I have the honor and good pleasure to conduct seven weddings this year. As I have been planning wedding services and conducting pre-marital counseling for seven couples, marriage has been on my mind a lot lately. What follows is a general reflection on the phenomenon of marriage:
As I mentioned in last week's blog post, marriage is a human cultural invention.
God did not command us to get married, he commanded us to be fruitful and multiply. God did not conduct a wedding for Adam and Eve, nor did he require them to endure one. God did intend them to be together, for "It is not good that the man [or the woman] should be alone" (Genesis 2:18). Adam and Eve were made out of the same flesh, and so ideally should work toward the reunion of that one flesh. But humans created marriage to mark God's less formal and more primordial intentions.
Marriage is not a commandment of God, but instead simply a human mechanism to help us follow God's more general wishes: 1. that we not be alone 2. that everyone has an equal partner or helper, and 3. that one be able to trust and depend on his or her partner. God never commanded humans to state explicit vows to one another. We require each other to make marriage vows, so that we can rest assured in the explicit intentions of another human being. After all, God made a covenant (a system of bi-directional vows), so why wouldn't a human being make a covenant with his or her partner?
But just as with sex (see last week's blog post: "How Does God Want Us to Have Sex?: In Search of a Biblical Position"), marriage in the Bible is very different form what marriage is today.
Biblically speaking, marriage is intended to be contractual. In the Bible, marriage and sex were a transaction. The man and woman entered a practical, socially binding agreement that gave each party something that they needed. In marriage, men were assured an heir. That's right, men (and not women) got married for the babies. Meanwhile, women were assured socio-economic security. Women could not own property themselves, were not given the freedom to work to support themselves. Women were, generally speaking, weaker and held no rights--not even rights over their own bodies. Thus, women needed a man to provide for them and protect them. The vows of marriage were to ensure that the man and the woman worked together for mutual benefit and didn't try to take advantage of the other.
The Bible, therefore is clear: marriage is not about love. God wanted all of his children to love each other. For our One God there is but one kind of love--the love one human is commanded to show God and every other human being. That love is modeled not on the goddess Venus or her son Eros, but rather is modeled on the one, true God's love for God's creatures. Judeo-Christian love is of one kind: steadfast, non-romantic, and based not on emotion but rather on promises. God's love is not about inter-personal relationship, but about mutual trust and support--providing for the practical needs of survival.
Think of it this way: the only type of love that matters for a Christian is the type of love found and expressed between the Father and the Son, the Father and the Spirit, the Son and the Spirit...and so on. There is only one love. It is not sexual. It is not emotional.
There is but one kind of love.
Sex is something else.
Emotion is something else.
Romantic involvement, broadly understood, is something else.
What we, in Christianity today, call marriage is something else.
The New Testament is pretty clear: disciples of Jesus Christ are married to Jesus. One vow, one relationship super-cedes all others--our vow to love God and be in relationship with God alone. Our relationships to everyone else and to everything else are mediated through that one marriage to Jesus Christ (accomplished through the Church). If I love my neighbor, it is only because of my marriage to Jesus Christ and the fact that I relate to my neighbor only through marriage. I have no spouse but Jesus. I have no family but Jesus. I have no friends but Jesus. If I have any enemies, it is because I have made Jesus my enemy first. (Remember, I can only relate to others through Jesus. Therefore, if another person is my enemy, Christ has already become my enemy.)
You see, when one is baptized, that one is made one with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female; the person is clothed with Christ, joined to Christ in his dying and rising--not just until death parts them. Baptism is one's marriage to God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
For this reason, St. Paul and other New Testament writers adamantly preached that Christians should not get married at all. If our nation and culture were truly Christian, marriage and weddings would not exist. Paul wrote that marriage was allowed only for the weak--those who were tempted to have sex and could not avoid their addiction to "the flesh." Marriage, Paul argued, was the only context in which preferential love and sexual expressions of love were even remotely permissible. For Paul, marriage is--at best--a necessary evil. The only thing that marriage is good for is to prevent you from doing other evil things beside getting married.
According to Jesus, the only thing worse than marriage is divorce. Why? Because if you cannot be faithful to another human being with whom you have entered a covenant, then you certainly cannot be faithful to your God. Indeed, dismissing the marriage covenant between you and another human is--by the same stroke and action--dismissing the marriage covenant you have made with God. In the very act of divorcing my spouse, I have divorced God. (No wonder Paul tells us not to get married! The stakes are absolute.)
In sum, the only good marriage is our marriage to God. This statement is most certainly true...if we trust the words of Scripture.
So why is the Church in the business of marrying people to each other at all? For the life of me, I can only think of one reason: the Church is unfaithful to God.
When it comes to marriage as a spiritual--or religious--phenomenon, there is only one marriage allowed: our marriage to God; there is only one wedding allowed: baptism. And the One Marriage is only allowed to be consummated in one way: holy communion. (Some Christian mystics use sex as a metaphor for communing with God, which is a good and helpful enough metaphor. But literally, the only communing we do with God is the Eucharist.)
Marriage to a human spouse is not spiritual, but mundane and practical...not religious but secular. Human marriage is, therefore, a matter of the secular state and not within the purview of the Church.
Marriage between two people is a state matter. Christians, being in the world but not of the world, are justified in seeking a legal marriage in order to obtain the protections, rights and privileges such a relationship offers under and according to the law (worldly law).
Throughout history, marriage has always been more about legality than spirituality. Marriage, remember, is a cultural institution, not a divine one. Marriage was invented as a means for human beings to hold two people accountable to one another--a means for a human being to hold her spouse accountable. Marriage is not about God holding us accountable--we are accountable to God for our promises whether or not there is a formal vow or a public vow or a legally recognized vow creating a legally defined relationship. Marriage is about humans holding humans accountable. Thus, marriage is a state matter.
Faith offers no reason to get married, but every reason to avoid a religious/spiritual marriage.
Meanwhile, human law offers every reason to get married. Tax laws, parentage rights/responsibilities, public validation of social position, inheritance laws, economic provisions, etc. are the only reasons to get married.
In the early Christian Church, weddings simply didn't happen. Marriage was solely a state institution. No wedding liturgy dates back to the early Church. And there is no evidence that Christian Churches were called on or felt obliged to bless civil marriages. Rather, Paul curses marriage and instructed churches to teach the same.
Notice also, that when Paul recommends marriage for those who cannot handle a pure Christian life, he is not sending them to the Church to get married. Paul is sending folks to the state. Although Paul does not make his theology about the role of state governments in the world yet, one can already anticipate in his thought what later theologians would conclude. To wit, God instituted state governments to help curb sinfulness by creating societies of peace and stability. In other words, when Paul suggests that Christians marry, he is, in effect saying, "Since you can't follow the Church, at least the non-Christian state help you avoid as much evil as possible."
But by the Middle Ages, marriage had become an action of the Church. Why? Because in 425 C.E. the Church became the bedfellow of the state because of Emperor Constantine. Since that time, the Church has continually tried to monopolize marriage for one reason: power. By the Middle Ages, the Church was already aiming to hold power in the world. Marriage was one instance of the Church usurping power from the state. Eventually, the state was not allowed to give two people the rights and privileges of being united under the law without the authorization of the Church. The Church wanted as much worldly authority as it could get. The Church wanted power and was given power.
Today, when I conduct a wedding, there is no doubt in my mind that I am acting as a representative of the state more so than the Church. As a called and ordained minister of the Church of Christ, I can bless all sorts of relationships. But when I marry two people, that marriage is only effective when I sign a legal, government document. And most of the time when two people ask me to marry them, what they want me to do is serve as their public witness and substitute government official to sign off on their legal marriage. In their minds, marriage happens in church. Traditional weddings are officiated by a pastor, not a judge. What couples usually want is a traditional wedding, not necessarily a divine blessing on their marriage.
If it were up to me, I would have the Church quit being involved in marriage. If it were up to me, weddings would be something that people sought from the state alone. All marriages would be conducted by a justice of the peace or some other governmental official vested with the power to marry. Only then, if--and only if--two people desired to hear the Good News that Jesus alone was the foundation of their relationship together, I would have the Church be on hand to bless their civil union and to ask God to help them live together in love, faith, hope, etc.
