is allegedly causing the demise of Western Civilization's health. Big neg, not just big zero.

Christianity clearly differs fundamentally from many other religions in its approach to spirituality and health. Maybe causality is reversed? Is it possible that the Bible focuses on spiritual enlightenment with implications for the body, whereas other religions focus on the body as a means of achieving spiritual enlightenment?

We certainly need to move past misquoting Prov 23:7 as a Biblical basis for the mind-body connection (read it in context and you will see what I mean), and toward a Christian theology of healing. In this regard, we have an excellent study here. Enjoy.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Revelation From Heaven

What a revelation it was to read this scripture (Romans 15:4) in context! Sure, Paul's words beautifully portray scripture's role in establishing Christian hope, but the context provides a powerful message.

Read the prior chapter and you will see that scripture was being used to tear apart the emerging Christian church. Paul powerfully states the freedom we have in Christ, and then passionately pleas for his fellow believers to not destroy the faith of weaker members through either
(a) imposing deeply held scripturally-based convictions on others, or
(b) exercising Christian freedom in ways that are damaging to Christian faith or unity.

Then, in Chapter 15 Paul says we have to empathize with the concerns of others, just like Jesus did. And he applies Psalm 69:9 to Jesus and to us -- just as Jesus was one with God in bearing the blasphemous insults of those around Him, we also should empathize with the cares and concerns of our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Right in the middle of making this point, he slips in verse 4, which is central to this study. In context, he is saying 'notice how I just used scripture to edify the church, rather than divide it. Lets use scripture to bring encouragement and hope into each other's lives, rather than to bring others into bondage.'

How have each one of us used scripture to bring others into bondage? Or, into hope? In your community of faith, is scripture a source of endurance, encouragement and hope, or is it a source of division and bondage?

Angela's Christian faith was molded in a church fond of quoting from a book called Christ's Object Lessons,
"Those who accept the Saviour, ..., should never be taught to say or to feel that they are saved. This is misleading."

This statement was never placed in the context of dozens of bible verses and quotes by the same author that present an abiding, enduring relationship with Christ as a present reality. See
http://www.andrews.edu/~jmoon/Documents/GSEM_534/Class_outline/Assurance%202004.pdf

Nigel, a school friend of mine, shot himself in the head with a rifle (which takes a bit of doing) because what he had been taught from the Scriptures robbed him of endurance, encouragement and hope.

Yes, Romans 15:4 is a beautiful testimony to the Bible as a source of hope, but it comes right in the middle of a heartfelt warning against using scripture to divide and destroy the body of Christ.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

The Word in Our Lives

Years ago, Angela and I were frequent guests in the Canadian home of a man whose success I admired. He and his wife were wonderful hosts to us, but he expressed disdain for some of our behaviors that he found peculiar. For example, I recall being addressed from the other end of a long dinner table;
"Alister, when when you grow up, you will find this to be a fine whisky."
Advice duly noted, ... and discarded.

Last year Angela and the girls visited our erstwhile hosts and found not a hint of disdain. He asked whether he could say bed-time prayers with our girls, and his conversation with God and the girls confessed to a relationship with God that he had previously resisted and rejected.

What made the difference? Can the Bible re-create a person?

Could evidence of re-creation speak more for the Bible's validity than does evidence for Creation?

What is the Bible's track record as a change agent in human lives? I lived in Rwanda for a year, a country that had more members of my Christian denomination than any country on the planet. When church was out, the city's traffic ground to a halt! But all those Sabbath School lessons and Bible-based sermons didn't preclude the subsequent brutality of the 1994 Rwandan Genocide.

You may have acquaintances with encyclopedic Biblical knowledge and no evidence of a relationship with Him who is Love. Does this argue for rejecting the Bible? Are our acquaintances likely to seek out Bible truth because of what they see it doing in our lives?

© Alister L Hunt PhD

The Bible and Science

A vivid childhood memory is of sitting amongst members of Dad's sales team on Sabbath afternoon, listening to discussions of God, the Bible and how the world works.

