John 3:8, Born of the Spirit

The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

Being “born again” is not a Christian invention. Many of the mystery religions incorporated a rebirthing ritual. The initiate’s intention was to become one with his god, to share in the experiences and emotions of that god. When this level was attained, the initiate was said to be twice-born.

In the Bible, the Spirit is associated with creation. See Genesis 1:2, the wind/spirit/breath-of-God blows across the deep. Thus the wind provides an excellent picture of the breath of God, the Spirit, roaming the earth. Breath is merely wind inside us. To be “born of the Spirit” means to be created anew, embracing the meaning of life intended by God. It is God breathing new life into a person. In both Hebrew and Greek, there is only one word for “wind” and “spirit.” It is not capitalized, and the tendency of the churches of today to conceptualize and personify this spirit loses much of the meaning. It is wind all around and inside us, cosmic breath, the invisible spectral, life-force. God is spirit, as John 3:24 flails to explain. Indeed, a central theme of John’s Gospel is to explain the Spirit, a real presence felt within his community.

Try to picture the moment Jesus arose from the Jordan waters and felt the Spirit descend upon him. Have you had such moments? For many, it’s a once-in-a-lifetime experience, impossible to forget. The moment arrives in transcendental form, and we feel bathed in a foreign substance.

In such moments, it’s common to be overwhelmed by an indescribable feeling of joy, peace, and love. Many have written about their own brush with the divine, though not always in Christian terms like “born again” or “washed by the Spirit.” Here are a few quotes from others, taken from Marcus J. Borg’s wonderful book, “The God We Never Knew”:

“Immediately I found the world bathed in a wonderful radiance with waves of beauty and joy swelling on every side, and no person or thing in the world seemed to me trivial or unpleasing” –Hindu poet Rabindranath Tagore.

“I praised God with my whole heart … Everything looked new to me, the people, the fields, the cattle, the trees.” –English evangelist Billy Bray.

“For a few seconds only, I suppose, the whole compartment was filled with light … All men were shining and glorious beings … In a few moments the glory departed—all but one curious, lingering feeling. I loved everybody in that compartment. It sounds silly now, and indeed I blush to write it, but at that moment, I think I would have died for any one of the people in that compartment.” –British theologian Leslie Weatherhead, as he rode a train from London.

Book review: The History of Hell

Buy on Amazon

by Alice K. Turner

★★★★★

This is not a new book; I dug it from my shelves just to write this review. It's not a scholarly-looking book; the oversize cover, glossy pages, and color pictures on every other page make it look more like a children's book than a theological treatise. It's not the work of a notable scholar; Ms. Turner is better known for her fiction and as an editor for Playboy. So what is this review doing on my blog today?

Against all odds, this is an important book about an important topic. Is it Alice's fault that she manages to turn it into a fun read as well?

The History of Hell begins at the beginning, with the earliest religious beliefs of an underworld. You'll explore the Egyptian Book of the Dead and Zoroastrianism. You'll move forward in time to the Greek understanding of Hades, the Platonic description of Hell, and the Hebrew teachings of Sheol. As these ideas merge into one, you begin to see glimpses of today's Christian version of Hell emerging.

In time, Purgatory arrives. Christian ideas continue to evolve through the centuries, giving birth to artwork and stories like Dante's Inferno, as imaginations let loose. Satan, once destined to chains in a dark netherworld transforms before your eyes into an evil taskmaster. Now, trident in hand, he gleefully tortures lost souls in a lake of fire forever and ever, amen.

You continue to travel through the Middle Ages, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, through the 19th century, and on into today's time, as Hell continues to evolve. Why is this journey important? Why put yourself through Hell? Because, as Christians, it's vitally important to our spiritual well-being to understand that we have made our own version of Hell. Ideas have evolved from the beginning of religion, and understanding this, knowing the "history of Hell," can set you free from the undertow of today's spiritually-damaging teachings.

And if you're going to take this frightful journey, you may as well make it an entertaining one. Pick up Alice's book.

