What Is Christianity?

Divided Faith Versus Singularity of Heart

2008-03-07T04:10:00.000-08:00

Question 20. What does God forbid in the First Commandment? Part 3.

The greatest form of idolatry today is not that people will bow down to a statue but that people will cling to someone or something other than the one true God. (As I noted in the December 4, 2007 post, even atheists have a god: whatever they trust!)

True faith teaches a singularity of heart, to have one's confession of faith, one's life, and one's actions focused upon and giving honor to The One. Because our lives are so hectic, it becomes more and more difficult to have this singularity of heart. Mere busyness delivers us from idleness but pushes us toward idolatry as we struggle to meet all our commitments. The One---the true God---becomes for us a face in the crowd rather than the object of our devotion, set apart and consecrated above all things.

In the end, true faith calls for more than a different belief but a different way of life that expresses that belief. Life with God and living for God go hand in hand. We see this most clearly in the person and work of Jesus. The balance in His life is truly remarkable. He had great gifts of teaching and healing so that crowds sought Him and huddled about Him, to the point where He was jostled and pushed and overwelmed by them. Mark 1 records:

32 That evening at sundown they brought to [Jesus] all who were sick or oppressed by demons. 33 And the whole city was gathered together at the door. 34 And he healed many who were sick with various diseases, and cast out many demons. And he would not permit the demons to speak, because they knew him. 35 And rising very early in the morning, while it was still dark, he departed and went out to a desolate place, and there he prayed. 36 And Simon and those who were with him searched for him, 37 and they found him and said to him, “Everyone is looking for you.” 38 And he said to them, “Let us go on to the next towns, that I may preach there also, for that is why I came out.”

Even when everyone around Jesus demanded His attention---and deservedly so---He slipped away to pray to His Father, to commune with Him but also to intercede for His disciples and those who came to Him with all their needs. This singularity of heart, focused on the Lord and His calling, helped Jesus with the day to day struggles as well as His ultimate commitment: His calling from the Father. As a man, Jesus was overrun with demands yet He remained singularly devoted to His Father and entrusted all His cares and burdens to the Father for the sake of those who would listen to Him.

Do Other Gods Exist?

2008-03-01T05:51:00.000-08:00

Question 20. What does God forbid in the First Commandment? Part 2.

As stated in the previous post, the First Commandment, "You shall have no other gods," seems to imply that other gods are real and that one can have a relationship with them. One may rightly ask, is this true?

The Bible consistently speaks against the idea that the figures of idols are true gods. Perhaps the best example of this is the prophet Isaiah's satire of a person carving an idol from a block of wood (Isaiah 44:9--20) and then using the wood trimming to warm his room and bake his bread---an excellent example of humor in the Bible!

But seriously, those who worship idols usually regard them as representations or manifestations of spiritual realities. In fact, archaeologists now believe that a bull calf idol of the ancient Near East actually represented the mount or throne for the god (typically Baal) who stood upon it. So, the idolaters were really directing their devotion beyond the wood, stone, gold, or silver that stood in front of them. The idol was a way to reach beyond and to "have" a connection to the god it represented. Modern religions that use idols have a similar understanding.

The apostle Paul strongly warns against such idolatry and sacrifices to idols when he writes: "I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons" (1 Corinthians 10:20; cf also Revelation 9:20). The biblical view then is that there are indeed spiritual realities---demons/false gods---standing behind idolatrous and false worship. So false worship can in no way honor the one true God.

In the First Commandment God is delivering something like an ultimatum to us: you will have Me as God or you will have some other god, you can't have both. To this He attaches a warning and a promise: (1) as the only true God, He will punish those who hate Him (Exodus 20:5) but (2) He will likewise show steadfast love to those who love Him and heed His word (20:6).

No Other Gods

2008-02-26T05:44:00.000-08:00

20. What does God forbid in the First Commandment?

The wording of the first commandment may, at first, feel a bid strange: "You shall have no other gods" (Exodus 20:3). How does one have a god? Such wording seems to imply that there are indeed other gods beside the one true God.

First, we must recognize that the wording in the catechism is an abbreviated form of the commandment, which actually runs another three verses. Using an abbreviated form was a medieval practice that made memorization easier. For the catechism, Luther built on this practice but included more of the text (Exodus 20:5--6) as a summary or "close" of the commandments. Here is the full statement of the commandment from Exodus:

“You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments."

We see then that the Lord forbids His people to have or make gods/idols before which they would bow down or serve (cf Exodus 32). To understand the word "have," consider the following expressions: I have a family; I have a father; we have a president. The word "have" does not mean simple possession of something. It describes a relationship---a bond---between persons or things. The Creator will not allow His creation to set up objects or barriers between Him and them. As He said it positively and emphatically in the opening to the Ten Commandments:

I am the Lord your God . . .

Now that He has freed Israel from the bondage of Egypt, He will not let them return to bondage by serving other gods or masters. This truth is foundational, not only to biblical/Christian faith, but also to western ideals of the freedom and value of the individual. Human beings are loved by God and, as created beings, they have a direct relationship with their Creator.