If it were up to me, I would never be asked to exercise the powers invested in me by the state of Illinois by pronouncing two people to be married.
After all, when I conduct pre-marital counseling, I am not really preparing two people for marriage. I am preparing two people to live as followers of Jesus Christ. The three of us present at those sessions implicitly understand that I am equipping them for Christian behavior within a relationship specifically and completely defined by a worldly institution...the state.
Faith informs a couple's marriage relationship in the same way that faith informs an individual's politics. The Church is forbidden to dictate the latter, why is the Church able to officially determine the former?
[Note: This year, I am doing more weddings than I have ever had the opportunity to do before. Weddings are not my favorite part of ministry, but I am growing to enjoy them more and more. It is not that I dislike performing weddings. Instead, from what history has taught me and from what the Bible teaches, I believe that the Church really has no business performing marriages for the state. The ELCA has orders (liturgies) for blessing homes and new jobs and all sorts of things. I am all for blessing marriages in the context of worship. But the Church has no official capacity or power when it comes to people buying homes or seeking new jobs. We can ask God's blessings on marriage without the Church being a servant of the state. I would prefer just being a servant of Christ's Church. For that reason alone, I will continue to preside as a deputized state official at weddings...because for the time being, my Church asks and expects me to serve in that way.]
Monday, June 16, 2014
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
How Does God Want Us to Have Sex?: In Search of a Biblical Position
Sex is biological, but it is also much more than that for humans.
For other animals and for plants, sex remains (with few exceptions) biological.
But what is the "more" that humans find in sex?
I believe that sex is considerably spiritual, and that sex is so infused with power over us and our relationships in such subtle ways that we do not appreciate its effect on us.
By "spiritual," I mean the mysterious nexus of body, mind, emotion and more. "Spiritual" does not refer to something that is simply ephemeral, although it points to that, too. We are spiritual beings, and a part of that spirituality is having physical bodies.
So, if sex is spiritual, we should expect to get some direction from God on matters of sexuality, particularly through the Word of God--Jesus and the Bible. As we hear Jesus preach and read the scriptures, however, we find that God is pretty clear on sex, but clear in a very different way than most Christians assume.
What we learn from Jesus and the Bible is this:
Sex is cultural.
What this means is that sexual ethics and morality are conditioned by culture and not by divine revelation. To be sure, God does reveal some things about sex, and the purpose of this blog is to tease out biblical teachings about what sex is and how we should do it, so to speak. However, if we are going to use biblical models of sexual relationships, then modern humans are really on the wrong track. For example, in many modern cultures in the West, it is important to us that sex be accompanied by love. If we are going to pattern our sexual relationships on the Bible, literally translated, then love is the last thing we would require before sex...and if we did require it before sex, then we would be breaking God's commandments. More on that later.
God is never specific about the relational context in which sex should occur.
Instead of micro-managing, God only gives us some general principles to guide us in our quest for sex: loyalty, fidelity, mutual trust and the benefit of vows (marriage).
What about monogamy? Surely, monogamy is one of God's guiding sexual principles. Well, yes and no. Monogamy is only revealed as the right way in the New Testament (and strict monogamy as a N.T. teaching is still debatable). Meanwhile, many Christians base their sexual ethics on Old Testament commandments. If we are going to listen at all to the Old Testament about sex, then we have to put polygamy, serial monogamy and sex outside of wedlock back on the table.
Issues of monogamy aside, the Bible is clear that if a man or woman is going to be faithful to a partner, it is really helpful to communicate that intention. God never said, "Marry and multiply." God did try to get his human creatures to be good to one another. Marriage was never a commandment, it was a human invention to help us to follow God's design for us: fidelity and mutual trust. Marriage as we know it, therefore, is also a purely cultural construct. Adam and Eve were never married. There was no wedding, no witnesses to any vows made (except God who is always our witness), no formal vows were even made--certainly no vows made in public, as we require today. Humans created marriage so that the promises made by two people could be formal and publicly accountable. We created marriage so that the contract could be enforced, that's all.
But marriage is off topic. We are talking about sex. The evolution of marriage is interesting and complex and deserves its own blog post. Yes, marriage is designed to be the proper relational context of sex. However, the point here is: marriage is not a divine estate (certainly not a sacrament--sorry Romans). Marriage is a cultural institution. Hence, sex is a cultural thing.
Today, many Christians believe that sex is about love. But that goes against everything the Bible tells us about sex.
The first thing God tells us about sex is: "Be fruitful and multiply..." (Genesis 1:28). Not only is this the only thing about sex that we consistently get right, it is the only divine commandment in the entire Bible that we haven't broken. We got this one, so we can move on, right? Let's not be hasty. Please note that the first time God tries to explain to humans why sex is even a thing, God says nothing about what a sexual relationship is supposed to look like. Sex is no more than a biological function. God gives the exact same commandment to the other animals--simply, "Be fruitful and multiply...." God refuses to micromanage the how-to-make-it-happen-responsibily at this point, and simply tells humans, "You need to start having sex." Things were so uncomplicated in Eden.
The rest of Genesis, and indeed most of the rest of the Old Testament, never expands on that one, basic ideal and purpose and context of sex, namely that it is all about biology. Abraham has sex with his slave, Hagar, in order to procreate and obtain an heir. His wife, Sarah, supports this plan (at first) and God does not punish Abraham's extra-marital sexual behavior. Why? Because sex is about biology--procreation--first and foremost. Yes, Sarah eventually changes her mind. We modern romantics tell ourselves that Sarah comes to despise Abraham's sexual relations with Hagar because she is jealous of Abraham and wants him to be true to her. In reality, Sarah changes her mind because she is jealous of Hagar and Ishmael (the child of Abraham and Hagar).
Here we see the first non-biological dynamic associated with sex: power.
Sarah is jealous of Hagar and Ishmael because they are all of a sudden threats to her and her son, Isaac's, claim to prominence in the family and right of inheritance. Sex is no longer merely biological, it is political. What does God do in response? God works to make it apolitical because sex, biblically understood so far, ought not be politicized. God lets Sarah force Abraham to exile Hagar and Ishmael, but then God goes to great measures to support, preserve and bless the exiles. Ishmael would come to inherit a great nation--just like Isaac.
God does not want sex to be about power. If I am having sex to exert power over another person, or I am using sexual relations to gain more power, this is wrong. But notice, it is not wrong because sex-of-power is devoid of love, it is wrong because we humans have made the biology more complicated (inter-personally speaking).
Another biblical story that comes to mind when I think of sex, is the story of Ruth and Boaz (found in the book of the Bible titled: Ruth). In chapter 3, Ruth goes to Boaz resting on the threshing floor and presents herself for him to have sex with her. Now, the modern readers assumes the following and inserts it between the biblical lines: Ruth falls in love with Boaz as soon as she sees him and does everything she can to win his love in return. As it happens, they find that they love each other (only after having sex, BTW) and decide to get married, and they live happily ever after. What really happens? Well, according to the Bible (if you believe the Bible), Ruth's friend Naomi tells her to go and have sex with Boaz because Naomi needs to seek, "...some security for you, so that it may be well with you" (Ruth 3:1). Ruth wasn't in love. She went to lay down with Boaz for reasons of survival and security. After spending an intense night together on the threshing floor, Boaz does decide to marry Ruth. Boaz wasn't in love with Ruth. By presenting herself for sex, Ruth was proposing a contract--I will "take care of you" if you take care of me, if you will. Proving it is a contract, Boaz says that he cannot marry Ruth right away, but must wait to see if another man will exercise his right to claim her as his. All of a sudden, Ruth is owed a debt. She had sex with him as a down payment on marriage. Now he says he can't give her that, so he owes her something. In a show both of good faith and in order to compensate Ruth, Boaz gives her "six measures of barley" so that she does not go back to Naomi "empty-handed" (Ruth 3:15, 17). Boaz does ultimately marry Ruth--and for all the right biblical reasons, none of which are love.
