Numbering the Seasons of the Church Year

Q:  When I attend church, I often see Sundays numbered with labels, like Epiphany or Pentecost or Advent.  What do these mean, and are they used in all churches? 

From the earliest times, the Christian Church began to mark time in a yearly cycle that guided the Church’s preaching to its members.  This began with the yearly celebration of the Resurrection, which quickly-expanded to an eight week-long event to coincide with the time Jesus spent living on earth following the Resurrection and the arrival of Pentecost, which is the day that the Apostles first preached in Jerusalem after receiving the Holy Spirit. 

Lent was a development that shortly followed, as Christians observed 40 days of fasting to prepare for the Resurrection feast, which mirrored other famous 40s in the Bible, such as the 40 years in the wilderness, the 40 days and nights of rain in the flood, and the 40-day temptation of Jesus in the wilderness, many of which serve as the appointed readings on the Sundays during Lent. 

Since the ancient world observed death dates more frequently than birth dates, the day of Jesus’ birth was not known, but based on an ancient belief that great figures died on the day of their conception, the Church observed the Annunciation (Gabriel’s announcement of Jesus’ conception to Mary) on March 25, and soon after, began to celebrate Christmas – the festival of the Savior’s birth – 9 month later, on December 25. 

Advent, a time of preparation prior to Christmas, centering on themes like the Second Coming of Christ and the events surrounding Mary, Joseph, Zechariah, Elizabeth, and John the Baptizer; arose not long afterward.  Then Epiphany – beginning on January 6 became a season to emphasize the building revelation of Jesus identity and span the time between Christmas and the beginning of Lent. 

So, these seasons, beginning 4 weeks before Christmas and ending 8 weeks after Easter, compose half of the Church Year, and focus somewhat-chronologically on highlights of the life of Jesus.  The other half of the Church Year begins with Pentecost (50 days after Easter) and focusses on the life of the Church and the teachings of Jesus.  Depending on the date of Easter, this season can be as short as 23 Sundays or as many as 28 Sundays before Advent begins again on the Sunday nearest to St. Andrew’s Day, which is November 30. 

These seasons are also marked by changes of color in the church – white for Christmas, Easter, and all festivals of Christ, blue for Advent, purple for Lent, red for Pentecost and other festivals of the Church and commemorations of the Apostles, and green for the “Ordinary Time” Sundays which follow Epiphany and Pentecost.  Other colors, including gold, black, rose, and scarlet are used in some traditions for particular observances. 

Not all denominations and traditions observe these seasons.  Some may only celebrate the Resurrection and Christmas, while others might add a few other significant days, but not the complete calendar.  However, there has been a renaissance of sorts regarding the Church Year in the past decade, in which less liturgical traditions, such as Baptist and non-denominational congregations have begun to discover this treasure of the ancient Church. 

 In the congregations which do follow the full calendar, these seasons and their themes are also accompanied by specified readings called a Lectionary.  Some congregations observe an older one-year schedule of readings, but over the last 50 years or so, most have transitioned to a three-year lectionary which concentrates on one Gospel (Matthew, Mark, or Luke) each year, and includes sections of John spread throughout the three-year cycle. 

In addition to instructing about the life of Christ on a yearly cycle, this also has the benefit of ensuring that the congregation receives a balanced diet of the Scripture each year, since the preacher does not have the potential to focus in only on his favorite subjects.  Furthermore, it has the collateral benefit that, with the exception of a few exceptions particular to a given denomination, congregations across denominational lines are following approximately the same thematic structure on any given Sunday. 

Do I Pledge Allegiance?

My article for this week's newspapers answers a question about participation in patriotic acts and government service:

Q:  Are Christians allowed to serve in elected office or the military, salute or pledge allegiance to the flag, vote, and participate as jurors or parties to a court case; and what is the line where a Christian’s involvement with secular government becomes inappropriate?

