the-resurrection-mar-apr-2016

MODERN REFORMATION VOL.25 | NO.2 | MARCH-APRIL 2016 | $6.95

PART

2 THE RESURRECTION

The

MARCH-APRIL 2016

RESURRECTION PA RT

2

FINDING YOURSELF IN GOD’S STORY Available April 5, 2016, Core Christianity unpacks what is core to the Christian faith in a way that’s easy to understand. In addition, Michael Horton shows why these beliefs matter to our lives today.

WHITEHORSEINN.ORG/CORE

V O L .2 5 | N O.2 | M A R C H -A P R I L 2 0 16

FEATURES

18 Resurrection Victory B Y DA N C L I F F O R D

28 The Resurrection Body B Y JA M E S D O U T H WA I T E

36 The Resurrection in a Secular World

46 Resurrection: Fact or Fiction?

BY DOUG POWELL

58 Seven Stanzas at Easter

BY JOHN UPDIKE

BY ALAN NOBLE

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

1

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT As a small, independent, nonprofit publisher, Modern Reformation depends

on each and every subscription we receive to continue our mission of engaging the big questions about God, this world, and your life in it.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

V O L .2 5 | N O.2 | M A R C H -A P R I L 2 0 16

DEPARTMENTS

4

61

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

BOOK REVIEWS

“John Knox”

BY ERIC LANDRY

REVIEWED BY GLENN A. MOOTS

5

“Luther on the Christian Life” R E V I E W E D B Y A DA M S. F R A N C I S C O

C H R I S T & C U LT U R E

“Eve: A Novel”

Perfectionism and Procrastination

REVIEWED BY BROOKE VENTURA

BY ANNA SMITH

68 7

GEEK SQUAD

Anxiety, Unity, and Womanhood

Answering Objections to the Resurrection

BY JESS FERRELL

BY SHANE ROSENTHAL

12

72

B I B L E S T U DY

B A C K PA G E

On Migraines and Mercy

Core Christianity

B Y A N D R E W D E L OA C H

B Y M I C H A E L S. H O R T O N

T H E O LO GY

COVER ILLUSTRATION BY OWEN GENT

Editor-in-Chief Michael S. Horton Executive Editor Eric Landry Managing Editor Patricia Anders Associate Editor Brooke Ventura Marketing Director Michele Tedrick Design Director José Reyes for Metaleap Creative, metaleapcreative.com Review Editor Ryan Glomsrud Designers Ashley Shugart, Harold Velarde Copy Editor Elizabeth Isaac Proofreader Ann Smith Modern Reformation © 2016 All rights reserved.

I S S N - 1 07 6 -7 1 6 9 M o d e r n R e f o r m a t i o n ( S u b s c r i p t i o n D e p a r t m e n t ) P.O. B o x 4 6 0 5 6 5 E s c o n d i d o , C A 9 2 0 4 6 ( 8 5 5 ) 4 9 2- 1 6 74 i n fo @ m o d e r n re fo r m a t i o n .o rg w w w. m o d e r n re fo r m a t i o n .o rg S u b s c r i p t i o n I n fo r m a t i o n U S 1 Y R $ 3 2 . 2 Y R $ 5 0. U S 3 Y R $ 6 0.

Digital Only 1 YR $25. US Student 1 YR $26. 2YR $40. Canada add $10 per year for postage. Foreign add $9 per year for postage.

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

3

LETTER from the EDITOR

God in the flesh and who was crucified by the Roman authorities—rose again from the dead.

Without the resurrection, Christianity devolves into a strange moral philosophy that gives guidelines for life but can never actually give life to those who are dead in their trespasses and sins.

Unfortunately, that’s the kind of religion most of us want. We can’t comprehend what life might look like after we die, so we settle for a faith that merely helps us get along here and now. As long as Christianity makes our marriages better, our kids moral, and our work successful, we’re satisfied. But that kind of religion, as Paul argues in n a 2014 interview with GQ magazine, 1 Corinthians 15, is pitiful. Christianity is a waste actor Matthew McConaughey talked a little of time, a waste of hope, and a waste of faith if about his faith: Christ is not raised from the dead. Nothing about Christianity should be believed, treaDoes your family go to church every sured, or accepted if Jesus is still in the grave.

Sunday? “Yeah. In Texas. It’s non-denomThe Disney movie The Lion King lied to us: inational. It’s based in the faith that Jesus death is not part of the circle of life. Death is is the son of God, that he died for our sins.” the intruder, the enemy. Christianity assures us, however, that there is an answer Was that a return for you, or had to this old problem of death: the you been going all along? “As soon resurrection of Jesus. Jesus has as we had children, I was like, ‘You risen from the dead, and so will “ WITHOUT THE know what? That was important to those who are united to him by my childhood.’ Even if it was just faith. That hope is what allows RESURRECTION, for the ritual of giving an hour and parents to survive the unbearCHRISTIANITY a half on Sunday to yourself, to able sadness of burying their DEVOLVES pray and to think about others…. children. That confidence is It’s a time for me to take inventory what allows us the courage to INTO A STRANGE of my last week, to look at what’s in face down evil in all its forms.

MORAL the future and say my thank-you’s The joy that comes from believPHILOSOPHY. ” and think about what I can work ing this good news is what on to do better.” enables us to live through the sorrows of this life.

D o e s n’t Mc C o n a ug h e y h av e As we continue on with our anything better to do on a Sunday than take yearlong theme, “The Story of God’s People,” our inventory of his week and say his “thank-you’s”? hope with this issue of Modern Reformation on Sadly, many professing Christians probably the resurrection of Jesus is that you will see how think the same thing. Even more tragic is that your story is shaped by his victory over death. if this is all Christianity has to offer, then it is the worst religion ever.

The central claim of Christianity is that Jesus of Nazareth—a man who claimed to be Israel’s ERIC LANDRY exec utive editor

I

4

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

01

C H R I S T & C U LT U R E

Perfectionism and Procrastination

by Anna Smith

am one of those tragic figures who is both a perfectionist and a procrastinator. I am such a perfectionist that the very idea of failure terrifies me to the core of my being. I am so afraid of doing things wrong that I am afraid to start, because I will probably not do it (whatever “it” is) perfectly and correctly.

So I have to wait around until the fear of failureby-not-finishing-at-all becomes greater than the fear of failure-by-not-doing-it-perfectly.

Once the scale tips the balance, I can then scramble to try to get it done in the little remaining time, my normal fear of imperfection having been overwhelmed by the terror of it not being completed by the deadline. If this doesn’t sound like a healthy pattern to you,

I

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

that’s good, because it isn’t. But let me tell you, it works. In high school, college, and graduate school, I became skilled at balancing those fears and I was a successful student, but often a miserable one.

Now that I am out of school, I have found that this strategy doesn’t work as well in normal life.

My job and life have few deadlines, so the fear of not doing a task perfectly doesn’t have any counterbalance. Effectively, that means I spend most of my time with a to-do list that I never properly tackle, and so I am always haunted by things that should be done and aren’t, which is not a pleasant way to live. It might seem as though self-imposed deadlines are the answer, but let me assure you that they are not. Selfimposed deadlines cannot generate nearly

5

C H R I S T & C U LT U R E

enough dread to counterbalance my perfectionism, because part of my fear of deadlines is my desire to please other people. If I get it done by the deadline that no one knows about, it still very well could be imperfect; and since no one knows about that deadline, I will hang on to it so I can agonize over it for as long as I actually have, which could be forever.

Unfortunately, this means I need to tackle my perfectionism at the root. My perfectionism consists of many fears—fear that I will fail, fear that people will find me lacking and no longer love me, fear that I am not good enough for anything, fear that I will be judged and found wanting, and the strange fear that somehow failure will destroy me rather than be a learning experience or a hilarious story to tell my grandchildren. These fears exist because I build my self-worth on my performance. If you can only love yourself (and believe that others will love you) as a straight-A student, then a B+ becomes an existential threat.

But why even have that standard? Isn’t it silly to base your self-worth on your GPA? Well, yes and no. It has its perks. For one, it means that I am limiting my worth to something that is easily measurable. It’s hard (or at least depressing) to determine whether or not I am a good person; it is easy to calculate a GPA. We all like things we can calculate; other popular measures of self-worth include the amount of money in the bank, the number on the scale, the sports statistics, the number of followers, the hours we spend volunteering. This is external evidence we can point to in order to say, “I am doing well and I am worthy of love.” It gives us assurance and security to have the facts in black and white.

But what about when the numbers go against us?

That’s not a nice experience, but this system, even with its downsides, still keeps my own justification under my control. Maybe I didn’t do well on that test, but I will work harder for the next one. Maybe my bank account isn’t that great, but I can get it to where it needs to be, and then I will be worthy. The whole process of determining my worthiness is in my hands.

6

If I want to escape the perfectionism/procrastination cycle, I need to let go of the whole project of establishing my own worthiness. I’ll never succeed. I make mistakes, I fail people, I hurt people. Busily engaging in my own pathetic attempt for perfection in limited areas doesn’t fix those things. These projects, which seem so terribly important, just distract us from the real issue. The real issue is that I am a sinner and there is a holy God, and I do not deserve good things from him. I need someone to fulfill the demands of the law on my behalf and suffer the judgment for my failures. Christ has done this exact thing for me and extended his worthiness to me by grace, and it means that my worthiness is no longer up for me to determine. Because of Christ I am good, I am safe, and no B+ (or worse!) can vouchsafe that reality.

I believe these things because they are true, and then the truth goes on to set me free. The truth frees me from my obsession with achieving perfection, and actually allows me to do my jobs well. This paper, or this assignment, or this blog post, is not a referendum on my worth as a person. It’s just an attempt to be faithful where God has placed me. I will fail from time to time, and I know I’m going to fail, and God knows I’m going to fail, and everything will still be ok. I do not need to procrastinate, because I am no longer driven by fears in any direction; so I don’t need to balance them.

Seeing things this way also enables me to have a much more accurate view of my abilities. When I’m in perfectionist mode, anything less than an A++++ is total failure. I never enjoy any of my hard-earned accomplishments, I’m overly self-critical, and all my friends and relations get tired of assuring me that getting three questions wrong on that test doesn’t mean the world is coming to an end. But when I am no longer trying to justify my personal soul, I realize that I am a pretty darned competent human being.

I do not do things perfectly, but I do a lot of things well and it’s not wrong to be happy about that. Having confidence in my abilities enables me to try newer and scarier things. When my

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

standards are so high that failure is inevitable, and when failure is emotionally devastating, it’s difficult to try new things. But when I have reasonable expectations, I can accomplish reasonable things that bring joy and fulfillment.

Taken altogether, letting go of my perfectionism is all gain and no loss. But it is still a difficult thing to do. What if God didn’t really mean this whole grace business? What if only the superficially perfect inherit the kingdom? That’s where faith, and trust, and resting in the promises of

I L L U S T R AT I O N B Y C H R I S T O P H E R D E L O R E N Z O

02

God come in. In repentance and rest is your salvation; in quietness and trust is your strength.

Some trust in their achievements (including me!), and some trust in their own facades (me too, quite often!), but we (are working to) depend on the Lord our God. ANNA SMITH is a graduate of Westminster Seminary Califor-

nia, where she now works in admissions. She blogs at thebeautifulplace.com. This article was originally published August 10, 2015, and is reprinted by kind permission of the author.

THEOLOGY

Anxiety, Unity, and Womanhood

by Jess Ferrell

P

lane rides are my worst fear (though my husband tells me all my fears are my “worst fear”).

What can I say? I blame my

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

parents for making me feel relatively safe and secure for so many years. They were slow and sneaky, forcing me to grow up one shoe size at a time. The first panic attack I can recall was the

7

THEOLOGY

night before my wedding. It wasn’t that I thought my husband couldn’t take care of me, but I knew I would need to take care of him, too, and that in many ways we would each need to take care of ourselves. It became my job to keep myself alive.

Unfortunately, it has occurred to me that even this is not entirely in my control. It’s the great human crisis we can endure only by masterful sidestepping.

My husband read a particular Calvin and Hobbes cartoon strip to me after our house was recently burgled: “This is one of those things you always figure will happen to someone else….

Unfortunately, we’re all ‘someone else’ to someone else.” We often view death the same way.

Martin Heidegger gave words to common public sentiment: “One of these days one will die too, in the end; but right now it has nothing to do with us.” But the fact remains: my death awaits me, and yours you. This is the traumatizing absurdity we all face, and pat answers such as “trust in God” or “have more faith” often provoke more guilt than assurance. I would like to suggest that we Christians who struggle with anxiety consider the idea that the hope of the gospel is nearer than we know, especially for women who uniquely identify in their bodies with life.

In this regard, I have become smitten by twentieth-century existentialists. Existentialism is notoriously difficult to define, but it can be said that it approaches the question of the nature of the human being in a way unlike the scientist. Instead of analyzing the world from a calculated and “distant” perspective, the existentialist recognizes that humans are not creatures outside looking in, but inside looking out. Heidegger called this way of existing in the world everydayness. Our knowledge of the world, Heidegger would argue, is not ultimately driven by raw information, but by care. These men have altered the way I think about my life, giving words to my sentiments and clarity to my confusion. Even atheists have renewed my hope in the great mystery that the incomprehensible God has made himself accessible to humans

8

“I would like to suggest that we Christians who struggle with anxiety consider the idea that the hope of the gospel is nearer than we know.”

through their everydayness. There is simply no other way to speak to a creature; if the words of God do not touch creatureliness, then they do not touch the creature at all. Oh great mystery, that the Word of God touched creatureliness in the most literal way possible, by taking on flesh, trapping himself in our everydayness so that we might be free to find him there.

If Christ has sought to save your body through his body, then dear reader, I urge you: do not despise your body. It is the speaking place of God. What eyes must we have that the very same God who said to Moses “You cannot see my face, for no man can see me and live” also said through the Son “He who has seen me has seen the Father.” What ears must we have that God revealed himself to Israel through the words, “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.” And if the body is indispensable to the knowledge of God, then let us not dismiss the fact that there are two differentiated human bodies, that of the man and the woman. How might their different experiences of embodied everydayness influence their consideration of God respectively? What does the man’s body

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

mean? What does the woman’s body mean?

These questions cannot be answered in isolation from each other. Andre LaCocque, a professor of Hebrew Bible at Chicago Theological Seminary, has said that male and female identities are contingent, not absolute, as if they could be described apart from each other. If this is the case, I cannot help but wonder if the image of the Triune God is seen most clearly not in man and woman as they are in themselves but when they are joined together in love.

This important point aside, I would like to draw the reader’s attention to the significance of life-capacity for the woman specifically (the presence of the seed in Scripture is also essential to understanding the gospel, but that is a subject of such magnitude, it deserves separate attention). I believe the more pressing issue today, in light of the many developing women’s liberation movements and the simultaneous continued marginalization of women, regards the meaning of female identity. I grow just as weary of “gender equality” as I do of men who gloss over the Pauline edict that “women should keep silent in the churches,” as if this did not stir up desperate questions in the deepest recesses of my soul. To take away a woman’s voice—is this not to take away the woman? (I don’t believe Paul intends that a woman never speak in church, but that is another issue altogether.) The point is this—the only thing worse than being mishandled is not being handled at all. Within the walls of the dear church, I sometimes hold up my hands and watch the flesh dissipate until I see only a faint outline of my fingers as I disappear into a realm of trinkets, a more or less ornate appendage to my husband. Conversely, outside those walls are many feminists who would have me be a human and no more, as if true unity with my brothers could result apart from diversity. I disappear again. When calling myself a Christian does not mean enough and calling myself a feminist means perhaps too much, I am not sure what word to use. I don’t think there is one. All I know is that whether in the church or in feminist circles, a distinctly

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

female identity has felt like a bit of a dunce cap, something to be ashamed of.

