Bible Interpretation

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about BIble Interpretation:

Q: When I talk with other Christians, especially those from different denominations, we often have different ways of understanding certain Bible passages. Is it possible to tell who is correct, and how would that be done?

Correctly understanding the Bible can sometimes be a challenging task when we encounter so many different interpretations surrounding us. Because people have their own personal biases and denominations desire to defend certain doctrines, we arrive at varying conclusions regarding the way certain passages are to be understood, but two contradictory interpretations cannot both be true.

First, it is helpful to distinguish between interpretation and application. On one hand, a certain passage may, in fact, have many applications for Christians. A verse which speaks of one thing may be applied by the individual in a variety of ways, depending on their circumstances. On the other hand, there can be no more than one correct meaning or interpretation of a given passage. If several people have different understandings of a passage’s meaning, it is possible that all of them are incorrect, but no more than one may be correct.

Sometimes determining this correct understanding is very simple. For example, when Jesus says, “Every man who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart,” there is no doubt about what He is saying. Other times, finding the meaning of a passage takes deeper study. On those occasions, here are a few important principles:

The first principle is to approach the Bible to find out its conclusion rather than simply using it to defend your own. It is important that we let the Bible speak to us rather than attempting to force it to confirm our predetermined conclusions.

Context is always your best tool. Do not look at the verse alone, but look at the verses around it, the rest of the chapter, and even the rest of the book of the Bible in which you find it. Look even to other books of the Bible for passages with similar themes that can help to clarify its meaning. Always start with very clear and straightforward verses and use them to help you understand the more difficult verses—not the reverse.

Be aware what it is you are reading. Some statements are intended to be taken literally, and in those cases we should do so. In other cases (such as Apocalyptic Visions and the Parables of Jesus), the passage is intended to communicate something deeper. Consider what kind of writing it is. Is it a Psalm? A Historical account? An Epistle (or letter)? A parable? A vision? Who is writing and for whom are they writing it? This will all assist in understanding what is meant by the author.

How does the text relate to Jesus? How does a given understanding of the verse relate to Jesus? All Scripture ultimately points to Jesus, so if Jesus is central in an interpretation, it is a good sign. If an interpretation pushes Jesus aside or ignores him, this is evidence that things may have gone off track.

The Bible’s message is always consistent with itself. If a passage seems to contradict a passage which clearly states something elsewhere, further study is necessary. Reconsider your understanding of the less clear passage. It may even be wise at this point to consult a pastor, especially one who knows the Greek and Hebrew languages in which the Bible was originally written.

Even after considering these principles, there may be very rare occasions when it is just not possible to find a definite answer. Occasionally we find mysterious passages in the Bible which we simply do not have the capacity to understand. Examples of this include the phrase “because of the angels” in 1 Corinthians 11:10 and some of the more obscure images in the book of Revelation. In these cases, we simply return to the clear passages of the Scriptures to guide us.

Obviously, this is not all there is to Biblical interpretation. The typical seminary course on Bible Interpretation (called Hermeneutics) includes as much as 30-40 hours of classroom study, but these principles, along with a basic understanding of how to read literature in general, are typically sufficient to address the questions which the average Christian will encounter in their daily Bible reading or discussion with their friends and neighbors.

Israel

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about Israel:

Q:  How do the physical locations of Israel/Jerusalem and the physical descendants of the Israelites figure into God's will as expressed in prophecy?  How does this compare to the position of the New Testament regarding the earthly nation of Israel?

When reading any portion of the Bible, there are some important principles to keep in mind.  First, when we encounter a section of scripture that seems unclear or confusing, we first look to the very clear statements found elsewhere in scripture regarding the topic, and let them inform our understanding of the less clear sections.  Secondly, the entire Bible is ultimately about Jesus and everything contained in it points to Him.  A correct understanding of the Bible always centers on Jesus, and any interpretation that does not center on Jesus is defective.

In Old Testament times, there was a physically identifiable area of land, named Israel, which God promised would be the homeland of the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  The nation of people descended from these men was also named Israel.  

By the end of the Old Testament, we find that Israel, as an independent nation, no longer existed, that both its northern and southern kingdoms had been conquered by outside forces, and that many of their people exiled throughout the Middle-east. 

Based on the promises made to Eve and Abraham in the book of Genesis, we know that God's intention was that Israel would give birth to a certain man who would save the people of all nations from God's wrath.  This descendant was Jesus, and all promises of the Old Testament are fulfilled in Him.  

Jesus predicted in the Gospels that Jerusalem as it existed would be destroyed, which took place in A.D. 70.  Then, after an unspecified period of time, He would return again to judge the living and the dead—an event which we are still awaiting.  Today, we live in the time between these events.  When Jesus does return, the Bible says that He will raise all the dead and give eternal life to all who have trusted in Him, making a new creation in which they will live.