Revelation 21:24, Where is the New Jerusalem?

Speaking of the New Jerusalem, Revelation says,

The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it.

This is one of many verses that make it clear Revelation speaks of the New Jerusalem as residing on earth; not in some spiritual realm we call heaven. Revelation actually never does speak of heaven! All of its promises are for an everlasting life and kingdom on earth (if you don't believe me, take time to actually read the book).

What exactly does this mean that Revelation never promises life in heaven? It means that Revelation's author subscribed to the contemporary Jewish belief of a physical resurrection and a political redemption; Jews expected God to lift them above the other nations, to restore their rightful, God-given place as rulers of the earth. Regardless of the clear Christian bent behind Revelation, this expectation shines through clearly.

Is this your dream for everlasting life? Probably not, unless you're a Jehovah's Witness. But if you're quick to disregard this portion of Revelation's teachings, is it not possible to disregard also its dreams of a vengeful Messiah arriving to slaughter 200 million people? Leaving rivers of blood in his wake?

Revelation is not a pretty book, if read half-literally. Please, either read it as a spiritual lesson only, or don't go halfway on the "literal" scale; read it for exactly what it says and promises, and recognize within its pages long-held Jewish dreams that we no longer wish to see fulfilled.

http://www.thewayithappened.com/

Book review: Revelation, Four Views--A Parallel Commentary

Buy on Amazon

by Steve Gregg

★★★★★

If you begin with the premise that Revelation is inspired scripture, and wish to understand or choose from the four primary interpretations, then you won't find a better book out there than this one. This was definitely a favorite during my research. Dare I say so myself: if you couple my book, which takes a historical look at Revelation and does not presume it's inspired, with this book, which details the various ways believers read Revelation, you'll get a well-rounded picture.

Gregg goes verse-by-verse through Revelation and, with four columns side-by-side, describes how proponents of the four interpretive methods read the scripture. These four types are as follows:

The Historicist approach sees Revelation as surveying the entire church history, from Christ through today and beyond. Events described in Revelation reach fulfillment gradually, through the centuries.

The Preterist approach assumes fulfillment in the first century, and usually assumes an early writing of Revelation (before the war of 70 AD.) Revelation prophecies this "war to end of wars" in which Jerusalem is overrun and the Temple destroyed. This is closest to my own treatment, though a better label for my perspective would be contemporary-historical.

The Futurist approach awaits fulfillment in the future. This needs no further introduction; among today's Christians, this is by far the most popular interpretation, though it wasn't necessarily so throughout Christian history.

The Spiritual approach is Gregg's label for those who do not look for a literal interpretation, but rather see spiritual lessons and principles in the symbolism that runs rampant through this mysterious scripture.

All four interpretations are illuminating, and many readers, upon completion of this study, conclude that Revelation must be a complex combination of the above. Certainly, Revelation is revealed to be a book of deep meaning, seldom contemplated in its entirety by most Christians.

Genesis 2:7, Adam is Formed

the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Many Christians continue to hold to the idea of a young earth, and of God creating Adam and Eve at the beginning of creation. That is, I suppose, alright. But what is not alright is for these well-meaning Christians to push this understanding upon their children, as if rejecting evolution is somehow a necessary prerequisite to being a Christian. You do both yourself and your child a disservice by insisting he or she continue to embrace such antiquated bible interpretations, for at least two reasons:

1. You severely restrict the growth of your child in the sciences, even preventing certain fields of study. For example, it's nearly impossible to acquire even a basic understanding of biology or the medical sciences without embracing what we have learned in the last 150 years about DNA and the development of species.

2. You are likely to steer your child away from Christianity, because the day will likely come when he or she cannot any longer believe your interpretation of Genesis.

For this reason, I present the above verse, and a simple reconciliation that does not require discarding all that we have learned about this 5-billion-year-old earth. This does not necessarily describe my own beliefs, but merely the beliefs of many Christians who have been forced to reconcile science with their religion.