Every so often throughout history, a few Christian leaders start to raise questions about whether a Christian may participate in secular government.  Under older systems of empire or monarchy, this largely meant employment as a government official or soldier. 

In those cases, the permissibility of Christian service hinged largely on whether the job included duties that would be sinful (such as ancient Roman tax collectors who made a living by cheating citizens) or whether it required idolatry (such as the requirement for Roman Soldiers to worship Caesar as a god). 

In our American experience, this question takes on a new twist, because we citizens are the government in many ways.  While elected officials write and enforce our laws, those officials are chosen by the people’s vote, and the people serve in applying and carrying out the law in such actions as jury service. 

Although the early Christians were often at odds with government as members of a forbidden religion and a despised minority, it was not government in and of itself which they were separating from, but rather the actions of a government that was hostile to their faith and demanded that they disobey both God’s law and their own conscience in order to be citizens in good standing. 

Understood within the boundary that the Christian’s first allegiance is to the Triune God, and that the Christian must “obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29), the Bible is actually quite positive toward government and other earthly authorities.  Beginning with the understanding that the Fourth Commandment, “Honor your father and mother,” extends beyond parents to include all who are in positions of authority, and reinforced by numerous New Testament commands to obey those in authority, the Bible intends that Christians would be honest and obedient citizens and be a blessing to their governing authorities and their nation.  St. Paul even writes that governing authorities have been “instituted by God.”  (Romans 13)

So Christians are permitted to salute their flag and pledge allegiance, not by idolatrously considering their government equal or superior to God, but acknowledging that God has instituted earthly authority and called them to respect and obey it.  Military service (as explained more fully in a previous column) is also an honorable vocation for Christians who desire to defend and protect their neighbors. 

Likewise, the courts have been instituted to defend the rights of citizens to their safety, reputation, and property, and Christians may certainly use them, when necessary to prosecute crimes or settle disputes over property.  When Paul criticizes the Corinthians (ch. 5) for their lawsuits against one another, he does not do so because they made use of secular courts, but because they were doing harm to the reputation of the Church by airing grievances between fellow believers in public rather than settling them amongst themselves within the congregation. 

Finally, voting and public office are certainly appropriate pursuits for Christians.  It would be easier to say that one is sinning by refusing to participate in these functions rather than by exercising the privilege to do so.  In a government where the people themselves set the direction of policy and choose who will lead, what better way for a Christian to serve his fellow citizens than by voting for honorable public servants and advocating for moral and beneficial laws? 

The only limitation that a Christian faces in their participation is that they may not give the government higher honor than God or disobey God’s revealed law in order to obey the government’s policy or statutes.  Beyond this, the Christian is free honor his government and its flag and privileged to exercise his faith by honorable service to his neighbors. 

Was Jesus Married, and what was His family like?

My article for this week's newspapers responds to an inquiry about Jesus' family:

Q:  What was Jesus’ family like?  Did he have brothers, sisters, a wife, or children?  Was the same true for His disciples? 

From the early chapters of the Gospel of Luke, we learn about Jesus’ family at the time of His birth.  We know that His mother Mary was a virgin who was engaged to a man named Joseph when an angel initiated her pregnancy with the announcement that she would give birth to the Savior. 

Mary was likely young, as women were typically married shortly after the age where they were physically capable of childbearing.  Joseph was probably older, because it was expected that a man have a home and an established trade before he was considered eligible to marry. 

After Mary and Joseph flee to Egypt to escape Herod’s attempt to kill Jesus, the only other event Scripture records from Jesus’ childhood is when he was unintentionally left behind in Jerusalem by his parents and discovered in the temple discussing theology.  Although Joseph was not Jesus’ biological father, he was His earthly guardian, but after this event, Joseph is never mentioned again in the Gospels, leading many to believe that He died some time when Jesus was between the ages of 12 and 30. 