Jerusalem existed to be the place where the worship of the One True God took place by way of sacrifice.  This sacrifice was not merely the sacrifices of the temple, but more importantly, the sacrifice to end all sacrifice--that of Jesus' crucifixion.  The New Jerusalem, foretold in Revelation 21, will likewise be the place where God is worshipped, but this time apart from sacrifice, because Jesus has already been offered as the final and all-sufficient sacrifice.  There is also no temple there due to the direct and unveiled presence of God in that place which makes it unnecessary.

Biblically, Israel and Jerusalem are much broader concepts than mere physical locations.  Israel, although it had a definable ethnic identity and national borders for a time, was only an initial expression of a much broader reality--the people of God through Christ Jesus, regardless of time or place.  Likewise, Jerusalem, although it had, and still has, a specific geographic identity, is merely a shadow of a greater reality—the gathering of God's people to worship Him, both at the temple in the ancient past and around the throne of the Lamb in eternity, and even today as men and women gather to hear God's Word and receive Him through the Sacraments.  With Jesus at the center, Israel and the Church, Jerusalem and New Jerusalem, are not contradictions, but the worship of the same Jesus from opposite sides of the cross.

Sabbath Day

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about the Sabbath Day:

Q: Since the Ten Commandments say to “Remember the Sabbath Day by keeping it Holy,” then why do Christians worship on Sunday instead of Saturday? Are Christians required to refrain from working on certain days in order to honor the Sabbath Day?

When God created the world, He created for six days, and rested on the seventh, which is Saturday. When God gave the Commandments to Moses, He called this day the Sabbath Day and commanded that the people of Israel also rest that day, which included that they were not allowed to work or engage in certain other activities. Instead, it was typical during Old Testament times for the people to gather and hear and be taught about what was written by Moses and the Prophets.

Beyond merely being wise advice for their physical and mental health, this day also had a meaning which pointed forward to events which would occur in the future—those of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Jesus reflects this idea when He says, “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” (Mt. 11:28 ESV)

In addition, Jesus was charged with offending against the rules of Sabbath observance because He healed a man on the Sabbath (Mt. 12, Mk. 3, Lk. 13), and He was criticized because His disciples picked grain and ate it while walking through a field on the Sabbath. (Mt. 12, Mk. 2, Lk. 6) In response, Jesus makes clear that His presence has fulfilled the Sabbath, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.” (Mt. 12:8 ESV)

In the book of Acts, the first two times that Jesus appears to the disciples after His resurrection, it is on Sunday, and when the Holy Spirit comes to the Christians on Pentecost, it also occurs on a Sunday. It is later recorded throughout the New Testament that when the Apostles gathered for worship, they did so on Sunday, because that was the day on which Jesus rose from the dead.

However, while the Bible does instruct that Christians are expected to gather for worship (Heb. 10:25), it does not specify that they must do on a certain day. Christians throughout history, though, have overwhelmingly chosen to gather on Sunday, since it is the day on which Jesus’ resurrection, His appearances to the disciples, and Pentecost occurred, as well as the fact that Sunday worship was the example set by Jesus’ Apostles.

Elsewhere in the New Testament, Paul even corrects those who seek to require that Christians continue to observe the Sabbath Day or that they worship on a specific day of the week. He says, “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. (Col. 2:16-17 ESV)

He also says, “One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.” (Rom. 14:5 ESV)

Both Jesus and Paul make it clear that for Christians there is not a law regarding they day on which they are to worship, nor is there any longer a requirement that they avoid work or business on a certain day of the week. The book of Hebrews even says, “So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, for whoever has entered God's rest has also rested from his works as God did from his.” (Hebrews 4:9-10 ESV)

Whoever has entered God’s rest through faith in Jesus has already experienced the fulfillment of the Sabbath according to these verses. However, this commandment does still have relevance for Christians. Martin Luther says regarding this commandment, “We should…not despise preaching and God’s Word, but hold it sacred and gladly hear and learn it.”

Even though Christians are not obligated to take a certain day of rest or hold their worship services on a specific day of the week, God does still command that we do not neglect hearing and learning from the Scriptures. Instead, He invites us to read the Bible ourselves as well as gathering with other Christians to hear pastors teach about Jesus and to remember His death and celebrate His resurrection until He comes again.

Old Testament Laws

My Article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about the Old Testament Law:

God’s Laws?

Q: The Bible has many long lists of laws that God gave in the Old Testament. Why don’t Christians still follow all of these rules today?