First, accept that when the Bible says man was formed "of the dust of the ground," perhaps it describes the development of life from single-celled beings to the unimaginatively complex beings we humans have become. Second, do not imagine that there were no hominoids before "man"; thus when the day finally arrived when God breathed His breath into His creation, implanting within hominoids a living soul, in that moment Adam and mankind were born.

You may even find it easier to answer embarrasing questions such as, "where did Cain find a wife?"

Book review: How God Changes Your Brain

Buy on Amazon

by Andrew Newberg, M.D. and Mark Robert Waldman

★★★★
I see this as two books in one: first, a basic look at the malleability of our brain and how it can be trained--specifically, how spiritual practices rebuild neural paths within our brain--and second, a practical guide to basic meditation.

I give the first half five stars. I didn't read all of the second half. Guess that means I should drop my rating one star. It's not that I'm not interested in meditation, because I'm thoroughly convinced of its spiritual and mental value; it's that, like 95% of the rest of you, I ignore what's good for me in favor of what I enjoy. And I enjoy learning about the brain.

This isn't an evangelical book. It won't direct you to Christianity or Eastern religions or any other belief system. Nor is it ragging on the evils of religion, as the title might make you think. It's a very positive-minded book about the value of prayer, meditation, and belief. "God" does change your brain, because repeated mental exercise and directed thinking rebuilds neural paths for a healthier, happier life. If--as is my observation--Christians in general live happier, healthier lives than non-believers, there is a solid, scientific reason for that. The Christian brain is wired for spiritual well-being.

I emphasize Christians only because Christianity is my heritage. This book is written for skeptics and believers alike, and definitely worth reading.

Luke 1:47-55, The First Christmas

And Mary said,

   I'm bursting with God-news;
      I'm dancing the song of my Savior God.
      God took one good look at me, and look what happened—
      I'm the most fortunate woman on earth!
   What God has done for me will never be forgotten,
      the God whose very name is holy, set apart from all others.
   His mercy flows in wave after wave
      on those who are in awe before him.
   He bared his arm and showed his strength,
      scattered the bluffing braggarts.
   He knocked tyrants off their high horses,
      pulled victims out of the mud.
   The starving poor sat down to a banquet;
      the callous rich were left out in the cold.
   He embraced his chosen child, Israel;
      he remembered and piled on the mercies, piled them high.
   It's exactly what he promised,
      beginning with Abraham and right up to now.

--The Message Bible

Book review: Jesus of Nazareth

Buy on Amazon

by Paul Verhoeven

★★★★
Question: What happens when an accomplished film maker delves into the realm of historical Jesus scholarship?

Answer: Fresh insight.

Paul Verhoeven is the only non-theologian admitted to the Jesus Seminar, a group of scholars dedicated to uncovering the historical Jesus. While his book will not be recognized for the depth of research that goes into the books of more noted scholars, it's still an interesting read.

Verhoeven digs into the relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist, the sin of riches, exorcisms, and much more to paint Jesus in human terms. Jesus is not an ideal for Verhoeven, but a living, breathing person, with fears and failures alongside his accomplishments. Jesus is a hunted criminal who masterfully escapes the long arm of the law...until an apostate disciple masquerading as a Zealot (not likely one of the twelve, nor even named Judas, according to Verhoeven) leads the authorities to him.

After Jesus' crucifixion, his disciples believed he returned from the dead. But if the whole of the Jesus story were wrapped up in this miracle of overcoming death, Christianity could not have survived for 2,000 years. Jesus created powerful parables and devised a new code of ethics; regardless of his false understanding that the kingdom of God was imminent, he indeed transformed the world. Verhoeven closes his book with this paradox: Jesus' mistaken view of reality led to the most significant ethical revival in the past two thousand years.

John 4:24, God is Spirit

God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.

These are the words of Jesus, to the woman of Samaria. She was asking whether it was correct to worship God at the holy place of the Jews or of the Samaritans. Jesus' reply made it clear God would not be found "in" a place.