A Prayer for True, Simple, and Useful Teachings

2008-02-23T05:22:00.000-08:00

This morning I was reading an essay by Robert Preus on interpreting the Bible. He included a quote about Romans 15:4 from an early Lutheran document called “The Book of Concord.” After reading the passage, I decided to turn it into a prayer, since it so well expressed my attitude as I read the Holy Scriptures:

Merciful Father, Your Word was written for our instruction so that by steadfastness and by encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. Grant us sound interpretation of the Scriptures so we may receive all their comfort and hope according to Your Holy Spirit’s will and intent. Grant that we abide in this simple, direct, and useful explanation that is permanently and well-grounded in Your revealed will. Teach us to flee all lofty, specious questions and disputation so that we reject and condemn all things contrary to Your true, simple, and useful teachings; through Jesus Christ our Savior. Amen. (Rm 15:4; FC SD XI, 92—93)

The passage places special emphasis on comfort and hope (faith) as the goals of biblical study. Reading and studying the Bible is not always comforting, since God's ways are often mysterious to us and the Bible frequently describes His condemnation and judgment. But all such passages have a higher goal: our repentance. Comfort and hope are the blessings that follow repentance, the blessings in which Christians live.

I’ve been driving a few matters at work and at home, so haven’t posted lately. Praying all is well for you.

Three and One? Thinking reasonably about the Trinity

2008-02-05T03:39:00.000-08:00

Question 19: Who is the only true God? Part 3.

Jesus said, "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30).

People's biggest objection to the doctrine of the Trinity isn't that they can't see it in the Bible (confer earlier posts). Nor is it that the word "trinity" doesn't appear in the Bible (tri and uni; "three" and "one" certainly do). They can't understand how God can be three and one at the same time:

1 + 1 + 1 = 3, which does not equal 1

This is what we learn in elementary math. However, in a higher order of math we learn this:

1 x 1 x 1= 1, where three that are one do yield a 1

If, in a higher order a math, three can be one then certainly the true God can be three in one or triune (He is God, afterall; we should not think that He is limited to our order and reason). This is not an absolulte explanation of the doctrine of the Trinity or of God's being. Human langauage and mathematics can't explain the eternal God. But such an illustration can help us begin to see how what God says about Himself is surely possible.

Another illustation works like this: every physical object has the following three elements.

height x width x depth = volume

The entire object is height. The entire object is width. Likewise, it is all depth. Anywhere you start measuring, you find these three. These three elements describe the whole and yet the object is one. You can't take away an element without affecting the relationship to the others. You can't add to an element without affecting the relationship to the others. These three naturally stand together in a unity, as I illustrated earlier with the visual of a white sphere, which is one length, one height, and one depth.

If this sort of tri-unity is true of physical objects, certainly a similar tri-unity is possible for the one true God, as He presents Himself in Scripture. "Trinity" simply describes and summarizes what God has shown us about His being.

God is three-in-one

2008-02-02T10:43:00.000-08:00

Question 19: Who is the only true God? Part 2.

Christians don't believe in God because they have rationally proved His existence by accumulated evidence or reason. Instead, they believe in God based on the testimony of others who have experienced God's presence, work, and word. For example, consider the testimony of Abraham as described in Genesis. God simply came to Abraham and called him to follow His way (Genesis 12) and Abraham testified about this experience. The Bible simply assumes that God exists, records the experiences of those whom God called, and does not try to prove He's there.

The testimony of Scripture about God presents Him in ways that challenge our reason. God is clearly one (Dt 6) yet He is also variously described by those who heard from Him. In particular, the descriptions indicate that God is three-in-one or "triune." Some may complain that the word "trinity" does not appear in Scripture and so shouldn't be used but this is to misunderstand the word. "Three" and "one" certainly do appear in Scripture and the word "trinity" is simply a compilation of these biblical terms in order to express a biblical thought. Here's why the words "trinity" and "triune" came about:

Numbers 6:22--27

22 The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 23 “Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, Thus you shall bless the people of Israel: you shall say to them,

24 The Lord bless you and keep you;

25 the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;

26 the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.

27 “So shall they put my name upon the people of Israel, and I will bless them.”

Isaiah 6:3

And one called to another and said: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!”

Matthew 28:19--20

18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Other such passages could be multiplied. Note the singular character (same word [Lord or holy] used or the singular "name" used). Though the Scripture asserts that God is one, it also describes Him in this threefold way. When Christians talk about the Trinity, they're just describing what the Scriptures testify about God.

The question that usually follows is, "How can God be three and one at the same time---it doesn't add up?" I'll address that question next.

An All Important Question---The Existence of God

2008-01-26T06:24:00.000-08:00

Question 19: Who is the only true God? Part 1.

I addressed an aspect of this question earlier in the Dec 4, 2007 post where I noted that everyone has a god---even an atheist. The matter here builds on that thought by begging the question: how do you know you have the right God, the one true God? This is a much harder question, complicated by the many, many religions and worldviews out there, some of which have more than one god.

One might rightly wonder, "Why don't people come to the same conclusions and all point to the same God?" In a sense they do, but not with full agreement or clarity. Religious people generally agree that someone or something caused creation, existence as we experience it. Everything must have come from somewhere or something. In our experience, nothing comes from nothing.