This would have left Mary as a widow, and Jesus, her oldest son, would have likely been left as the primary provider for the family.  Even though there is not a record of the birth of Jesus’ siblings, the Gospels do mention His “mother and brothers” on one occasion, and on another occasion names four brothers (James, Jude, Simon, Joses) and refers to unnamed “sisters,” indicating two or more daughters born to Mary and Joseph. 

Some have attempted to describe Joseph as a widower, and these 6 or more siblings as children from that previous marriage, and not with Mary.  Others have described them as cousins or other relatives.  While both of these explanations are possible based on the words used in the Gospel for Jesus brothers and sisters, the plain usual meaning of this word is literal, biological siblings, and usage of that word for step-siblings or cousins would be far less common, making the most plain and reasonable conclusion that these 6 or more siblings are Jesus’ half-siblings born to Mary and Joseph. 

This is further supported by Matthew’s description of the marriage of Joseph and Mary, when he says Joseph “took Mary as his wife, but did not know her until she had given birth to her son.”   Compare this to the statement “John did not eat breakfast until he had showered.”  Such a statement indicates that John did actually eat breakfast, but only after he had showered.  Likewise, Matthew’s statement indicates that Joseph and Mary do consummate their marriage, but only after Jesus has been born. 

Some vague fragments and superstitious stories have arisen from time to time about Jesus having a wife, perhaps Mary Magdalene, but none of them are remotely reliable from a textual perspective, and most have conclusively been proven as forgeries that were not written until 300-400 years after the Resurrection of Jesus.  This results in the clear conclusion that Jesus had neither a wife nor children. 

Regarding the disciples, it appears that most of them had wives and typical families.  Paul was single, and he refers to the benefits of this status for His mission and ministry.  At the same time, his words in 1 Corinthians 9 imply that marriage and family were the norm among the other Apostles, and he specifically mentions Cephas [Peter] and the Lord’s brothers [probably James and Jude] as being married.  Luke specifically mentions Peter’s mother-in-law, who was healed by Jesus of a high fever, at the end of chapter 2 of his Gospel, indicating that Peter was certainly married. 

In spite of agenda-driven explanations to the contrary, the simplest explanation that can be drawn from Scripture regarding the family life of Jesus and the disciples is that Mary and Joseph carried on a normal married life after the birth of Jesus, that Jesus remained single and childless throughout His life, and that the average disciple, including their leader Peter, seems to have been married, with Paul as the one notable exception. 

Is Grandma watching over me?

My article from this week's newspapers deals with the question of relatives watching over us from heaven:

Q:  After the recent death of a relative, a friend tried to comfort me by saying that the relative was “watching over” me from heaven.  Is this true, and how do we know?

I’m not sure how far it goes back, but this belief has become increasingly popular among many Americans, even Christians.  And while it may have a bit of truth at its core, it goes farther than Scripture goes in describing the lives of our loved ones who have died. 

The first thing to consider is that “heaven” as we think of it is only a minor theme in Scripture.  Most of the Bible’s descriptions of afterlife are about something else – namely the Resurrection at the Last Day. 

At death, the body is buried, and the soul is judged.  For those who rely entirely on Jesus for forgiveness of sins this has the result that their soul goes to be at rest with Jesus.  However, this is not the soul’s final destination.  Instead, the body will be raised to be reunited with the soul on the Last Day, after which eternal life is lived in the body as a whole person. 

What we typically think of as “heaven” is referred to by theologians as the Interim State, indicating that the time while our souls rest with Christ is only an in-between time during which we await the full, embodied life which will commence at the Resurrection. 

From scripture we learn that these souls who rest with Christ are not unconscious or asleep, but seem to have some awareness of what is happening on earth.  We see this as the figures in Luke 16 are aware of events on earth even while they are at rest or in torment, and the souls under the altar in Revelation 6 long for the Resurrection of their bodies and the vindication of their fellow martyrs who suffer on earth. 