This is tragic, because womanhood is cause for great celebration. Whatever femininity may or may not mean to you, I am here addressing the meaning of one undeniable aspect of femininity—the possession of the womb. Is it too dramatic to say that the womb is a part of a woman’s everydayness? Far from it! The woman’s life is circumscribed by cycles, like the earth, which no sooner encircles the sun than it goes dancing around it again, like a great symphony after swirling into variations tumbles inevitably again to its theme. The theme around which the woman revolves is life. I ask, then, what does the womb mean? Perhaps this is an odd question to you, but the problem is not that there is too little meaning in this word but too much. The meaning of the body is too splendid for reduction to a perfect arrangement of words, but I will attempt at least to say something beautiful and true about it. It is my opinion that through the eyes of faith, the womb means a great deal and is a source of great hope to all women alike.

What does it mean that “the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now”? The curse of the woman in childbearing is a metaphor for the curse of creation and for those who “have the firstfruits of the Spirit,” who “groan inwardly as [they] wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of [their] bodies.” All creation and humanity are in need of new life. Though the woman’s pains were surely multiplied in childbearing, new life itself was not taken away. I cannot help thinking that in some way every mother has made a complete mockery of the curse. Though it has sunk its nails into her every nerve, her tears dry and eventually turn to laughter and love, and she is ready to pay its price again. Labor cannot outdo its reward, absurdity cannot outstrip meaning, and scars cannot cover beauty. There is an overabundance of life that breaks through pain just as life bursts through the thistles and thorns of the ground, for believers and unbelievers alike, which I hear especially in the promise, “Never

9

THEOLOGY

again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.” Women participate uniquely in their very bodies in this inability of death to eradicate new life.

Lest anyone think I have forgotten the tears of the weary ones, whose bodies cry “Life” but cannot answer their own call, while I don’t admit of anything truly insightful to say, I respectfully offer my thoughts. If nonbeing is a derivation of being, then I do not see how the meaning of a woman’s body could ever be taken away from her, and this loss of meaning is indeed a great threat. (Paul Tillich said that the threat of meaninglessness is even greater than that of death, for there is no worse nightmare than a meaningless death. If death, however, could have meaning, perhaps it could also be overcome. As the woman’s labor pain ushers in new life, the Christian’s death means the same thing.) For the woman unable to bear children, if there is a shadow that follows her, then there is a light shining on her. If there is brokenness, there was first wholeness. If there is an absence, then there is a presence—as Sartre said when he reminds us that fear, guilt, and shame are

all emotions we feel when we are alone but not really alone. And how can we deny this when heartache and separation have perhaps conjured up more presence of love in music than has intimacy? For the happy lover, the presence is felt in the touch of the other; but for the rejected, the presence is still powerfully felt in the song. What I mean is this: the woman who cannot conceive still lives in a life-emanating body, and nothing can take this away from her.

She is magically haunted by a reverberation through her bones of a note that has not yet resounded, if that were even possible. I do not, of course, pretend to understand things I have not yet experienced, and I do not ignore that theirs is the greater burden.

As for me, I am a lonely sort of woman for a number of reasons, but one is this (and I realize this is a caricature): I am stretched between women who think little of new life and women who think of little else, between those who think new life is a mere preference of lifestyle and those who think it is a mandate. And here am I, trying to light a candle that will illumine this place where I stand. Hello? Is anyone there?

The mother can see death and reply, “What little

“‘Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.’ Women participate uniquely in their very bodies in this inability of death to eradicate new life.”

10

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

you seem to have to do with me. I am food. I am home.” What are these if not the dearest cradles of life? But I am a spare room, and my body constantly reminds me of this. I cannot escape it.

The meaning of my body knocks from inside.

There are those with children, those who cannot have them, and those who do not want them. But where are the voices of those who wait deliberately while humming under their breath the soft tune of life and salvation, cognizant of a literal hollow beneath the heart? What does it mean to be that woman? For now the only solidarity I have in this regard is in being a complete cliché: “I have some things I want to do first.” I look forward to the day when I will perhaps realize more of my fundamental possibilities as a uniquely female human. But until then, although I may dangle in a tin can thousands of feet above the sweet, sweet soil, I carry in my body the mysterious anticipation of new life, and by this I fundamentally mean life eternal.

Indeed, this is the main purpose of my writing: not to address so much the unique burdens of women in regard to the womb, but to respond to the greatest common human burden, the opposite of life—death. What good could come if women in the church would recognize that, whatever authentic resistance toward death may be experienced in this lifetime, they are in the unique position of having had this resistance sewn into their being in the form of a unique capacity for life, whether this capacity is fulfilled or not. Women sing a life song in their bodies; it is their blood’s rhythm, stretching to their fingertips. The story of life that comes to us through suffering is nothing else than the story of the gospel. The gospel story is told to us in our very bodies! How perfectly the gospel was portrayed in the body of Mary through whose pain in childbearing came not only life but the Life of the world. In Christ, the curse of the woman is a shadow of a spiritual death stripped of power by the Victor “who is your life.” Through faith in Christ who brings everlasting life, life abundant, the sisterhood of believers cannot be broken. Despite our ages, despite our day-to-day

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

“Through faith in Christ who brings everlasting life, life abundant, the sisterhood of believers cannot be broken. ”

schedules—whether we are mothers, grandmothers, workers, or all of the above—we have in common bodies of life, the powerful meaning of which has not been dissolved by the curse, just as eternal life has not been lost by Adam never to be found again. Christ, taking our curse in his suffering on the cross, has defeated death by his resurrection. Though death still awaits us, Christ has embarrassed it, leaving it dumbstruck and without retort when we ask, “Where, O Death, is your victory? Where, O Death, is your sting?” Sisters, when you look at your body, do not first think of its imperfections or how you would improve upon it—but first see how you are “fearfully and wonderfully made” and marvel at the nearness of God, that even in the meaning of our bodies he is “actually not far from each one of us.” May we with such words of life guard one another against every kind of fear.

JESSICA FERRELL has a Master of Arts in historical theology

from Westminster Seminary California. She hopes to pursue further education in philosophy and eventually teach on the relationship between philosophy and theology.

11

03

B I B L E ST U DY

On Migraines and Mercy

by Andrew DeLoach

“

hy don’t you take a few Advil?” The glaring stare this suggestion produced told me immediately I had gotten something quite wrong.

My instinct to help had so far been a good one. Now my presence in the room was a problem. Speaking again was unwise; anything but silent departure, imprudent.

People who don’t have migraines don’t understand what it is like to have one. I had no real idea until I witnessed it myself, and my ignorance led me to reconsider the times I had called my own headache a migraine. Suffering with a migraine can be debilitating; it incapacitates the body and overruns the senses so that sounds nauseate and light penetrates like a knife. As Joan Didion describes in her marvelous essay

W

12

on migraines, “In Bed,” a “headache of blinding severity” is only one of “an essentially hereditary complex of symptoms.” One inherits this affliction, and it is not escaped but lived with.

Sin is very much like this. It is just as invisibly real as a migraine; I’m aware of it in ways that no one else can see or feel or experience. I feel my sin in acute pangs and concentrated aches in body and soul. Because of sin my heart is, as Luther puts it, “crushed to the point of despair.”

Keeping to the darkness, the light penetrates like a knife. Unlike migraines, however, sin is inherited not by a mere unfortunate segment of the population, but by every human being— a universal hereditary failure to fear, love, and trust in God above all things. Whether or not we feel it, and however we feel about it, it is a

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

burden on each of us that, if ignored, “will in fact break us, will send us from this world to whatever happens afterwards, not as souls but as broken souls.”1 Yet many today do ignore it or, at best, don’t believe that sin is a serious problem. In fact, our culture has virtually abandoned the concept of sin and replaced it with a general class of socially inappropriate behavior. For some, sin is suffused with “the lingering scent of divinity”— it is an inescapably religious category—and is therefore incompatible with a nontheistic worldview. The pseudo-academic secular fundamentalism of “freethinkers,” such as Sam Harris, addresses this dilemma by labeling as “secular sin” any bad behavior that transgresses important secular ethics. Experimental psychologist (and professed atheist) Steven Pinker has suggested that science indeed supports a secular version of sin. But even a focus on these sins is considered unwise. Terrorism, infectious disease, failing infrastructure—these are what Harris calls “our deeper interests.” Religious sin is nothing but masochism.

While most of our culture is not interested in such a vigorous attack on sin, it is perfectly willing to ignore the significance of sin and redefine it as social impropriety. This new form of nihilistic “mass wised-upness,” as George Grant called it, is more apparent than ever. Certainly, unarguably, the paramount contemporary sin is intolerance. To impose any stigma on one’s chosen identity or to diminish one’s personhood—these are no longer simply social anathema but are now judicially forbidden.

Cultural furor has metastasized into jurisprudential cancer. Underlying this is the fact that our society is no longer haunted by any sense of personal guilt for objective wrongs. Absent consequences, one is inclined to excuse the behavior as acceptable, even repeatable. If I don’t get caught, it can’t be wrong. Yet this same lack of personal guilt is seemingly no barrier to ascribing fault to someone else. “Do what thou wilt”—but watch what thou sayest, lest one’s feelings be hurt. And as it turns out, zealously

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

guarding one neighbor’s feelings from insult by another neighbor is exhausting. An entire pool of emotional lifeguards fosters an oppressive social anxiety.

But this anxiety is an insufficient proxy for sin. Though it is far removed from that existential “sickness unto death” that comes from true despair over one’s sins, it is nevertheless a sign that sin is very real—in fact, inescapable.

Redefining sin does nothing to solve the problem of sin. Calling a marital affair a “discreet encounter” does not prevent the harm and hurt it causes, and it certainly does nothing to make the problem go away. Focusing on the “deeper interests” of society does not alleviate the guilt of sin. Only a mass dumbed-downness prescribes Advil for a hereditary and fatal sickness. And the problem with seeing sin as a temporary malady (or worse, a social faux pas) is how easily we presume that one day we may improve and get over it. This puts the impetus on us and on our effort. Yet calling sin what it really is—an inherited condition of unbelief—forces us to throw up our hands and confess with Saint Augustine, “I am terrified by my sins and the dead weight of my misery.”2 Indeed, Holy Scripture is replete with such confessions. “For I know my transgressions,” David laments, “and my sin is ever before me” (Ps. 51:3). We stand accused and “our sins

“Our culture has virtually abandoned the concept of sin and replaced it with a general class of socially inappropriate behavior.”

13

B I B L E ST U DY

“As with the ‘pleasant euphoria’ that comes with the end of a migraine, so much more does the euphoria of divine mercy bring healing and rest.”

testify against us” (Isa. 59:12). Even more, we have hidden sins that we cannot discern and yet must confess (Ps. 19:12). If we keep silent, our bones waste away (Ps. 32:3). Clearly, we must know and grieve over the guilt of our sins. To be a sinner is to experience deep anguish in body and soul. Sin separates us from God, and it pulls us away from good and into denial and despair.

Worse, to be a sinner is to be a captive to death, for sin is not only a sickness but spiritual death (Eph. 2:1). Ultimately, where this sense of sin is diluted, the price of redemption is forgotten, and as Flannery O’Connor notes, “Redemption is meaningless unless there is cause for it in the actual life we live.”3 In fact, we must be willing not only to call ourselves sinners but to be sinners, “for Christ dwells only in sinners.”4 It is precisely because we are sinners that we are commended to the mercy of God. None of our sins will stand in the way of his unqualified gift of grace. Everyone, even the worst of us, is someone for whom Christ died, and he did this while we were sinners (Rom. 5:8). Though our sins cry out against us, his blood, poured out for our sins, cries louder (Heb. 12:24). Our hearts have been broken by sin and crushed by the law, but now they look to Christ for forgiveness. “He first leads one into hell through serious pain so he may lead that one back out of hell with savory

14

grace.”5 As with the “pleasant euphoria” that comes with the end of a migraine, so much more does the euphoria of divine mercy bring healing and rest. With forgiveness of sins come also life and salvation, and this is cause for celebration—for we sinners were dead but are alive again (Luke 15).

Our dear Lord Christ, who suffered for our sins…comfort and strengthen your heart in true faith. And do not be troubled any more about your sin.6 ANDREW DELOACH is an attorney practicing in estate planning and probate law. He is also an adjunct professor at Trinity Law School and serves as professor-in-residence for Trinity’s summer International Human Rights program in Strasbourg, France. He is a Fellow of the International Academy of Apologetics, Evangelism & Human Rights, as well as an elder at Holy Trinity Lutheran Church in Hacienda Heights, California.

1 C. S. Lewis, “Miserable Offenders,” God in the Dock (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 121.

2 St. Augustine, Confessions of a Sinner (London: Penguin Books, 2004), 94.

3 Flannery O’Connor, “The Fiction Writer & His Country,” Mystery and Manners (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1969), 33.

4 Martin Luther, in Theodore G. Tappert, ed., Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel (Vancouver, BC: Regent College Publishing, 2003), 110.

5 Johann Gerhard, Sacred Meditations, trans. Wade R. Johnson (Saginaw, MI: Magdeburg Press, 2008), 30.

6 Luther, 103.

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

SINK YOUR TEETH INTO TOUGH TOPICS Do we all worship the same God? Is mental illness a spiritual problem? We know your groups have

big questions. That’s why we’ve created study kits that combine multimedia content from past issues, broadcasts with group study questions, and guides to provide pathways for deeper thinking.

WHITEHORSEINN.ORG/STUDYKITS

BINGELISTENERS REJOICE You can get your fill of theology everywhere from the car to the treadmill.

Previous White Horse Inn broadcasts are available for download or streaming 24 hours a day.

WHITEHORSEINN.ORG/ARCHIVES

V O L .2 5 | N O.2

FEATURES

36 The Resurrection in a Secular World

18

28

46

58

RESURRECTION VICTORY

THE RESURRECTION BODY

RESURRECTION: FACT OR FICTION?

SEVEN STANZAS AT EASTER

17

by DAN CLIFFORD

RESURRECTION

VICTORY illustrations by OWEN GENT

18

19

O N O C T O B E R 1 3 , 2 0 1 0, F L O R AVA L O S E M E R G E D F R O M T H E A N D B R E AT H E D F R E S H A I R F I R S T T I M E I N M A N Y DAYS .

H

E A N D T H I RT YTWO other miners

had suffered virtual entombment two thousand feet below ground in the par tially collapsed San JosĂŠ Mine in the Chilean deser t.