So people naturally conclude that there is a maker (theists) or sustainer of what exists (those who believe in the eternity of matter essentially have matter as their god; e.g., pantheists). Even atheists do not escape this, since they presumably will believe that matter exists. And the material world or some aspect of it would then be their god. So commonsense and experience have everyone pointing in the same general direction: there is a source for existence.

Most religions today also agree that God is one or a unity. The belief in many gods (polytheism) is fading away fast. Even religions that continue to speak of more than one god often also have some idea of a basic divinity that stands behind their various gods.

So, to summarize, (1) all people believing in someone or something. (2) Religions and common sense point toward one God or a divine unity. (3) And this one God or unity is the maker of sustainer of what exists. I've represented this visually above by a simply "point," which people use for representing "one" of something. I surely do not intend that the true God is a circle of some sort, but only wish to convey a concept visually. I'll explain why later.

Natural Law and the Ten Commandments

2008-01-24T14:50:00.000-08:00

Question 18: Whom does God mean when in the Ten Commandments He says, "You shall"?

The Ten Commandments are central to what has been called "natural law," universal truths written by God in human hearts. Think of "law" here in the sense of "principles." When you read "nature," don't just think of plants and animals acting on instinct. Think of people acting on their instincts, which is just as natural.

God's law is part of our instinct, what people ought to do naturally, based on the way God made them. So, just as a person naturally seeks food, shelter, and procreation, they ought naturally to fear and love God. They ought naturally to care for their neighbors.

We can experience these natural urges within ourselves. For example, we naturally want to honor our parents (4th Commandment). It is in us to be religious and devoted to God (1st and 3rd Commandments). The standards of the Ten Commandments naturally apply to every person. They are also the natural basis for religions, ethical systems, and societal laws that are found everywhere you find human beings.

Geek the Dogma

In my December 10, 2007 post I described how the Old Testament begins and speaks with universal interest. Though it focuses on the emergence of Abraham and his descendants (Israel), it often relates this history to all humanity (e.g., Gn 12). So the Ten Commandments, as part of this story, are related to all human beings of all times.

Back to Blogging

2008-01-24T05:54:00.000-08:00

Sorry, folks. I've been occupied with family/work for the past week. I'll begin posting again this weekend.

EE

What is Love?

2008-01-16T04:38:00.000-08:00

Question 17: What is the summary of all the commandments?

Love. The commandments are about God's "steadfast love" for us and the love we are called to show to our neighbors. Simple enough. Yet the trouble always seems to come in the details, such as "How do I show love for my neighbor?" Or "What is meant by love?"

A simple definition of love might be: Love is wanting and doing what is best for another person.

So love is more than emotion or feeling. Thinking about my neighbor offers little help. Love requires action. That biblical term "steadfast love" has the sense of "loyalty" or "allegiance." It describes one's commitment to another.

This is best shown in the person and work of Jesus the Christ. He not only loved us, in the sense of having a positive attitude toward us, He sought to teach us the love of God and God's ways. He declared that God was for us---our ally in the struggle of good against evil---and that He would deliver us from evil. Jesus' mission led to a sacrificial death on the cross by which He bore the sins of the world and revealed the depth of God's love for us. In love, Jesus takes away our sins against the commandments and reconciles us with the heavenly Father and with one another.

Love, Not Toleration

2008-01-13T14:42:00.000-08:00

Question 16: What is the summary of commandments 4--10 (Second Table)?

The first table, on our relationship with God, takes up two-thirds of the commandments. So the second table, on our relationship to one another, takes up one-third. Just as the first table is about love for God, the second table is about love for one's neighbor (or fellow human beings).

In the first commandment, God ("I") addresses the reader ("you") directly. But in the remaining commandments (2--10), Moses is addressing the people ("you") and directing them to the Lord ("His/Him"). Love for others compels us, not only to refrain from harming them, but also to encourage positively them in their relationship to God. The second table of the Law makes us examples of God's love and care to the world by guiding our actions (commands 4--8) and directing our hearts (commands 9--10). The Law of God directs our thoughts, words, and deeds with love.

A modern confusion about the teachings of the Bible and Christianity emerges at this point. Some have concluded that the Christian message is one of love and acceptance for all people no matter what they do or believe---the modern ethic of toleration. But the Scriptures teach something different. They teach clearly about right and wrong and that God and His people should oppose what is wrong.

God calls His people to repent of their sins and trust in the Savior, Jesus, for forgiveness and new life. His people, in turn, call other to repent as well. So, the heart of the Christian message is not toleration but sincere love that patiently calls a person to repentance, forgiveness, and trust in the one true God. This is how the Bible's major theme---the Lord delivers us from evil---plays itself out in our daily lives.

The Lord our Creator, Redeemer, and Judge

2008-01-12T05:51:00.000-08:00

Question 15: What is the summary of commandments 1--3 (First Table)?