The above verse is from the NIV translation; let me give it to you again in our familiar King James version:

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

See the difference? How the KJV made assumptions about the nature of God, which the NIV corrected by retranslating the original Greek? God is not "a Spirit" (capital S), God is "spirit." You don't worship "him" in spirit, you merely worship in spirit. John's Gospel, we all realize, is the most esoteric or spiritual of the four, and this is critical to understanding the Johannine writings.

God is not "a" love. God is love. God is not "a" light, or "a" life," or "a" spirit, or "a" anything. God just is. Give up trying to point to him, because there is no "him" to point to. As The Shack would say, God is a verb.

In my opinion, grasping this basic difference will take you a long way to understanding John's point of view.

Book review: God and Sex

Buy on Amazon

by Michael Coogan

★★★★★

If you're hoping for a biblical Harlequin, look elsewhere. This is a heavy little book, even a little overwhelming, as it delves into the sexual inequalities of biblical times. I found the book rather dark in places; an obvious agenda of the author is to extol how grateful we should be to have outgrown the biblical view of women as property. Indeed there are multiple horror stories of how women were treated in the Bible, but is it healthy to overdose on this topic? Coogan touches only briefly on the other side of the coin--the radical change in treatment encouraged by Jesus and his earliest followers. Even Paul, says Coogan, suppressed women, as he argues against current scholarship that many of the suppressive teachings recorded by "Paul" were actually later writings.

But, thankfully, the book isn't entirely about sexual inequality. Some of the topics are more light-hearted. You'll learn about sexual innuendos which shed light on several passages in the Bible; you'll find out whether David and Jonathan were gay lovers (they weren't); you'll learn about the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah (it wasn't sodomy, or even sexual perversity); you'll learn about Yahweh's wife in Israel’s most primitive beliefs, including several passages from the Bible. I highly recommend the book, and I guarantee you'll learn from it.

Luke 2:1-2, When Was Jesus Born?

In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.)

Today's post is not meant to ridicule traditional Christian beliefs; it is to help reconcile followers of Christ, whether believers of the supernatural or not.

Do you think all Christians need to believe literally in the virgin birth? Can you fellowship with nonbelievers? I'd like to give one of many examples why liberal Christians and Jesus scholars have a hard time believing in the virgin birth, so that believers can begin to understand the complications nonbelievers struggle with.

Note that many early Christians didn't believe in the virgin birth either. The early Jerusalem church (the Ebionite sect), headed by James, brother of Jesus, did not. Paul writes only that Jesus was “born of a woman, born under the law” and that he descended from David “according to the flesh,” while Mark portrays Jesus as estranged from his family, disowning mother and brothers, hardly an endorsement for the idea of Mary being informed by an angel of Jesus’s divinity. John insists that Jesus was never born, but existed before the creation. Only Matthew and Luke tell a story of Jesus' birth, and these two stories contradict each other quite radically.

I present today's verse as just one example. In Matthew's rendition, Joseph and Mary flee Herod, who died in 4 BC. In Luke's story, Joseph and Mary come to Bethlehem for a census overseen by governor Quirinius ... but Quirinius did not govern before 6 AD. So, was Jesus born before 4 BC or after 6 AD?

This and other examples convince many that the birth narratives were written to honor Jesus in story, not to relate historical facts. You must decide for yourself; are one or both of the birth stories true or not? But I hope that, whatever you decide, it will not cause you to criticize those Christians who decide otherwise. May we all have a merry Christmas as brethren!

Book Review: Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt

Buy on Amazon

by Anne Rice

★★★★

I'm trying to be fair; this really isn't my kind of book. It's highly speculative and it's fiction. Then I'm reminded of the book I just published about Revelation; it, too, is fiction (well, 1/3 of it is fiction) and it, too, will surely be considered highly speculative by many. I'd like to think, however, that my book is grounded in more solid research than Rice's; mine is, after all, hailed by other scholars as historically plausible.

Given, then, that we are discussing a purely fictional account of Jesus' years as a child, my review must be based upon whether or not the story held my interest. It did for a time; Anne Rice is a good writer. But I have a quest to learn (I seldom read fiction), and I really felt I was learning very little, so I nearly didn't finish the book.