Chris, a member of that group, had an engineering background and an expansive mind. I recall Chris' excitement as he pursued a picture of God emanating from Genesis 1:3, "And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light." Chris understood that the physical matter of this universe can be conceived of in terms of energy and waves, much like visible light. So, the next thing he was busily calculating out in his head the energy equivalence of the earth's mass -- energy equals mass times the speed of light squared.

Chris was in awe of this picture of the power of God's word that could bring physical matter into being. The numbers he came up with meant nothing to me as a child (and probably wouldn't now), but the vivid picture of a person earnestly seeking out an understanding of God through scientific insight remains with me.

How do you gain glimpses of God in the 'science' of your vocation?

As an economist I am constantly amazed at the beauty of market equilibrium. The "invisible hand" of Adam Smith's 1759 'Theory of Moral Sentiments' provides me with a glimpse of the free, self-ordering nature of God's universe -- a picture of the "Great Architect of the Universe", as Smith put it. Others don't share my excitement with equilibrium, suggesting that markets are from the dark side of 'dog eat dog' competition instead of heavenly harmony. But I can see the beauty of "voluntary market exchange such that both parties are better off" as part of the creative order of God's universe. Karol Wojtyla, better known as Pope John Paul II, was prominent among many Christians in recognizing that free economic creativity is part of what it means for us to have been created in God's image.

This study asks us to consider how the Bible can contribute to our understanding of science. I encourage you to consider how the Bible affects your view of scientific knowledge in your field of daily endeavor. Do you see pictures of God where others see randomness and chance?

© Alister L Hunt PhD

When the Rocks Cry Out

While this study primarily examines archaeological support for the Bible's historicity and authenticity, it also examines the nature of Christian faith. Interestingly, this week the US is examining the basis for Mormon faith, with considerable coverage of Mormonism on both Public Television and National Public Radio. A recurring theme is that all religious revelation is somewhat mystical, so we need not press on the details too hard -- Nephi Plates, or the Bible.

What part does the Bible's authenticity play in your Christian experience?

How seriously have you evaluated the Bible's authenticity?

How seriously should we?

Here is an excerpt from an interview with Terryl Givens, professor of literature and religion at the University of Richmond and author of 'By the Hand of Mormon: The American Scripture that Launched a New World Religion'. Read through the excerpt and consider whether you could insert 'Bible' in place of references to the Book of Mormon.

'My idea going into this study of the _____, ..., was if the _____ is true, then it has to stand up to the most rigorous assaults and critiques that skeptics and nonbelievers can make. So I made every effort to honestly, fully investigate every criticism, every objection that's ever been made to the historicity of the _____. One has to suspend judgment in a number of cases, because it's hard to say when the evidence will all be in, but at the present there are still a number of unresolved anachronisms and problems and ambiguities in the text.

But I felt satisfied that there was in every case a corresponding weight on the other side of the equation, which actually led me to, I think, some very important insights into the nature of faith and how faith works. I came to the conclusion, ..., that for faith to operate, and for faith to have moral significance in our lives, then it has to at some level be a choice. It can't be urged upon us by an irresistible, overwhelming body of evidence, or what merit is there in the espousing of faith? And it can't be something that we embrace in spite of overwhelming logical rational evidence to the contrary, because I don't believe that God expects us to hold in disregard that faculty of reason that he gave us.'

© Alister L Hunt PhD

The Bible is Reliable

We continue our study of Biblical authenticity and reliability, addressing
external validity -- the resurrection as the basis of faith -- and
internal validity -- the New Testament's reliance on the Old Testament.

Both are important and interesting studies.

Here's something to think about. Do the references by Jesus, Paul, etc. to the OT indicate reliance and authenticity? Or, were they just referring to something that their hearers could relate to, much as we might refer to the 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy or Narnia Tales to illustrate a concept?

Note that there are quotations in the New Testament from the heathen poets, such as Aratus in Acts 17:28, Menander in I Corinthians 15:33, and Epimenides in Titus 1:12. Also, there are eleven margin references in the original King James Bible to Apocryphal books.

So, as we read through NT references to the OT, lets consider whether they are intended to establish and strengthen our reliance on the scriptures, or whether they are nothing more than, say, Paul's reference to the poet Menander.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

Bible Prophecy Fulfilled

I watched an interesting film as a teenager. A judge empanels an independent jury and then a lawyer presents a 'case' for Jesus being the Messiah. The jury returns a verdict of 'Messiah' on the basis of incontrovertible evidence.