The first three commandments are known as the first "table" or tablet of the law because they focus on a person's relationship to God. Although there are only three commandments here, they actually take up much more space in the biblical text than the other six commandments do. They represent about two-thirds of the words in Exodus 20:1--17, with God adding explanations about His role as:

Redeemer/Savior---I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. (20:2)

Judge---You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments. (20:5--6)

Creator---Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. (20:9--11)

Notice how intensely personal the wording is. God ("I") speaks personally to the people ("you") throughout. He would be their God and show them steadfast love; He covets their love, too. How fitting then that Jesus and other rabbis taught that this first table of the Law was about love for God (Mt 22:37; Dt 6:5).

Also notice that the three roles God defines here (Creator, Redeemer, Judge) correspond to the roles of God that the early Christians included in the Apostles Creed: The Lord created the heavens and the earth, redeemed us through the blood of His Son Jesus, and He will return again for the Last Judgment to pronounce us guilty or not guilty.

Two Ways from the Beginning

2008-01-09T04:14:00.000-08:00

Question 14: How did God give His Law?

As I've pointed out in earlier posts, God has two ways of working with people: His yes and no, His Law and Gospel. The same can be seen in God's giving of the Law to Adam and Eve. He did not physically give them the Ten Commandments as He later did with Moses. Instead, God gave them two trees---one that was for life and the other that would bring death. He told them that they could eat of any tree in the garden but then gave them this law:

Genesis 3:17. "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

This is the first law attested in Scripture and it demonstrates the life-and-death character of the Law. Over the centuries, some interpreters have wondered whether the tree and its fruit were poison. Others have wondered why Adam and Eve did not immediately die when they ate the fruit. But these suggestions miss the point of the Law.

The tree was not poison but marked a boundary between doing what was right and what was wrong. It was right to eat from all the other trees in the garden. It was wrong to eat from this one tree. Breaking God's Law meant rebellion and separation from God, the author of life and blessing. So, wandering from His ways naturally brought about death. The words "in the day" do not necessarily mean that those who broke the law would die within twenty-four hours. Instead, "in the day" is a common Hebrew expression translated "when" and introduces the legal sentence against those who broke the Law.

So, God gave the Law from the beginning. Indeed, the apostle Paul states that God even placed the Law, a natural knowledge of right and wrong, in peoples hearts (Romans 2:14--15). That is why all people yet today have a sense of right and wrong.

Readings
Romans 2:14--15

14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them

The Ten Words, Not Just Commandments

2008-01-08T03:40:00.000-08:00

Question 13: What are the Ten Commandments?

Most everyone has heard of the Ten Commandments. Many people, at some point in their childhood, have read them or even memorized them. But if you go to the Bible and look carefully for the "Ten Commandments," you will actually find some surprising things.

First of all, the "Ten Commandments" are not literally ten commands (see Exodus 20:1--7). They are, in fact, ten statements of how God wants His people to be and to live. When you read in your English Bible, the "ten commandments" it literally says in the Hebrew as Moses wrote them, "the ten words." They are ten statements from God about His people, which in part have the force of a command ("Here's how you will be and live") but also pronounce God's care for the people, especially in the following verses:

Exodus 20:2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery."

Exodus 20:5--6 "I the Lord your God am a jealous God . . . showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments."

Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

So the "Ten Commandments" are really God's words to you of command and care, as He defines them in Exodus 24:12:

The Lord said to Moses, “Come up to me on the mountain and wait there, that I may give you the tablets of stone, with the law [Hbr "instruction"] and the commandment, which I have written for their instruction.”

A Review Part 2: Joseph Campbell's "The Masks of God: Primitive Mythology"

2008-01-05T09:47:00.000-08:00

I picked up Campbell's book because I was interested in reading some primitive mythology. I especially wanted to learn more about primitive art work, since art is a hobby of mine. I would not recommend Campbell's book for investigating primitive mythology and art. He's really not focused on those topics but on explaining his worldview that all mythology is really a unity.

Campbell's method, to my eye, has serious short comings. He suffers from what has been called, "parallelomania." This is the tendency to relate things together even when they are not related. Campbell often stretches for points of comparison between the myths of difference cultures, based on some symbolic aspect in a myth or ritual (e.g., a common animal; see also pp 112--116). He then argues that somehow these myths and rituals are related to one another in the distant past, a proposal that is completely untestible. The book is riddled with this sort of parallelomania and poor evaluation of why the specific communities held to a myth or ritual. With Campbell, everything gets generalized, which fits his broader goal.

People who hold traditional religious beliefs should take special note that Campbell's worldview is hostile toward them. In the first place, he is clearly a materialist (p 28) so he does not believe in spiritual realities. Second, Campbell is hostile to any religious orthodoxy. He writes, "Every student of comparative mythology knows that when the orthodox mind talks and writes of God the nations go asunder" (p 463). Ironically, Campbell has introduced a new orthodoxy and he does nothing to solve the logical contradiction he creates by doing so. Third, Campbell has a thoroughly human centered worldview, which looks down upon those who do not share his beliefs. He regards traditional religionist as shallow (p 472) and ends by asserting, "The human mind . . . is the ultimate mythogenetic zone---the creator and destroyer, the slave and yet the master, of all the gods" (p 472).