As Avalos stepped from the capsule that had lifted him to safety, he became a focal point of joy for the people of Chile and the watching world. News of his emergence also assured the remaining trapped miners of their own eventual escape. This amazing rescue provides an illustration of what Jesus achieved on an infinitely greater scale. When Jesus emerged from the tomb the second day

20

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

ENCIO GROUND FOR THE

moves forward from his resurrection triumph to ascend into heaven, sit at God’s right hand, pour out the Holy Spirit on the church, and some day return as Savior and Judge. As we begin to understand the scope and spoils of his victory, we begin to grasp the great hope and joy that belong to us as the people of a risen Lord.

THE SCOPE OF JESUS’ VICTORY In rising from the dead, Christ secures and begins to unveil a victory of immense scope. It is nothing less than a righteous transformation of the cosmos—a dismantling of the effects of sin on creation and “making all things new” (Rev. 21:5). Jesus’ renewal of all things involves at least three major aspects: restoring humanity, defeating his enemies, and renewing creation.

Humanity Restored

after his crucifixion, he came forth as the embodiment of hope and joy for his church. He rose as what 1 Corinthians 15:23 calls the “firstfruits” from the dead—the beginning of the great harvest of God’s people who, on the basis of his victory, also will escape the bonds of death and enter into a glorious, resurrected life.

We rejoice in Jesus’ victory every Easter. The church triumphantly sings, “He arose a victor from the dark domain, and he lives forever with his saints to reign.” But do we appreciate the immensity of what we celebrate? Scripture calls the resurrection a “victory” over death that Jesus wins for us; without it we would “perish” (1 Cor. 15:18, 57). Jesus has risen, vested by God with “all authority in heaven and on earth” to gather his church, defeat his enemies, and consummate his kingdom (Matt. 28:18–20). He accomplishes these goals by taking up his victorious rule as he

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

Jesus’ victory over sin and death overturns the consequences of the failed headship of the first man, Adam, whom God created as the original leader and representative of the human race (Rom. 5:14–19). Although Adam had every reason to stay loyal to God, he entertained Satan’s insinuations that God did not have his best interests at heart, and he rebelled against God. We all know how a bad leader can make choices that cause trouble for his followers. The worst damage we have ever experienced from poor leadership, however, cannot compare to the catastrophic effect of Adam’s sin. Standing as the head of the human race, he dragged humanity with him into guilt, moral corruption, and death (Gen. 6:5; Rom. 6:23; 1 Cor. 15:21–22).

Against the backdrop of Adam’s failure, Christ came as the “last Adam” (1 Cor. 15:45), a new head of a renewed human race consisting of his people, the church. When God joins us to Christ by faith, we undergo the most radical leadership change imaginable. The first Adam led our race into sin and death, but Christ (the second Adam) has atoned for our sins and provides us with righteousness and eternal life. “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made

21

alive” (1 Cor. 15:22). Jesus has taken our sin and death upon himself on the cross, and he has overcome their power by rising again. As the Apostle Paul put it, “We know that Christ, being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him” (Rom. 6:9).

Jesus therefore has gained a victory that will last forever, with no risk of undermining it through a leadership failure like Adam’s. In Christ, God has taken human nature into permanent union with himself so that, in the words of John Owen, “the gracious relationship between God and our nature could be stable and permanent.”1 Harmony between God and man will always exist in blessed equilibrium in the person of Christ, and therefore the second Adam cannot fail.

The Defeat of the Enemy Christ has risen to “reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet” (1 Cor. 15:25). The resurrection gives a conclusive answer to the defection of Satan and the fallen angels who consistently express their rebellion by seeking to damage and demean human beings, who are made in God’s image (cf. Job 1:8–11). Satan particularly loves to torment people with the guilt of sin, the degradation of sin, and the fear of the death that will follow from sin (Rev. 12:10; 2 Tim. 2:26; Heb. 2:14–15). Jesus, however, in rising from the dead, has permanently stopped Satan’s pretentions to mar God’s works and bully the human race at will (cf. Luke 1:71). Jesus slipped Satan’s net: he faced death, Satan’s greatest instrument of tyranny, but escaped its power. God vindicated him and raised him up as the Righteous One (cf. Acts 5:30–31) and the Justifier of all who would trust in him.

Colossians 2:15 says that God, through the death and resurrection of Christ, has “disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.”

Jesus is like the Old Testament hero Benaiah, who battled a spear-brandishing Egyptian warrior: “Benaiah went down to him with a staff and snatched the spear out of the Egyptian’s hand and killed him with his own spear” (2 Sam. 23:21). In the same way, Christ defeats

22

the devil with his own weapon, death, and delivers us from his tyranny. Herman Bavinck writes, In the resurrection of Christ it was proved that there was a man who could not be contained by death, could not be ruled by Satan, by the power of corruption, who was stronger than the grave and death and hell. In principle, therefore, Satan has as a matter of fact no longer the dominion over death. Christ by his death had overcome death (Heb. 2:14).2 In addition to overcoming the evil of Satan, Christ also overcomes all wickedness of human beings—by judgment in the case of the world and by conversion in the case of the church.

The Renewal of Creation Scripture says that our world, originally created “very good” (Gen. 1:31), now suffers futility through man’s sin. When Adam failed to rule the earth for God’s glory (Gen. 1:28), God cursed the ground and made it unruly under man’s leadership (Gen. 3:17–19). The mismanagement of man and the curse of God give the creation a tortured aspect in which corruption is mingled with beauty. Every news report of an arson fire, an oil spill, or a drug-resistant bacterium reminds us that creation needs to be reborn.

Scripture represents the creation as “groaning together in the pains of childbirth” as it awaits the renewing of all things through Christ (Rom. 8:20–23). When Jesus comes to apply the fruits of his resurrection, he will rejuvenate all creation (Rom. 8:21), and we will finally experience a “new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells” (2 Pet. 3:13).

THE SPOILS OF JESUS’ VICTORY Grasping the scope of Jesus’ resurrection victory prepares us to appreciate and enjoy the spoils of the triumph he shares with his people.

His vast triumph touches us at many points where we need equipping and encouraging.

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

We experience another fruit of Jesus’ resurrection victory when the Holy Spirit makes us spiritually alive. Scripture speaks of our being “raised with Christ,” not just bodily when he comes again, but inwardly in our conversion (2 Cor. 4:16).3 We need this inner resurrection because, as Ephesians 2:1–3 teaches, we are by nature dead in sin, enslaved to the devil, and children of wrath, just like the rest of mankind. We need God to give us “a new heart” in place of our “heart of stone” (Ezek. 36:26). He enlivens us by the only remedy possible—joining us to Christ by faith (Eph. 2:8) so that we share in his resurrection life. “But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:4–6). Thus by the power of his resurrection, we pass from spiritual death to a spiritual life so fundamental that we can consider ourselves “seated” with Christ as possessors of heaven in principle already.

By this inner resurrection that comes to us through the victory of Christ, God equips us to carry out our mission to pick up our cross and follow Christ, turning our back on sin and learning to live as God’s holy people. Before we take one step forward in the Christian life, he underwrites and undergirds all our efforts through the triumph of Christ. We move ahead as Christians knowing that, in principle, we already have died with Christ to sin and have been raised with him to newness of life (Rom. 6:1–14). Thus the Christian life is less about gaining victory than

“ THE CHRISTIAN LIFE IS LESS ABOUT GAINING VICTORY THAN LEARNING TO LIVE ACCORDING TO THE VICTORY CHRIST GAVE US WHEN WE CAME INTO FELLOWSHIP WITH HIM.” One great result of Jesus’ victory is that, in the resurrection, God objectively establishes us in a right relationship with himself. Romans 4:25 says that Jesus “was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.”

Contemplating the ugliness and stubbornness of our sin may tempt us to doubt whether we can really be considered “justified”—that is, pardoned and counted righteous. In the resurrection, however, God settles the matter. Jesus arose as the announcement of our justification: by raising up his Son, God declares that he accepts Jesus’ righteous life and sacrificial death in our place. Also, Jesus arose as the accomplisher of our justification—he sends the Holy Spirit to join us to himself by faith so that we might receive all the benefits of salvation (2 Thess. 2:13–14), including the gift of his righteousness in place of our unrighteousness (Rom. 4:20–25). The resurrection of Christ therefore cements our justification. Ultimately, it is not up to us to decide whether sinners like us ought to be called “justified”; God has already decided and has raised Jesus from the dead as the indisputable Prover and Accomplisher of our justification.

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

23

learning to live according to the victory Christ gave us when we came into fellowship with him.

Paul brings this out in 1 Corinthians 15—after masterfully portraying our resurrection hope, he sums up with this exhortation in verse 58: “Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.” We labor steadfastly and effectually because we labor “in the Lord.” We follow his pattern by his power. All of our efforts, though at times feeble or intermittent, fit into the bigger picture of Jesus’ sure victory: “We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our mortal flesh” (2 Cor. 4:8–10).

Our progress in sanctification therefore depends on Jesus applying his new life to us by the Spirit, first in our inward renewal at conversion and then as the Spirit teaches us to “put to death the deeds of the body” and learn to live as “sons of God” (Rom. 8:13–14). Just as the resurrection is necessary for us to be justified and delivered from the guilt of sin, so the resurrection is necessary for us to be sanctified and delivered from the power of sin as we live the Christian life.

Christ’s victory also makes us hopeful about the endpoint of our lives in Christ. The Apostle Peter writes: Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

(1 Pet. 1:3–5) Not every hope is a living hope. Many nonbelievers hope for a pleasant afterlife based on vague ideas of their own goodness or God’s benevolence. Hope in Christ, however, is not

24

misty or vague. It can even thrive amid the sorrow and broken promises of this life, since it is anchored in Christ. Jesus has risen and ascended to secure our eternal blessings. He has proven that our salvation and heavenly inheritance are real, and this gives us a living hope.

The same hope that undergirds our individual lives also propels the work of the church. In the Great Commission, Jesus pledges to stand by the church to equip her for her labor, especially through the ordained ministry of sacraments and word. He will be with us, with all of his risen power and authority, to the end of the age (Matt. 28:18–20; 2 Tim. 4:17–18). This gives us confidence in the work of the church. Our own efforts can give no permanent results—“apart from me, you can do nothing” (John 15:5).

Although our power is negligible, the reign of life in Christ dominates all things (Eph. 1:22).

It is the fundamental power at work in the world today, rolling back and overcoming the kingdom of Satan (1 Cor. 15:25), even when evil seems stronger than the church. In the first century, the Roman Empire, headed by emperors worshipped as divine, seemed to dominate the world. The church appeared weak by comparison, yet Paul assured the Roman Christians, “The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet” (Rom. 16:20). So certain is Christ’s triumph that no force can prevail against the church. As Western culture seems to be sliding toward the darkness of a new paganism, the triumph of Jesus in his resurrection still stands, and no force of darkness can overcome his kingdom (cf. John 1:5)!

Along similar lines, the resurrection encourages us by demonstrating Satan’s defeat.

Scripture calls Satan our “adversary” who prowls about like a roaring lion (1 Pet. 5:8). His tyranny runs deep in the human race. To people outside of Christ, he is the “god of this world” who blinds their minds and prevents them from seeing the glory of Christ (2 Cor. 4:4). He even “schemes” against believers and aims at their overthrow (Eph. 6:11; Luke 22:31). Flashes of anger, pride, and conflict in the church are his typical calling cards (Eph. 4:26–27; 1 Tim. 3:6–7; 2 Cor. 2:10–11). We would consider ourselves no

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

“NOT ONLY DOES THE RISEN CHRIST TAKE AWAY SATAN’S ABILITY TO TYRANNIZE US WITH DEATH, BUT GOD FURTHER CONFOUNDS THE DEVIL’S PRIDE BY BRINGING ABOUT HIS TOTAL SUBJECTION THROUGH THE VERY HUMANITY HE TYRANNIZED.”

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

25

match for his cunning if it were not for the resurrection of Christ.

Not only does the risen Christ take away Satan’s ability to tyrannize us with death, but God further confounds the devil’s pride by bringing about his total subjection through the very humanity he tyrannized.

Through the assumption of weak human flesh, the incarnate Son of God fulfilled the law and paid the penalty of our rebellion, thereby overthrowing the works of the devil (1 John 3:8).

By the resurrection, God demonstrated that he is placing final judgment in the hands of this Godman (Acts 17:31; cf. Jude 6). Satan will hear Jesus pronounce his fate, and the church will join in affirming that judgment (1 Cor. 6:3). So while we may personally experience, as Martin Luther wrote, that Satan’s “craft and power are great,” we should take heart that his defeat is assured and “one little word shall fell him.” Jesus makes us victorious over our great adversary.

Another fundamental implication of Christ’s triumph as the “firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Cor. 15:20) is that all who are joined to him will likewise experience a glorious resurrection of their bodies. This hope grows more precious the longer we live, especially as we experience the passing of friends and become more aware of our own impending deaths. Each time we stand at a graveside service and face the seeming finality of the grave, we need to be strengthened in the truth that death is not the end for us. Christ has provided this reassurance by blazing a trail into death and coming safely out the other side. We appreciate a trailblazer in any dangerous activity; we want to see someone else safely cross a flooded road before we try it. Christ, in going before us,

“EACH TIME WE…FACE THE SEEMING FINALITY OF THE GRAVE, WE NEED TO BE STRENGTHENED IN THE TRUTH THAT DEATH IS NOT THE END FOR US.”

26

assures us that we will fare as he did, since we belong to him.

Our resurrection hope becomes even more concrete when we consider that our glorified bodies will follow the pattern of the risen Christ—they will be our very same bodies that died, yet gloriously imbued with the Spirit of God and fitted for a heavenly life. Thus, after his resurrection, Jesus was both different and recognizable (John 20:15–16; 21:12). His body was clearly physical but also transcended the physical limitations of our earthly bodies (John 20:19, 26). This is the pattern for us. When Christ appears, he will “transform our lowly bodies to be like his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21). As Jesus raises our bodies, he will retrofit them to match their glorious new environment. A mountain climber must acclimate to high altitudes, and a deep sea diver must adjust to the pressures of an underwater environment. In a much more fundamental way, our mortal frames, patterned on Adam, the “man of dust” (1 Cor. 15:48), must be glorified and imbued with the Spirit to “inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 15:49–50). In the resurrection, therefore, Christ will “change” us to “bear the image of the man of heaven” so that our perishable bodies will

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

“put on the imperishable”; what is mortal will “put on immortality” (1 Cor. 15:49–53).

WE REJOICE IN A REAL CHANGE We rejoice over the resurrection of Jesus Christ because his victory over sin and death means that the age of a new and glorious creation is dawning. Florencio Avalos and the other Chilean miners may have emerged from virtual death into virtual new life, but the excitement of their rescue already has passed. Those miners who have managed to reintegrate into society have now gone back to their normal activities. Their escape from death did not fundamentally lift them to a new life. Through the resurrection of Christ, by contrast, God accomplishes real change. We find some evidence of this change in the ways that Christians’ lives differ from those outside of Christ, such as their holiness and their hope in the face of death. These outward marks of change are not absolute—Christians may sin less than the non-Christians they once were, but they still sin. Christians may die with hope, but they still die. Outward appearances, then, do not provide a full basis for our hope of resurrection and eternal life. The full basis for our hope is the fact that Jesus has actually escaped the snare of death and has entered into glorious immortal life. Christ stands as the second Adam, at the head of a renewed humanity, pulling his people along with him through a death to sin, and an induction into new life, now spiritual and someday physical.