Powerful stuff - prophetic fulfillment - that strengthened my faith.

It wasn't until recently that I read the messianic prophecies in context and found that they weren't quite as forensic as I had thought as a teenager.

For example,

* Matt 2:15 reference to Hosea 11:1 (Messiah called out of Egypt)
Hosea was actually talking about God's deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, and deliverance from idol worship, etc., not the Messiah.

* Matt 2:18 reference to Jeremiah 31:15 (Herod kills the babies)
Jeremiah was talking about Rachel weeping for her children, who are then brought back from captivity by God, not the Messiah.

* Matt 2:23 reference to ..., well, that's the problem. Its a reference to nothing identifiable in the 66 books of scripture.

These three examples from one New Testament chapter make it look like my 'case' is unravelling! What do the rest of the New Testament references back to Messianic prophecies look like in context? If you were a member of the jury, what would your verdict be?

I don't raise this issue to shake your faith in Jesus as the Messiah. Rather, I want us to have a look at each of these OT / NT linkages in full context BEFORE we engage in trying to prove to someone that Jesus is the fulfillment of Messianic prophecy.

When I was a teenager I was happy to rush through a prepared Bible study guide, ticking off each apparent NT fulfillment of OT prophecy. But I would hope that the rigor of my Biblical analysis and understanding would have progressed in the last 30 years. All of us are analytical thinkers in our respective fields, and we owe it to ourselves to bring at least that same level of rigorous thinking to our Bible study, particularly study that purports to be forensic.

Take the time to prayerfully read the Messianic prophecies that may lead to another Emmaus Road experience with Christ.

© Alister L Hunt PhD

The Final Word

Some years ago I was selling Christian books door-to-door and happened to call on the local Anglican clergywoman. She dressed me down emphatically for selling expensive books to parents who, according to her social analysis, could barely afford to feed their children. Being the impertinent youngster that I was, I responded by quoting Matthew 4 to her -- scripture from this week's study.

Visualize it: young Alister standing on the vicarage doorstep, quoting "It is written: Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God." She was quite unimpressed, and said "That's the problem with you fundamentalists; always quoting scripture." Well, she was only 21% right, as last week's entry attests.

Jesus was, of course, quoting from Deuteronomy, where God fed the Israelites with manna from heaven. It's fascinating to go back and read Deuteronomy and realize that we typically use this scripture out of context. God is reminding his people of his care and leading over the last 40 years and then says:
'I gave you manna so that you would know that you are sustained not by your own efforts, but by my word. I covenanted with you, and I will not forget my word.'

What word? Well, we have to go back 40 years to the Exodus, with the Egyptians hot on their trail. The prophetic word from God through Moses was
'Do not be afraid. Stand firm and you will see the deliverance the Lord will bring you today. ... The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.' (Ex 14:13,14).

Manna follows in the next chapter.

Two thousand years later, Jesus was not so much making a statement about scriptural authority as he was declaring His reliance on His Father, even in circumstances of extreme hunger far beyond anything the Israelites experienced in their 40-year wilderness safari.

This week's study is a case for the 'authority' of scripture, with Jesus' reliance on scripture as Exhibit A. The 'authority' of scripture has always been of more interest to the supposed custodians of God's word than it has been to God's people. If the Bible is the 'final authority', then clergy entrusted with expositing and ruling on scripture also have 'final authority'. Fortunately, most of us meet within a community of faith that rejects such views. But Jesus had to deal with that view head on. In the Sermon on the Mount, he repeatedly rebuts Biblical interpretation that is inconsistent with His character with "You have heard it said, ... but I say ..." (Matt 5). Nothing is 'final' while God continues to more fully reveal His character to us.

Read the Bible passages for yourself and prayerfully consider what they say about scriptural authority.

BTW, the 'further study' reading, pp. 15-23 Selected Messages, Book I, is excellent.  I have included an excerpt below (which I find personally challenging).