Ultimately, Campbell's worldview is ego-centric and pleasure seeking. He tries to disguise this fact by distinguishing between the pursuit of pleasure and the pleasure one takes in beauty (aesthetics). But in the end, this is only a difference in the object pursued and not the goal of pleasure (p 469).

A Review: Joseph Campbell's "The Masks of God: Primitive Mythology"

2008-01-05T06:10:00.000-08:00

I have walked through the first twelve questions in Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation and will next begin walking through the Ten Commandments, the first part of the traditional catechism. However, as promised earlier, I would also like to pause here and present a review and critique of the popular work by Joseph Campbell.

Campbell presents his study of mythology as "a unitary mythological science" (p 464) but it can only be regarded as science in the broadest sense of the term: a field of study. His book is more properly a work of philsophy and he is arguing for a specific worldview, which he invites the reader to adopt.

Campbell wishes to show that there is an "ultimate unity of all religions" (p 463) that is demonstrable through the study of (1) psychology, (2) history of religions, (3) ethnology, and (4) comparative literature/mythology. He moves back and forth between these fields constantly, which at times makes the book challenging to read. Nevertheless, there are many interesting accounts that he has strung together from a broad selection of sources. So the breadth of this effort is admirable and often entertaining, though sometimes disturbing (e.g., accounts of human sacrifice).

Important influences for Campbell include psychologists Freud and Jung, philosophers Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, and the poets Joyce and Shelley. But readers should also note that Campbell was a student of Sanskrit and that Indian religion/philosophy plays an imporant role in his worldview, as he evidences in his conclusion.

Campbell may rightly be described as a psychological mystic and romantic. He admires mythology not because he believes the myths are true but because he believes myths play an important function in human experience and existence, they release the mind from the necessary traps of pleasure, pursuit of power, and duty. The goal is to gain rapturous insight, which for Campbell means recognizing the ultimate unity of all these things and the pleasure gained from that insight.

I'll post more about Campbell's hostility to traditional religion later.

By Scripture Alone

2008-01-03T19:07:00.000-08:00

Question 12: Why are all six chief parts of the Small Catechism taken from the Bible alone?

As noted in my December posts, the Bible is like no other book. It has deeper roots in history and broader use than any other collection of sacred texts. Its message is for all people. Across the ages, people have recognized its holy character. The very breath of God formed its words---the Holy Spirit led its writers. Most of all, the Bible proclaims the deliverer: Jesus the Christ, who is its theme and key from first to last. Therefore, it is fitting that Christian teaching should come from the Bible alone.

Given the surpassing character of Holy Scripture, one may wonder why the catechism is necessary at all. Why not just use "Scripture alone." The trouble is that the Bible is so long and broad and deep a book that people who need to learn the basics of the faith are overwelmed by it. In wisdom, the Church has presented basic Bible texts---the catechism---as a summary and door to all of Scripture.

In the past, "Scripture alone" was a rallying cry for Christians when they sought to return to the basics and renew their focus. But this idea of "Scripture alone" was also misunderstood. Some took it to mean that people should only use the Bible and have no other books: no catechism, no creed, no hymnal---not even a prayer book or a sermon! This is not what "Scripture alone" means. Instead, it means by Scripture alone all teachings and ways of life shall be judged. The Scripture is the standard for Christian faith and life by which all things are measured. So the Church may write, confess, chant, sing, and pray in the language of every people in every generation, drawing and presenting for them refreshment from this one spring: the pure and clear fount of Holy Scripture.

Readings

From Martin Luther's Preface to the Large Catechism:
"A Christian, profitable, and necessary preface, and faithful serious encouragment from Dr. Martin Luther to all Christians, but especially to pastors and preachers. They should exercise themselves in the catechism, which is a short summary and epitome of the entire Holy Scriptures. They should always teach the catechism."

Martin Luther's Life

2008-01-03T05:44:00.000-08:00

Question 11. Who wrote our Small Catechism?

There is a very fine timeline for the life of Martin Luther at:

http://www.susanlynnpeterson.com/index_files/luther.htm

Browse her presentation to get better aquainted with the challenges and blessings in Luther's life. He is typically regarded by historians as one of the top ten figures in history because of the enormous influence of his ideas and the outcome of his actions.

Luther witnessed the very poor state of Christian education when he and others made a formal visit to the churches in Saxony, Germany. This experience convinced Luther that he needed to write a catechism for the average Christian learner as well as something for Christian teachers. In 1528 he was writing the Small and Large Catechisms at the same time, based on three series of sermons. The catechisms were both published in 1529.

Learning the Basics

2008-01-02T03:53:00.000-08:00

Question 10. What is a catechism?

Catechism and its related terms are words you find in church but not usually in day-to-day English. Catechism comes from a Greek word (katacheo) that means simply "to instruct" and refers to teaching by word of mouth (normal in the first century AD since there were so many illiterate people). So a catechism is a book of instruction that works like a conversation, teaching through questions and answers. The Greek word for such instruction appears a few times in the New Testament, notibly in Luke 1.

"It seemed good to me [Luke] also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught." (Luke 1:3--4)

Theophilus was likely reviewing the basic teachings of the Christian faith and may have requested more information about Jesus, which urged Luke to write his account of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection for the forgiveness of our sins.