The resurrection therefore gives us a basis to have an objective hope that if we are in Christ, then things are truly different, even though our lives outwardly seem like the lives of others in many respects. The lens of the resurrection brings into focus the difference between those in Christ and those outside of Christ. It is true that all people sin—but for the person outside of Christ, sin shows the tightening grip of condemnation; whereas for the Christian, sin is the loosening grip of the old self, which is passing away. All people get sick and suffer hardship, but for the non-Christian these trials hint at

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

further miseries to come from a just Judge, while for the Christian they come as training and reproof from the hand of a loving Father (1 Pet. 4:17; Rom. 5:3–5). Non-Christians and Christians are thus like two people lying in adjacent hospital beds with similar symptoms, but one is dying and the other is recovering. We make these distinctions between ourselves and our non-Christian friends not based on a belief that Christians are superior, but based on Christ’s resurrection as the firstfruits from the dead; we will follow the trail he has blazed. Our connection to a risen Savior makes all the difference. When we share the gospel, therefore, we should emphasize the resurrection, as the apostles did in their preaching. The resurrection shows that new life is a genuine hope; those who repent and trust Christ, crucified and risen, will share that hope and begin to understand what it means that old things have passed away and the new has come.

Likewise, the resurrection of Christ encourages us by connecting our little life stories to the big story of redemption. The risen Christ is renewing all things, and when we put our faith in him, we know that he sweeps our lives up into his triumph. Our comfort in the face of suffering and death does not rise from hope that is private and unprovable. A non-Christian may tell a Christian, “I am glad you have that hope.” But a Christian can respond, “I am glad I have a risen Savior—reigning and life-giving.” Jesus said, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live” (John 11:25). We do not seize on Christ as a way to have subjective hope. Instead, Christ seizes on us. He has died for our sins, and through his resurrection he has pulled us into an objective hope. Victory is ours. Christ has risen.

DAN CLIFFORD is senior pastor of Grace Presbyterian Church in Vienna, Virginia.

1 John Owen, The Works of John Owen, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2013), 48.

2 Herman Bavinck, Our Reasonable Faith (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977), 368.

3 For a discussion of the use of “inner” and “outer” to describe the effects of the resurrection on believers, see Richard B. Gaffin, Jr., Resurrection and Redemption (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1987), 61.

27

Re

by JAMES DOUTHWAITE

surrection

BODY

29

“CHRIST IS RISEN! HE IS RIS A L L E L U I A ! ” T H I S C RY W I L L R I MANY CHURCHES THIS EAST AS WE REJOICE IN THE RESUR OF JESUS CHRIST FROM THE

O

N THE THIRD DAY,

the grave in which they laid his body w a s e m p t y. H i s body had not been stolen—the posting of Roman soldiers and the sealing of the tomb prevented that (Matt.27:65– 66). No, Jesus had risen, just as he said (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34).

That was the message of the angel (Luke 24:6– 7), the basis of apostolic preaching in the book of Acts (2:32; 3:15; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30), and is what separates Christianity from all other religions.

This is the reason why the teaching of the resurrection is also under attack. Satan knows that if he wants to undermine Christianity,

30

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

EN INDEED! SE FROM ER SEASON RECTION D E A D.

knocking over the domino of the resurrection can make all the rest fall as well. At the time of Jesus, the Sadducees said there was no resurrection (Matt. 22:23); the men of Athens who listened to Paul at the Areopagus mocked t his t ea ching (Ac ts 17:32), and some in the Corinthian congregation were saying there is no resurrection (1 Cor. 15:12). Later, the church found the need to enshrine the doctrine of the resurrection in all three of her ecumenical creeds to combat those who spoke against it, and to this day there are those

(even Christians) who question the resurrection of Jesus, of humanity, or both.

As a pastor, I will never forget the first time one of my parishioners said there is no resurrection. “Sure, Jesus rose from the dead,” he said. “But we will not—just our spirits will live forever in heaven.” (He himself is now awaiting the resurrection of his body.) Yikes! I was surprised, but I should not have been. The truth of the resurrection needs to be constantly proclaimed against the spiritual-reincarnational thinking of false religions, those who seek to demythologize the Bible, and the ancient Greek thought affirming that a good soul just needs to be released from the shackles of an evil body.

This latter thinking can be seen not only in those who deny the resurrection of the body, but also in those who believe that who they are spiritually is different from what they are bodily (i.e., I am a man trapped in a woman’s body), same-sex marriage (your body doesn’t matter), and even in talk of “soulmates.” Such popular notions undermine the truth in insidious ways.

But is the resurrection of the body that important? Does it really matter that much? Yes. The Apostle Paul devotes the entire fifteenth chapter to it in his letter to the Corinthians. There he states, “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain” (1 Cor. 15:14 ESV). In other words, if Christ has not been raised, then go home! Christianity is nothing. It is a false religion with false preaching. If Jesus’ body is still in the grave, then he lost. Death won. Sin won. The wages of sin

“ SATAN KNOWS THAT IF HE WANTS TO UNDERMINE CHRISTIANITY, KNOCKING OVER THE DOMINO OF THE RESURRECTION CAN MAKE ALL THE REST FALL AS WELL.”

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

31

is death (Rom. 6:23), and if Jesus didn’t beat death—if his body is s t i ll de a d — t h e n h e didn’t beat sin either.

The same is true for you.

If your body doesn’t rise, then sin has won. Your identity as a person consists of both body and spirit; you aren’t one or the other. There are such creatures: animals have bodies but no spirits, and angels have spir i ts b ut no bodies—but you are both. We’re “angimals,” as Australian theologian John Kleinig said.

Contrary to Mormon teaching, you didn’t preexist as a spirit child who needed a body to live in for a while. The crown of God’s cre ation are males and females created in his image, body and spirit together. Jesus came to redeem that you—all of you—body and spirit.

A good place to regain a proper understanding of this teaching and its importance is Paul’s great “resurrection chapter,” 1 Corinthians 15.

The more time you spend in this chapter, the more jewels you unearth. From start to finish, Paul’s aim is to establish his flock firmly in this teaching once again. He begins, most appropriately, with the Scriptures. For Paul and the Corinthians, this would be the Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible. Everything that Jesus did and that Paul preaches has its roots and foundation there “in accordance with the Scriptures”—including the resurrection. Paul does not specify what Scripture he is referring to here (perhaps he expects the people to remember what he taught them before), but some possible examples are helpful. There are

“THE PSALMIST WRITES, ‘FOR YOU WILL NOT ABANDON MY SOUL TO SHEOL, OR LET YOUR HOLY ONE SEE CORRUPTION.’”

32

the accounts of the bodily translation of Enoch (Gen. 5:24; cf. Heb. 11:5), of both Elijah (1 Kings 17:17–24) and Elisha (2 Kings 4:18–37) raising children back to life from the dead, and the famous words of Job (19:25–27 ESV): “I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been thus destroyed, yet in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another.”

These are resurrections of humans, but we have words that speak of the resurrection of the Messiah as well. The psalmist writes, “For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption” (Ps. 16:10; cf. Acts 2:27). Jesus himself points to the story of Jonah as a prefiguring of what will happen to him: “For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matt.12:40 ESV). Though the words rise or resurrection are not used here, those who know the story of Jonah know what happened next: he was spit out of his fishy grave to live again, and so would Jesus.

There are also more general prophecies of resurrection, such as in Daniel, “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake” (12:2 ESV), and in Isaiah, “He will swallow up death forever” (25:8 ESV). We also read in the prophet Hosea: “After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him” (6:2 ESV). Some might think this verse is not speaking of Christ since it uses the plural pronoun “us,” despite the attractive reference to the three days. But, in fact, Hosea’s pronoun makes Paul’s case: the resurrection of Christ and those who belong to him are intimately connected. Paul demonstrates this in 1 Corinthians by using the example of “firstfruits” (v. 20). This was the practice of bringing the first of the harvest to the Lord as an acknowledgement that the whole harvest, still to come, belonged to him. In the same way, Christ’s resurrection was just the beginning of the harvest, the beginning of the resurrection to come. Or, as Paul would later write to the Romans, “For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his” (Rom. 6:5 ESV).

Paul also has a word for those who perhaps do not accept this testimony of the Scriptures.

Even if you do not accept his teaching, there are other eyewitnesses of Jesus’ resurrection— over five hundred of them! Most were still alive as Paul penned this letter—only “some” had “fallen asleep” (v. 6). Imagine a court of law today where the defense attorney is able to produce five hundred witnesses to a fact he is trying to prove! That is overwhelming evidence.

Any defense attorney making such an audacious claim could expect to receive a challenge from the prosecution to produce those witnesses. If they did not actually exist, then Paul is taking quite a risk. His credibility would be ruined, his teaching exposed as false, and his authority destroyed. But if they did exist, as Paul asserts,

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

then there is near irrefutable evidence from these eyewitnesses to Jesus having risen from the dead.

With that, Paul also disproves the argument of those who “say there is no resurrection of the dead” (v. 12 ESV). Logically, an absolute assertion (“there is no resurrection of the dead”) can be refuted by producing just one contrary example, and that example is Jesus. So if Jesus has been raised, then it is not true that there is no resurrection. But does Jesus’ resurrection necessarily lead to ours? To address that question, Paul goes back to the beginning, to Adam (cf. Rom. 5): “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive” (v. 22 ESV). In other words, Christ came to undo what Adam did. What had Adam done? He brought sin and death into the world, and after nine hundred thirty years, Adam himself died (Gen. 5:5). By adding up the ages of the patriarchs, Luther concluded that Enoch was translated to heaven shortly after Adam’s death as testimony to the resurrection of the dead and to God’s faithfulness. Enoch being taken into heaven was not just for him and his benefit, but for the benefit and comfort of those left behind.

What Enoch’s translation testified to, Jesus has accomplished. As Adam brought sin and death into the world, Jesus brought forgiveness from sin and life from death for all the world.

The resurrection was not for Jesus alone, just as Adam’s death did not affect himself alone. Just as Adam died and so we die, so Christ is risen and “then at his coming those who belong to Christ” (v. 23 ESV). With his bodily resurrection, Jesus has reversed the death—the real, bodily death—of Adam and provided for all the world the promise of resurrection as well. For not just some enemies, but all enemies, are subject to him, including death (v. 26).

Not everyone sees death as an enemy, however.

In our day and age, death is increasingly seen as a solution, a friend, an answer to our problems, inconveniences, and suffering. This too is the fruit of the thinking that who we are spiritually is divorced from who we are physically, so ending my physical life will set me free spiritually. Yet how quickly such thinking evaporates

33

when standing beside the grave of a loved one we want back. Death is no friend.

Indeed, Paul proclaims that Jesus has come to destroy death, not just defeat it. To this Isaiah testified when he prophesied that the Messiah would “swallow up death” (Isa. 25:8). There is also this comforting picture for us from the book of Revelation: that in the end, not only the beast, the false prophet, and the devil will be thrown into the lake of fire, but so will Death and Hades (Rev. 19:20; 20:10, 14)! That is truly to destroy death, and that is what Jesus has done for us.

Even standing beside the grave of a loved one we want back, we find good news, for we know that this is not the end. In Jesus, we no longer live lives that end in death; the deaths we die end in life!

34

Even in the face of this good news, Paul knows there will be detractors and scoffers. How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come? We have similar questions today: How old will I be? Will my hair be gray and my skin wrinkled? What about those crushed and never found when the World Trade Center collapsed on them? Their bodies will certainly be different, Paul says. Better. You will be yourself; there will be continuity from this life to the next.

Job confessed that it would be his skin and his eyes that would behold his Redeemer (Job 19:26–27). The nail and spear marks could still be seen and felt in Jesus’ body (John 20:20, 27).

Yet there will also be a transformation, a discontinuity. What is “sown a natural body…is raised a spiritual body” (v. 44 ESV). It sounds like an oxymoron, doesn’t it? A “spiritual body” sounds a little like saying a “black whiteness.”

Perhaps that jarring effect is exactly what Paul was aiming for here. He is not saying that you

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

“ LIKE LAZARUS…JESUS WILL CALL US FORTH FROM OUR GRAVES, AND WE WILL LIVE WITH HIM WHO IS THE RESURRECTION AND THE LIFE FOREVER.”

are a body now and will be a spirit later, but that your body will be changed—from a natural body to a spiritual body. A natural body is a body infused with sin that will die; but a spiritual body is wholly enlivened, infused with the Spirit of God, that will never die again. Your body will be raised new and improved! “The perishable will put on the imperishable and the mortal will put on immortality” (v. 54).

And this is just as true for those buried yesterday or thousands of years ago, those cremated by design or by terrorists, those eaten by wild beasts, or those whose bodies have been destroyed in other ways. Can God raise them?

Read Ezekiel 37.

So in Christ, Paul concludes (v. 54) that the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, “Death is swallowed up in victory” (Isa. 25:8). Though it looks strong and menacing now, though sadness and grief grip us every time a loved one is lowered into the freshly dug earth, death will not have the last word—that belongs to Jesus. Like Lazarus (John 11), Jesus will call us forth from our graves, and we will live with him who is the resurrection and the life forever. For Jesus “was

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom. 4:25 ESV). Jesus didn’t just die for you, and the resurrection was his reward for a job well done—no! His resurrection was for you also—so you would be raised and justified, and the sin and death of Adam would be undone by the forgiveness and life of Jesus. He entered into our death that we might join him in his resurrection.

That is exactly what will happen on the last day when “the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed” (v. 52 ESV). He who calls you also justifies you, glorifies you (Rom. 8:30), and sanctifies you completely “at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

He who calls you is faithful; he will surely do it” (1 Thess. 5:23). “Thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 15:57). Those words of Paul end this chapter with the ancient call that reverberates throughout the ages as we shout with our brothers and sisters: “Alleluia! Christ is risen!”

JAMES DOUTHWAITE is pastor of Saint Athanasius Lutheran

Church in Fairfax County, Virginia.

35

by ALAN NOBLE

RESURRECTI Secular

World

36

ON

37

THE RESURRECTION OF JE I S I N A R G UA B LY T H E C O R N E T H E E N T I R E C H R I S T I A N FA

A

ND I THINK FOR

a lot of non-Christians in the West that’s pretty clear because we (rightfully) make a big deal out of the resurrection. We love to tell the story of t h e e mp t y t o mb ever y chance we get, even though most people we know have already heard this story. But what if all our Easter pageants, our sunrise services, our dramatizations of Carmen’s 1985 classic song, “The Champion,” and all our sermons and messages about Christ’s resurrection don’t make sense to people anymore? And it’s not that these methods aren’t relevant enough; it’s

38

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

SUS CHRIST RSTONE OF ITH.

that we’re all just a little too modern to understand what it means for Christ to rise from the dead for our justification, as Paul writes in 1 Corinthians. The resurrection has always been a stumbling block to faith. From the beginning there have been some, like the Apostle Thomas, who took Christ’s death to be the final word on his divinity and the resurrection to be wishful thinking on the part of the overly devout. But unlike St. Thomas, our contemporary disbelief comes less from skepticism than from a habit of seeing the world from a particular, modern frame, one which has no way to conceptualize Christ’s resurrection except as historical fact or an inspirational ur-myth of rebirth.