In the Old Testament, God gives hundreds of laws to the people of Israel after He frees them from slavery in Egypt and as they travel to the land He promised them. During Old Testament times, all of these laws were required to be followed by every Israelite. These Old Testament laws dealt with three areas of Israelite life: Worship, Government, and Morality.

Laws regarding worship, called the Ceremonial Law, include regulations for Israel’s worship of Yahweh. A great number of these laws regard the tabernacle and temple and the ceremonies and sacrifices carried out there. In addition, the Ceremonial Law specified other requirements for the people of Israel to maintain their ritual purity, by forbidding such things as the eating of certain foods such as pork and shellfish, wearing clothing of mixed fabric, trimming of the beard, or being tattooed.

Laws for government, called the Civil Law, include regulations that protect property and provide for the poor and homeless, as well as specifying certain punishments for crimes.

The primary example of the Old Testament’s laws regarding morality is the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20, Deut. 5). The Moral law also includes other laws which serve to clarify or further explain the Ten Commandments.

When considering these laws, it is important to remember that the Bible is not merely a rule-book like the Koran or a collection of wise sayings, such as found in Poor Richard’s Almanac. Instead, the Bible is the true story of God’s actions in history to forgive sins and save humans from eternal punishment by bringing about the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

As we read the Gospels, we find that Jesus endorses many of these laws, but he does not follow others, nor does He require His disciples to do so. In later New Testament books, Paul and the other apostles affirm many of these laws to be good but indicate that Christians need not observe others. Understanding how these Biblical laws from the Old Testament apply to Christians requires careful study and prayerful consideration. The most authoritative way to discern this is to pay attention to which laws the New Testament affirms and which it does not.

Because the laws regarding worship and sacrifice were intended to point forward to Jesus, as explained in the book of Hebrews, and signified by the tearing in half of the temple curtain at Jesus’ death (Mt. 27, Mk. 15, Lk. 23), they were only in force until Jesus had died, and do not apply to Christians today. Similarly, the laws forbidding work on the Sabbath day (Saturday) are specifically mentioned by Jesus (Mt. 12, Mk. 2, Lk. 6) and the New Testament authors (Heb. 4:8-12, Col. 2:16-17) as already fulfilled.

Likewise, the laws regarding government were only applicable to the people of Israel and only as long as that nation existed. This includes the punishments specified for certain moral offenses. Even though the Old Testament specified certain punishments, up to and including death, for certain crimes such as adultery, cursing one’s parents, murder, and idolatry, these punishments are not mandatory for people in New Testament times, even though the related moral laws still hold true. Jesus gives evidence of this when He persuades the Pharisees not to execute the woman caught in adultery (Jn. 8:1-11). He does not condone her action, but He does show forbearance in the carrying out of punishment.

While the laws regarding worship and government were for the people of Israel only, the laws governing morality reflect God’s expectations for all people in all times and places. This is evidenced in the fact that God never criticizes other nations in the Old Testament for what they eat or wear, but He does criticize them for immoral behaviors like adultery and idolatry.

Another test of whether an Old Testament law is still applicable for New Testament people is to consider whether it relates to the Ten Commandments. For example, laws regarding sexual ethics are still applicable because they explain the commandment against adultery, and laws regarding assault are still applicable because they explain the commandment against murder. Laws regarding mixed fabric clothing, pork, and shellfish do not relate to the Ten Commandments, and therefore are not applicable for people today.

Even if we understand these laws correctly, however, it is even more important that we understand that no one can be saved by obeying even these laws, but only by God’s grace through faith in Jesus.

Readers may submit questions to revjpeterson@yahoo.com or to P.O. Box 195; Burt, IA 50522.

Should Christians judge?

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about Matthew 7:1 and judging:

Q: I read in my Bible that God has many moral laws for humanity, but in Matthew 7:1, Jesus says, “Do not judge , lest you be judged.” How can these two things be reconciled?

In recent years, this verse has become one of the most well-known in the entire Bible among Americans, perhaps even surpassing John 3:16 in familiarity. In our present culture, the making of moral or theological judgments is strictly frowned-upon, and anything that could be interpreted as judging is firmly denounced. This, however, is not the position of the Bible or of Jesus.

To begin, it is necessary to look, not just at verse 1 of Matthew 7, but at the entire five verses of the chapter where Jesus makes this statement. Jesus immediately follows by saying in verse 2, “For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.” These words both assume that his hearers actually will judge in some way and reveal that it is not all judging that He warns against, but instead, hypocritical judgments which apply a different standard to another person than one follows himself.

This is further emphasized in the verses which follow. Jesus gives the example of a man attempting to remove a piece of sawdust from another man’s eye. Ironically, the first man actually has a large log in his own eye, which makes the task impossible. Jesus closes by saying, “First take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” Jesus first points out the absurdity of a person making hypocritical judgments, but with His final words, He also instructs that the person who has first gotten his own affairs in order will then assist his neighbor in doing the same. This would be impossible if all judging were unconditionally prohibited.