"But the oracles of God have been so manifestly neglected that there are but few in our world, even of those who profess to explain it to others, who have the divine knowledge of the scriptures. There are learned men who have a college education, but these shepherds do not feed the flock of God. They do not consider that the excellencies of the Scriptures will be continually unfolding their hidden treasures as precious jewels are discovered by digging for them."

The Voice From Heaven

I just completed an interesting online questionnaire. It is meant to categorize a person's Christian beliefs on the basis of their responses to a series of questions. It then quantifies and graphs various dimensions of your Christian belief. I'm not sure how scientific it is, but it is quite a bit of fun to compare assessments with others.

Have a go at it, and consider sharing your assessment with others who have done it.
http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=43870

I am categorized as an Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan. Apparently that means that I share John Wesley's belief that the doctrine of predestination is blasphemous, representing "God as worse than the devil". I am also apparently not a Roman Catholic and score poorly in the 'Liberal' and 'Fundamentalist' categories. It also says that I believe that I am saved by God's grace, even though I am "totally depraved". How did it know that!? : )

So, what has a non-scientific questionnaire got to do with this study? As we begin this study of the Bible's role in our lives, it is interesting to consider (and perhaps quantify) how we view the Bible as a revelation from God. I am apparently 21% fundamentalist. I'm surprised it isn't 0% fundamentalist, since I don't accept the idea of word-by-word inspiration of the Bible. I recognize the human dimension of inspiration inherent in the statement that
"Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Peter 1:21.

Spend some time considering where you sit on the fundamentalist spectrum. It will be interesting to compare our views of the Bible at the end of this quarter and consider how they might have changed as we study and share together.

"What is the Bible, and how does it come to be?" The clearest, rational and most Biblical answer to that question that I am aware of is in the Introduction section to a book called Great Controversy that many of us are familiar with. I'd suggest reading that brief section as quite a good start to this study, if not for the quarter. You can find it at the following address:

http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gcintroduction.html

The Conclusion of the Matter

I have just returned from four days in Christchurch, the city of my birth, showing our girls the trees I climbed, the places I buried 'treasure', and the streams I waded in. I showed them the house I lived in, the church where I first heard of God, and the classroom where I began my schooling in 1969. A lot changes in half a lifetime. The fields where I once built forts are now covered in houses. The good climbing trees are gone, and the prize exhibits in the Christchurch Museum have long since been moved to a dusty back room.

Until this week I hadn't noticed the words chiseled in stone above the museum entrance;
"These are parts of HIS ways, but how little a portion is heard of HIM".
How could I have, in my youth, overlooked this tribute to the Creator of my treasured exhibits? I now know that the chiseled stone tribute is a quote from the end of Job 26, where Job is recounting the unfathomable creative power emanating from God's spoken word. Had I traveled 10,000 miles to show our girls the creations of my youth, or their Creator? (v1)

We visited Ruru Lawn Cemetery, Block 24, Plot 12. We uncovered the marble marker as best we could, rebuked the encroaching grass, and scraped off the lichen that was drawing life from the very marker that declared the absence of Daisy Elizabeth Hunt's life -- laid to rest, Tuesday 27 November 1973, having died at the age of 85 in my mother's arms. What was her conclusion of the whole matter? Her final words? "Pat, I've been waiting for you ... waiting for you to come and just hold me." The silver cord was severed (v6), and her breath returned to God who gave it (v7; Gen 2:7). Meaningless? (v8)

What were King David's last words to his son, King in Jerusalem? As 1 Kings 2 records, King David's last words to his son were "make sure that Joab and Shimei meet with a bloody death. I promised not to kill Shimei, but that promise doesn't bind you." In the light of that dubious precedent, Solomon's 'conclusion of the matter' appears downright noble.

But is it? Is your message to the next generation,
"Fulfill your duty to keep God's commandments, (v13)
because there is going to be a judgment." (v14)

Or, do you have another conclusion to the 'whole matter' of humanity's apparent hopelessness?

In concluding our study of Ecclesiastes, please share your message to the next generation.