The story of Ruth and Boaz tells us something: sex is about life. Not just the life of the species, but also about life for the individual. Sex is both a tool to propagate the species and a tool used to ensure an individual's abundant life. The latter requires things like trust, security, relationships, and other suchlike things. As far as the Bible tells us, God fully supports and blesses the way that Naomi, Ruth and Boaz use and understand sex. Sex is good and is for the good of God's people.
Imagine with me. What if Boaz refused to have sex with or marry Ruth because he "did not love" her? The Bible and God would have judged him--and not positively. Ruth, whose descendent was going to be King David and therefore also Jesus, needed Boaz to preserve her life and to help her create the life that Israel was waiting for (in and through David and Jesus). If he had said, "I can't. I don't love you." He would have been selfishly putting himself before Ruth and all of Israel. Make no mistake, according to the Bible, Boaz has a duty to Israel and a responsibility to Ruth to forget about his own feelings and have sex...then get married. Compassion for the poor and devotion to nation and countrymen are more important than what Boaz wants or feels. If there is one thing God punishes in the Bible, it is selfishness at the expense of God's needy people.
Again and again, the Bible is clear--God is clear--that sex is not about love or emotion or even spirituality per se. Sex is for procreation. Sex is transactional and contractual--a commodity that can be traded for the goal of economic and social security. Sex is not about inter-personal relationship, it is about contractual agreement. We modern romantics are offended by this, but God condones and blesses it.
For many modern people in the West, sex is spiritual. For us, sex is emotional and mental and relational, and, yes, still physical...specifically, pleasurably physical.
We have sex for reasons other than procreation. We have sex for pleasure.
We have sex for reasons other than ensuring our own lives and livelihoods.
We have sex to express (and to help build or strengthen) meaningful inter-personal relationships--not just for our survival, but for our happiness. The relationships are not a means to an end, but an end in themselves. We do not love our partners just so that we have practical support through life, we love them--and have sex with them--just to get happiness being together with them.
None of the reasons why we have sex today are biblical. In fact, the reasons we have sex are downright hedonistically self-indulgent compared to the reasons why people in the Bible had sex.
So, are we wrong for associating sex with love?
Are we wrong for taking pleasure from sex?
Are we wrong to want to build relationship for relationship sake and not just for security in the world?
No, we are not wrong.
Because sexual ethics and morality do not come to us as revelations of God.
Sex--how we view it and how we do it--are cultural constructs.
In biblical times, people viewed sex (and marriage) differently than we do today. They had different rules, methods, taboos and preferences than we do. And that is ok.
Because all God wants us to remember is:
Sex, because it is a part of creation, is good.
-and-
Sex should be somehow grounded in mutual trust, fidelity and the goal of abundant life.
God has not changed his intentions and hopes for us when it comes to sex, and yet the subtext and process of sexual relations in biblical times is foreign to us. Why? Because the culture of and surrounding sex has changed and evolved. God supports and blesses that evolutionary process.
God says, "Be fruitful and multiply."
Culture says, "Here's how we expect you to do that in ways that are healthy for you and society."
Right now, our culture says sex ought to be about love and a deeper inter-personal relationship. Why? Because these things are the best goods that sex can offer society. We do not need to dramatically increase the human population on earth (in fact doing so would be disastrous). We do not need sex-as-social-security because we have come up with better, more generous and dependable corporate systems of preserving individual lives and their socio-economic security. In the past, a woman's social security meant having a man to protect and provide. Today, social security is about protecting each individual's civil liberties and ensuring a healthy society that gives both men and women opportunities to seek life and liberty, and to pursue fulfillment. God's gift of sex is freed from these requirements to give us different benefits and blessings today. Therefore, sex is understood differently today, and cultural expectations surrounding sex are different. Sex can make life good and healthy for us in different ways today than it was able to in biblical times.
In other words: sex has evolved, and the Holy Spirit must guide us toward sexual ethics and morality...biblical examples and models are no longer prescriptive.
And at the end of the day, the only time God disapproves of our approach to sex is when it becomes about something other than or is destructive to abundant life.
God does not want to micro-manage your sex life.
The Church isn't supposed to, either.
So, I put the question: How can Christians be better witnesses of the Good News about sex?
For other animals and for plants, sex remains (with few exceptions) biological.
But what is the "more" that humans find in sex?
I believe that sex is considerably spiritual, and that sex is so infused with power over us and our relationships in such subtle ways that we do not appreciate its effect on us.
By "spiritual," I mean the mysterious nexus of body, mind, emotion and more. "Spiritual" does not refer to something that is simply ephemeral, although it points to that, too. We are spiritual beings, and a part of that spirituality is having physical bodies.
So, if sex is spiritual, we should expect to get some direction from God on matters of sexuality, particularly through the Word of God--Jesus and the Bible. As we hear Jesus preach and read the scriptures, however, we find that God is pretty clear on sex, but clear in a very different way than most Christians assume.
What we learn from Jesus and the Bible is this:
Sex is cultural.
What this means is that sexual ethics and morality are conditioned by culture and not by divine revelation. To be sure, God does reveal some things about sex, and the purpose of this blog is to tease out biblical teachings about what sex is and how we should do it, so to speak. However, if we are going to use biblical models of sexual relationships, then modern humans are really on the wrong track. For example, in many modern cultures in the West, it is important to us that sex be accompanied by love. If we are going to pattern our sexual relationships on the Bible, literally translated, then love is the last thing we would require before sex...and if we did require it before sex, then we would be breaking God's commandments. More on that later.
God is never specific about the relational context in which sex should occur.
Instead of micro-managing, God only gives us some general principles to guide us in our quest for sex: loyalty, fidelity, mutual trust and the benefit of vows (marriage).
What about monogamy? Surely, monogamy is one of God's guiding sexual principles. Well, yes and no. Monogamy is only revealed as the right way in the New Testament (and strict monogamy as a N.T. teaching is still debatable). Meanwhile, many Christians base their sexual ethics on Old Testament commandments. If we are going to listen at all to the Old Testament about sex, then we have to put polygamy, serial monogamy and sex outside of wedlock back on the table.
Issues of monogamy aside, the Bible is clear that if a man or woman is going to be faithful to a partner, it is really helpful to communicate that intention. God never said, "Marry and multiply." God did try to get his human creatures to be good to one another. Marriage was never a commandment, it was a human invention to help us to follow God's design for us: fidelity and mutual trust. Marriage as we know it, therefore, is also a purely cultural construct. Adam and Eve were never married. There was no wedding, no witnesses to any vows made (except God who is always our witness), no formal vows were even made--certainly no vows made in public, as we require today. Humans created marriage so that the promises made by two people could be formal and publicly accountable. We created marriage so that the contract could be enforced, that's all.
But marriage is off topic. We are talking about sex. The evolution of marriage is interesting and complex and deserves its own blog post. Yes, marriage is designed to be the proper relational context of sex. However, the point here is: marriage is not a divine estate (certainly not a sacrament--sorry Romans). Marriage is a cultural institution. Hence, sex is a cultural thing.
Today, many Christians believe that sex is about love. But that goes against everything the Bible tells us about sex.
The first thing God tells us about sex is: "Be fruitful and multiply..." (Genesis 1:28). Not only is this the only thing about sex that we consistently get right, it is the only divine commandment in the entire Bible that we haven't broken. We got this one, so we can move on, right? Let's not be hasty. Please note that the first time God tries to explain to humans why sex is even a thing, God says nothing about what a sexual relationship is supposed to look like. Sex is no more than a biological function. God gives the exact same commandment to the other animals--simply, "Be fruitful and multiply...." God refuses to micromanage the how-to-make-it-happen-responsibily at this point, and simply tells humans, "You need to start having sex." Things were so uncomplicated in Eden.
The rest of Genesis, and indeed most of the rest of the Old Testament, never expands on that one, basic ideal and purpose and context of sex, namely that it is all about biology. Abraham has sex with his slave, Hagar, in order to procreate and obtain an heir. His wife, Sarah, supports this plan (at first) and God does not punish Abraham's extra-marital sexual behavior. Why? Because sex is about biology--procreation--first and foremost. Yes, Sarah eventually changes her mind. We modern romantics tell ourselves that Sarah comes to despise Abraham's sexual relations with Hagar because she is jealous of Abraham and wants him to be true to her. In reality, Sarah changes her mind because she is jealous of Hagar and Ishmael (the child of Abraham and Hagar).
