Regularly Expressing

Category: Theology

  • You Are Being Watched

    I recently chanced upon a minor flame war about whether atheists or believers in God are more moral. Clearly, belief in God is not required for morality, and many who profess belief in God are less moral than many who don’t.

    A study was done which reached the unsurprising conclusion that people behave more ethically when they believe they are being watched. It occurs to me that any person who really believes a god or gods or whatever is watching them would behave more honestly. So remember, even after you clear your browser history, your Higher Power knows what websites you were visiting. 🙂

  • What Adam and Eve Wrote

    I’m not generally in favor or Bible literalism, as frequently (I think) that is not how the text is meant to be read, and especially so in the case of the book of Genesis.

    People (Isaac Newton among them) have estimated the age of the earth by adding up the ages of people mentioned in scripture and come with a figure of roughly 6500 years. There are numerous reasons that this procedure of adding up ages might be invalid, for example the Hebrews were inclined to telescope generations (e.g. the Bible says that Jesus “is the son of David” when clearly he is the ancestor of David).

    Even allowing for that, it seems unlikely that we could arrive at 200,000 years, the age of the earliest modern human.

    One might postulate that the first human soul or spirit might have entered the universe around 6500 years ago, but this feels a bit too speculative an explanation to take seriously. Whether or not it is correct, humans did undergo a significant change around that time.

    It appears the earliest known writing dates to 5500 years ago. This is about a thousand years from the supposed time of Adam and Even in the garden, but it seems unlikely that we would find the first actual piece of writing. Maybe the first writing was 1000 or so years earlier. Could it be that the Biblical record actually points to the dawn of human literacy?

    It isn’t clear why gaining a soul should result in the ability to write. Maybe it doesn’t. But maybe there was some key evolutionary step in humankind, something that made the modern human the creature we recognize today, something that only happened at roughly the time pointed to by the book of Genesis.

  • Congregation for the Extirpation of Paranormal Menaces (CEPM)

    The best sort of April Fool’s story is one that starts out plausible but weird, then gets progressively stranger until you realize it’s funny and laugh. If the reader passes the story on, believing it to be real, then the joke isn’t fun any more. If the news is too personal or emotionally charged, it’s not fun either. (It’s not funny to fake your death, pretend your pregnant, married, etc.) The personal aspect and emotional impact take the fun out of it. That’s why I really loved this post from Jimmy Akin. He’s a very scholarly Catholic writer who takes great pains to clarify matters of faith, communications from the Vatican, etc. In his April Fool’s piece he creates a masterful narrative that’s as entertaining (I think) as many works of urban fantasy. I started out believing he was serious. About halfway through I realized something was wrong, and maybe a few paragraphs later asked myself, “Wait a minute, what day is this?”

  • On Becoming a vampire without being bitten

    A recent psychological study titled “Becoming a vampire without being bitten: A new study shows that reading expands our self-concepts” says that reading about becoming a vampire, or Harry Potter’s school of wizarding, helps us to psychologically feel we are part of a community and satisfies a need for belonging. While I’m not sure I agree with the description of the study’s methods, I find that the thesis resonates with me. Part of the need for belonging (which they don’t state) is belonging in a special group and ties to magic and the supernatural do that quite well. I think when we read we want to see ourselves simultaneously as belonging and set apart. We want to be the chosen people. Christianity is a religion that focuses on literacy, and the telling of Christ’s story. In that story we learn that Christians become “spiritual Jews” by believing in him. We can’t grow fangs, and we can’t learn to cast spells–but we can learn to be better people, to practice love, to be less selfish, to share what we have with others. We can become a part of the chosen people by making ourselves better, and thereby satisfy our spiritual longings in a way that Edward Cullen can’t match.

  • Nomina Sacra

    Some early Old Testament Greek manuscripts glorify God’s name by writing them in Hebrew characters. Some of my Jehovah’s Witness friends have made much of this fact, as properly reverencing the Divine Name is of central important to them.

    I have recently discovered, in “The Cambridge History of the Bible, Vol I,” that these manuscripts with the Divine Name in Hebrew were Jewish manuscripts. While Christians did not observe the same practice, they did specially mark nomina sacra (i.e. sacred names) by leaving out a few vowels and writing a line over the contraction. What is interesting to me is that the nomina sacra include the words Theos (God), Kourious (Lord), Kristos (Christ), and Iasous (Jesus).

    It is interesting evidence on two fronts:

    1. It treats the names God and Jesus on an equal footing, making clear the Divine status attributed to Jesus.
    2. It seems to leave out references to the Holy Spirit, as well as references to God as Father do not make use of this practice. Thus this practice does not give evidence to the Doctrine of the Trinity, but because “the Father” does not get this treatment it does not seem to be evidence against it either.