Other English words that come from this Greek verb are:

catechesis---Instruction

catechist---Instructor

catechumen---One being instructed, a learner

The sculpture pictured above depicts Martynas Mazvydas (1547) preparing an edition of Luther's Small Catechism, which was the first book printed in the Lithuanian language. Mazvydas included instruction in the ABCs and other tools for teaching his countrymen to read and study God's Word.

The Roots of Luther's Small Catechism

2008-01-01T07:37:00.000-08:00

Question 9. How does the Small Catechism sum up Christian doctrine?

Luther's Small Catechism first appeared in a chart form in January and March of 1529, the headwaters of a new emphasis on education in the Christian Church. There had, of course, been Christian education before---Luther's work flows from that long tradition. But Luther's efforts brought renewed focus on teaching the faith in a specific and intentional way.

The core texts of Christian education had long been: (1) The Ten Commandments, (2) The Creed, and (3) The Lord's Prayer. Luther retained these basic texts and provided brief explanations for them in a question and answer format. He placed the Ten Commandments first since God's Law comes first to show us the difference between good and evil. The Creed came second to show us our Savior from sin and evil. The Lord's Prayer came third to show us how a believer, delivered from evil, may daily address the Lord in prayer and worship. The first three parts of the catechism work together and lay out the Christian faith before us.

The next parts of the catechism had not always been part of the earlier catechism tradition. These parts helped people identify and understand the means of grace Jesus Christ provided for believers: (4) Holy Baptism is the point at which Christian life begins, (5) Confession and Absolution are a return to the blessings of Baptism since Christians continually need the new life God gives, and (6) The Lord's Supper nurtures Christian faith and life as we commune with our Lord and one another. These last three parts were also called "Sacraments," sacred words and actions by which the Lord delivers us from evil and declares us holy.

So, the six chief parts of the catechism present the Christian faith and Christian life in a simple way. Luther also provided Daily Prayers and a Table of Duties in 1529 to help believers better understand their relationship to the Lord and to one another in the three basic orders of life: (1) Home, (2) Church, and (3) Society/Government. Luther viewed these orders of life as blessings provided by God for the peace and benefit of all.

Geek the Dogma

Here's how parts of the Catechism rolled out in different editions. I have notes about this in my copy of the catechism so I can keep track of the history.

January, 1529 Chart Edition included:

Ten Commandments

Apostles' Creed

Lord's Prayer (minus explanations of the introduction and conclusion to the prayer)

Holy Baptism

Sacrament of the Altar

Daily Prayers

May 16, 1529 Edition added:

Table of Duties

June, 1529 Edition added:

A Short Form of Confession

1531 Edition added:

Explanations for the introduction and conclusion of the Lord's Prayer

Confession and Absolution (questions and answers)

1546 Edition added:

Office of the Keys (three questions/answers in the Confession section)

1549 Erfurt Edition added:

Christian Questions with Their Answers (Luther may not have written these)

Common Ways to Confuse Law and Gospel

2007-12-29T10:52:00.000-08:00

Questions 7 & 8. What does God teach and do in the Law? What does God teach and do in the Gospel? Part 2.

Certain words seem to give people special trouble when they are trying to distinguish Law and Gospel. I've listed some of these terms below and described challenges surrounding them:

Love. People often associate the word "love" with Gospel. However, love is actually a very important word for understanding the Law. For example, the following passage summarizes a person's duty toward God:

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. (Deuteronomy 6:5)

Note that the Law commands our love for God. It is something the Law requires of us. Whenever Scripture is talking about our need to love, it is talking about the Law. In contrast, when Scripture talks about God's love for us, then it is talking about the Gospel, how God cares for us and forgives us in Christ (cf John 3:16).

covenant. This term means something like "contract" and describes a formal and binding relationship between two parties. As a result, people typically think of "covenant" as Law. However, one should also see that when God makes a covenant with someone, He makes promises to them. He promises to love, and bless, and care for them. This aspect of a covenant has to do with the Gospel.

Law. The translation of the Hebrew term torah is often confusing. It commonly appears as "law" in English translations. However, it means more literally, "instruction" which can be instruction in God's laws or instruction in His promises and blessings. So, when you run into the word "law" in Scripture, carefully consider its context.

holy. As with love, how one understandings references to holiness depends on its use. If the passage requires a person to be holy, then it is Law (also if it describes God's holiness in contrast with a person's sinfulness). But if the passage describes how God makes a person holy or sanctifies him, then think Gospel.

Distinguishing Law and Gospel through Word Pairs

2007-12-29T05:14:00.000-08:00

Questions 7 & 8. What does God teach and do in the Law? What does God teach and do in the Gospel? Part 1.

I'd like to take these two questions together since, for the sake of contrast, it's helpful to see Law and Gospel working side by side. A good beginner's strategy for distinguishing Law and Gospel in the Bible is to begin with some basic biblical word pairs:

curse and bless

death and life

slavery and freedom

commands and promises

unclean and clean

the way of man and the way of the Lord

wickedness and righteousness

repentance and forgiveness

doubt and faith

guilt and confidence

sin and grace

The first word in each pair tends to do with the Law. The second word in each pair tends to do with the Gospel. However, a number of terms can easily lead to confusion. (I'll write about them for the next post.) Distinguishing Law and Gospel is an art and it takes time to learn how to apply this art.