Here we see the first non-biological dynamic associated with sex: power.
Sarah is jealous of Hagar and Ishmael because they are all of a sudden threats to her and her son, Isaac's, claim to prominence in the family and right of inheritance. Sex is no longer merely biological, it is political. What does God do in response? God works to make it apolitical because sex, biblically understood so far, ought not be politicized. God lets Sarah force Abraham to exile Hagar and Ishmael, but then God goes to great measures to support, preserve and bless the exiles. Ishmael would come to inherit a great nation--just like Isaac.
God does not want sex to be about power. If I am having sex to exert power over another person, or I am using sexual relations to gain more power, this is wrong. But notice, it is not wrong because sex-of-power is devoid of love, it is wrong because we humans have made the biology more complicated (inter-personally speaking).
Another biblical story that comes to mind when I think of sex, is the story of Ruth and Boaz (found in the book of the Bible titled: Ruth). In chapter 3, Ruth goes to Boaz resting on the threshing floor and presents herself for him to have sex with her. Now, the modern readers assumes the following and inserts it between the biblical lines: Ruth falls in love with Boaz as soon as she sees him and does everything she can to win his love in return. As it happens, they find that they love each other (only after having sex, BTW) and decide to get married, and they live happily ever after. What really happens? Well, according to the Bible (if you believe the Bible), Ruth's friend Naomi tells her to go and have sex with Boaz because Naomi needs to seek, "...some security for you, so that it may be well with you" (Ruth 3:1). Ruth wasn't in love. She went to lay down with Boaz for reasons of survival and security. After spending an intense night together on the threshing floor, Boaz does decide to marry Ruth. Boaz wasn't in love with Ruth. By presenting herself for sex, Ruth was proposing a contract--I will "take care of you" if you take care of me, if you will. Proving it is a contract, Boaz says that he cannot marry Ruth right away, but must wait to see if another man will exercise his right to claim her as his. All of a sudden, Ruth is owed a debt. She had sex with him as a down payment on marriage. Now he says he can't give her that, so he owes her something. In a show both of good faith and in order to compensate Ruth, Boaz gives her "six measures of barley" so that she does not go back to Naomi "empty-handed" (Ruth 3:15, 17). Boaz does ultimately marry Ruth--and for all the right biblical reasons, none of which are love.
The story of Ruth and Boaz tells us something: sex is about life. Not just the life of the species, but also about life for the individual. Sex is both a tool to propagate the species and a tool used to ensure an individual's abundant life. The latter requires things like trust, security, relationships, and other suchlike things. As far as the Bible tells us, God fully supports and blesses the way that Naomi, Ruth and Boaz use and understand sex. Sex is good and is for the good of God's people.
Imagine with me. What if Boaz refused to have sex with or marry Ruth because he "did not love" her? The Bible and God would have judged him--and not positively. Ruth, whose descendent was going to be King David and therefore also Jesus, needed Boaz to preserve her life and to help her create the life that Israel was waiting for (in and through David and Jesus). If he had said, "I can't. I don't love you." He would have been selfishly putting himself before Ruth and all of Israel. Make no mistake, according to the Bible, Boaz has a duty to Israel and a responsibility to Ruth to forget about his own feelings and have sex...then get married. Compassion for the poor and devotion to nation and countrymen are more important than what Boaz wants or feels. If there is one thing God punishes in the Bible, it is selfishness at the expense of God's needy people.
Again and again, the Bible is clear--God is clear--that sex is not about love or emotion or even spirituality per se. Sex is for procreation. Sex is transactional and contractual--a commodity that can be traded for the goal of economic and social security. Sex is not about inter-personal relationship, it is about contractual agreement. We modern romantics are offended by this, but God condones and blesses it.
For many modern people in the West, sex is spiritual. For us, sex is emotional and mental and relational, and, yes, still physical...specifically, pleasurably physical.
We have sex for reasons other than procreation. We have sex for pleasure.
We have sex for reasons other than ensuring our own lives and livelihoods.
We have sex to express (and to help build or strengthen) meaningful inter-personal relationships--not just for our survival, but for our happiness. The relationships are not a means to an end, but an end in themselves. We do not love our partners just so that we have practical support through life, we love them--and have sex with them--just to get happiness being together with them.
None of the reasons why we have sex today are biblical. In fact, the reasons we have sex are downright hedonistically self-indulgent compared to the reasons why people in the Bible had sex.
So, are we wrong for associating sex with love?
Are we wrong for taking pleasure from sex?
Are we wrong to want to build relationship for relationship sake and not just for security in the world?
No, we are not wrong.
Because sexual ethics and morality do not come to us as revelations of God.
Sex--how we view it and how we do it--are cultural constructs.
In biblical times, people viewed sex (and marriage) differently than we do today. They had different rules, methods, taboos and preferences than we do. And that is ok.
Because all God wants us to remember is:
Sex, because it is a part of creation, is good.
-and-
Sex should be somehow grounded in mutual trust, fidelity and the goal of abundant life.
God has not changed his intentions and hopes for us when it comes to sex, and yet the subtext and process of sexual relations in biblical times is foreign to us. Why? Because the culture of and surrounding sex has changed and evolved. God supports and blesses that evolutionary process.
God says, "Be fruitful and multiply."
Culture says, "Here's how we expect you to do that in ways that are healthy for you and society."
Right now, our culture says sex ought to be about love and a deeper inter-personal relationship. Why? Because these things are the best goods that sex can offer society. We do not need to dramatically increase the human population on earth (in fact doing so would be disastrous). We do not need sex-as-social-security because we have come up with better, more generous and dependable corporate systems of preserving individual lives and their socio-economic security. In the past, a woman's social security meant having a man to protect and provide. Today, social security is about protecting each individual's civil liberties and ensuring a healthy society that gives both men and women opportunities to seek life and liberty, and to pursue fulfillment. God's gift of sex is freed from these requirements to give us different benefits and blessings today. Therefore, sex is understood differently today, and cultural expectations surrounding sex are different. Sex can make life good and healthy for us in different ways today than it was able to in biblical times.
In other words: sex has evolved, and the Holy Spirit must guide us toward sexual ethics and morality...biblical examples and models are no longer prescriptive.
And at the end of the day, the only time God disapproves of our approach to sex is when it becomes about something other than or is destructive to abundant life.
God does not want to micro-manage your sex life.
The Church isn't supposed to, either.
So, I put the question: How can Christians be better witnesses of the Good News about sex?
Friday, January 10, 2014
New Year, New Rules
Each new year, around this time, people in our culture participate in a curious custom:
"It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery." Galatians 5:1
"Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom." 2 Corinthians 3:17
the New Year's Resolution.
We make unwritten amendments to the constitution of our lives, using these resolutions as springboards for our will power. We make new rules for ourselves, things that we know will be good for us and for our health and for those around us. But where does this odd custom come from? Well, I don't know the history, nor am I concerned with that part of the story. I am much more concerned with the more inward allure of the resolutions we make for ourselves. I think that the elemental reason for New Year's resolutions is the hope that only comes with newness.
The same hope comes each time the sun rises in the East--every day is a new day. The idea is that we are free in that newness, free from the past and all of our mistakes and failures and bad habits. New Year's Resolutions help us to draw a line (albeit a line in the sand--a wholly arbitrary line), a line that separates us from what was, so that we can start new.
"It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery." Galatians 5:1
The irony in this is that freedom comes from discipline. We need new rules, or resolutions, in order to free us from former habits. We need new rules before new behaviors can become the norm, can become habit. Our culture today, however, resists rules--even when the fruit of those rules is so rewarding. Jesus knew we needed new rules to replace the old ones, before we could taste freedom, which was why he offered us his yoke:
"Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." Matthew 11:29-30
We so often think of freedom in a vacuum, forgetting that being a slave to one's self is not freedom at all. Our actions (even some of the ones we choose!) are not decided upon in a vacuum. Instead, we are bombarded with all sorts of influences--upon our conscious and sub-conscious selves. Freedom, therefore, is not just being able to do what we "want" to do. More than that, freedom is the ability to actively decide what our actions and habits will be. Freedom is the opportunity to change, and the ability to change in deliberate ways. Freedom is self-discipline.