© Alister L. Hunt Ph.D

Ecclesiastes 11 - Cast Thy Bread Upon the Waters

We read Jesus' Manifesto on the Mount -- the principles upon which He runs the kingdom (Matt 6-8) -- and realize that what God has in mind appears to be an ever-upward spiral of everyone giving of themselves to others, emanating from a deep trust in the bountiful provision of our heavenly Father. Will the Kingdom of Heaven work? Does it work?

We may be inclined to think that Jesus' Manifesto will work in heaven, but it won't work here, where there are some Class-A takers. Consider, for example, the person who snatched Angela's bag on Friday. But then we remember that Jesus constantly stated that "The Kingdom of Heaven is ...". Now. Not later. Jesus appears to invite us to demonstrate with Him that His way of living not only works, but also results in happiness.

What has this to do with Ecclesiastes 11, our study for this week? I'm inclined to read verses 1 through 6 as an exhortation to take risks in life and business. However, most commentators apply this passage to the Christian business of liberality. This seems odd, since the prior ten chapters encouraged us to employ our resources in making our miserable lives as comfortable as can be expected. So, you can decide whether or not the generally accepted interpretation of Eccl 11:1-6 is yet another well-known quote interpreted out of context. But lets follow the crowd for a change.

"No good deed goes unpunished" is a favorite saying of Angela's and mine, as the business of "good deeds" is fraught with difficulty. Cast your bread upon the sea of humanity (Rev 17:15) and you are barely likely to get a thank-you, let alone anything vaguely resembling recompense.

We are exhorted to "give, ... because we do not know what evil is ahead" (v 2). Interestingly, that is exactly the reason I use for not giving. I don't know what hard times are ahead for my family, when I may need resources that might appear surplus to current need. Perhaps I should be beneficent now so that "when the evil days come" I will have the comfort of having done good while I was able?

I am particularly cautious in my few endeavors to "cast my bread" upon needy humanity because I am concerned that my giving may be directed at charlatans. Perhaps if I wait for a riskless opportunity to give I will never sow, and therefore never reap (v4)? Perhaps I just need to recognize that some of my attempts to give will be redemptive in the lives of recipients, and other attempts will be crucified by others as naive at best. A shared experience with God?

It seems that God needs brave volunteers to go first in demonstrating that His manifesto works -- that giving can be a way of life that results in ever-increasing joy for all involved. I still recall as a child watching my father siphon -- what magic. Starting with a small flow would move hundreds of gallons. Perhaps it doesn't matter much after all whether Eccl 11:1-6 is about risk-taking or giving, because the most exciting risk we can take as Christians is to start the flow that will change the world.

Happy casting, giving and sowing this week.

© Alister L. Hunt, PhD

The Innocent Man

It is truly a defining mark of the Biblical canon that it expresses every dimension of the human experience -- including that of hopelessness and helplessness. At every point in our lives, there is something in the record of humanity's searching after God that resonates with our hearts and ultimately draws all [men] unto Him.

John Grisham's recent non-fiction book, 'The Innocent Man' has an excerpt that reads like a modern excerpt from the book of Ecclesiastes. Here's what Ronald Keith Williamson had to say after experiencing dashed career hopes, alcoholism, wrongful conviction for murder, and exoneration while on death row.

"I hope I go to neither heaven or hell. I wish at the time of my death that I could go to sleep and never wake up and never have a bad dream. Eternal rest, like you've seen on some tombstones, that's what I hope for. Because I don't want to go through the Judgment. I don't want anybody judging me again. I asked myself what was the reason for my birth when I was on death row, if I was going to have to go through all that, What was even the reason for my birth? I almost cursed my mother and dad -- it was so bad -- for putting me on this earth. If I had it all to do over again, I wouldn't be born."

It seems that just as The Word was "in all points tempted like as we are" (Heb 4:15), The Word of God also internalizes every human experience. If God entrusted me with editing the Bible, I'd be inclined to produce something like "Chicken Soup for the Soul", full of heart-warming stories of people who pulled it all together despite the odds, and lived happily ever after.

In doing so, I would no doubt disenfranchise the very people that God wishes to reach.

The Word of God would be incomplete without Ecclesiastes.

© Alister L. Hunt Ph.D

Ecclesiastes 10

Don't bother with this week's study of Ecclesiastes 10 -- there's nothing there.

