A Different Kind of Call to Action

Dear Fellow Disciples,

I know this blog is focused on Biblical Scholarship, but this evening I want to share a message from God that was spoken to me through an entirely different source. Last evening I received a forwarded email calling all Christians to action. It spoke of a new TV series that was portraying Christians negatively and painted a dire picture of potential consequences if we do nothing to stop its publicity. I typically don't take the time to read chain emails, but this one particularly caught my eye. After I read it, I felt convicted by God to do something. I didn't immediately contact the advertisers or the network directly as the email requested, but instead I spent the better part of a sleepless night in contemplative prayer over my own life.

When the time came this evening to take action, I felt God calling me to first take a look at the show prior to doing anything. As we do not have television service, I am unable to watch an episode myself, but I was able to find the trailer for the show on YouTube, which referenced the book upon which the series is based.

I read a few of the book reviews and saw that the book very much is being read as a satirical critique of the Church, particularly those in the South. It is a story about a woman whose husband cheated on her. Heartbroken, she returned to her hometown church in search of God, but rather than finding God, she found the Church to be full of hypocrisy and elitism. She came seeking God, but instead found judgment and public ridicule in the form of praise over the return of the long lost Black Sheep. It didn't help that those praising God had lives that were legalistic and full of sin, unwilling to cross their religious boundaries and actively do wrong, yet having no desire to pursue holiness. They are portrayed as modern day Pharisees, legalistic and self-righteous, more than willing to pick out the specks out of her eye yet oblivious to the fact that they are blind to the Truth of the Gospel.

I don't know how the story ends, and I don't know if it's intended as satire or if it's simply being read as such. I also don't know if the TV series will continue to be viewed as satire or if the show will join the ranks of Desperate Housewives. But what I do know is that the Church today is not exempt from this critique, and our behaviour by reacting and standing up against the network and the advertisers rather than standing up for personal and communal holiness, Christian discipleship, and Christlike behaviour, is typical of our own self-righteousness--my own included.

I belonged to an elite group of "Born Again" Christians in high school, and after spending the past 10 years at a seminary that is heavily influenced by John Wesley and his focus on always improving personal and social holiness through community discipleship, I realise that while I may have been on the other side of the Baptismal stream, I was no follower of Christ; and my behaviours in High School probably turned away more than one person seeking God--and I did it all in the name of God. I know I am not alone in this, though I am not pointing fingers at anyone personally. I am, however, standing up and saying that on a large scale, this satire is an accurate exaggeration of both the Catholic and Protestant Churches*, and it's a critique that we need to take to heart.

God calls us to be "In the World but Not of The World." Many of us respond by being "In the Church but Not of The Church."* Perhaps rather than standing up against the world when they rightfully criticize us, we need to take their criticism to heart, and rather than defending our wrong behaviour--whether or not it applies to us individually--we need to spurn a change within the hearts and minds of those around us who call Jesus their Lord.

To close, will you join me in the following prayer:

God, forgive me for not listening to your voice when it is spoken through unfamiliar mouths. Forgive me for seeking to protect my own reputation and those of my friends rather than restoring Your reputation to its rightful place. Forgive me for my own self-righteous behaviour, however small it may seem and however seldom it may be displayed. 

Grant me attentive ears to listen to Your voice above my own. Grant me perceptive vision to see where You are working in and through me so that I may join You in Your ongoing mission to redeem this world. Grant me a wise tongue that only speaks Your Truth. And most of all, grant me skillful hands to work only Your will.

Together we pray this with the full authority of Jesus, the Messiah, our Lord, the Redeemer and Perfecter of our Faith, through the gift of Your Holy Spirit, and in the Matchless Name of Yahweh Alone. Amen.

~ The Greater Magician's Apprentice

---

*I mention only the sects of Christianity in which I have personally observed a widespread problem. Please do not interpret the absence of the mention of any Christian sect as being exempt from the critique.

*In The Church but Not of The Church (c) 2011. Planned publication 2014.

"Science vs the Bible" - A Brief Portrayal of a Failing Worldview

Today's entry comes not straight from the pages of the Bible but rather from a personal life lesson that occurred while studying variations of the Hebrew Bible this morning. One of the requirements for 700-level Old Testament courses at Asbury is in-depth text criticism. Essentially what this means is that students must interact with different versions of Ancient Hebrew manuscripts, some of which are mere fragments of passages, and make a substantial case for reconstructing the "original" Hebrew text.

If we, as Christians, believe that the Bible "as originally given" is the inspired word of God, figuring out what that original word is and constantly reworking hypotheses to accomodate new archaeological findings of even-older manuscripts is an important step in helping others understand the Message of the Bible. While the current versions based primarily on copies by Jewish scholars dating from around 600 CE are fairly reliable, they are not carbon copy replicas of the "original text."

This isn't a task for everyone. Undergraduate students can often get by without even taking any courses in Hebrew, and graduate students who are training for pastoral ministry rather than for a career in the Academy can often excel in their profession by simply taking elementary language courses. But there are some who God has called to aid or train the pastors and teachers by doing this type of original research, and according to Scripture, those who he has called he will equip.

I say all this to lay out a parallel that I found striking as I was practicing my own text criticism this morning. I--a novice at best--was busy making a substantial case for a variation of a word in Genesis 4 this morning, having spent several hours studying this particular word, the variations, and different ways other ancient texts have translated it. In the middle of my study I received an email about a fossil that was found near the Panama Canal that suggested there may have been a camal-like creature with a crocodile-like snout and teeth. As evidence they showed a picture of a jawbone fragment that was slightly larger than the length of the scientist's hand.

Instantly my mind switched gears from what I was doing and immediately reverted back to my early childhood anti-science education. I sarcastically and rhetorically asked myself, "How could anybody trust that information? No one can reconstruct an extinct species from a single fossil fragment!" I had read a single sentence along the lines of, "A new study suggests camels with long, crocodile-like snouts once lived near what is now the Panama Canal," looked at the photo, and had dismissed the entire study as invalid based on simple prejudice--and given the nature of my current assignment, a rather hypocritical prejudice at that.

While I realise there are significant differences between the science/art of textual criticism and the science/art of reconstructing extinct species, what struck me as hypocritical was that my upbringing had led me to be prejudiced against reconstructing based on fragments because I assumed the falsehood that "the fragment is all there is" was true. Now, I know nothing about this study other than what I mentioned, and the source of the email was a particularly unreliable source known for intentionally making extreme hyperboles for the purpose of making people laugh. In this particular case, my conclusion could have been based on the incredulity of the source, but it wasn't. It was instantly based on the subject matter.

As my personal studies are revealing, the fragment is not all there is. One does not simply find a bone (or a word) and assume it belongs to something completely different. There are rules that scientists (or scholars) must follow before making public speculations regarding the nature of a bone (or a word). I'm not a paleontologist--I'm simply a novice paleographer--so I don't know all of the rules, but I trust that some people do, and I trust that those who are qualified to teach the teachers follow those rules, and perhaps even rewrite them as necessary.

The moral of the story: don't be so quick to judge a study solely based on the subject matter. When it comes down to it, very few of us are experts in the fields we most often like to discredit. And when it comes down to it, we can either trust those who God has called and equipped in their fields, or we can trust that our own lack of calling and equipping is better than God's discernment. I guess it goes back to Genesis 1 vs Genesis 3.

Never simply disbelieve because you don't feel like putting forth the effort to understand.