What we so often lack is self-dicipline. The ability to set limits for ourselves, to rule ourselves. We can take our lesson from the ascetics (although creating an entirely disciplined life apart from the world is going to the other extreme and is not a way of living in the world). Spiritual disciplines are not just to practice being religious. Rather, these disciplines are meant to bring wholeness and health to every aspect of life--physical, mental, emotional, interpersonal and, yes, spiritual. Regular worship, meditation, devotion, prayer and service, all of these things benefit us in just so many ways. They help free us from our habits by helping us to see that we are more than merely the sum of our habits. They help us realize that we are human and beloved and that we have been gifted with free will. Many people consider these things to be law, and they are since we are supposed to do these things. But many, because these are laws, resist doing them.
Jesus Christ can offer you the freedom that comes with newness. Jesus Christ is the source of renewal, in fact. And so when you make your New Year's Resolutions this year, make them spiritual disciplines that will keep on giving. In fact, just make some New Year's resolutions--that, in and of itself, is a spiritual discipline, strengthening the will, and therefore strengthening the Spirit in you.
"Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." Matthew 11:29-30
We so often think of freedom in a vacuum, forgetting that being a slave to one's self is not freedom at all. Our actions (even some of the ones we choose!) are not decided upon in a vacuum. Instead, we are bombarded with all sorts of influences--upon our conscious and sub-conscious selves. Freedom, therefore, is not just being able to do what we "want" to do. More than that, freedom is the ability to actively decide what our actions and habits will be. Freedom is the opportunity to change, and the ability to change in deliberate ways. Freedom is self-discipline.
What we so often lack is self-dicipline. The ability to set limits for ourselves, to rule ourselves. We can take our lesson from the ascetics (although creating an entirely disciplined life apart from the world is going to the other extreme and is not a way of living in the world). Spiritual disciplines are not just to practice being religious. Rather, these disciplines are meant to bring wholeness and health to every aspect of life--physical, mental, emotional, interpersonal and, yes, spiritual. Regular worship, meditation, devotion, prayer and service, all of these things benefit us in just so many ways. They help free us from our habits by helping us to see that we are more than merely the sum of our habits. They help us realize that we are human and beloved and that we have been gifted with free will. Many people consider these things to be law, and they are since we are supposed to do these things. But many, because these are laws, resist doing them.
Jesus Christ can offer you the freedom that comes with newness. Jesus Christ is the source of renewal, in fact. And so when you make your New Year's Resolutions this year, make them spiritual disciplines that will keep on giving. In fact, just make some New Year's resolutions--that, in and of itself, is a spiritual discipline, strengthening the will, and therefore strengthening the Spirit in you.
"Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom." 2 Corinthians 3:17
Thursday, December 19, 2013
The Pagan Roots of Christmas
Here, my Dear Reader, I discuss the origins of our beloved Christian holy day, the Nativity of Our Lord (Christmas). These origins may startle you. For, as you will see, Christmas is more closely tied to pagan rituals than Halloween. But my aim is not to dissuade anyone from celebrating Christmas. No, my aim is to show how the Church encounters something in the world, and works to redeem it by absorbing it into its own practices. It is the nature of the Church to assimilate things in the culture of the world, and change them--taking what is unsavory and creating something more beautiful and righteous. Remember, as you celebrate this Christmas, how the Church takes what is ugly and mundane, and uses it to be a vehicle for the truth. Such is the task of the Church throughout the ages--to find new ways to share the Good News of Jesus Christ.
Why December 25th?
Jesus was not born on December 25th. The Church did not make this the official date for observing the Nativity until sometime in the 2nd Century A.D. The date was chosen for a couple of reasons. First, it occurred in winter--at a time of the year when we need light in the darkness. Second, and more importantly, the 25th of December was the last day of the week long celebration of the Roman holiday Saturnalia. This pagan Roman holiday was celebrated with feasts, lawlessness and carousing. Christmas caroling, or wassailing, is a hold over from Saturnalia, as are all of those large meals that we cook for family and friends to enjoy together. The Church tried to bring some morality, self-restraint and temperance to the practice of Saturnalia by making the 25th of December a high holy day.
The Christmas Tree, Holly Wreaths, Garlands and Yule Logs
One of the most central of decorations at Christmas is the Christmas tree. We put them in our front windows for all to see, we decorate them lovingly with lights and special ornaments, and they serve as the center piece for Christmas morning, as families gather around the tree to open presents found beneath the branches. And yet, the Christmas tree (as well as garlands and yule logs) come from ancient Norse pagan traditions, when people used to worship the trees themselves. Yes, the Christmas tree comes from tree worshippers. Now, I know that today Christians do not worship their trees, although if you stand back and look objectively a lot of our traditions surrounding the Christmas tree might seem--to the outsider--like we do worship the tree itself. Wreaths of holly or of evergreen, meanwhile, were once thought to be winter refuges for fairy or elf beings. We put them in our homes so that these miniature supernatural (and woodland dwelling) beings would show us favor the rest of the year.
Santa Claus, Christmas Stockings, and Christmas Presents
Whereas most of our Christmas traditions came from pagan holidays assimilated into the Church, Santa Claus was a wholly Christian phenomenon that was assimilated by secular culture. Santa is based on Saint Nicholas, who was a real, historical figure, a bishop of the church. As the Christian tradition goes, there was a poor family who had a daughter. Destitute, the girl's parents were planning on selling their daughter into slavery to survive. St. Nick heard of this and anonymously left gold pieces on the window sill of the girl's house at Christmas time. He put the money in a stocking (this is why we hang Christmas stockings on our fire places). St. Nick prevented the girl from going into slavery. This is also the origin of the tradition of giving Christmas presents--it began as mission. Christians would give gifts to those who had nothing, to the poor and not necessarily to their loved ones, at least not just to their loved ones.
Early depictions of Saint Nicholas show that he wore a green robe and was a slim man. The Santa Claus that we know and love today--the fat old elf in a red suit with white trim who comes down the chimney--was created single-handedly by the Coca Cola corporation. Coca Cola used the red clad fat man, complete with long, white beard, as a marketing tool. We have all but forgotten the true Christian Saint Nicholas in favor of this commercialized pretender. The giving of Christmas presents has similarly been co-opted by our culture. Now Christmas is marked not by mission to the poor, but by rampant consumerism which begins with Black Friday.
Saving Christmas
My purpose in sharing these facts and origins of our Christmas traditions is not to ruin Christmas for you. I do not advise anyone to get rid of any of these traditions. I do not want anyone to stop celebrating Christmas. Instead, it is my hope that knowing these things might help make your celebration of our dear Savior's birth purer. Remember the real story of St. Nicholas so that you remember our Christian mission--to wit, that gifts should first of all be given to the poor. Remember the pagan roots of Christmas traditions and decorations so that you can focus on the real reasons we still have these things--to remember the gospel. All of these pagan traditions have become a part of being a Christian at Christmas time because they are helpful in remembering why our Savior came to save us. The Christmas tree holds Christ's light in the darkness. Our holiday meals are a foretaste of the feast to come. In all that you do to observe Christmas, think about why you do those things and use them--bend them--to be a witness to Jesus Christ.
Most of all, place the story of Jesus' birth at the center of your Christmas remembrances. Always keep in mind the scriptures. Jesus, who is God, was born a normal and regular human being in order to redeem the world, and all creation. In the same way, the Church takes traditions of our secular culture and redeems them, using them to help us remember the story of God's love in Jesus Christ.
So, celebrate Christmas in new and old ways. And remember the baby who was laid in a manger.
Immanuel. "God with us."
Thanks be to God for him.
Amen.
Why December 25th?
Jesus was not born on December 25th. The Church did not make this the official date for observing the Nativity until sometime in the 2nd Century A.D. The date was chosen for a couple of reasons. First, it occurred in winter--at a time of the year when we need light in the darkness. Second, and more importantly, the 25th of December was the last day of the week long celebration of the Roman holiday Saturnalia. This pagan Roman holiday was celebrated with feasts, lawlessness and carousing. Christmas caroling, or wassailing, is a hold over from Saturnalia, as are all of those large meals that we cook for family and friends to enjoy together. The Church tried to bring some morality, self-restraint and temperance to the practice of Saturnalia by making the 25th of December a high holy day.