He exhorts us to
'vote Republican',
avoid dangerous vocations,
sharpen our tools, and
respect social ordering based on riches and nobility of birth.

The last point (above) is convenient, as the writer seems to have nobility and riches. He introduces himself as "Son of David, King in Jerusalem" in Eccl. 1:1. And 1 Kings 10:23 says that "King Solomon was greater in riches and wisdom than all the other kings of the earth". What's he going to say? Something like "man looks on the outward appearance, but we should look on their heart"? I guess that if God operated on the principle of nobility and birth order, Solomon would have been introducing himself as "Son of Eliab, King in Jerusalem" (1 Sam 16:6,7).

So not only not much there, but what is there is self-serving.

Now, you might want to check and see if I'm wrong -- it happens. Let me know your thoughts.

© Alister L. Hunt Ph.D

Ecclesiastes 9 and Causality

There are planned careers, and then there are ones like mine. My life could indeed be a case study of "time and chance" (v11) as the guiding principles of human life. I wonder, though, whether this fatalistic interpretation recognizes two other observations:
(a) God created me as a cognitive being with the freedom of choice; and
(b) There may be more of God's design in my life than I can currently see.

This week we study Solomon's observations on causality. The great difficulty with which Solomon contends in his search for God and meaning in his life was the little difference that is made between those that are good and bad in the distribution of comforts and burdens, and in life outcomes. This has perplexed the honest minds of many wise and contemplative people -- Job (Job 24), Jeremiah (Jer 12), Habakkuk (Hab 1), and Asaph (Psalm 73). Interestingly, each of these men begin their analysis from a position of of God's righteousness, holiness, and goodness. They are battling with the tension between their own experience of their Heavenly Father's goodness, and the empirical evidence that they often appear to receive stones for bread, serpents for fish, and scorpions for eggs (Luke 11:11,12).

Interestingly, Ecclesiastes recognizes no power in this world other than God. Perhaps we should add a third observation to the above two:
(c) Satan appears to be the prince of the planet on which we reside (Job 1:6).

It is amazing that God's inspired revelation of Himself devotes as many lines as it does to this question of God's goodness. If I was to guide others in writing a definitive text that revealed my character, I would strongly suggest that it omit discourses on how the empirical evidence appears to be at odds with the proposition that Alister Hunt is "a good bloke". God appears not to have placed Himself above questioning regarding the justice and goodness inherent in the observed causality between human action and outcome.

Is Solomon willing to experiment with a relationship with God? Or, is he going to conclude that life is meaningless, that there is little point to this life beyond throwing ourselves into our work and enjoying what little pleasures this life might afford. Is he going to conclude that there is nothing beyond this life? Read on through Ecclesiastes.

What are we going to conclude?

Take time this week to (re)read 1 Kings 9:3-9. It is useful context to Solomon's discourse on causality.

Also, you will enjoy Matthew Henry's commentary on Ecclesiastes 9 this week -- this note draws on Henry's comments.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc3.xxi.x.html

In the week to come, may we enjoy our relationships, our work, our food, and our clothes. But more importantly, I pray that we will grapple with the issue with which Solomon contends -- and be willing to consider conclusions other than that of Ecclesiastes 9.

© Alister L. Hunt Ph.D

Ecclesiastes 5 Revisited

My pastor sent me an interesting rewrite of Ecclesiastes 5 (see below). I recall thinking when I read Eccl 5:1-7 previously that it was a bit of a dark picture of God. My lay paraphrase of the passage was something like the following:

"Be really careful around God because He gets angry with people and destroys what they have worked for, just on a whim. So, tread carefully and speak carefully around God and His house."

But, perhaps I got it wrong? The paraphrase below takes a more positive tack, and in the process challenges us to rethink our behavior in God's house.

ECCLESIASTES 5 FOR TODAY

Watch your step when you go to church. This is not some habit or ritual that you go through, unmindful of the fact that you are in God’s presence. Don’t be so foolish as to think that God is merely taking attendance and has no interest in your attitude; you don’t get points for just showing up. True worship consists of listening to God, not just going through the motions.