It's also helpful to remember that, when we're talking about Law and Gospel, we're talking about what God's Word does to us as we read it and hear it. The Law reveals God's "no" to us, how God shows us the boundaries of life. It brings feelings of encouragement and discouragement children have when parents tell them to do something or not to do something. It shows us where we are in relation to our heavenly Father: in the right or in the wrong.

Through Jesus Christ, the Gospel puts us in the right with our heavenly Father by taking away our sins and giving us His blessings, life, freedom, righteousness, faith, grace, etc. The Gospel is a creative word that leads us to trust God and to desire what He desires. The Gospel is God's "yes" to us, affirming His promises of forgiveness, life, and salvation. The Gospel brings feelings of affirmation, comfort, and peace.

I've mentioned feelings in connection with Law and Gospel because feelings are so essential to human experience and are naturally part of religion. We have feelings whether we want to or not, so its important to talk about them. But the Christian life should not be a striving after certain feelings. We must bear in mind that feelings are often wrong and easily deceive us. Just as you can't live by instinct alone, you can't go by feelings alone. For example, we often feel things are right and good when in fact the opposite is true. Likewise, we may feel discourged and despair when in fact there is every reason to have hope and joy.

Realizing the troubles brought on by deceptive feelings makes it all the more important to learn the proper distinction between Law and Gospel, to understand what God sees in our lives and what He says about us. God is not deceived by feelings as we are. He sees our lives clearly so that His Word becomes a clear and sure guide to the forgiveness, peace, and joy that He desires for us as His children.

God's Yes and God's No

2007-12-27T02:21:00.000-08:00

Question 6. What basic distinction must we keep in mind in order to understand the Bible?

In my December 1, 2007 post I described the role of (A) affirmation and (B) boundaries that are essential to religion, human relationships, and survival. These ideas of "Yes" and "No" are likewise essential to understanding the Holy Bible. They emerge in a pattern in the teaching of the Old Testament prophets. But they began with God.

The pattern that emerges is God saying, "No" to people's sins and "Yes" to forgiving them and delivering them from evil. These are God's two basic ways of working with people as He explained to Moses:

“The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children's children, to the third and the fourth generation.” (Exodus 34:6--7)

God's explanation and distinction of His two basic works became one of the most commonly quoted passages from the Old Testament, showing up repeatedly in the Psalms and the Prophets.

Jesus and John the Baptist taught this distinction by preaching, "Repent and believe the Gospel" (Mark 1:15). St. Paul writes about this most basic theological distinction in Galatians 3. A number of the Church Fathers noticed it as well, especially Tertullian, Tyconius, and Augustine.

During the Reformation, Luther and Melanchthon first called this "the Law and the Promises" but later they called it the distinction between "Law and Gospel." Recognizing and distinguishing these two teachings of God is at the essence of reading and applying the Bible. To confuse the two is to misunderstand and misapply the Holy Scriptures.

Readings

Tertullian writes in Against Marcion:

"'the New Testament' will appertain to none other than Him who promised it--if not "its letter, yet its spirit;" [5692] and herein will lie its newness. Indeed, He who had engraved its letter in stones is the same as He who had said of its spirit, "I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh." [5693] Even if "the letter killeth, yet the Spirit giveth life;" [5694] and both belong to Him who says: "I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal." [5695] We have already made good the Creator's claim to this twofold character of judgment and goodness [5696] --"killing in the letter" through the law, and "quickening in the Spirit" through the Gospel. Now these attributes, however different they be, cannot possibly make two gods; for they have already (in the prevenient dispensation of the Old Testament) been found to meet in One." (ANF 3:452--53)

Tyconius writes in The Book of Rules:

"The [Gospel's] promise is distinct from the Law; and since they are different, they cannot be mixed." (under Rule III)

John Chrysostum writes in a sermon on 2 Corinthians 3:

"In the Law, he that hath sin is punished; here, he that hath sins cometh and is baptized and is made righteous, and being made righteous, he liveth, being delivered from the death of sin. The Law, if it lay hold on a murderer, putteth him to death; the Gospel, if it lay hold on a murderer, enlighteneth, and giveth him life." (NPNF1 12:307)

Augustine writes in On the Spirit and the Letter:

"His words are, "The righteousness of God is manifested:" [Romans 3:21] . . . This is witnessed by the law and the prophets; in other words, the law and the prophets each afford it testimony. The law, indeed, by issuing its commands and threats, and by justifying no man, sufficiently shows that it is by God's gift, through the help of the Spirit, that a man is justified; and the prophets, because it was what they predicted that Christ at His coming accomplished." (NPNF1 5:88--89)

A Classic Issue for Faith and Reason

2007-12-20T03:57:00.000-08:00

Question 5: How is human reason to be used in understanding Holy Scripture? Part 2.

Who wrote about the death of Moses in Deuteronomy 34? Critics of the Bible have raised this question to challenge the biblical belief that the first five books of Holy Scripture were written by the prophet Moses.