I think readers who do not have a background in early Christian literature will be at a disadvantage. For example, in the story, the child Jesus sculpts a bird out of clay, then gives it life and it flies away. Um, really? But scholars will recognize the story from the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, which Rice latches onto and includes in her book, caring not that no historian of this gnostic gospel considers it to be true. The story is pure mythology, and not even Biblical myth.

Who, then, is the audience for this book? Not fundamentalist Christians, who will take offense at this portrayal of the Christ child. It isn't "biblical." Not historians, who will be unable to take it seriously. If Anne Rice is celebrating her return to Christianity with this series (the book is the first of a promised series) then it's an odd way to start out, wouldn't you think?

The answer, of course, is that Rice is writing mythology after the manner of Gospels; she collects stories, builds a personality for Christ as a youngster, then puts it all together in much the same way as Gospel writers did 2,000 years ago...honoring Christ not in fact, but in storytelling. And that's why I'm writing this review today, 5 days before Christmas. Today, as I drive down the streets of Minneapolis, I see manger scenes; scenes I know to be mythic, but beautiful and inspiring none-the-less. We have taken two contradictory Gospel renditions of Jesus' birth (Matthew and Luke), spliced them together, added some nice touches, and created an idyllic Christmas picture. In the same spirit of honoring Christ in myth, we can enjoy Anne Rice's fictive "gospel", and even give it ... well, four stars.

Revelation 13:15, Giving Breath to the Image of the Beast

He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed.

Ever wonder what this verse is all about? Unfortunately, we'll probably never know for sure, since we have no record of this event happening. We do know it was a popular ruse among magicians of the first century to cause statues to talk. You may have heard how Gaius Caesar ordered a statue of Jupiter moved from Olympia to Rome, but when the workmen arrived to move it, the statue started to laugh at them.  The workmen’s scaffolding collapsed and they scattered in panic.

Simon Magus, whom many believe to have been the "false prophet" of Revelation, was known for his ability to make stone statues talk.

Early Christians throughout the Empire appeared distressed by these statues. The Christian apologist Athenagoras wrestles with this problem of pagan statues “giving oracles” and healing the sick and considers them neither tricks nor miracles but demons taking possession of the minds of the audience, persuading them with “empty visions” as if exuding from the statues.

The beast in this verse we can be fairly certain refers to Nero Caesar, and Nero seemed omnipresent with statues throughout the empire, including a 120-foot abomination even greater than Nebuchadnezzar’s statue in the book of Daniel.  But, so far as I'm aware, we have no record in history of any of Nero's statues talking! What, exactly, does this verse in Revelation refer to?

One more mystery about the book of Revelation that we'll probably never uncover!

Book review: The Miracle Detective

Click to purchase

By Randal Sullivan

★★★★

In the war-torn country of Yugoslavia, late 1980's, a cluster of children (ages up through 16) began seeing the Virgin Mary and reporting her words. Medjugorje, if you've ever heard of the place, appeared protected from the war by the madonna.

The Miracle Detective describes Sullivan's trip into the world of miracles and the investigation of these miracles by the Catholic church. By the end of the book, even Sullivan has been deeply affected by his brush with the supernatural, and it is this personal journal by the author that makes the book most interesting.

Nearly all the experts that researched Medjugorje and interviewed (interrogated) the children came to the same conclusion: there was no attempt to deceive, and the children truly experienced the unexplainable. Others around them could not see Mary, yet the children's eyes moved in unison as they tracked her progress through the air; they reported the same message from heaven; and they showed no response to any pain or attention-grabbing administered by the "experts" while in their vision state. Many other visitors to this sacred site experienced supernatural healings. Surely, the madonna herself was to be found in this place!