Here’s the scary part. What if, when we preach the resurrection, we think that we have spoken accurately and our hearers believe that they have received the good news of the resurrection,

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

while in reality, they’ve received something much less—something thin, airy, and emotive, something thoroughly inspirational? Christians are called to preach Christ crucified and raised from the dead, but the way our culture conceptualizes spiritual truths has radically changed from the first century, or even from the early twentieth century, so that it is incumbent upon believers to help their hearers conceive of the resurrection as the potent, immanent, and transcendent event that it is; to help them see the resurrection in all its starkness. To do this, we must understand the ways in which our contemporary habits of thinking work to buffer us from the rich import of this event and the duties it creates for us. Our understanding of the body, the transcendent, the supernatural, death, and spiritual meaning deeply affect the way we interpret the words “He is risen.” And if we are not careful, we may not communicate that “he is risen indeed.”

The secularism I’m trying to describe here isn’t usually a conscious choice or even a comprehensive worldview. It’s more like a reflex—unconscious, habitual, and natural— and as a result, it affects all of us alive in the West today, in some way or another. I’m trying to describe how people hear the resurrection, even when they aren’t hostile to it. They hear it the way they are taught to interpret miracles, the way they understand history and know their bodies. This is not secularism as a worldview, but as a default way of interpreting the world.

It’s not that most of our neighbors consciously believe that there is no God and that miracles are impossible. For now, the majority of Americans still identify as Christian, and most would probably say they believe God can intervene in our world in supernatural ways. But when we hear the Easter story or are reminded by a worship song that Jesus rose from the dead, our default way of interpreting the story is through a secular imagination. In that vision, the resurrection is a great spiritual truth, a tremendous inspiration, and maybe forensic evidence of Christ’s divinity.

But it’s not the firstfruit of the redemption of the world, it’s not an event transcending but yet not denying the immanent, it is not a supernatural

39

event, and it is especially not a reality with spiritual results reverberating even to today. And so, the challenge for Christians in the twenty-first century is how to help our hearers go beyond their secular reflex to hear the resurrection anew. Put differently, how do we overcome the failure of the secular imagination to understand the resurrection?

THE BODY In the wake of theological liberalism in the early twentieth century, it became important for evangelicals to speak about Christ’s “bodily resurrection.” The body had to be emphasized because for some liberal theologians, the truth of the resurrection was in its symbolic meaning, not in Christ’s rising from the dead “in space and time,” as Francis Schaeffer liked to say. As long as we believe the spiritual truth that Christ conquered death, then it is immaterial if Christ

really rose from the grave, so the argument went.

Of course, such things are still debated among theologians, but for the most part, evangelicals accept as an essential truth of the faith that when Christ was raised from the dead his physical body was actually raised, and had we been there with Mary Magdalene we would have seen the empty tomb and the risen Lord. It’s still difficult for modern people to accept that Christ rose bodily. But for contemporary hearers, we struggle to imagine the body mattering. It’s not that we don’t believe that there’s evidence of the resurrection; it’s that we don’t see it matters much, except as evidence of Christ’s divinity. The idea that a redeemed body might have implications for how we live is hard for us to grasp. We like to keep our spiritual truths and our physical truths neatly separated.

Many converging forces have worked to create this climate in our society where the basic assumption about life is that what constitutes “real” is either outside of us and objective (empirically verifiable using the scientif ic method) or deep inside us and subjective (emotively verifiable using a test of authenticity). In this way, it’s easier for us to understand the resurrection either as a historical event we could have recorded on our smartphone, had we been there, or as an intimate, personal truth—something that aesthetically resonates with us, that moves our emotions and inspires us to become better people. Undergirding the way we interpret the modern world is the unspoken belief that “real” things are physical, measurable things or internal, emotive

“ THE IDEA THAT A REDEEMED BODY MIGHT HAVE IMPLICATIONS FOR HOW WE LIVE IS HARD FOR US TO GRASP. WE LIKE TO KEEP OUR SPIRITUAL TRUTHS AND OUR PHYSICAL TRUTHS NEATLY SEPARATED.”

40

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

things. But the resurrection is more than a historical reality or an inward truth. It speaks to our collective anthropology, the way we value and care for our bodies in this life, because we know that God cares about bodies.

For the resurrection to be sensible to modern hearers, we need to know our bodies matter.

Not that the endless preservation of our bodies matters, or the autonomy of our bodies, but that because of Christ’s bodily resurrection, our bodies are valuable and good beyond this life—and that is difficult for a secular people to imagine.

While we struggle to imagine a redeemed body, we also long for it. Bodily resurrection is the only adequate response to the inward groan we all feel at death and decay. This groan is universal and powerful, but we are also terrified of it. For modern people, it represents the absurdity of existence—that we innately and profoundly know our need for bodily redemption, but we also believe such redemption to be fundamentally impossible, unthinkable.

The fundamental law of the natural world is that things die and decay. We cannot think of physicality without decay and death. Yet, absurdly, such a physicality is exactly what we long for, so that there is no limit to our efforts to combat death, reverse aging, and redeem our bodies secularly. The transhumanist movement is evidence of this desperation, as is Google’s Calico program, an entire department devoted to discover ways of extending our lives. But this ache we all feel for redeemed bodies cannot be accepted as representing something true about our lives. We can imagine a future of immateriality, spirits floating on clouds and playing harps, before we can imagine one of physicality. But when Christ offered his hands and side to a doubting Thomas, he offered a body that was really there and was in some meaningful sense the same as the body that hung on the cross.

To communicate the resurrection to modern people, we must disentangle the longing for immortality that manifests in things such as Calico, anti-aging cream, and the promise of a deathless future given by science, while recognizing that this basic longing for life is not

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

merely an evolutionary drive for self-preservation. It reflects a basic truth about us: we were created to live for eternity with God, in our bodies. In Onward: Engaging the Culture without Losing the Gospel, Russell Moore writes, “Christians respect the body because we believe our material bodies are part of God’s goal for us and the universe” (62). Christ’s risen body tells us something important about our bodies today and their ultimate state for eternity, and this knowledge cannot be discovered either through careful scientific study of the human body or reflective contemplation about our inward state.

There is a kind of knowledge that comes with the resurrection that the modern mind will struggle to categorize, always preferring to reduce it to either evidence of the historical resurrection or confirmation of some inward revelation. Even more difficult for us to conceive is the reality that the resurrection produces an ontological change in believers.

A SIGN In Charles Taylor’s A Secular Age, he notes that one of the major shifts that occurs from the old order of the premodern world to our secular age is the creation of “buffered selves.” What he means by this term is that modern people think of themselves as protected in some sense from outside forces. Things may happen to us, but ultimately we are the ones who decide how they affect our lives and what they mean to us. We are even buffered from our bodies, able to distantly observe and judge our existence in the world. Taylor contrasts this with

41

“IT’S SOMETHING ELSE WERE BURIED AND R THAT IN SOME PROFOU YET COMPLETELY OBJEC EVENT IN THE PAST A

the premodern world when we thought of ourselves as “porous,” meaning that forces outside of us could affect us. This was a world of angels and demons, where cause and effect could not be explained entirely by natural processes. And while many of us continue to believe in such a world, it requires a conscious effort to overcome the basic assumptions of our society.

The challenge of the resurrection is that modern people really don’t have a good category for this kind of event. If the point of the resurrection is to simply be evidence of Christ’s divinity, then we can comprehend it. Evidence is something we get. Or if the point of the resurrection is to inspire us to overcome our deepest fear of death, we can get that too. But we don’t have a category for historical events outside of the standard, closed physical world, let alone historical

42

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

TO KNOW THAT WE AISED WITH CHRIST— ND, IMMEASURABLE, AND TIVE AND REAL WAY, AN CTS UPON US TODAY.”

events that affect us specifically and personally.

And that’s what the resurrection does. In the resurrection, I was raised with Christ as a new creation. And while the particulars of this new creation may yet come to fruition, the fact that I was affected is an objective reality.

Again, we just aren’t accustomed to recognizing something having the effect on us that the resurrection does. We don’t have the ability to categorize it. For instance, although we believe that we are the product of history, we don’t readily understand how an event that occurred two thousand years ago could directly alter our being today. We can understand the event as an influential cultural moment, or a dramatic projection of God’s love, but it’s something else to know that we were buried and raised with Christ— that in some profound, immeasurable, and yet

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

completely objective and real way, an event in the past acts upon us today.

The thing with having a buffered self is that we get to decide who we are and what defines us.

The right to create and craft our own identities is not merely a basic belief of our society, but it’s also the dominant theme of all our stories, the drive behind consumer culture, and the number one hobby in America. There is no outside force that can define us unless we choose it first. But the resurrection doesn’t ask permission. It fundamentally changes our being, whether we want it to or not, whether we live accordingly or not. In Romans, Paul exhorts us to stop living in sin because we have been united with Christ through his death, burial, and resurrection, in which we participate in baptism. Paul tells his readers to recognize what is already true about

43

them: they are “alive to God in Christ Jesus” because they were raised with him.

How can we communicate this truth to modern people, people for whom “Christ rose from the dead for our justification” is at best a spiritually touching story? Part of our task will be to draw attention to the starkness of the resurrection. Our hearers need to understand how unsettling this event was and continues to be.

The resurrection is not merely a sign of Christ’s divinity (although it certainly was that), but also an event in the distant past that fundamentally changed us today and who we will be in the future. The pageantry of an Easter drama, the swelling emotions evoked through a passionate reading of the Easter narrative, the boldly sung declaration that “our God is alive and risen” may do much to remind us of the historical reality of Christ’s resurrection and inspire us with a story of triumph; but unless we preach

“THE RESURRECTION IS NOT MERELY A SIGN OF CHRIST’S DIVINITY (ALTHOUGH IT CERTAINLY WAS THAT), BUT ALSO AN EVENT IN THE DISTANT PAST THAT FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED US TODAY AND WHO WE WILL BE IN THE FUTURE.”

44

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

the resurrection as the transcendent and perpetually potent event it was and continues to be, we are not preaching the resurrection. We are preaching an empty sign, not an empty tomb.

“LET US EAT AND DRINK FOR TOMORROW WE DIE” In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul addresses those who had been teaching that there is no resurrection from the dead. Aside from the evidence he gives that this resurrection was in fact a real historical event, witnessed by those the readers could meet and receive confirmation, Paul argues that without the resurrection, Christians are “of all people most to be pitied” because we have “hope in this life only” (15:19). Indeed, if Christ was not raised, then we shall not be raised, and therefore “let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die” (15:32).

But the resurrection did happen, and our resurrection will too. So, we must eat the bread and drink the wine, for tomorrow we live. Through eating and drinking, we partake in a different future, a future of hope. The terminus of our lives is lifted up from the plate toward the horizon. We eat and drink toward a future of eternity rather than of nothingness, so that all of our actions in this life are renewed and infused with significance because they are grounded in a significance outside of ourselves. The regular practice of the Lord’s Supper can remind those within the church how to interpret the resurrection rightly, since it’s in that Supper that we physically partake in a spiritual sacrament that reflects our objective forgiven state because of a historical event in the distant past. Properly led, the Lord’s Supper is a regular reminder of the economy of our faith, which transcends the mechanistic and individualistic logic of our modern, secular age. The Lord’s Supper is a sacred ritual that produces a real effect within us, outside of the measurements of science, and not reliant upon our inward belief.

To those outside of the church who cannot partake of the Lord’s Supper, our desire must be to challenge the secular imagination. The

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

pressure of our secular society will always push us to shift the meaning of the resurrection away from what it is: a transcendent event with continuing meaning and potency to change people.

Our task is to identify this pressure and push back against it. One way to do that is to be careful about what we emphasize when we tell the story of Christ’s resurrection. While it is important to preach the historical resurrection and to remind the church, as Paul did, of the numerous witnesses, we should take care not to give them the impression that the primary significance of the resurrection is to provide evidence of the existence of God or Christ’s divinity. Likewise, the resurrection should cause us to wonder at our marvelous God; but if we choose to foreground Christ’s uniqueness among the world religions, rather than the meaning and significance of his empty tomb, we may be unknowingly reinforcing the popular idea that Christianity is merely one of many faith options we can choose from. What we emphasize when we speak of the resurrection will either confirm or challenge our hearer’s expectations. Knowing that most of our hearers will have secular expectations about what constitutes the significance and effects of the resurrection, believers must learn to identify and betray those expectations.

We need a teaching of Easter that reveals the failure of the secular imagination and offers a compelling alternative. The nature of the resurrection has not changed in two thousand years, and neither has the need to preach Christ crucified and risen for our sins and justification; but how we understand this event has changed, as we have moved from a premodern world of porous individuals to one of buffered selves.

Christ’s resurrection does something and means something that cannot be captured empirically and is not dependent on our inner assent. This is a resurrection worth declaring.

ALAN NOBLE is assistant professor of English at Oklahoma

Baptist University, editor-in-chief of Christ and Pop Culture, and a member of City Presbyterian Church in Oklahoma City. His first book, tentatively titled Disruptive Witness, is expected for release in 2017 with InterVarsity Press.

45

FA

Resurrection:

CT

by DOUG POWELL

Fiction?

47

W H Y I S T H E R E S U R R EC T I O N SO IMPORTANT? AF TER ALL, W H E N O U R S I N S A R E PA I D

T

HAT WAS THE WORK JESUS did

two days earlier on the cross. And the resurrection is not when Christ’s perfect obedience is credited to us so we can stand before God. That work was also done by Jesus on the cross. But how do we know that’s actually what happened on the cross? Where does that interpretation come from? It comes from Jesus himself. But how do we know Jesus was telling the truth about the meaning of his death and the work he came to do? Because of his resurrection.

The resurrection of Jesus is how we know we can trust anything and everything he taught.

48

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

OF JESUS IT’S NOT FOR.

Much of what he taught could not fact-checked, but he performed many miracles and signs to show he was telling the truth. Recall the moment when Jesus forgave the sins of a paralytic whose friends had lowered him through the roof (Luke 2:5–11; cf. Matt. 9:1–9; Mark 2:1–12). The miracle of a once-lame man now walking home gave people an indisputable reason to believe Jesus had the power to forgive sin, which is one of the ways he claimed to be God. The resurrection is evidence that Jesus is who he claimed to be and what he taught was true. Why do we have the Old Testament in our Bibles? Because Jesus taught it was the revealed word of God. Why do we believe Jesus? Because of his resurrection. This means the resurrection is so important that if it did not happen, there could be no Christianity at all. It is the claim upon which the truth of Christianity stands or

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

falls. In his letter to the church at Corinth, Paul tells them that if Christ is not raised from the dead, then the gospel is a lie and their faith in worthless because they’re still dead in their sins (1 Cor. 15:12–17).

Unlike other religions, Christianity is unique in that it’s falsifiable—that is, it offers criteria that, if shown to be false, would prove it is unreliable. In effect, Paul says, “If you want to prove what I’m saying isn’t true, show me that Christ isn’t raised from the dead.” If the resurrection didn’t happen, if there is a better explanation for Jesus’ death and what happened two days later, then Christianity is false. No other world religion points to its weakest claim and tempts skeptics to take advantage of it. But Paul is so certain the evidence for the resurrection is strong enough to stand up to investigation that he has no problem announcing it. He wants people to look because he’s convinced the evidence is powerful and persuasive.