    These four words were not invariably written this way, if the usage were non-theological then it would be written without contraction.

    The Bible refers to Christians were “Believers in the Name.” What was this name? In New Testament usage, a name is not necessarily a literal word, but sometimes an authority, power, or personal identity. The practice of the sacra nomina points to four words that identify the sacred name and testify to a primitive belief in the Divinity of Chrst.

  • Bill’s Quote of the Day

    I have a “quote of the day” feature on my Google home page. This is the one I saw today:

     

    Just in terms of allocation of time resources, religion is not very efficient. There’s a lot more I could be doing on a Sunday morning.

    – Bill Gates

     

    What is efficiency, and how do we measure it? I probably spend an hour or two a week at church, but I think I gain a great deal from it… both in terms of the spiritual recharging it supplies to me and the life lessons it teaches to my children. I think it is no small benefit to a little one to see his/her parents on their knees giving thanks to his Creator.

    Many people complain about the “boring ritual,” etc. But unless you regularly worship God you will probably never understand the kind of spiritual consolations that can descend on you in that environment. I suppose color blind people may find rainbows uninteresting, or gazing at them to be inefficient.

  • Natural Family Planning, the Church’s Best Kept Secret

    When I began my journey to becoming Catholic I was focused mainly on doctrinal issues, e.g. what is the nature of the eucharist, did Mary remain a virgin her whole life, did Christ intend for the Pope to be the head of the church, etc. After I was fairly far along in my studies I asked the priest, “Doesn’t the Catholic Church have some funny teaching about birth control?”

    What began as a naive question turned into a life-changing experience. I was told that the Catholic church condemns artificial birth control and surgical sterilization as sinful, no exceptions. My wife and I had a serious medical reason to avoid future pregnancies, so we followed the only option approved of by the church: Natural Family Planning (NFP). In NFP, the couple monitors and charts symptoms of fertility in order to identify fertile and infertile times. There are a number of different NFP methods. The one we learned is called “The Sympto Thermal Method” and it is taught by the Couple to Couple League.

    Learning the method consisted of attending four one hour classes, and doing some reading. In class we received counseling, studied charts, and watched presentations. We discovered that NFP was not just a birth control method, but a marriage building activity. It has some of the following benefits:

    1. 99+% method effectiveness, comparable to the best artificial birth control.
    2. For married couples, sex can easily become routine. By adding a time of abstinence, new interest is generated. I heard a comedian say, “I am over thirty. I still like sex, but I want to know what’s on cable first.” Practitioners of NFP will not generally care what’s on cable when the period of abstinence is over.
    3. Many couples have mis-matched sex drives. This simple thing can lead to a world of bad feeling. Having a regular time of abstinence is a natural compromise.
    4. Because of its very nature, NFP encourages communication about family planning and helps to make it more of a mutually shared concern.
    5. NFP does not involve putting possibly harmful chemicals or drugs in your system, so it is potentially healthier.
    6. Using NFP creates no waste products, so it is better for the environment.
    7. Many of the methods can be taught and practiced with no special equipment. This means that they can be used in third world countries without cost. The only method approved by the Catholic church is also the most practical.

    When we first started the classes, my Protestant wife was upset about the way my religious studies were impacting our lives. But soon after we started using NFP she fell so in love with the method that she wanted us to start teaching it. We’ve been at it for 16+ years and it has worked perfectly. We’ve never known anyone who had an unwanted pregnancy while using it (although we have read about such cases).

  • Is the Book of Job a Play?

    Something I’ve always wondered about is whether the Bible book of Job was originally a play. To clarify, I am not suggesting that the story is not factual — rather that it was adapted to be performed. Why do I think this?

    1. A very limited number of scenes, actors, and props are required:
      There are a very limited number of scenes, props, and people required. There are probably only about 3 in the entire story. The first, the dialogue in Heaven, could be carried out in almost total darkness. Here are the scenes. They are either performed in front of a curtain

      1. Verses 1:1-2: Announcer speaks from in front of curtain.
      2. Verses 1:3-12: Still in front of curtain, the Devil and a few angels could come on stage and the voice of God can come in from offstage.
      3. Verses 1:13-22: Curtains open, job is eating when catastrophe strikes Props consit of tables, chairs, dishes.
      4. Verses 2:1-8: Curtains close, Devil returns briefly.
      5. Verse 2:9 to the end: Final scene. No props on stage.

      The entire cast consists of:

      1. Job’s wife
      2. Job
      3. Job’s 3 friends
      4. The 3 messengers
      5. God (always off stage)
      6. The Devil (maybe some angels)
      7. The announcer

      If you double up on a few of the roles this could probably be performed by 5 men and a woman.