Scripture, though, does not credit the dead with "watching over" us, appearing to us, contacting us, or otherwise intervening in any way here on earth. Those things are the sole ability of the Lord, and Luke 16 makes very clear that there is no return, communication, or intervention between this world and the deceased.

It also seems preferable to speak of the saints with the Lord as "aware" of events here on earth rather than sensory language like "see" or "hear," since that sensory language implies a body, which they lack until the Resurrection on the Last Day. The language of watching over also might give the impression that they are occupied with earthly events or attentive to minor or embarrassing details here on earth or cause concern that they sorrow over the sin and suffering they witness.  Instead, they are occupied with the Lord while they are present with Him, and it seems that in some mysterious way, their souls share in some portion (even if incomplete) of His perfect knowledge and understanding of earthly events.

Ultimately, while it might be comforting to think of our deceased loved ones as watching over us, we have an even greater promise – namely that Christ Himself watches over us.  While they are beloved, they are merely human  and have not received supernatural power or authority, while He is the possessor of all divine power, and He who has forgiven our sins has promised that He will order all things for the good of our souls and the forgiveness of our sins so that we too would join Him and them in the eternal, resurrected life that is without end. 

Is Heaven for Real?

I've been meaning to answer this question (review this book) for years now, but it just stayed on the back burner.  With the movie being released soon, I thought it had simmered long enough:  

Q:  I found the book Heaven is for Real very touching, but I can’t help but wonder whether the boy’s experience was genuine.  Can you offer any guidance to help me sort this out?

In the handful of years since this book was released, it has become very widely known because of its touching images and inspiring portrayal of childlike faith.  At the same time, I, like the many readers who have sent me this question, wonder whether the accounts of heaven it communicates are accurate and trustworthy – whether Colton Burpo’s experience was genuine or from another source. 

Beyond the difficulty of communicating any individual's experience to those who do not personally share it, this book faces the challenge of a third party – his father – communicating the experiences of his preschool-aged son.  For the sake of being both concise and charitable, I am willing to forego any accusations that the experience was fabricated for fame or financial gain and to assume that Colton really did experience the events he describes. 

The bigger question that seems necessary to ask is regarding the source of Colton’s experience.  The possibilities that immediately come to mind are those of hallucination, a dream, or the boy’s mind integrating diverse fragments of information during a semi-conscious state or under the influence of sedatives and anesthetic. 

Those would be easy conclusions, except that the account in the book also includes information that the authors claim could not have been known within the limitations of time and space in its circumstances.  These include knowledge of a deceased grandfather’s appearance in an era generations ago, the existence of a previously-unrevealed miscarried sister, and the location and behavior of Colton’s parents during his surgery.  If we concede that these were not fabricated, then we are left to consider spiritual origins for this experience – but from what spiritual source? 

Scripture gives clear guidance regarding those who claim to have experienced extraordinary spiritual revelations – namely, that they must present complete accuracy.  Predictions must be completely fulfilled (Deut. 18), and claims to truth must match completely with those already known in Scripture (Deut. 13, 1 John 4), which is the point where this account raises concerns for me. 

Many of the descriptions of heaven in the book are untestable because they are neither confirmed by Scripture nor contradictory to it.  Many others are consistent with what we should expect from an experience of heaven based on Biblical revelation.  On a few occasions, though, Colton’s experiences directly contradict truths known from Scripture or history. 

First, and most significant of these is the location of Jesus’ crucifixion wounds (in the palm rather than at the junction of the forearm bones at the wrist).  Another worrisome description is the repeated references to the winged appearance of deceased believers.  Additionally, while the Bible clearly states that death must precede entrance into the states described in the account (Hebrews 9:27), medical records showed that Colton did not die. 

Finally, Colton says about Pop, “He’s got a new body.  Jesus told me if you don’t go to heaven, you don’t get a new body.”  Scripture, on the other hand, very clearly describes death as separation from the body (2 Cor. 5:8 et. al.) and that all people, not only believers will receive a resurrected body – but that it will be on the Last Day, and not in the temporary, spiritual state which precedes it. 