In addition, we never read one portion of the Bible in exclusion of the others. Instead, we look at the entire history of what God has said through its authors. When we do this, we find Jesus’ Apostles, such as Peter, James, and Paul, making frequent judgments about both doctrine and morality throughout their letters that have been recorded in the New Testament.

We also see numerous instances where the Bible actually commands, requires, or even praises certain types of judging:

• To discipline public sins in the church (Mt. 18, 1 Cor. 5)
• To settle disputes between people in the church (1 Cor. 6)
• To test doctrinal teaching (Mt. 7:15-20, Acts 17:11, 1 Cor. 14:29, 1 Jn. 4:1)
• To test qualifications for church leadership (1 Tim. 3, Titus 2)

These are merely a few of the most obvious examples where Jesus, Luke, and Paul speak favorably regarding instances of judging.

The teaching of Jesus and the testimony of the Bible as a whole are not that judging is unconditionally prohibited, but that the judgments made by Christians are to live up to certain standards. First, they are to be honest rather than hypocritical (Mt. 7, Rom. 2:1). Secondly, the standard for all valid judgments is the teachings and laws of the Bible, and not any cultural or individual opinion. Additionally, not all judgments are to be openly declared for all to hear. Depending on a person’s position of authority and the nature of the issue at hand, there are criteria which determine whether one should warn another person privately or announce a judgment publicly (Mt. 18).

There are certainly situations where the most caring and compassionate thing a person can do would actually be to judge another, for example when family and friends participate in an intervention for a loved one experiencing addictive or harmful behaviors or when police arrest those who are endangering others.

Jesus certainly did not intend that Christians are to approve of all beliefs and actions without discernment. Instead, He is warning those listening at the time and those reading today not to make judgments about others out of self-righteousness rather than compassion or out of hypocritical pride rather than sincere defense of the truth.

Jesus' Resurrection

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about the Resurrection of Jesus:

Q:  Did Jesus actually rise from the dead on the first Easter, or is it a myth intended to teach us something?  How can we know if it is true?

The  resurrection of Jesus is an actual historical event which literally occurred approximately 1980 years ago, but it is not by blind faith that we accept that this event (and the others of Jesus’ life) actually occurred, but because they have been reported to us by reliable eyewitnesses. 

Five books of the Bible report the Resurrection of Jesus and the events of the following 40 days, in which He appeared to His follower alive.  The Gospels of Matthew and John were written by men who were first-hand eyewitnesses to these events.  The Gospel of Mark was written by an associate of Peter, based on his eyewitness testimony, and the Gospel of Luke along with the book of Acts were written by a doctor, based on his interviews of the eyewitnesses. 

The four authors who wrote these books are reporting events which they witnessed or which they heard from the witnesses, much like four television stations might all report the same news event.  Although some people today would insist that these reports are mythical stories, the authors themselves do not portray their reports as mere myths.  Instead, they wrote their reports as historical fact and make it clear that they intend them to be read as such. 

In this light, it would be only reasonable to examine these four authors’ accounts by the same standards applied to other pieces of historical literature of the time.  When this is done, it is found that the resurrection of Jesus actually has more eyewitness reports than many of the major events of Greek and Roman history which we commonly accepted without objection.

Not only do we have more eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus than these other events, but we also have more copies available to verify that the reports of Jesus’ resurrection have been accurately copied than we have of the reports of the other events.  In addition, this great number of available copies are older and more consistent than those of other events of the time.  In fact, I myself have had the privilege of visiting the Special Collections Library at the University of Michigan where I was able to read from copies of Biblical books that were almost 1900 years old, and I still have a CD with images of several of these pages.

Beyond the textual evidence for Jesus’ resurrection, we also can examine the physical evidence.  The founders of every other major religion died and their tombs are visited by countless followers to this day, because their bodies are still there.  On the other hand, the location where Jesus had been buried is uncertain, and nobody has ever produced His body to refute the claim that He rose from the dead. 

The Bible records that some of Jesus’ enemies claimed that the disciples stole His body, but His disciples were as surprised as anyone when they did not find His body, and some thought it had been moved by others.  Additionally, what would be the odds that a few unarmed Jewish fishermen could overpower the trained Roman soldiers who had been assigned to guard the grave to prevent against just such an occurrence?

Other modern objectors have claimed that Jesus did not actually die, but merely passed out, but the details given in the Gospels, especially by Luke, a doctor, clearly describe a man who has died.  Beyond that, Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers—the most proficient executioners in human history, who certainly knew how to make sure that a man was dead. 