The Christmas Tree, Holly Wreaths, Garlands and Yule Logs
One of the most central of decorations at Christmas is the Christmas tree. We put them in our front windows for all to see, we decorate them lovingly with lights and special ornaments, and they serve as the center piece for Christmas morning, as families gather around the tree to open presents found beneath the branches. And yet, the Christmas tree (as well as garlands and yule logs) come from ancient Norse pagan traditions, when people used to worship the trees themselves. Yes, the Christmas tree comes from tree worshippers. Now, I know that today Christians do not worship their trees, although if you stand back and look objectively a lot of our traditions surrounding the Christmas tree might seem--to the outsider--like we do worship the tree itself. Wreaths of holly or of evergreen, meanwhile, were once thought to be winter refuges for fairy or elf beings. We put them in our homes so that these miniature supernatural (and woodland dwelling) beings would show us favor the rest of the year.
Santa Claus, Christmas Stockings, and Christmas Presents
Whereas most of our Christmas traditions came from pagan holidays assimilated into the Church, Santa Claus was a wholly Christian phenomenon that was assimilated by secular culture. Santa is based on Saint Nicholas, who was a real, historical figure, a bishop of the church. As the Christian tradition goes, there was a poor family who had a daughter. Destitute, the girl's parents were planning on selling their daughter into slavery to survive. St. Nick heard of this and anonymously left gold pieces on the window sill of the girl's house at Christmas time. He put the money in a stocking (this is why we hang Christmas stockings on our fire places). St. Nick prevented the girl from going into slavery. This is also the origin of the tradition of giving Christmas presents--it began as mission. Christians would give gifts to those who had nothing, to the poor and not necessarily to their loved ones, at least not just to their loved ones.
Early depictions of Saint Nicholas show that he wore a green robe and was a slim man. The Santa Claus that we know and love today--the fat old elf in a red suit with white trim who comes down the chimney--was created single-handedly by the Coca Cola corporation. Coca Cola used the red clad fat man, complete with long, white beard, as a marketing tool. We have all but forgotten the true Christian Saint Nicholas in favor of this commercialized pretender. The giving of Christmas presents has similarly been co-opted by our culture. Now Christmas is marked not by mission to the poor, but by rampant consumerism which begins with Black Friday.
Saving Christmas
My purpose in sharing these facts and origins of our Christmas traditions is not to ruin Christmas for you. I do not advise anyone to get rid of any of these traditions. I do not want anyone to stop celebrating Christmas. Instead, it is my hope that knowing these things might help make your celebration of our dear Savior's birth purer. Remember the real story of St. Nicholas so that you remember our Christian mission--to wit, that gifts should first of all be given to the poor. Remember the pagan roots of Christmas traditions and decorations so that you can focus on the real reasons we still have these things--to remember the gospel. All of these pagan traditions have become a part of being a Christian at Christmas time because they are helpful in remembering why our Savior came to save us. The Christmas tree holds Christ's light in the darkness. Our holiday meals are a foretaste of the feast to come. In all that you do to observe Christmas, think about why you do those things and use them--bend them--to be a witness to Jesus Christ.
Most of all, place the story of Jesus' birth at the center of your Christmas remembrances. Always keep in mind the scriptures. Jesus, who is God, was born a normal and regular human being in order to redeem the world, and all creation. In the same way, the Church takes traditions of our secular culture and redeems them, using them to help us remember the story of God's love in Jesus Christ.
So, celebrate Christmas in new and old ways. And remember the baby who was laid in a manger.
Immanuel. "God with us."
Thanks be to God for him.
Amen.
Friday, December 13, 2013
What to Buy this Christmas
Ask any child if they are ready for Christmas, and you will hear, "Yeah! I can't wait for presents."
Ask any adult if they are ready for Christmas, and you will hear, "Well, I still have a few more gifts to buy."
Since the day after Thanksgiving, the day called 'Black Friday' (which is aptly named as most people leave home in the dark, and are inside stores so much that they seldom see the light of that day)--since Black Friday people have scoured shops and stores to find the choicest deals on both needed items and Christmas gifts. On this post-modern hunt, people prowl to find big prey that can be taken down easily. The month between Black Friday and Christmas is a swarm, an economic frenzy. People spend saved-up money (or temporarily utilize someone else's money) to purchase all kinds of trinkets and gizmos. The frenzy and excitement are palpable in any store one visits during this time.
The most fascinating thing of all is that during this time of the year, few seem to be window-shoppers. Everyone is out on a mission, if not for a specific gift, then for the luck of finding the perfect one. People who, during the rest of the year are frugal and simply window-shop, are now buying with abandon. Even these folks, who spent the year merely creating wish lists and doggedly sticking to the fiscal responsibilities of budgets and savings, are now spending...because the time is ripe.
Many Christians would denounce the frenzy, and the frivolousness of this time of year. Money, after all, is the root of all evil. And so, you will hear preachers and parishioners sermonize about the real meaning of Christmas (the "reason for the season"). [For some reason, these same folks make 'Happy Holidays' the most important front on their 'war to save Christmas.' Clearly they have forgotten what "holiday" means: "holy day." Of all the battlegrounds on which to die.... In any event, allow me to continue:] The flurry of money and credit and gifts becomes a target this time of year. The economic boost our retailers--and nation--receive at this time of year is considered greed at its height. Oddly enough, these same detractors are out swarming and participating in the same commercial predation as everyone else. As if to justify themselves, they argue: we are buying gifts, but we know that it is not the priority. In other words, they are participating in the activity while trying to suppress the frenzy. Or, as I would prefer to say it, they are taking the spirit out of the action.
I would much rather preserve the fervor and frenzy, and let it bleed over into our spiritual life. There is nothing wrong with buying gifts. Gifts can be signs of love. In fact, for many people, their language of love is gifts. And there is nothing wrong with spending money (as long as you have it or will have it). Nor is it wrong to get excited about these mundane economic things. Indeed, the economic exchange and flow during this season of the year can be a great training ground for our spiritual lives.
I am reminded of a poem by Rumi, an Islamic mystic and poet:
+ + +
These spiritual windowshoppers,
who idly ask, How much is that? Oh, I'm just looking.
They handle a hundred items and put them down,
shadows with no capital.
What is spent is love and two eyes wet with weeping.
But these walk into a shop,
and their whole lives pass suddenly in that moment,
in that shop.
Where di you go? "Nowhere."
What did you have to eat? "Nothing much."
Even if you don't know what you want,
buy something, to be part of the exchanging flow.
Start a huge foolish project,
like Noah.
It makes absolutely no difference
what people think of you.
+ + +
Our faith lives should look like the purchasing frenzy of the month after Black Friday.
When it comes to faith, we should spend frivolously. Who knew the reason for the season was all of the buying and selling?!? After all, the whole point of Jesus' ministry was to buy us! And he was not frugal. Nor should we be frugal with our spirituality and mission.
So, go ahead and spend.
God's people are easy to "buy" for.
God takes on all our "debts."
Thanks be to God.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
The Valley of Zombies
As we concluded last time, monsters are creative constructions that help us to safely face our fear of death. If monsters provide a catharsis for our fear of death, then perhaps the monsters with which that specific fear is most vivid are zombies. Where most monsters are harbingers of death, zombies are more. Zombies are death itself come back, reanimated, in order to kill us. The dead bringing death.
Moreover, the scariest part about zombies is not their predatory quickness or their cruel intelligence, but rather zombies are frightening because of their numbers and because they are relentless and unstoppable. One zombie is easy to dispatch. They are stupid, plodding creatures. Slow enough for anyone to overcome when they are alone. No, zombies are dreadful in large numbers because they can overwhelm even the most experienced and skilled fighter. In this respect, zombies are a perfect metaphor for death itself. We can run, we can even fight for a while, but eventually death will catch and overwhelm us. Death does not need to move fast, because claiming us for itself is inevitable.