But what did the Church think? It's still under investigation, 20-25 years later. As one priest explained to Sullivan, the Church does not merely test for the unexplainable; a true miracle from God must pass several tests, such as "theological correctness, usefulness to the Church, and a clear relationship between the messages the person reports and changes in the quality of their own lives." Unquestionably, the experiences rocked the lives of these children and many others who visited (and still visit) Medjugorje, but what is the Church to think when Mary, queen of heaven, arrives with the message that we should respect all religions, even (perhaps especially) Islam?

I found the book interesting, one I'm glad I read, though it was a bit long. But, sorry, I've no opinion yet on the authenticity of the visions.  :)

John 11:35, Jesus Wept

Jesus wept.

The smallest verse in the Bible, we were taught as children. Perhaps the only verse I'm able to memorize. But what is interesting enough in this little nibble to warrant a blog post?

It's that this verse is not the way first-century citizens thought about God.

Jesus wept as he walked toward the grave of Lazarus, the man he would raise from the dead. John's Gospel, you will recall, is the Gospel that portrays Jesus as God. It is this Gospel, more than any other book in the Bible, that steered Christianity toward the Trinity doctrine; the understanding that, in some mysterious way, Jesus is God.

God wept.

But, you see, gods don't weep. To the Greeks (and all of the Gospels were written in Greek and among the Greeks) the primary characteristic of God was something they called apatheia, which means total inability to feel any emotion whatsoever. This verse, one commentator of John supposes, may be the most astonishing verse in the Gospel.

Book review: Reading Judas

Click to purchase

By Elaine Pagels and Karen L. King

★★★★

This is a fun one. Short and sweet, Karen and Elaine share their unique interpretation of this fascinating discovery. Scholars of the gospel of Judas would never consider it mainstream Christianity ... can any book who paints a Christian villian as a hero be mainstream? ... and yet, there remains a lot of controversy about exactly how to classify  that ancient Gospel. Part of the problem, of course, is that it's far from complete; and while that's certainly not the fault of Pagels and King, it does disrupt the readability of their book when pieces of the manuscript are missing.

The subtitle of the book is "The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity." This discussion of early Christianity is, precisely, what makes the Pagels/King book interesting. They delve into the conflict between Paul and Peter, and how later writers (such as the book of Acts) purposefully glossed over this conflict in an attempt to bring unison.

The book is in two parts: First, a discussion of the gospel and it setting, and second, an interpretation of the gospel itself with commentary. Karen King translates it herself, and their understanding is unique, quite different from other coverage of the gospel of Judas, as they are unafraid to give serious attention to alternative strands of Christianity and their meaning of the cross, the suffering of martyrs, and of Jesus' divinity. These were important topics in the early years of Christianity, and Christians today are, for the most part, quite unaware of the divisive strands that existed in those days.

Pagels and King do present controversial views (I found myself often disagreeing), but regardless of your beliefs or opinions, this is a fascinating read about an equally fascinating topic.

Ezekiel 18:20, Who Is Guilty?

The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son.

Ezekiel is a favorite of few Bible readers. It certainly wasn't mine; imagine my surprise when, researching for my book about Revelation, I discovered Revelation to be an update and rewrite of Ezekiel.

Just as we, today, routinely update and rewrite Revelation to match the beliefs of today's Christians, so did Revelation update and rewrite Ezekiel. Our eschatological beliefs differ from John's Revelation as severly as John's differ from Ezekiel's. And now, in this verse, we see how radically Ezekiel has rewritten the scriptures of his day. We read in exodus:

for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

So, which is it? Does God punish the offspring of the sinner, or is "the one who sins the one who will die?" Clearly, we prefer Ezekiel's understanding.

What will tomorrow's Christians believe about God's punishment? If Christianity is going to continue evolving on its humanitarian journey, then it's up to us to continue to grow in our understanding of God.

Book review: The Fourth Gospel and the Quest for Jesus

Click to purchase

By Paul N. Anderson

★★★★★

A boring looking book, eh? Don't let the blandness of the cover fool you. This skinny little book may be one of the most important theological efforts of the last five years. My next book will be about the Gospel of John, and Anderson's book contributed significantly to my research.