Even more, if he had merely passed out, he would not only have needed to survive two nights in a cold, sealed stone tomb, but to do so wrapped in a few dozen pounds of spices and burial cloths, and recover so well as to be able to unseal the tomb from the inside by removing a stone that would typically require at least two men to move.

If all of this were not enough evidence, His own mother and brothers, who would have known His actions most closely, as well as some of His fiercest enemies, such as Saul (later re-named St. Paul) worshipped Him as God.  Only something as miraculous as the resurrection could bring this about.  Furthermore, even under the pressure of torture, none of the disciples who witnessed His resurrection ever retracted their claims. 

There is simply no other explanation to the resurrection of Jesus than that it actually occurred, just as He predicted during His life.

Jesus' Descent into Hell

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about Jesus' descending into hell:

Q: In church, I heard it said in the Apostles’ Creed that Jesus “descended into hell.” Is this true, and if so, why did Jesus go to hell?

In describing Jesus’ death and resurrection, the Apostles’ Creed says that Jesus, “was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell. The third day He rose again from the dead.”

The statement that Jesus “descended into hell” is based on the Apostle Peter’s words in 1 Peter 3:18-20. “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey.” (1 Peter 3:18-20 ESV)

Ancient documents like the Creeds have been handed down to us from other languages, such as Latin, Hebrew, and Greek. The English word “hell” in this sentence of the Creed can be a bit confusing, because it can be used in reference to several different words from these ancient languages. Typically, when English speakers hear this word, we think of the fiery pit described in the book of Revelation where Satan and the demons are destined to be punished for eternity. In this case, “hell” is used as a translation of the Latin word inferna, which literally means “the lower world,” and in the verses mentioned earlier, Peter uses the phrase “in prison” to describe the location of the spirits to whom Jesus proclaimed His message. The place to which Peter and the Creed refer is not the fiery pit spoken of in Revelation, but the place where condemned souls go to await the eternal punishment they will receive on judgment day.

Because the Bible’s coverage of Jesus descending into hell is not extremely broad, there remains a certain layer of mystery surrounding this topic. However, based on other teachings from the Bible, we can draw several conclusions about Jesus descending into hell.

First, Jesus did not spend the entire time between His death and resurrection in hell. As He was being crucified, Jesus told the thief who was being crucified next to Him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43 ESV) According to Jesus words, His spirit, along with that of the thief, were in paradise, not hell following their deaths.

Second, Jesus did not descend into hell to be punished. As Jesus was dying, He declared “It is finished,” indicating that at the moment of His death, the penalty for sin had been fully paid, and required no more suffering on His part. When Jesus was abandoned by God the Father on the cross and died, He had already completely suffered the punishment for the world’s sin. Additionally, in speaking about evil forces, Paul says that Jesus “disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them. (Col. 2:15 ESV)

Third, in the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16), Jesus teaches that after death, souls are irreversibly divided into two places, one for the saved, and one for the condemned. The place to which Jesus descended was a place where condemned souls resided and not the saved. We know this because peter refers to them as being “in prison,” and later says that they are there because “they did not obey.”

Lastly, Jesus did not go and preach to the spirits “in prison” in order to give them a second chance at salvation. At death, a person’s eternal status is permanently decided based on whether they trusted Jesus to save them. This is clearly explained in Jesus teaching in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, as well as the statement in the book of Hebrews that, “it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment.” (Hebrews 9:27 ESV)

Based on these things, we can conclude that Jesus died Friday afternoon, and His spirit was in paradise with God the Father. His body was buried, and on Sunday morning, He was raised to life, at which time He preached to the spirits in prison and then was seen alive by His disciples.

The purpose for which Jesus descended into hell was not to be punished or to give condemned souls a second chance, but instead to proclaim His victory. Like an ancient king would travel through conquered territory to proclaim His victory to His new subjects or a driver takes a victory lap after a race, Jesus descends into hell to proclaim His victory by the cross over Satan, sin, and death.

Readers may submit questions to revjpeterson@yahoo.com or to P.O. Box 195; Burt, IA 50522.

Killing and Murder

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about murder:

Q:  What is meant by “You shall not kill.” in the fifth commandment?  Is there ever a time when it is acceptable to kill?

This commandment from Exodus 20:13 is sometimes translated as “You shall not kill,” most notably by the King James Version and the New American Bible.  Although it is more commonly translated as “You shall not Murder.”  The difference between killing in general and the more specific act of murder is that murder is a killing that is unlawful. 

In order for a killing to be considered murder in the biblical sense, there are three requirements:  First, the killing must be intentional; second, it must be a human that is killed; and third, the killing must be unlawful or unjust. 