So what is the evidence for the historical, bodily resurrection of Jesus? It depends on whom you ask. It’s easy to forget that although there are many New Testament scholars, not all of them are Christians—some are Jewish, some are agnostics or even atheists. Some who identify as Christians are theologically liberal and don’t stand in the tradition of historic, orthodox Christianity. Not all New Testament scholars are Christians who believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. Some accept everything it says as factual, some accept many (but not all) facts, and some accept almost none of the New Testament’s claims about Jesus’ death and what happened to him two days later.

However, there are about a dozen facts that are accepted by virtually all New Testament scholars, whether or not they believe the biblical account of Jesus’ resurrection. These facts have two things in common—they’re found in more than one source and not all of them are Christian. These non-Christian sources preserve traditions from the first and second centuries and include Jewish tradition and Roman historians.

The Babylonian Talmud, which contains rabbinical tradition from between about 400 BC to

49

AD 500, mentions Jesus in several places. The Talmud comprises tractates (books) that are divided into chapters. The tractate Sanhedrin 43a says, “On the eve of the Passover Yeshu (the Nazarene) was hanged.” “Hanged” is a euphemism for crucifixion. The Talmud refers to Jesus as a heretic, idolater, and sinner who led people astray. Clearly, it is not sympathetic to his teachings. Yet from this source we see that Jesus is affirmed as really existing, that he was from Nazareth (though not all editions of the Talmud contain this reference), and that he was crucified and died.

Another source from Jewish tradition is the Toledot Yeshu. Although the date when it was written or compiled is debated, scholars generally agree that it contains tradition from early in the Christian era. The book is a short biography of Jesus written to make him look bad, like a kind of hit piece. According to the Toledot Yeshu: Yeshu was put to death on the sixth hour on the eve of the Passover and of the Sabbath.

When they tried to hang him on a tree it broke, for when he had possessed the power he had pronounced by the Ineffable Name that no tree should hold him. He had failed to pronounce the prohibition over the carobstalk, for it was a plant more than a tree, and on it he was hanged until the hour for afternoon prayer, for it is written in Scripture, “His body shall not remain all night upon the tree.” They buried him outside the city.

On the first day of the week his bold followers came to Queen Helene with the report that he who was slain was truly the Messiah and that he was not in his grave; he had ascended to heaven as he prophesied. Diligent search was made and he was not found in the grave where he had been buried. A gardener had taken him from the grave and had brought him into his garden and buried him in the sand over which the waters flowed into the garden.

The differences from the biblical version are obvious—for example, there’s no mention of

50

“Queen Helene” in any of the gospels. What is important is that it affirms several claims in Scripture. It says Jesus was a real person who was crucified and died the day before Passover, and that he was then buried in a tomb that was discovered empty on the first day of the week.

The Toledot Yeshu also later mentions the Apostle Paul and describes him as a learned man who became a follower of Jesus.

Written in the first century by the Jewish/ Roman historian Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews contains a general history that is mostly considered accurate and reliable. In book 20, chapter 9, he records the martyrdom of James, leader of the Jerusalem church: Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he (Ananus, the high priest) assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.

This account of the death of James—an event that happened during the lifetime of Josephus— affirms that Jesus was a real person and that his own brother was a follower of his teachings.

Josephus may mention Jesus in other writings, but these passages are disputed by some scholars. This particular passage, however, is not disputed.

The Roman historian Tacitus, who lived from the mid-first century to the early second century, records in his book The Annals how Nero persecuted Christians: Christus, from whom the name (Christians) had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

the world find their centre a n d b e co m e p o p u l a r.

(Annals 15.44) Again, Jesus is affirmed as a real person who died as a result of crucifixion. There are also a number of nonbiblical Christian sources that agree with both the non-Christian sources and the biblical account. Their corroboration gives us even more reason to believe the New Testament’s record of what happened to Jesus.

Hegesippus was an early church historian who lived during the second century.

He records the martyrdom of James in more detail than Josephus:

“ THE FAITH OF JAMES AND HIS WILLINGNESS TO DIE FOR HIS FAITH IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS.”

So they went up and threw down the just man, and said to one another: “Let us stone James the Just.” And they began to stone him: for he was not killed by the fall; but he turned, and kneeled down, and said: “I beseech Thee, Lord God our Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”

And, while they were thus stoning him to death, one of the priests, the sons of Rechab, the son of Rechabim, to whom testimony is borne by Jeremiah the prophet, began to cry aloud, saying: “Cease, what do ye? The just man is praying for us.” But one among them, one of the fullers, took the staff with which he was accustomed to wring out the garments he dyed, and hurled it at the head of the just man.

And so he suffered martyrdom; and they buried him on the spot, and the pillar erected to his memory still remains, close by the temple. This man was a true witness to both Jews and Greeks that Jesus is the Christ.

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

The faith of James and his willingness to die for his faith is an important piece of evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, as we’ll see below.

Dialogue with Trypho is a defense of Christianity written in the second century by Justin Martyr. In it he preserves what the Jews claimed happened to Jesus after his death: You (the Jews) have sent chosen and ordained men throughout all the world to proclaim that a godless and lawless heresy had sprung from one Jesus, a Galilean deceiver, whom we crucified, but his disciples stole him by night from the tomb, where he was laid when unfastened from the cross, and now deceive men by asserting that he has risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. (108) This means the Jews believed Jesus was a real person, who had been crucified, died, and buried in a tomb that had then been found empty.

51

Tertullian, another church father from the second century, also preserves the Jewish claim about Jesus’ tomb. He sarcastically writes, “This is He whom His disciples secretly stole away, that it might be said He had risen again” (On the Spectacles, 30). Once more, we see that Jesus died, was buried in a tomb, and that the tomb was found empty.

There are about a dozen facts about Jesus’ death and missing body that are accepted by virtually all New Testament scholars, and all of them are drawn from these sources. The scholars who reject the resurrection still have to explain what happened to Jesus in a way that explains all of them. There have been many alternate theories offered, but, interestingly, none of them can make sense of the data on which those theories are built. Only the New Testament account of the resurrection covers all the bases. If even half of them are used to make a case, the alternate theories still can’t account for those six—only the resurrection can.

This is a powerful tool for defending the historical resurrection, because Christians cannot be accused of playing with their own facts.

Using only the facts that virtually all scholars accept—and that critics and skeptics accept— the only thing that can explain all the data is the historical, bodily resurrection of Jesus. To use this argument, the six facts must not be stated in a way that stacks the deck toward one side or another. They are stated below in a way that is as unbiased as possible.

1. Jesus was crucified. This fact is not disputed. Sometimes this can be referred to as being hung on a tree, but its meaning is the same. This was the form of torture and execution Jesus suffered.

2. Jesus died. Crucifixion was a death penalty carried out by professional executioners. They knew how to kill their victims and how to recognize when someone had died. There is only one account of someone surviving a crucifixion, having been taken down almost immediately after being hung.

3. Jesus was buried. This is the only one of the facts that has any detractors. The scholars who reject this fact do so because crucifixion victims

52

were rarely given back to families to be buried.

Instead, the victims were left on the cross to rot and serve as a warning, or they were thrown in common graves. The idea was not just to kill the victim, but to erase them from society and family. However, the few scholars who reject this fact do not engage other scholars on this point. They don’t present papers or write articles for scholarly journals to try to get their view accepted. In other words, they don’t play by the rules of scholarship that leads to an increased understanding of the field. Instead, they make their views known on television shows and magazines more interested in controversy than truth. Also, the criteria of multiple sources and non-Christian sources are powerful enough to persuade most scholars to ignore the claims of detractors on this point.

4. Two days later, Jesus’ tomb was found empty. Jewish tradition records that the disciples stole the body from the tomb. This is also what the New Testament says the Jews taught about the empty tomb (Matt. 28:11–15). This means Jesus was buried and that the tomb was found empty. After all, the Jews had to know in which tomb Jesus was placed in order to know the tomb was empty. They invented the story to explain the facts they accepted.

5. Followers of Jesus believed they encountered him after his death. Notice the way this fact is stated: it does not say that they actually did encounter Jesus, only that they thought they did. This is important in order to get skeptical scholars on board. The followers who thought they saw and spoke to Jesus include his disciples, followers such as the women at the tomb, the men on the road to Emmaus, and up to five hundred people at once.

6. Enemies of Jesus believed they encountered him after his death. Again, this fact has to be stated in a way that allows for the possibility, but it is one of the hardest facts for an alternate theory to explain. In particular, there are two enemies of Jesus that have to be explained. One is Saul of Tarsus, who became the Apostle Paul. Saul was a well-educated and committed Pharisee who correctly recognized that Jesus was a heretic who deserved death—that is, unless Jesus

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

“USING ONLY THE FACTS THAT VIRTUALLY ALL SCHOLARS ACCEPT—AND THAT CRITICS AND SKEPTICS ACCEPT—THE ONLY THING THAT CAN EXPLAIN ALL THE DATA IS THE HISTORICAL, BODILY RESURRECTION OF JESUS.”

53

was telling the truth.

Because Saul thought Jesus was a heretic, he persecuted Jesus’ followers (Acts 8:1–3; 9:1–2). He was on his way to Damascus when something happened to him that radically changed his life (Acts 9:3–19). As a result of that incident, he gave up all comfort and privilege in order to spend the next thirty years or so spreading the teaching of Jesus all over the Mediterranean world.

During that time he was beaten, imprisoned, hungry, shipwrecked, homeless, and finally (according to tradition) beheaded. No alternate theory can account for Paul’s behavior.

But an even tougher enemy to explain is James, the brother of Jesus. During Jesus’ ministry, James did not believe him (John 7:5).

In fact, James thought his brother was insane (Mark 3:21). But shortly after Jesus’ death, something happened to James that made him become a believer. Think about that. What would it take for you to believe that your own brother was God incarnate? In fact, he believed it so strongly that he became the leader of the church in Jerusalem. Not only that, but he was martyred for it. Like Paul, no alternate theory can account for James’ radical transformation. Anyone who rejects the resurrection of Jesus has to come up with an explanation that covers these six facts.

There have been many stories offered up, but all of them fall short.

The “Swoon Theory” says Jesus merely fainted on the cross and revived in the tomb, but that doesn’t explain why Paul and James became believers. Neither does it take Jesus’ brutal

“LIKE PAUL, NO ALTERNATE THEORY CAN ACCOUNT FOR JAMES’ RADICAL TRANSFORMATION.”

54

punishment very seriously. For this theory to be true, it would mean professional executioners could not tell if Jesus was still alive. After awakening in the tomb, Jesus popped his shoulders back in place (they would have been dislocated during crucifixion), stood on ankles that would be barely functional, and rolled away an enormous stone.

Then, wearing no clothes and with gaping open wounds left from the scourging, Jesus walked the seven or so miles to Emmaus, got a bite to eat, walked back to Jerusalem, and travelled anonymously through the streets without causing a commotion. Finally, he had to find his followers and break into their locked room without any of them noticing, and then lie to them to try to convince them that he had risen from the dead. For all of that to happen would arguably be a bigger miracle than the resurrection itself.

Another theory says the witnesses went to the wrong tomb. But that doesn’t actually explain

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

why the tomb was found empty. If it were known that they went to the wrong tomb, then that means people knew where the right tomb was.

And since they knew where the right tomb was, all the Romans or Jews would have had to do was to open the tomb to find the body. If the body was in the tomb, then Christianity would be dead. But even the Jews confirmed it was not the wrong tomb, since they said the body was stolen by the disciples, meaning they knew that the actual tomb was found empty. This theory also fails to explain Paul and James, as well as the followers of Jesus who believed they saw him.

The story that the body was stolen has the same problems: it does not explain Paul and James, or why followers of Jesus say they saw Jesus. Who had a motive to steal the body anyway? Not the Romans or the Jews—they wanted Christianity obliterated, not for the movement to continue. And the disciples had no motive either—they had nothing to gain from taking the body; every one of them (John excepted) was imprisoned, tortured, beaten, and ultimately killed for proclaiming the resurrection. (Although traditions may vary on how or where the apostles died, no tradition says that any of them died of natural causes except John.)

They spread all over the known world—from Britain, to Ethiopia, to India—to proclaim the message of Jesus. They gave up all the comforts and stability of family, were persecuted, beaten, imprisoned, starved, and eventually killed for spreading the gospel, which centered on the claim that Jesus was resurrected from the dead.

They would have had to be willing to die for a lie they concocted and that brought them no advantage. Who does that? People die for lies, but not ones they make up themselves.

Some people say that Jesus’ appearances didn’t actually happen but were merely elaborations of his followers’ hallucinations. That sounds reasonable, but it would have had to have been a pretty incredible hallucination— one shared by over three thousand people who all hallucinated the same thing at the same time and remembered it the same way. Hallucinations are mental projections unique to the individuals experiencing them, and as such they can’t be

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

simultaneously and precisely communicated to other people. This theory also doesn’t explain Paul or James—people don’t radically reorient their lives based on a brief hallucination, nor do they spend the remaining twenty or thirty years of their lives travelling around the world trying to convince other people that their hallucination was a spatiotemporal event. They certainly don’t die for them. Even supposing that there was a mass hallucination—which somehow included Paul, James, and the other disciples—this still doesn’t explain why the tomb was empty. If it were just a hallucination, then the body would have been there.

The “Substitute Theory” says that Jesus had a twin who was crucified in his place. Even supposing Jesus did have a twin (a big assumption, considering that there’s no documentary evidence to substantiate it) who loved him enough to undergo the agonizing death of crucifixion so that Jesus could return to Jerusalem and convert more skeptics, it (again) doesn’t explain the empty tomb or the conversion of Paul and James.

The tomb would still have a body in it. Two variations of the twin theory (or substitution theory) are popular in Islam, according to the Qur’an.

And for their saying, “We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the apostle of Allah”—though they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but so it was made to appear to them. Indeed those who differ concerning him are surely in doubt about him: they do not have any knowledge of that beyond following conjectures, and certainly they did not kill him. Rather Allah raised him up toward Himself, and Allah is allmighty, all-wise. (Sura 4:157–158) Only the body is crucified, not the soul; therefore, Jesus wasn’t really crucified. However, a body without a soul is still dead, and only a body can be crucified. Instead of countering the claim of resurrection, the Qur’an simply makes a confusing dodge that still fails to account for Paul, James, and (once again) the empty tomb.

The other popular claim in Islam comes from the Gospel of Barnabas, a medieval forgery.

55

“EVEN IF WE USE ONLY HALF OF THE EVIDENCE ALLOWED BY CRITICS AND SKEPTICS, THE CASE FOR THE RESURRECTION STILL STANDS—IT’S THE ONLY EXPLANATION THAT COVERS ALL THE FACTS.”

It claims that God made Judas look and sound exactly like Jesus so that when the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, they took Judas instead.