John's Gospel differs so significantly from the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that the question arises often between scholars: Do we trust John, or the other three? In one simple example, the Synoptics present a one-year ministry of Jesus, whereas John indicates at least a three-year ministry. But since John's Gospel reads so mystically (a more acceptable word may be "spiritually"), and since he seems outnumbered 3-to-1, most scholars through the centuries have given it little weight. It gets relegated to the pulpit as the "fourth Gospel," as if it didn't deserve a name.

Recent archaeological discoveries, however, have proven John's Gospel spot-on in a number of its claims. John is also the one Gospel that claims to be an eye-witness account. Anderson jumps on the bandwagon of recent scholarship and presents his argument that this Gospel is equally historically accurate, and as important to understanding the life of Jesus, as the Synoptics. And, of course, I believe he is right.

The casual reader may find little to hold their interest in this book, but the scholar and the pastor cannot afford to be without it.

Matthew 10:28, Fear Not Those Who Kill the Body

Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

What do you think about this verse? Kill the soul?? Most people are taught in church that the soul is eternal, and even ungodly men live forever ... albeit in hell instead of heaven.

Actually, controversy raged in the early church about the unsaved. Are they tortured forever in the fire (Jude) or merely killed by it? (2 Peter, which appears to be a rewrite and update of Jude). Paul taught that the godly would live forever while the ungodly die; the end. "The wages of sin is death." This would be known centuries later as the "annihilation theory."

Revelation appears to agree with Matthew that the fires of "hell" are temporary. (Don't get me started on the differences between Sheol, the Hebrew dwelling place of the dead, and Hades, the Greek place of punishment for naughty fellas, and how the two merged into the Christian concept of hell.) The beast, the false prophet, and the dragon all appear to be tortured eternally in Revelation, but not any of the rest of humanity. (this is the position I argue for in my book, Revelation: The Way it Happened.)

What do you think?

Book review: The Birth of Christianity

Click to purchase

By John Dominic Crossan

★★★★

I've read many of Crossan's books, and although they can be dry, they do always provide something to sink your teeth into. He seems to write two kinds of books: Long, scholarly tomes, and short, interesting summaries. The Birth of Christianity is (unfortunately or fortunately, depending upon your purpose for reading) of the former type.

Crossan attempts in this book to initiate more scholarly research into the early years of Christianity, by which he means those years after Christ died but before the Gospels were published. Years 30-70 AD. His ideas are controversial--hey, every publication by every liberal Christian will be controversial--but they are well documented. In my opinion, too well documented. I don't think Crossan needs 641 pages to explain and support his research. He delves deeply, for example into the topic "memory and orality," to bolster his opinion about how poorly our memories operate and thus how unreliable oral transmission is.

Nevertheless, Crossan's picture of early Christianity and particularly his long discussion of various types of eschatology (apocalyptic, ascetical, ethical) are important to the understanding of the Jesus movement of the first century. He explains how different communities of Christians could share different eschatological ideas--and you don't have to think of eschatology as the end of the universe, but merely the end of an age and the dawning of a new kind of life--and develop very different brands of Christianity. Crossan traces the emphasis of early Christian communities into two traditions: Jesus' "life" and "death." The moral teachings of Jesus and the passion-resurrection tradition. Both, Crossan insists, are very early traditions; for example, he discusses the Common Meal Tradition. Is it a giving-sharing experience, or a eucharistic experience? From this merger of traditions grew the latter church.

I definitely recommend reading The Birth of Christianity and I think it will be an important foundation for continuing research into this era. I would  not, however, insist that the casual read the entire book cover to cover. Perhaps he will one day publish an abbreviated version. :)

Acts 10:38, The Dubious Disciple's Beginnings

Maybe I should begin my new blog with what may be my favorite verse in the Bible:

God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power: who went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, for God was with him. – Acts 10:38

An inspiring verse regardless of your concept of God, your experience with the Spirit, and what you think about that evil fella we call the devil. Regardless of your religious beliefs, this is a Jesus we can all appreciate and seek to emulate.