The critics argue that Moses could not possibly have written about his own death. Common sense would support this view. However, some commentators on the Bible have suggested that God could have related the matter to Moses before it happened. Certainly God could have done so. But there is an alternative explanation that accords well with faith and also with common sense.

The thoughtful reader of the Books of Moses will notice that Moses cites other authors or documents fairly often. Consider the following examples:

The Book of the Generations of Adam (Gn 5:1)
The Saying about Nimrod (Gn 10:9)
The Saying about the Mount of the Lord (Gn 22:14)
The Tradition of the Sinew (Gn 32:32)
The Statute of Joseph (Gn 47:26)
The Song of the Sea (Ex 15:1–18)
The Song of Miriam (Ex 15:20–21)
The Memorial for Joshua (Ex 17:14)
The Book of the Covenant (Ex 24:7)
The Tables of the Testimony (Ex 24:12)
The Book of the Wars of the Lord (Nu 21:14–15)
The Song of the Well (Nu 21:17–18)
The Song of Heshbon (Nu 21:27–30)
The Book of the Law (Dt 29:21; 30:10; 31:26).

When giving place names Moses also may have drawn on written or oral sources (cf Gn 11:9; 16:14; 26:33; 33:17; 35:20; Dt 3:14).

From Numbers 1 and 26 it is clear that Moses has other writers collecting information for him (in these cases, census information). So in producing the first five books of Scripture, Moses had help from others. Also, Joshua is called Moses' assistant (Ex 24:13; 33:11; Nu 11:28). Ancient writers often composed material by dictating text to a scribe who assisted the writing process.

After a careful, common sense reading of the Books of Moses, one can safely conclude that another writer likely "assisted" Moses by preparing the account of Moses' death in Deuteronomy 34. This proposal is faithful to evidence found throughout the Books of Moses and also accords well with common sense.

Geek the Dogma

I now have in hand the three volume work The Context of Scripture, Hallo and Younger eds. (Leiden: Brill, 2003) and have begun reading the Egyptian material in the first volume. Fascinating.

I would like to quote the General Editor's introduction, "Can we, in fact should we, separate literary and ideological considerations in assessing ancient sources? Can we and should we divide our sources strickly into literary and historical ones? I have long pleaded for using literary and historical sources to illuminate each other---treating sources as precious aids in reconstructing history, and reconstructing history as the essential context for literature" (William W. Hallo, p xxvii). Though I'm sure I will not agree with everything I read here, I am encourged to see some common sense being applied to the study of ancient literature.

The study of the many, many new documents discovered by archaeologists over the last 200 years has significantly undermined the nineteenth century skeptical views that dismissed the historical value of the biblical accounts. Kitchen's book On the Reliablity of the Old Testament is getting serious consideration because it makes the case that the accounts in Scripture actually fit pretty well into the times, cultures, and literary contexts they describe. There will still be lots of debate about who wrote what and when. But anyone still holding onto the notion that the Old Testament was suddenly "made up" during the Persian period of history is badly out of touch with reasonable scholarship.

The Tension Between Faith and Reason, Counsel from Luther and Anselm

2007-12-19T04:00:00.000-08:00

Question 5: How is human reason to be used in understanding Holy Scripture? Part 1.

Over the centuries members of the Christian Church have struggled to understand and apply the relationship between faith and reason. For example, many Scholastic theologians during the Middle Ages taught that faith and reason were fully compatable. Luther and other Reformers argued that reason always went too far in trying to resolve the tensions that arise between faith and reason.

Reason usually does not want to follow faith but ends up having faith in itself---a form of idolatry. When this happens, reason stops being reasonable and becomes doubt and skepticism. As a philosophy, skepticism has been very attractive to some thinkers over the centuries (e.g., Cynics, Cartesians) but most people have never broadly embraced skepticism as a philosophy of life. Why? They sense that there's something impossible and unreasonable about living in constant doubt. As I pointed out earlier, trust---faith---is not a luxuary or a delusion. We are born dependant on others. We are born requiring trust in order to survive. We are designed to live by faith and by reason. Casting aside one or the other leads to disaster.

The motto of St. Anselm (c 1033--1109), "Faith seeking understanding," provided a helpful warning to the early scholastic thinkers. It reminded them and us to live by faith and exercise reason with due humility. A famous saying of Martin Luther (1483--1546) builds on these imporant themes. When confronted by a council at Worms, Germany, and asked to recant of his teachings, Luther is reported to have said:

"Unless I can be instructed and convinced with evidence from the Holy Scriptures or with open, clear, and distinct grounds and reasoning---and my conscience is captive to the Word of God---then I cannot and will not recant, because it is neither wise nor safe to act against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. God's help me! Amen."

Martin Luther supported the use of what we call "commonsense" or sound reasoning but emphasized the Holy Scriptures, the Word of God, as the basis for faith and our relationship to God and His creation. So, we approach the Holy Scripture and life with our commonsense serving---not ruling---our faith so that we might believe and understanding. God help us! Amen.

Tomorrow I'll provide an example of this approach to Scripture using a question raised earlier about who wrote the last chapter of Deuteronomy.