For example, if the fifth commandment forbade all killing, Christians and Jews would be required to live life as vegetarians.  If taken to its extreme, a prohibition against killing in general would ultimately forbid Christians from farming, driving, and many other everyday activities which have the potential to cause the death of one creature or another. 

When we look to the rest of the Bible, we see that God gave permission to Noah that he could kill animals in order to eat them.  Elsewhere, we see God specifying that certain animals are to be sacrificed as part of the Old Testament law.  In the Old Testament law, the killing of an animal that belongs to another person is forbidden, but it is treated as a property crime rather than a murder. 

There are a limited number of situations in which the Bible considers even the killing of another human not to be a sin.  The first of these is the case of capital punishment.  In several portions of the Old Testament law, God specifically commands that the leaders of Israel put people to death for certain crimes, such as murder or treason.  We still see this law in use today by our federal government and by many states of our nation. 

The second of these cases is that of a true accident, where the murder did not occur intentionally, but was the result of a mistake on the part of the killer and was not intended to cause death.  This is also reflected in our modern laws where the accidental nature of a killing can reduce or eliminate punishment for the killer.

The third case is that of self-defense.  The Bible never condemns a person for killing another as a result of defending himself or his family from a robber, intruder, or another who is seeking to harm them. 

The last circumstance in which killing is not considered murder by the Bible is the case of a soldier killing in war.  On numerous occasions in the Old Testament, God commands the army of Israel to kill the enemy who is attacking them. 

St. Augustine and Martin Luther both wrote at length concerning the righteousness or unrighteousness of a Christian serving as a soldier and taking part in killing as part of that vocation.  The general consensus arrived at was that it is acceptable for a government to make war for the purpose of defending the people of their nation and that it is even a noble vocation for a Christian to serve as a soldier for the purpose of defending his neighbors, even though that may involve killing soldiers of the enemy army. 

Under these limited circumstances, a killing would not be considered murder from a moral perspective, but otherwise, the Bible considers all instances of one human directly causing the death of another to be murder.  In fact, the Bible even considered the person who desires to murder another person to be guilty of murder in God’s eyes.  (1 John 3:15)

Lenten Traditions

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about Lenten traditions:

Q:  What is Lent?  Why do people give up something they enjoy?  Are there any other traditions associated with Lent?

Much like a school year or a company’s fiscal year differs from our calendar year, there is also a church year that includes seasons and festivals commemorated by Christians.  Because Christmas and Easter are such important festivals for the church, this calendar includes special seasons to prepare for these festivals.  The season of preparation for Christmas is called Advent and the season of preparation for Easter is called Lent. 

Lent is a forty day season, but Sundays are not counted toward the forty, so this results in the first day of Lent being 46 days before Easter, which is called Ash Wednesday.  On Ash Wednesday, many Christians gather to receive the Lord’s Supper and allow themselves to be marked with ashes on the forehead to remind them of their failure to keep God’s commands and that the result is death.

Contrary to many misconceptions, Lent is not intended to be a season of mourning for Jesus death or a season of misery or despair for Christians.  Instead, it is a season where Christians are encouraged to pay special attention to remembering all that Jesus has done for them by becoming human, dying by crucifixion, and rising to life after three days. 

Part of this focus includes an emphasis on repentance which means to turn away from the desire for sinful things and toward trusting in Jesus.  Another common misconception about Lent is that it is the only time that Christians focus on repentance and remembering Jesus’ death.  These two things are always focal points in Christianity, but in Lent, they receive special emphasis as they are remembered in preparation to celebrate Easter.

Because of the focus on repentance in Lent, fasting has been a very common practice throughout history.  The most intense form of fasting is to refrain from eating or drinking anything except for water for a period of time, but typical Lenten fasting only includes giving up certain types of food or giving up food for certain portions of the day.  Historically, the most common type of fasting for Lent has been to give up meat to various degrees.  This could be as simple as giving up beef one day a week or as drastic as eating a basically vegan diet for the entire Lenten season.

In modern times, this fasting has often expressed itself differently.  Catholics and Lutherans especially, but many protestants as well, will give up something which they enjoy during the season of Lent, such as chocolate, coffee, sugar, or television.  However, this is not intended to be a sacrifice to make up for sins or to earn God’s kindness.  Instead, giving up a favorite luxury serves as a reminder to remember the sacrifice Jesus made for us by dying for sin.  Celebrations like Carnival or Mari Gras original began as people enjoyed these favorite things one last time before giving them up for Lent. 

Other Lenten traditions in the church include giving up more joyful parts of the Divine Service or Mass, such as certain songs or the word “Alleluia.”  In the past, some churches have even stopped using their organ or other musical instruments for the entire season of Lent. 