According to chapter 217, “Truly I say that the voice, the face, and the person of Judas were so like to Jesus, that his disciples and believers entirely believed that he was Jesus.” Judas, then, was tried and crucified, not Jesus. Jesus hid himself and then pretended to be resurrected from the dead. This story still cannot account for the empty tomb, since Judas’s body would still be buried there.

The most popular explanation held by nonChristian scholars today is the “Legend Theory.”

Often it is articulated as something like “From Jesus to Christ,” meaning there is a difference between the Jesus of history and the Christ

56

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

of Christianity. But this theory explains very little—like Paul and James and the empty tomb.

It also doesn’t explain why the first witnesses of the empty tomb and first witnesses of the risen Christ are women. In the first century, women were considered so frivolous that their testimony was not trusted in a court of law. Why would a legend include the least credible witnesses in society, rather than close confederates such as Peter or John? Also, the legend would have had to develop during the lifetimes of the apostles who were commissioned to preserve the integrity of the gospel, not adapt it to their own purposes. It is not very likely a legend could gain steam when the apostles were around to make sure it did not spread.

The best way to counter the Legend Theory is to show what first-century Christians did believe about him just after the crucifixion: For I passed on to you as most important what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. Then He appeared to over 500 brothers at one time; most of them are still alive, but some have fallen asleep.

Then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles. (1 Cor. 15:3–7) Paul says he is handing down what he also received—specifically, the tradition (i.e., the codified beliefs) that preceded him. Since he received this tradition (he learned it from someone else), it stands to reason that this statement of beliefs predates his own conversion. Galatians 2:1 says Paul went to Jerusalem for the second time fourteen years after his conversion. (This is probably the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27–30, since no prior visits are mentioned except the one just after his conversion.

Incidentally, Josephus mentions the Judean famine, dating it to about AD 46–48.) If Paul visited Jerusalem around the time of the famine, then if we subtract fourteen years from that date (AD 46–48), we might date Paul’s conversion

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

between AD 31 and 35. Since the creed precedes his conversion, we can infer it was established no later than five years after the resurrection.

What’s particularly interesting is its theological care and precision: Jesus was already called Christ (so there was no “development” from Jesus-the-good-teacher to Jesus-the-promisedMessiah); he paid for our sins (so it wasn’t a “later interpretation” imposed by those who wanted to use his death as the basis for their religious authority); it references the Hebrew Bible (which means he was already understood to be the fulfillment of the prophecies and ceremonial laws); and it lists witnesses who could still be questioned at that time. The “Legend Theory” withers under such a powerful early summary of the Christian faith.

Even if we use only half of the evidence allowed by critics and skeptics, the case for the resurrection still stands—it’s the only explanation that covers all the facts. Paul has no qualms about pointing out Christianity’s most vulnerable point, because he knows that he’s telling the truth and that the facts bear it out.

The resurrection explains far more than just these six facts, of course. It makes sense of all facts—period. Because it confirms Jesus was telling the truth about himself, it confirms the entire biblical witness. And because the God of the Bible is the creator of all things outside of himself, he is the creator of all things that can be known and all the ways by which we know them.

God is the necessary precondition for any fact that can be known in the first place. Although many stories have been invented over the last two thousand years to explain what happened to Jesus at his death and the two days that followed, none of them have stood up to Paul’s challenge.

The resurrection gives us assurance that we can run our race well and not grow weary in doing good, for in due time we will reap the rewards of the rich inheritance in Christ—if we don’t give up.

DOUG POWELL (Master of Arts in apologetics, Biola Uni-

versity) is the author of ten books, a contributor to the Apologetics Study Bible, and the developer of seven Selfless Defense apps. As a musician, he has released nine albums.

57

S EVE N STA NZAS

Easter

by JOHN UPDIKE

Make no mistake: if He rose at all it was as His body; if the cell’s dissolution did not reverse, the molecules reknit, the amino acids rekindle, the Church will fall.

It was not as the flowers, each soft Spring recurrent; it was not as His Spirit in the mouths and fuddled eyes of the eleven apostles; it was as His flesh: ours.

The same hinged thumbs and toes, the same valved heart that–pierced–died, withered, paused, and then regathered out of enduring Might new strength to enclose.

58

Let us not mock God with metaphor, analogy, sidestepping, transcendence; making of the event a parable, a sign painted in the faded credulity of earlier ages: let us walk through the door.

The stone is rolled back, not papier-mâché, not a stone in a story, but the vast rock of materiality that in the slow grinding of time will eclipse for each of us the wide light of day.

And if we will have an angel at the tomb, make it a real angel, weighty with Max Planck’s quanta, vivid with hair, opaque in the dawn light, robed in real linen spun on a definite loom.

Let us not seek to make it less monstrous, for our own convenience, our own sense of beauty, lest, awakened in one unthinkable hour, we are embarrassed by the miracle, and crushed by remonstrance.

JOHN UPDIKE (1932–2009) was a Pulitzer Prize-winning American novelist, as well as a poet and short story writer.

“Seven Stanzas at Easter” from Collected Poems, 1953-1993 by John Updike, copyright © 1993 John Updike. Used by permission of Alfred A. Knopf, an imprint of Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House LLC. All rights reserved.

59

KNOW WHAT YOU BELIEVE With over twenty-five years of radio broadcasting and magazine publishing, our mission is help Christians “know what they believe and why they believe it” through conversational theology.

Visit us at whitehorseinn.org to learn more and browse the archives.

WHITEHORSEINN.ORG

04

BOOK REVIEWS

Book Reviews 62

64

66

John Knox

Luther on the Christian Life: Cross and Freedom

Eve: A Novel

by Jane Dawson

by William Paul Young

by Carl R. Trueman

REVIEWED BY

REVIEWED BY

REVIEWED BY

Glenn A. Moots

Adam S. Francisco

Brooke Ventura

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

61

BOOK REVIEWS

“Churching it Like a Scythian” John Knox

by Jane Dawson Yale University Press, 2015 , 334 pages (hardcover), $45.00 n her new biography of John Knox, Jane Dawson asks an insightful question: If Knox had died sooner than 1572, how would his career and character have been assessed? After all, a disappointed Knox, deep in “dolour,” wished many times for death, and there were many occasions when Knox reasonably expected to die at the hands of his political or religious enemies. Knox tempted violence as a young man by theatrically carrying a claymore in the entourage of Scottish reformer George Wishart, cheated death as a French galley slave, survived clandestine journeys to and around Britain, ministered unflinchingly in Edinburgh during the plague, and unapologetically chose sides during civil wars. Yet despite his own wish to die and the malice of his opponents, God spared Knox for a long and storied career.

That career is now chronicled most exper tly by Professor Dawson of the University of Edinburgh.

Dawson has not only published extensively on Scottish history but also recently unearthed letters between Knox and his close friend Christopher Goodman, an archival discovery enhancing this biography. Her presentation of Knox is objective but sympathetic, giving full treatment to Knox’s virtues and vices as well as his pastoral heart and self-doubt. It is not quite the rehabilitation that Dawson promises, but neither friend nor foe of Knox can

I

62

content themselves with anything less than the full picture contained in Dawson’s deliberate narrative.

Knox is best known for his leadership in the Scottish Reformation, particularly his sermon in Perth that sparked a Protestant riot. His History of the Reformation in Scotland likewise shaped Scotland’s religious identity. Knox also famously rejected the 1552 Book of Common Prayer, a protest that continued in exile from “Bloody Mary” on the continent. He collaborated in the creation of the Book of Common Order, the metrical psalter, the (subversive) Geneva Bible, the Scottish Confession of Faith, and the First Book of Discipline. Knox also established the ethos of the Regulative Principle.

Despite contemporary Presbyterians eschewing these traditional elements with alarming frequency, it is impossible to imagine the Reformed faith, particularly Presbyterianism, without Knox.

Knox also served as a model prophet before rulers and advanced a corresponding political theology of resistance—a legacy demonstrated by the 1766 republication in Philadelphia of Knox’s The First Blast of the Trumpet agai ns t the Mo ns t ro us Regiment of Women (1588) that was no doubt a response to the Stamp Act. (Knox’s more robust theory of rebellion wasn’t articulated, however, until 1564.) James VI testified to Knox’s revolutionary reputation when he exclaimed that had Knox’s three surviving children been men instead of women, he would not have enjoyed his three kingdoms in peace. James was right.

Knox was loathe to give peace to the three Marys that preceded James in Scotland and England.

He wrote his First Blast against both Mary of Guise and Mary Tudor, gave powerful spiritual momentum to the overthrow of Mary of Guise,

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

and administered hours of personal torment to Mary, Queen of Scots.

Knox’s legacy came not only from his pen but also from authoritative preaching. Fifteenyear-old James Melville recalled that the application portion of Knox’s sermon, delivered after thirty minutes of exposition, caused the listener to shudder and tremble such that he could no longer hold his pen. Remarkably, this was in 1571 when Knox was physically faltering and spending most of his time in bed. Over a decade before, Thomas Randolph compared Knox’s battlefield preaching to the Lords of the Congregation to having five hundred trumpets blown in one’s ears.

Knox’s life’s work can be summarized as his unshakable conviction that Scotland was a nation covenanted before God and accountable for reform from the accretions and idolatry of Rome. Such conviction permeates Knox’s History, and it determined not only subsequent impressions of Knox but also the longstanding Scottish belief that they were a people of God. Warning against national sins and inevitable judgment, Knox’s extant work evinces little difference in his mind between Scotland and Old Testament Israel. His own self-appointed role as mediating prophet necessitated preaching on public affairs. Knox continually threatened to withdraw from political life but was inevitably drawn back in, laboring without hesitation and often worn to exhaustion.

But all of this is largely grist for the mill of Knox’s admirers over the centuries. Dawson also reminds us that Knox’s belief in the covenanted nation sometimes drew him into a contradictory cul-de-sac. The preacher advancing active resistance to avoid national judgment was eventually won over by the virtues of ecclesiastical unity.

Knox warmed to separatists within the Church of England in the late 1560s, for example, but withheld his approval for their secessionist schemes despite their use of his own prior arguments. Such dilemmas exemplified the oscillation of Reformed political theologians between the triumphant idea of a national

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

“Knox’s life’s work can be summarized as his unshakable conviction that Scotland was a nation covenanted before God.”

church and the siege mentality of a persecuted minority. In pursuit of reform, Knox confused opponents with enemies and imbued politics with righteousness to the point of threatening excommunication for Protestant allies of Mary, Queen of Scots. He even refused to concede that Mary herself was capable of repentance and he had gloated over the death of Mary of Guise.

Not surprisingly, Knox was likewise prone to polarities and stereotypes and not given to particulars or subtleties. Throughout his career, he proved less than adept at building effective alliances or taking prudent advice. He came to acquire the reputation of “churching it like a Scythian” (as John Jewel cleverly put it in a letter to Peter Martyr). In other words, Knox drank undiluted reform just as the Scythians drank undiluted wine. He readily defamed his opponents but resisted criticism of himself. Dawson frequently asserts that Knox was inclined to “shoot first and ask questions later” and tended to see the glass as “permanently half empty.” The misogynist tone of Knox’s First Blast made him repellent to Elizabeth I and blunted any further penetration that either Knox or Geneva (i.e., Calvin) could make into the Church of England.

This was a blow to Knox, who “regarded himself as an Englishman by adoption” and who devoted so much of his early ministry to England (rather than Scotland) that he was mocked for having an English accent. Furthermore, the man who boldly wielded the claymore as a youth was sometimes quick to shrink back from a fight.

63

BOOK REVIEWS

Dawson’s book provides almost all of these facts elegantly and precisely, but it should not be approached by general readers without some caution. Dawson’s command of the historical particulars could prove frustrating for readers desiring more explanation and elaboration from such a relatively economical volume. Also, Dawson shares the historian’s fastidious insistence on quoting early modern authors verbatim, implicitly demanding a shared appreciation for sixteenth-century grammar and spelling. Also, like most historians, she is loath to offer commentary or insight until the end of the book. When was Knox clearly right or wrong in declarations about his contemporaries, for example? Dawson usually offers such judgments only obliquely.

Nevertheless, Dawson’s volume can be read profitably not only for its academic merits but also to spur meditation upon historical providence and the weary pilgrimage that men like Knox endured for the sake of ecclesiastical reform.

GLENN A. MOOTS is Professor and Chair, Philosophy and

Political Science Director, The Forum for Citizenship and Enterprise.

A Theologian of the Cross Luther on the Christian Life: Cross and Freedom Theologians on the Christian Life Series

by Carl R. Trueman Crossway, 2015, 224 pages (paperback), $17.99 artin Luther’s historical significance is not only indisputable, it is also hard to overstate. His effort to clear away the artificial and arbitrary trappings of the Roman church in order to bring it in line with the teachings of the Bible was the impetus to the Protestant Reformation, a late medieval event that in some ways paved the way to the modern world. This has made Luther a common reference in historical

M

64

literature and contemporary theological discourse. In fact, few historical figures have received as much attention. So there is a tremendous amount of sources covering every aspect of the Reformer’s life and theology.

Why another book on him then? Like most influential figures, Luther is often misunderstood. This is particularly prevalent in contemporary evangelicalism and is one of the reasons Carl R. Trueman’s Luther on the Christian Life is worth the read. Throughout, he draws attention to how radically different and “deeply alien” his theology (and context) was in comparison to modern evangelicalism.

He starts with a basic yet complete biography. In just over twenty pages he covers the course of the Reformer’s dramatic life from the events leading to his trial and excommunication (1517–1521) and all that transpired up until the day he uttered Psalm 31:5 just before he took his last breath (1546): “Into your hands I commit my spirit; you have redeemed me, O Lord, faithful God.” This is followed, in the subsequent chapters, by an incisive examination of Luther’s theology, particularly as it relates to the Christian life.

Here is where Trueman really distinguishes himself as both a historical and pastoral theologian of the highest caliber. He begins where Luther began to make his distinct theological mark as a theologian of the cross—at the Heidelberg Disputation. Such a theologian confesses the “visible and manifest”—the a posteriori—“things” of God as he revealed them in a particular way in and through the person and work of Jesus. This is contrasted with the course many a medieval theologian took by speculating “upon the invisible things of God.” This Luther called a theology of glory, and he spent over two decades teaching against it.

It is only through Christ that the good and gracious nature of God is revealed to us, especially in his atoning work on the cross. The way this news—this good news—reaches sinners is through the word of God. Luther certainly believed this word was located in the text of

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

Scripture, but Trueman reminds us that as a preacher to Germans, many of whom were illiterate, he often emphasized the preached word of God, for that was where God especially dealt with sinners by convicting them of their sin and condemnation before the law. The law of God was never complete, however, unless it was attended by the proclamation of the gospel whereby terrified consciences were comforted by the accomplished fact of Christ’s crucifixion for sin and resurrection for justification.

Trueman deals in chapter 4 with the implications this fundamental reorientation of Christian theology had on public worship. The Roman Mass was often regarded as a good work offered to God by Christians, Luther charged in Concerning the Order for Public Worship (1523). So he reformed it to ensure that the liturgy was not (and could not be seen as) something men and women performed for God but that its order allowed the “the word of God free course among us.”

It took quite some time, but finally Germans could worship and receive the word of God in their native tongue by 1526.