Moreover, the scariest part about zombies is not their predatory quickness or their cruel intelligence, but rather zombies are frightening because of their numbers and because they are relentless and unstoppable. One zombie is easy to dispatch. They are stupid, plodding creatures. Slow enough for anyone to overcome when they are alone. No, zombies are dreadful in large numbers because they can overwhelm even the most experienced and skilled fighter. In this respect, zombies are a perfect metaphor for death itself. We can run, we can even fight for a while, but eventually death will catch and overwhelm us. Death does not need to move fast, because claiming us for itself is inevitable.
Zombies occur a handful of places in the Bible, believe it or not. But the most chilling account of zombies is found in the book of Ezekiel.
Please read Ezekiel 37:1-14
(No really, you are going to want to read this one before proceeding.)
Imagine, for a moment, what Ezekiel witnessed.
He was shown a valley full of dry bones. And God reanimated them. First, the bones gathered themselves back into skeletons. Then, sinews, organs, flesh and skin began to form within and around those skeletons. A whole army of zombies was being built before Ezekiel's eyes.
Think how horrified Ezekiel must have been. He had no reason to believe that these humanoid creatures had human souls. After all, they just stood there, silently...waiting. But then, God commanded that breath be sent into the mechanically refurbished, but lifeless, bodies. This is the turning point. Before the breath comes, the reconstituted bodies are just the walking dead. Ezekiel must have been struck with fear--to be faced with an army of zombies.
But as with so many things, God takes what we expect--death--and gives us the opposite: life. God breathes life into the zombies, giving them back their lives, complete with personalities--their very beings.
God does not make zombies. Yet, without the Breath of Life, zombies these creatures would remain. Breath (ruach in Hebrew and pneuma in Greek) is more than just the exchange of carbon dioxide we exhale and the oxygen/nitrogen etc. mix of air we inhale. In Scripture, when God breathes into a human being (like he did with Adam and Eve), God is bestowing upon them a part of God's self...a distinct being that is one with God's own being.
The word we use today is "soul." However, I don't like using that word. The word "soul" implies--in the minds of our present day culture (because of the Victorian Era's impact on these matters) an independent form of our being. Not only independent from the physical, but also independent from God. The latter is complete rubbish. There is no part of us that is eternal apart from Jesus Christ. We are created mortal--body, mind and soul. And so if we have eternal life it is only because we inhere or abide in God.
The former is also tragically misguided. The story of the Valley of Dry Bones in Ezekiel is clear: just as our bodies need breath in order to live, so too does our breath need a body. God resurrects the people bodily first, and only then is able to bestow the life of the soul. In the resurrection that we are promised when Christ returns, we may not get physical bodies in the way we have now. Paul says that we will put on incorruptible, spiritual bodies--whatever that means (1 Corinthians 15).
The point is that even if we are faced with inevitable death, such as a valley full of zombies coming for us, we still do not fear. We do not fear even the valley of the shadow of death because of Jesus Christ.
So this Halloween, I encourage you, just as the Bible says:
"For this reason I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you...; for God did not give us a spirit of fear, but rather a spirit of power and of love and of self-discipline" (2 Timothy 1:6-7). Like the self-discipline not to want to eat our neighbors' brains.
Halloween is about working through our fear of death, so that we can be ready for All Saint's Day. So that we can be ready for God's words promising resurrection. If we do not first fear death, then we will not know the great relief and joy of the resurrection. Halloween and All Saint's Day must come together, just as surely as we need both the Cross and the Resurrection. They are but one act, but one event.
Thanks be to God that neither life, nor death, nor un-death can separate us from the love of God in Jesus Christ.
God be with your spirit.
Amen.
But as with so many things, God takes what we expect--death--and gives us the opposite: life. God breathes life into the zombies, giving them back their lives, complete with personalities--their very beings.
God does not make zombies. Yet, without the Breath of Life, zombies these creatures would remain. Breath (ruach in Hebrew and pneuma in Greek) is more than just the exchange of carbon dioxide we exhale and the oxygen/nitrogen etc. mix of air we inhale. In Scripture, when God breathes into a human being (like he did with Adam and Eve), God is bestowing upon them a part of God's self...a distinct being that is one with God's own being.
The word we use today is "soul." However, I don't like using that word. The word "soul" implies--in the minds of our present day culture (because of the Victorian Era's impact on these matters) an independent form of our being. Not only independent from the physical, but also independent from God. The latter is complete rubbish. There is no part of us that is eternal apart from Jesus Christ. We are created mortal--body, mind and soul. And so if we have eternal life it is only because we inhere or abide in God.
The former is also tragically misguided. The story of the Valley of Dry Bones in Ezekiel is clear: just as our bodies need breath in order to live, so too does our breath need a body. God resurrects the people bodily first, and only then is able to bestow the life of the soul. In the resurrection that we are promised when Christ returns, we may not get physical bodies in the way we have now. Paul says that we will put on incorruptible, spiritual bodies--whatever that means (1 Corinthians 15).
The point is that even if we are faced with inevitable death, such as a valley full of zombies coming for us, we still do not fear. We do not fear even the valley of the shadow of death because of Jesus Christ.
So this Halloween, I encourage you, just as the Bible says:
"For this reason I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you...; for God did not give us a spirit of fear, but rather a spirit of power and of love and of self-discipline" (2 Timothy 1:6-7). Like the self-discipline not to want to eat our neighbors' brains.
Halloween is about working through our fear of death, so that we can be ready for All Saint's Day. So that we can be ready for God's words promising resurrection. If we do not first fear death, then we will not know the great relief and joy of the resurrection. Halloween and All Saint's Day must come together, just as surely as we need both the Cross and the Resurrection. They are but one act, but one event.
Thanks be to God that neither life, nor death, nor un-death can separate us from the love of God in Jesus Christ.
God be with your spirit.
Amen.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Even Monsters are Created by God
God's creation is full of things that strike fear in the hearts of human beings: wolves, jellyfish, sharks, alligators, mice, hornets, fire ants, lions, tigers and bears (yes, I'll say it--Oh, my!). Humans are, at least without our brains and technologies, quite vulnerable. We were not created with tough hides or large teeth, or fast running speeds. If we have no natural predators today, it is because we climbed our way up the food chain.
But Scripture tells us that God also created monsters that will always keep us vulnerable. These monsters were made for their own sake, because God willed it, but they also serve the purpose of keeping us humble. These biblical monsters, whether real or mythical, have the purpose of making sure that we remember that sometimes God is our only help and defense. Let's take a look at some of the most-well known monsters of the Bible:
LEVIATHAN
Yonder is the sea, great and wide,
creeping things innumerable are there,
living things both small and great.
There go the ships,
and Leviathan that you formed to sport in it. (Psalm 104:25-26)
Leviathan is a huge sea monster. Its skin is described as chain mail, its back as being made of shields set in overlapping rows. Iron is like straw to this creature, and harpoons, hooks and swords have no effect on it. (A good modern depiction of a Leviathan-like creature, are those living, flying, snake-like troop carriers in the recent Avengers movie.) It breathes smoke from its nostrils and spews fire from its mouth. "On earth it has no equal, a creature without fear. It surveys everything that is lofty; it is king over all that are proud" (Job 41). Only God can subdue this aquatic nightmare. In the mind of ancient humans, the sea was a place where chaos still held sway. At creation, God separated the waters and brought forth order. But God did not eradicate chaos entirely, instead he put limits to the sea--land and sky. The sea was a dangerous, unpredictable place--a place where humans were simply not created to live. Leviathan is the ruler of that place, the king of chaos. It lives in the deep, and easily claims ships and all the souls aboard. As terrifying as Leviathan is to us, God's creation in the monster is good. It proves that God is able to create life in the most hostile of environments. Leviathan was made to sport--or play--in the chaotic seas. However, it is best not to play with Leviathan.
BEHEMOTH
Look at Behemoth,
which I made just as I made you;
it eats grass like an ox.
Its strength is in its loins,
and its power in the muscles of its belly.
It makes its tail stiff like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are knit together.
Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like bars of iron.