The intention of Lent and of each of these Lenten traditions is never that they be approached as a requirement to satisfy church rules or as something we do to appease God or make up for our failures, but that they are an exercise which helps Christians to remember their need for a Savior from sin and that Jesus has fulfilled that need by accomplishing everything necessary for the salvation of the world by His life, death, and resurrection. 

Numbering the Ten Commandments

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about numbering the Ten Commandments:

Q:  Why are the Ten Commandments assigned different numbers in different types of churches?

The complete list of Ten Commandments is found in two places in the Bible:  Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5.  These two biblical lists are primarily the same, with only slight variations in wording.  However, neither of these lists is numbered.  Beginning very early in Judaism, the commandments have always been numbered as ten, but even among Jewish rabbis, the numbering of the list has varied over the course of time.  Likewise, among Christians the arrangement of the commandments has often varied, although always adding up to ten.

There are two primary ways that the commandments are numbered today among Christians.  The first, and the one with which I am most familiar, is that held by Lutherans and Roman Catholics.  In this system, the commandments are numbered as follows:

1.  You shall have no other gods.
2. You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God.
3. Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.
4. Honor your father and mother.
5. You shall not murder.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not steal.
8. You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.
9. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. [The words “wife” and “house” may be reversed in different traditions.]

The second way that the commandments are numbered is held by most Protestant denominations and Eastern Orthodox churches, who consider the Second Commandment to be “You shall not make for yourself any graven image.”  Commandments three through eight above are then numbered one higher and commandments nine and ten are combined into a single commandment.  The way that the commandments have been phrased here is condensed for the sake of memorization.  All eleven of the commands listed so far, along with some introduction and commentary, are a part of the commandments as written in the Bible.  The difference is not in the content of the commandments, but only in their numbering. 

St. Augustine, who is considered one of the greatest theologians in Christian history, began the tradition of numbering the commandments in the way familiar to Lutherans and Roman Catholics.  It is a result of his influence that the Roman Catholic Church numbers the commandments as they do.  Martin Luther began his theological studies as a Catholic monk, and was familiar with the writings of St. Augustine.  Since he saw no deficiencies with that numbering of the commandments, Lutherans continued to number them in the same way as Roman Catholics, even after they became separate churches. 

The numbering system used by most Protestants and the Eastern Orthodox comes from another ancient Christian teacher named Origin.  All Christians, regardless of which numbering system they use, acknowledge that all the words of Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 are God’s commands.  Lutherans and Catholics still believe that God commands humans not to make or worship idols, but they consider these words to be an explanation of the first commandment against having other gods rather than a separate commandment.

More important than the way in which the Ten Commandments are numbered is that Christians continually examine their lives in light of them, repenting where they have failed, receiving the forgiveness of Jesus, and going forward again with the desire to keep them with a thankful faith toward God which results a fervent love for one another.

What did Jesus Look like?

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about Jesus' appearance:

Q:  How do we know what Jesus looked like?  If we do not know what He looked like, is it appropriate to attempt make a picture or statue? 

There are many characteristics which we have come to recognize as characterizing a picture of Jesus in our culture.  Typically, we see Jesus portrayed with a light complexion and long hair, smooth skin, and a beard.  There are often additional features which alert us to His identity, such as a praying posture or emanation of light, or that he is portrayed in the context of a Biblical story.

At the time Jesus lived, there were obviously no cameras or video recordings, and much of the art of that time did not survive until our present day.  When we combine this lack of visual evidence with the fact that there is no description of Jesus physical appearance given in the Gospels, we are left to look for other sources for information. 

The image we typically see today is based primarily on two sources.  The first of these is ancient art made by Christians two or three centuries after Jesus’ resurrection.  It is during this time period, the beard and long hair that we find so common in images of Jesus today became a standard feature. 

The second of these sources is the Shroud of Turin, which is an ancient piece of cloth which bears the image of a man’s body.  The legend concerning this item is that it was one of the burial cloths in which Jesus was wrapped when He was buried.  It is held that when Jesus rose from the dead, the energy discharge in that event burned his image into the shroud.  Even though these claims regarding the Shroud of Turin can neither be conclusively proven nor refuted, its image remains a primary source for modern depictions of the physical appearance of Jesus. 

While no description of Jesus physical appearance is given in the Gospels, the Bible does give us several pieces of information that inform our knowledge of what Jesus would have looked like.  In predicting the coming of the savior, Isaiah prophesies that Jesus would have “no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.” (Isaiah 53:2 ESV) In other words, He had the appearance of an ordinary man.  This is further evidenced by the Pharisees and other people during His life who rejected His claims to be God. 