Later in the book, Trueman explains Luther’s “highly sacramental” theology. To the modern evangelical, this aspect of the Reformer’s thought might look basically Catholic, but it could certainly be said that, in restoring a biblical understanding of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, he understood them as evangelical or gospel. Baptism—water combined with the word of God—drowned sinners and raised them to new life in Christ. The Lord’s Supper, instead of being viewed as a sacrifice, was taught to be a gift God gives to Christians for the forgiveness of their sins as well as to strengthen them in their struggle “against the world, the flesh, and indeed the Devil.”

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

It was this latter concern—the strengthening of Christians in their life of faith—that drove Luther to write the Small and Large Catechism in 1529. Providing instruction in doctrine and morality, they are in many ways essential for understanding Luther’s basic theological disposition. Trueman does an outstanding job of unpacking their content and connection to Luther’s overall pastoral and pedagogical focus. His treatment of the role good works plays in godly living is summarized particularly well when he writes, “Luther did not wish to see a unilateral emphasis on… grace which would then result in swallowing up the power of the law, eclipsing the holiness of God and effectively underplaying the perilous state in which fallen men and women existed.” Although it is often overshadowed by his profound message of freedom in the gospel, Luther himself placed tremendous emphasis on the nurturing of faith through active study of biblical doctrine and holy living. This was never confused, however, with the sufficiency of Christ’s holiness for the salvation of men and women who cannot live holy lives.

Throughout the book, Tr ueman leaves no stone unturned as he examines these and other central themes of Luther’s theology.

He strikes the right balance between serious scholarship and lucid historical and theological prose, making Luther on the Christian Life both comprehensible and useful for the Christian today. Anyone interested in Reformation theology and spirituality will benefit greatly from this superb book.

ADAM S. FRANCISCO (DPhil) is professor of history and

chair of the History and Political Thought Department at Concordia University in Irvine, California.

65

BOOK REVIEWS

Another Ramshackle Story Eve: A Novel

by William Paul Young Howard Books, 2015, 320 pages (paperback), $16.00 “The first demand any work of art makes upon us is surrender. Look. Listen. Receive. Get yourself out of the way.”

—C. S. Lewis, An Experiment in Criticism n the Parks and Recreation episode “The Camel,” Tom Haverford (played by Aziz Ansari), bon vivant and assistant to Leslie Knope (Amy Poehler), hires a local art student to paint a mural for the city office’s mural competition. The student hands him the final piece, an abstract painting that Tom says “looks like a lizard puking up Skittles.”

He takes it to the meeting where his coworkers are presenting their contributions and is somehow suddenly moved by it. By the end of the episode, he demands that the student make more paintings for him and spends five hours looking at and weeping over the original. It’s a humorous reminder that ar t of any medium requires both patience and thought, something not highly prized in this 140-characters-or-less world.

I’m not quite ready to call William Paul Young’s Eve “art,” but, like Tom Haverford, I’m willing to spend a few hours looking at something I’m initially averse to for the sake of understanding it better.

The story opens when Lilly, a young girl, washes up on the shore of an island somewhere between Earth and another world, unconscious and physically battered. She’s found by John, a Collector, and over the course of a year she

I

66

is medically healed. As she drifts in and out of consciousness, she has several visions or experiences in which she watches the creation of Earth unfold, beginning with the initial six days and ending with Adam’s expulsion from the Garden. She discusses these visions with John and three Scholars, one of whom gives her a mirror that will theoretically show her the truth about herself and give her the ability to stop Eve from “turning” (i.e., sinning), thereby changing the course of redemptive history. Faint tragic memories from her life on Earth continue to haunt her; and by continually reflecting on the horrible image she sees reflected in the mirror, she becomes convinced that she’s unworthy of John and the Scholars’ love, and resolves to return to the Garden to save Eve. When she fails to do that, she’s met by Adonai (i.e., God), and through choosing to trust him—and discovering who he says she is—she is finally truly healed.

One reviewer has said that Eve is a troubling, faulty, and even dangerous story. I can certainly see why he thinks so: Young freely speculates into the mystery of the Fall, postulates attributes about God for which there is no scriptural foundation, and introduces new scenes into the creation narrative that are as awkward and contrived as they are erroneous. We’re left with the impression that salvation isn’t as much humanity being saved from the consequences of our inherited and committed sin as much as it is learning to truly trust God and know ourselves in light of who he says we are.

Nonetheless, I’m not sure that dangerous is the best word to use here. In a promotional video for the book, Young said that he’s not trying to convince the reader to interpret the creation narrative as he does, but to open up a creative space where people can discuss it in order to come to a

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

“While theology can (and does) inform art, there’s a significant loss to both when art is exploited to discuss theological concepts, particularly when those concepts are derived from a canonical text.”

greater understanding of who they are as human beings. He’s not holding up his gloss on the creation account as authoritative; he wants to start a conversation about the story and the assumptions we make about what it means. Therein lies my big quibble with the book—while theology can (and does) inform art, there’s a significant loss to both when art is exploited to discuss theological concepts, particularly when those concepts are derived from a canonical text. This isn’t to say that art can never be used to explore theological themes; simply that it shouldn’t be abused or violated for the sake of making a theological point. C. S. Lewis, Georges Rouault, and Terrence Malick are excellent examples of artists who regularly explore theological topics in their respective mediums to great effect. I think this is the trouble with Eve: stilted, inelegant prose, and overly emotional characters who detract from the story’s provocative and engaging ideas.

In the author’s letter at the end of the book, Young writes that he wants to “explore the feelings and assumptions we make when approaching the biggest questions.” The summary says that the book “opens a refreshing conversation about the equality of men and women within the context of our beginnings, helping us see each other as our Creator

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

does—complete, unique, and not constrained by cultural rules or limitations.” It’s an interesting topic and worthy goal, but the story was told in such a way that I was left wondering what exactly it was the author was trying to say. Space was devoted to describing places and objects (e.g., the Vault, Machiara) that had minimal impact on the story, while scenes like God breastfeeding Adam and Adam becoming pregnant with Eve were almost totally undeveloped. By the end of the book, I was more preoccupied by my own questions than I was captivated by the “bold, unprecedented exploration” of the creation narrative. What are these assumptions he believes we make? How does expanding on the canonical story help us see one another as our Creator does, particularly when the Creator has given us his own “story” that details precisely how he sees his people?

In terms of providing talking points for interdenominational conversation, the story did its job; but when it came to enabling Christians to better understand who they are as beings created in the image of God, it adds to the confusion more than it elucidates popular assumptions.

BROOKE VENTURA is associate editor of Modern Reformation. She lives with her family in Ontario, Canada.

67

05

GEEK SQUAD

Answering Objections to the Resurrection

by Shane Rosenthal

1

BIASED SOURCES

Those who wrote the NT documents were “believers” and therefore biased. These texts are not historical documents but articles of faith.

2

HALLUCINATION

Though they may have thought they saw Jesus, perhaps it was just in their minds.

R E B U T TA L

R E B U T TA L

1 Everyone is biased. A lawyer building a case is biased

in favor of his client, but that does not invalidate the evidence.

2 What accounts for the particular “faith” of these early disciples and the rise of early Christianity? Why were they willing to die for this faith?

68

1 The disciples were skeptics who needed to touch

Christ’s wounds.

2 What about the appearances to non-disciples (James

and John)?

3 What about Christ’s appearance to over five hundred

witnesses at once?

4 This theory does not explain the empty tomb.

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

3

STOLEN BODY

Jesus really did die on the cross, but the disciples stole his body. This is the oldest objection (Matt. 28:11–15; Justin Martyr, Dialog with Trypho, 108).

5

SPIRITUAL RESURRECTION

Jesus was not raised from the dead bodily but spiritually (in the hearts of the disciples).

R E B U T TA L

1 This is not the claim of the earliest witnesses. Thomas R E B U T TA L

1 How did the disciples overcome the armed guards?

(Matt. 27:65; Acts 4:1). Alfred Edersheim says that a temple guard consisted of “ten men.” Were all really asleep? Did no one awaken? (Matt. 28:13).

2 What was the motive for their actions and later fabrication? Why did they suffer persecution for the rest of their lives knowing it was all a hoax?

3 This theory does not explain the eyewitness accounts of Christ’s resurrection from numerous sources and the conversion of doubting members of Jesus’ family or of Saul.

4 Why did so many Jews begin worshiping on Sunday?

needed to touch Christ’s wounds. Also, what about the empty tomb?

6

TWIN / LOOK-ALIKE

Jesus died, but a twin or look-alike later claimed he was the risen Christ. Conversely, someone who looked like Jesus may have been killed by mistake. According to the Quran: “They never crucified him—they were made to think that they did” (Sura 4:157–158).

R E B U T TA L

4

THE JESUS MYTH

1 This theory does not explain the empty tomb.

2 James and other members of Jesus’ immediate family

Jesus never existed. His story is an attempt to historicize ancient pagan myths about dying and rising gods.

R E B U T TA L

are skeptics in the Gospels (Mark 3:21; John 7:5), and only become believers after reports of the resurrection (Acts 1:14).

3 Thomas, who was a twin, refused to believe in the resurrection unless he could put his hand in Jesus’ wounds (John 20:24–30).

I L L U S T R AT I O N B Y C H R I S T O P H E R D E L O R E N Z O

1 What accounts for the fact that so many first-century

citizens of Jerusalem believed this account to be true, given that many would have known that these things never happened? Why are they corroborated by so many sources?

2 Why were the NT texts written the way they were? Why multiple versions? Why women eyewitnesses? Why was Jesus thought to be insane? Why didn’t he have perfect foreknowledge?

3 Why would the authors of this myth continue to spread this lie in the face of great suffering and death?

4 Even skeptic Bart Ehrman finds this theory to be without merit.

M ODERNRE FOR M ATION .OR G

7

CANCELLED OUT

All religious traditions make miraculous claims.

R E B U T TA L

1 Making claims and vindicating those claims are different

things.

2 The resurrection, if true, merits a reconsideration of

Jesus’ claims.

69

GEEK SQUAD

8

MISPLACED BODY

Jesus’ body was placed in the wrong tomb. When the correct tomb was visited, the body appeared to be missing.

R E B U T TA L

11

EMBELLISHMENT

Jesus was a real teacher, but the events of his life were not written down until much later, and were incorporated with legends. The first century was a superstitious age, and it was common to believe in such nonsense.

1 Joseph of Arimathea and other followers of Jesus

witnessed the burial location (Matt. 25:57–59; Mark 15:43–46), and a temple guard was at the tomb.

2 Though this offers an explanation of the empty tomb, it does not explain the transformation of the disciples, the boldness of their proclamation during persecution, and the conversion of skeptics.

9

R E B U T TA L

1 There is strong evidence that the NT was written before

AD 70.

2 What about the eyewitness testimony of 1 Corinthians

15, written in the 50s, and its citation of the creed dating to the 30s?

3 Attempts to demythologize the NT have failed.

4 The NT shows Jewish skepticism, not superstition.

SWOON THEORY 12

Jesus did not actually die on the cross but simply fell into a coma and recovered in the tomb.

R E B U T TA L

1 See JAMA (www.godandscience.org/apologetics/

deathjesus.pdf).

2 The first witnesses reported a resurrection and ascen-

sion, but if Jesus was still alive and recovering, he would’ve been seen.

3 How would this persuade Jesus’ family members?

FAULTY TRANSMISSION

Jesus may have existed, but we can’t know much about him since the texts we have are unreliable copies of copies of copies, with numerous mistakes and additions (Bart Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus).

R E B U T TA L

1 How do we know what the mistakes are unless we have

a good idea what the original texts said?

2 Not copies of copies of copies, but multiple lines of

transmission we can use to compare.

10

NO WAY TO PROVE

Even if it did happen, there is no way to prove it, since it is an unrepeatable event. Miracles are impossible.

3 The Bible is by far the most reliable work of antiquity;

98% of the copy differences are insignificant. Out of 60,000 lines of Greek text, only forty are in doubt and these don’t relate to core beliefs.

R E B U T TA L

1 All historical claims fall under this critique. History is not

math or science; it’s an art.

2 The belief that miracles are impossible is a religious dogma.

70

SHANE ROSENTHAL is executive producer of the White

Horse Inn radio broadcast (www.whitehorseinn.org).

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

BECOME A SILENT CO-HOST Through your monthly support as a partner of White Horse Inn, you will help others rediscover the riches of the Reformation. Our partnership benefits include a subscription to Modern Reformation, private partner podcast or CDs, books, and invitations to special events.

WHITEHORSEINN.ORG/SUPPORT

06

B AC K PAG E

Core Christianity

by Michael S. Horton

n my new book, set to be released in April, I take another look at the primary doctrines of our Christian faith. Continuing the project that began with The Christian Faith and Pilgrim Theology, this new book, Core Christianity: Finding Yourself in God’s Story (Zondervan, 2016), was written to help you answer basic questions about what we believe.

That’s really the first question that needs to be addressed: “Why should you be interested in Christian doctrine?” We study things we care about. We pursue an education to work in a particular field. People invest enormous amounts of time and energy in sports, culture, business, child-rearing, learning a new technology, and various hobbies. It’s all about desire. What do we really love? What are the most important things in life?

In some cases, doctrine seems irrelevant because there is a firewall between faith and reason, believing and thinking. “I just believe,” people say, but what do they believe? And why?

The average person on the street relegates religion to the realm of irrational feelings, not facts, and dismisses it accordingly. To such people, belief is completely subjective. The question is not whether it’s true, but whether it works for you. That might be a legitimate assumption for other religions and self-help philosophies, but Christianity rests on historical, public claims. These claims are either true or false; they cannot be true for some people and not for others.

I

72

Another question that must be answered is one some of our friends and family, even in our own churches, ask us: “Shouldn’t we just concentrate on loving Jesus and get on with life?”

Imagine that you’ve just been told you have cancer. You’re going to need surgery immediately.

As you tell the story to your spouse or friend, you are asked details about the diagnosis, the symptoms, and the cure. You shrug and say, “I’m not sure. I’m not a doctor, so I’ll just go with the flow.”

Well, what about the doctor? What are his or her credentials? Has the surgeon performed this operation before? What’s the success rate? Again you shrug. “Hmmm. I haven’t really checked.”

Obviously, anyone who loves you is going to press you to take it all a little more seriously and do some homework. “Look,” you reply. “I just have to trust the process and hope it all turns out all right. Right now it’s working for me.”

This is an absurd scenario for most of us. We would take our physical health more seriously than this person. But what about our spiritual health? Despite medical advances, one day you and I will die. In comparison with eternity, whatever life span we’re given seems pretty brief. The time we have now is for asking the big questions—and finding answers. That is what theology or doctrine is all about: exploring the most important convictions that shape our outlook, desires, hopes, and lives. For more on what we believe and why what we believe matters, I hope you’ll check out Core Christianity.

MICHAEL S. HORTON is editor-in-chief of Modern Reformation.

Vol. 25 No. 2 Mar/Apr 2016

A SIMPLE STORY COMES TO LIFE With every issue of this year’s Modern Reformation, we’re unraveling the compelling stories

of God’s people, giving a glimpse into the world in which God is at work—a world much like our own.

Along the way, we’ll discover how our stories make sense only in God’s story. .

WHITEHORSEINN.ORG/BACKISSUES