    2. Contrived dialogue: Verses 1:13-17 when the three messengers come in all at once, each describe a catastrophe, and then each finishes with “I am the only one who has escaped to tell you” just sounds more theatrical than natural. Also, the speeches exchanged by Job and his 3 friends in the last scene are rather long, poetic, and sound more literary than natural. How often have you heard people argue without interrupting each other?
    3. I have heard it said that the book of Job is some of the most difficult Hebrew of the Bible. This might well be the case if composed by a master writer.

    I have no idea how a theater company would have fit in to the life of ancient Israel, or why this one work should be the only example of it that survived (assuming it is, I don’t know of any others). I haven’t read the theory that this book is really a play anywhere else. Are the Bible Scholars out there who have heard it before? I can’t believe that I’m the first to come up with it.

    All I know is that every time I read this book, I am always impressed how much it sounds like a performance.

  • Returning to Earth After the Rapture

    Many popular books, movies and websites have told us, based on 1 Thess 4:16-17:

    1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 (King James Version)
    King James Version (KJV)

    Public Domain
    [A Public Domain Bible] [KJV at Zondervan] [Zondervan]

    16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

    17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

    The teaching is that Christ will come to snatch the true believers away in something called the Rapture (Rapture, of course, is just the English translation of the Latin “harpazo”, meaning “caught up”). Are they right? The way it is imagined, suits of clothes, cars, airplanes and the like will all suddenly lack drivers. The true believers will have disappeared. A simple surface reading of the text does seem to support what they say.

    The assumption here, is that the believers go to Heaven and stay there with Christ. Is it valid?

    Scolar N. T. Wight says this: “… Paul conjures up images of an emperor visiting a colony or province. The citizens go out to meet him in open country and then escort him into the city. Paul’s image of the people “meeting the Lord in the air” should be read with the assumption that the people will immediately turn around and lead the Lord back to the newly remade world.”

    Placed in the cultural context of Paul’s audience, the teaching that we will be snatched away leaving empty suits of clothes for our unbelieving friends and family to find seems unlikely to be what Paul intended.

    A useful guide for Scripture interpretation is available in the Rule of St. Vincent.

    A General Rule for distinguishing the Truth of the Catholic Faith from the Falsehood of Heretical Pravity

    I HAVE often then inquired earnestly and attentively of very many men eminent for sanctity and learning, how and by what sure and so to speak universal rule I may be able to distinguish the truth of Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical pravity; and I have always, and in almost every instance, received an answer to this effect: That whether I or any one else should wish to detect the frauds and avoid the snares of heretics as they rise, and to continue sound and complete in the Catholic faith, we must, the Lord helping, fortify our own belief in two ways; first, by the authority of the Divine Law, and then, by the Tradition of the Catholic Church.

    But here some one perhaps will ask, Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church’s interpretation? For this reason, – because, owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another; so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are interpreters. For Novatian expounds it one way, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, another, Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscillian, another, Iovinian, Pelagius, Celestius, another, lastly, Nestorius another. Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various error, that the rule for the right understanding of the prophets and apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard of Ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretation.

    Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense “Catholic,” which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors.

  • Proof of God, DNA, and Drake

    A number of proponents of “Intelligent Design” attempt to show, possibly using the Drake equation, that the occurrence of intelligent life anywhere is extremely unlikely, that a miracle would have been required to create us, to explain our existence.

    I can’t help but think this backwards. Doesn’t this argument show that we were not part of the design but something added afterwards?

    Let’s approach the problem from a different direction. What is the mark of intelligence? What is the clearest evidence of its presence? Language. If in future times we explore other stars and chance upon a book we will know with certainty that an intelligent race produced it.

    But there is more than one kind of language. We develop languages for different purposes: speaking, writing, and even communicating with our machines. This last type of language is called a programming language, and at its fundamental level it is a linear sequence of binary data.

    Now consider DNA. It is a programming language for life. It is base 4, not base 2 like our programming languages, but this difference is trivial. (although the density of genetic material is also important) The fact that it comes in strands makes it even more similar to a book or a linear seqence of program instructions.

    Where does DNA come from? While we don’t yet know exactly how it is created, simulations of planetary atmospheres suggest that nucleic acids can be formed there by fairly natural processes. Can these components, and strands of DNA or RNA themselves, can come about on their own as a consequence of the laws of physics themselves? Let us assume that this is so.

    If language signifies intelligence, and DNA is a language written in the very physical laws of the universe, then we argue that there is a primeval intelligence who is the author of those laws: God. I would say that DNA and evolution should form the backbone of the Christian argument for design.

    If this reasoning is correct, life should be relatively common in the universe. Perhaps discoveries like the habitable world Gilese 581c are our first steps to verifying this hope. Of course, we should not be too narrow minded in our consideration of what a habitable world is, as some bacteria can live without water and little oxygen in a tar pit, and some grow faster in the presense of ionizing radiation.