We also know from the Bible that Jesus was Jewish.  This means that recent depictions of Caucasian, African, Asian, and other ethnic portrayals of Jesus are certainly inaccurate.  Instead, He would most likely have had an appearance more similar to lighter-complected residents of the modern-day Middle-east.  Additionally, we know that Jesus’ stepfather Joseph was a construction worker and therefore, Jesus would have almost certainly followed in learning that trade until He began His ministry at age thirty.  Because of the harsh work of building by hand with stone and rock, Jesus would have likely had a pronounced ruggedness not often seen in our depictions. 

The final and most important feature revealed about Jesus in the Bible is that He continued to have the scars from His crucifixion, even after He rose from the dead.  The most certain and obvious way to tell that a picture or statue portrays Jesus is to look for these marks.  The statue in the front of my church has pronounced red markings on the hands and feet, leaving no doubt that it is intended to portray Jesus.  This is a much more specific and clear way of indicating the figure is Jesus than any other.

Ultimately, there is no hard evidence regarding Jesus precise physical appearance, but if our depictions of his appearance are faithful to what we do know about Him from the Bible, instead of portraying Him the way that we would like Him to look, especially when they use clear signs such as the wounds of the crucifixion, then they have served their purpose.  This is particularly true when we remember that we are not worshipping the statue or picture, but instead the risen Lord who sits at the right hand of the Father in Heaven.

Graven Images

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about graven images.

Q:  Why do so many churches have pictures or statues of Jesus and other Biblical figures when in Exodus 20:4-5, the Bible says, “You shall not make for yourself any graven image or any likeness of anything that is in the heavens above or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water below the earth.  You shall not bow down to them or serve them.”?

These verses, and their implications for the life of the Church have been a topic of discussion among Christians for most of the history of Christianity.  They have been interpreted in a wide variety of ways throughout Christian history, and have been used as the basis for widely varying rules regarding the propriety of different types of ecclesiastical art. 

For example, Eastern Orthodox Christians forbid any kind of free-standing, three-dimensional statues in their churches and their worship.  They interpret these verses as only prohibiting statues, but not paintings, drawings, mosaics, carvings, or any other art that is not a free-standing statue.  When Jesus is depicted, this interpretation even allows for this type of representation, called an icon, to be venerated—that is that the person can pray to God “through” the icon while not actually praying “to” it.

Many Christians in the tradition of John Calvin do not allow for any type of depiction of Jesus or God to exist in the spaces where they worship.  Paintings or drawings of scenes from Bible stories are sometimes considered acceptable in one’s home, but are not considered appropriate in a worship space or for devotional use.  Symbols, such as a cross or dove, are typically allowed, but in some very strict traditions, even these are avoided.

In Catholic and Lutheran traditions, three dimensional art depicting Jesus, and even the saints, is extremely common.  In the Catholic tradition, these sculptures, particularly of Mary and Jesus, may even be treated in a worshipful manner with acts such as kneeling and bowing before them, especially if they are reported to be connected to a miraculous event.  In Lutheran traditions, this is not the case, but in some circumstances Lutherans may bow toward the crucifix (a cross which includes a carving of Jesus’ body) out of respect for Jesus, but with the understanding that they are not worshipping the crucifix itself.

While the first look at this passage might seem to condemn many practices that occur in churches today, a closer look at the precise wording reveals that the meaning is much more precise than it might appear at first glance.

First, this passage addresses the depiction of created things “in the heavens above or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water below the earth.”  Because God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are invisible, it would not be possible to depict them in art other than by symbol (such as a bright light for the Father or a dove for the Holy Spirit), and to do so should not be attempted.  To depict Jesus in art during Old Testament times would have been similarly impossible, since He had not yet become man and therefore had not yet been seen.  Today, however, Jesus has become man and has been seen.  Since He is eternal God and not created, it would not be forbidden to depict Jesus.

Secondly, even though the prohibition in these verses includes depictions of created things, this prohibition only exists if they are to be worshipped.  In many of the world’s religions, especially in ancient times, people would carve or shape a statue of a bird, animal, or mythical creature, and worship it, not just as a representation of an unseen god, but actually as their god. 

To worship any created thing in place of the One True God would be idolatry, regardless whether it was a statue, a painting, or the real thing, but it is perfectly acceptable for Christians to own a statue of George Washington or the mascot of their favorite sports team, paintings of wildlife, or the portraits of their children, as long as they do not worship them.  Likewise, a picture or statue of Jesus is not forbidden by God as long as it we do not worship it.  The matter is not a question of what is depicted or how it is done, but rather it is a question of attempting to visibly portray the invisible God or to worship any created thing in place of God.

Readers are encouraged to submit questions for inclusion in future issues.  You may submit questions by email to revjpeterson@yahoo.com or by mail to P.O. Box 195; Burt, IA  50522.

Rev. Jason P. Peterson

Pastor, St. John’s Lutheran Church – Burt