It is the first of the great acts of God--
only its Maker can approach it with the sword. (Job 40:15-19)
Some liken Behemoth to the (fictional) Brontosaurus--a plodding creature with a huge tail and thick, sturdy legs. The word "behemoth" means "beast." But the image is of a huge animal. Since the Behemoth was an herbivore, the danger was not in being eaten or hunted. Rather, the dread that came from this creature was its size. You feared Behemoth because it could crush you so easily, and because there was no way to stop it. God made some things for humans to just stay away from.
LOCUSTS of the ABYSS
"In appearance the locusts were like horses equipped for battle. ON their heads were what looked like crowns of gold; their faces were like human faces, their hair like women's hair, and the teeth like lions' teeth; they had scales like iron breastplates, and the noise of their wings was like the noise of many chariots with horses rushing into battle. They have tails like scorpions, with stingers, and in their tails is their power to harm people for five months. They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit; his name is [the Destroyer]" (Revelation 9:7-11).
I would not want to ever meet these things...never. These things were not created by God per se. Instead, they are more like frankensteinian science experiment gone wrong. God created their constituent parts (locusts, humans, horses, scorpions, lions, etc), but the abyss--Hell--has changed and twisted them together into a fearful hybrid species of monster. In the Book of Revelation, they are unleashed upon the earth because our sinfulness has finally reached a head at the end of the age. They are not a punishment sent from God, but rather they are called forth from Hell by our own wrongdoing and bloodthirsty fallen nature. So, if you don't want to encounter these things then either be good, or trust in God. (I would recommend the latter, since we can only sustain the former for so long before we slip--part of our human nature.)
THE DRAGON (Revelation 12)
The Dragon is, in a word, Satan. Throughout the course of history, the Dragon chases the Son of God to kill him and devours human beings. At one point, the Dragon thought he won, but death could not keep the Son of God...because God's life is too strong. The Dragon shows up in Revelation as the steroid-enhanced version of the Serpent in the Adam and Eve story in Genesis. Long before time began, the Dragon was cast down from heaven to earth. Since then, he has prowled like a roaring lion, coming to devour. For a limited time, he is able to roam freely on the earth, trying to turn humans to his side. He is the source of all evil in the world, and king of monsters (in a bad way, not in a good way, like Godzilla). The Good News: God always wins out against the Dragon. And at the End of Days, God will win the ultimate victory and the Dragon will vanish from existence. Thanks be to God.
As we can see, most of the monsters of the Bible--just like almost all of the monsters we know and love today--are inspired by natural things. Either they are creatures that have been on the earth the whole time, just hidden away somewhere. Or they are creatures that have been changed or mutated because of our irresponsible actions, especially in science. For example, Godzilla was created by the nuclear blasts on the island of Japan. The movie The Fly was a bout a man who was changed into a giant fly through some science experiment. In any case, monsters help us deal with our fear of those natural processes--or creatures--that we cannot control or cannot defend ourselves against. Ultimately, all of these monsters symbolize death: the natural process from which we can run, but we cannot hide.
When faced with monsters of any kind, human, medical, natural or supernatural, we must always remember that God has power over all of it. And that since God's life is stronger than death, no monsters will get us in the end. No one slips out of God's hands. Thanks be to God. Amen.
But Scripture tells us that God also created monsters that will always keep us vulnerable. These monsters were made for their own sake, because God willed it, but they also serve the purpose of keeping us humble. These biblical monsters, whether real or mythical, have the purpose of making sure that we remember that sometimes God is our only help and defense. Let's take a look at some of the most-well known monsters of the Bible:
LEVIATHAN
Yonder is the sea, great and wide,
creeping things innumerable are there,
living things both small and great.
There go the ships,
and Leviathan that you formed to sport in it. (Psalm 104:25-26)
Leviathan is a huge sea monster. Its skin is described as chain mail, its back as being made of shields set in overlapping rows. Iron is like straw to this creature, and harpoons, hooks and swords have no effect on it. (A good modern depiction of a Leviathan-like creature, are those living, flying, snake-like troop carriers in the recent Avengers movie.) It breathes smoke from its nostrils and spews fire from its mouth. "On earth it has no equal, a creature without fear. It surveys everything that is lofty; it is king over all that are proud" (Job 41). Only God can subdue this aquatic nightmare. In the mind of ancient humans, the sea was a place where chaos still held sway. At creation, God separated the waters and brought forth order. But God did not eradicate chaos entirely, instead he put limits to the sea--land and sky. The sea was a dangerous, unpredictable place--a place where humans were simply not created to live. Leviathan is the ruler of that place, the king of chaos. It lives in the deep, and easily claims ships and all the souls aboard. As terrifying as Leviathan is to us, God's creation in the monster is good. It proves that God is able to create life in the most hostile of environments. Leviathan was made to sport--or play--in the chaotic seas. However, it is best not to play with Leviathan.
BEHEMOTH
Look at Behemoth,
which I made just as I made you;
it eats grass like an ox.
Its strength is in its loins,
and its power in the muscles of its belly.
It makes its tail stiff like a cedar;
the sinews of its thighs are knit together.
Its bones are tubes of bronze,
its limbs like bars of iron.
It is the first of the great acts of God--
only its Maker can approach it with the sword. (Job 40:15-19)
Some liken Behemoth to the (fictional) Brontosaurus--a plodding creature with a huge tail and thick, sturdy legs. The word "behemoth" means "beast." But the image is of a huge animal. Since the Behemoth was an herbivore, the danger was not in being eaten or hunted. Rather, the dread that came from this creature was its size. You feared Behemoth because it could crush you so easily, and because there was no way to stop it. God made some things for humans to just stay away from.
LOCUSTS of the ABYSS
"In appearance the locusts were like horses equipped for battle. ON their heads were what looked like crowns of gold; their faces were like human faces, their hair like women's hair, and the teeth like lions' teeth; they had scales like iron breastplates, and the noise of their wings was like the noise of many chariots with horses rushing into battle. They have tails like scorpions, with stingers, and in their tails is their power to harm people for five months. They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit; his name is [the Destroyer]" (Revelation 9:7-11).
I would not want to ever meet these things...never. These things were not created by God per se. Instead, they are more like frankensteinian science experiment gone wrong. God created their constituent parts (locusts, humans, horses, scorpions, lions, etc), but the abyss--Hell--has changed and twisted them together into a fearful hybrid species of monster. In the Book of Revelation, they are unleashed upon the earth because our sinfulness has finally reached a head at the end of the age. They are not a punishment sent from God, but rather they are called forth from Hell by our own wrongdoing and bloodthirsty fallen nature. So, if you don't want to encounter these things then either be good, or trust in God. (I would recommend the latter, since we can only sustain the former for so long before we slip--part of our human nature.)
THE DRAGON (Revelation 12)
The Dragon is, in a word, Satan. Throughout the course of history, the Dragon chases the Son of God to kill him and devours human beings. At one point, the Dragon thought he won, but death could not keep the Son of God...because God's life is too strong. The Dragon shows up in Revelation as the steroid-enhanced version of the Serpent in the Adam and Eve story in Genesis. Long before time began, the Dragon was cast down from heaven to earth. Since then, he has prowled like a roaring lion, coming to devour. For a limited time, he is able to roam freely on the earth, trying to turn humans to his side. He is the source of all evil in the world, and king of monsters (in a bad way, not in a good way, like Godzilla). The Good News: God always wins out against the Dragon. And at the End of Days, God will win the ultimate victory and the Dragon will vanish from existence. Thanks be to God.
As we can see, most of the monsters of the Bible--just like almost all of the monsters we know and love today--are inspired by natural things. Either they are creatures that have been on the earth the whole time, just hidden away somewhere. Or they are creatures that have been changed or mutated because of our irresponsible actions, especially in science. For example, Godzilla was created by the nuclear blasts on the island of Japan. The movie The Fly was a bout a man who was changed into a giant fly through some science experiment. In any case, monsters help us deal with our fear of those natural processes--or creatures--that we cannot control or cannot defend ourselves against. Ultimately, all of these monsters symbolize death: the natural process from which we can run, but we cannot hide.
When faced with monsters of any kind, human, medical, natural or supernatural, we must always remember that God has power over all of it. And that since God's life is stronger than death, no monsters will get us in the end. No one slips out of God's hands. Thanks be to God. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)