Don’t be too quick to speak, either. Keep in mind, you’re in the presence of the Master of the Universe; you’re at church for worship! All too often going to church serves as nothing more than an opportunity to catch up on the latest gossip or to criticize and complain. The effect of this is that you go to God’s house, and in his very presence, you honor Satan rather than him!

Think I’m overstating my case? Listen to yourself and what you talk about at church. When your mind wanders because of other preoccupations, it will come out in your speech and you will have a clear indication of where your focus is. All too often, it’s not on worship.

Remember that when you gave your heart to Christ, you made an all-encompassing commitment. This commitment includes your behavior at church. Don’t be so foolish as to say you are a Christian and then to come into the very presence of God in his house and act as though your behavior doesn’t matter. Keep your word to God by watching your words at church. You’d be better off never having committed to Christ in the first place than to have taken his name in vain.

Keep in mind that there is a direct association between what is in your heart and what comes out of your mouth. When your heart is wrong, your speech is too, and when you are careless in your speech, your entire being is at risk of eternal loss. And whatever you do, don’t add insult to injury - don’t dare excuse your sinful behavior by saying that it was no big deal, that surely God wouldn’t make you accountable for such a trivial mistake as that. When you do, you’ve not only scorned God but everything he stands for besides.

The fact is that your wandering mind and undisciplined speech leave you in a very precarious position before God - much better to give him the honor and respect he is due when you come into his house, and to show it through your attitude and demeanor.

© Alister L. Hunt Ph.D

The Divine Right of Kings

The Hunt family has a recent fascination with the life of King James I, patron of the so-called "Authorized Version" of the Bible. What a surreal life he lived "under the sun". No wonder he was known as "the wisest fool in Christendom".

King James' book, 'The True Law of Free Monarchies' lays out the doctrine known as the "divine right of kings" -- a doctrine of political absolutism. It states that a monarch owes his rule to the will of God, not to the will of his subjects, parliament, the aristocracy or any other competing authority. This doctrine continued with the claim that any attempt to depose a monarch or to restrict his powers ran contrary to the will of God. James wrote his treatise to rebut the puritan ideas of the day that would ultimately give rise to the American Revolution.

Interestingly, the 'divine right of kings' doctrine is closely linked to the concept of 'apostolic succession' that underpins much of the Christian church's claim to authority over its subjects. In short, it is the belief that Bishops, etc. 'reign' in the unbroken lineage of Peter and the other Apostles. The crossover between political and religious 'absolutism' is seen to this day in the 'ordination' of royalty in the United Kingdom, and in genealogical attempts to link modern monarchs (modern monarchs?) to King David, appointed by God.
http://www.kingdavid.org/genealogy.html

So, what has the 'divine right of kings' got to do with Ecclesiastes 8, our study for this week? Here's why. The way we view political or ecclesiastical powers says a lot about how we view God. And vice versa, presumably. King James instructed the interpreters of the 'authorized version' to replace Tyndale's references to 'congregations' and 'elders' with the ecclesiatical terms of 'churches' and 'priests', and his view of political and ecclesiastical authority has colored Christianity for nearly four centuries.

Lets do the following; read chapter 8's description of royal authority and ask ourselves what that says about God. That is, what does the Son of David (Eccl. 1:1) tell us about THE Son of David (Matt 1:1)?

v2 Obey GOD's command.

v3 Do not stand up for a bad cause, because GOD will do whatever he pleases

v4 Since GOD's word is supreme, who can say to GOD, "What are you doing?"

v5 Whoever obeys GOD's command will come to no harm

v9 There is a time when GOD lords it over others to His own hurt

v11 When GOD does not quickly carry out a sentence for a crime, the hearts of the people are filled with schemes to do wrong.

In sum, what does the Son of David's treatise on the 'divine right of kings' tell you about God? If political authorities are God's representatives on earth (Rom 13:1,2), then what does this tell us about God. Is the picture of God reflected in verses 2 through 11 consistent with your own personal experience of God? Does God rule by 'divine fiat', or is the all-powerful God of the universe subject to the will of His 'subjects'? Does God "do whatever He pleases" (v3)?

Happy studying, whether in the land of revolutionaries or loyalists. : )

Study guide attached.

© Alister L. Hunt Ph.D