This leaves us with two choices:  First, we can dismiss these discrepancies as the result of a child’s limited comprehension or communication ability, but then we would be left to doubt all the rest of the account on the same grounds.  Alternatively, we could wonder, in spite of Colton’s and his Father’s sincere belief that the account is genuine, if the experience was introduced from another, spiritually hostile source which conveyed a great deal of truth mixed with just enough error to be distract from what is most important. 

This leads to my final concern – heaven is never described as the end game in Scripture.  We have only a handful of descriptions of it, and very few direct references to it.  Instead, the big idea in Scripture regarding afterlife is that it is lived out in an eternal resurrection, which follows the Last Day.  Too much focus on “heaven” (which we Americans have been guilty of for generations) distracts from that truth that we will physically live again forever. 

Yes, Heaven is for real.  We know this because eyewitnesses saw our Lord resurrected, and He told them it was true.  This book, however, leaves serious questions of credibility, which we cannot overlook.

Since my local newspaper column is limited at 800 words, this review is exceedingly brief.  Perhaps after Holy Week, there will be time for me to provide an expanded critique, offering the insights I lacked the space to include here.  

Do Christians Believe in Extra-terrestrial life?

My article from this week's newspapers answers a question about Christians and extra-terrestrial life:  

Q:  Do Christians believe in aliens or that life exists on other planets?  What evidence is there from the Bible for or against this idea?

While it would be convenient if the Bible contained information about every conceivable topic, the fact is that it only contains the information relevant to its purpose – to provide the history of God’s interaction with man and His ultimate revelation in the crucified and risen Christ.  Even though the Bible never mentions aliens or other life forms, it does contain a number of concepts that would influence the way Christians respond the question of extra-terrestrial life. 

From Genesis, the Bible portrays humanity as the pinnacle and crowning element of creation.  In relation to all other life on earth, Adam and Eve are placed as the superior caretaker and described with qualities not attributed to other creatures.  While God speaks other creatures into existence, He forms Adam from the dust and breathes life into him.  He then gives Adam the task of naming the rest of creation, then creates Eve from Adam’s rib as a fitting complement to Him. 

When the creation account describes the rest of the creation beyond the earth’s atmosphere, it describes everything in relation to earth.  Sun and moon are created for the purpose of creating a fitting environment on earth.  Stars and other planets are described as being tasked with marking time and seasons – both purposes that center on activities here on earth, and not out in space. 

In any of the Bible’s descriptions of the origins of life, the whole story is centered on earth and only on earth.  We are not given any positive indication that there are intelligent creatures elsewhere – or any form of life at all.  We also are not given any absolute denials that God could have created life elsewhere beyond our planet.  The question is simply not addressed.    

While there have been attempts made by imaginative individuals to explain some of the unusual images of the book of Revelation, as well as other prophetic elements as descriptions of future alien encounters, these ideas are not well-supported by textual study or church history, and are more likely wishful thinking or exceeding the appropriate bounds of creativity in handling these portions of Scripture.

What we do know is that the Bible describes the creation of life here on earth.  We do know that it describes the fall of that creation into sin at the hand of our first parents, and we do know that it describes the perfect life, death, and resurrection of Jesus as our substitute and points us there as the remedy for every spiritual ill, and directs us to the Resurrection of the Last Day as the end of all earthly suffering that is the consequence of sin. 

While we cannot dogmatically say that there is no life beyond our own planet, we also have no confirmation that there is, nor do we have any instruction to seek it out.  If God desired to form other creations in far-away solar systems, that look and operate differently than we do, it would certainly be within His ability and rights to do so.  However, because we have found no credible evidence that this is true, nor has it been revealed to us in Scripture, there is no warrant for Christians to introduce such ideas into discussion of spiritual things, because even if they did exist, it would apparently be of no consequence to us or our salvation in Christ– which is the purpose and central theme of God’s revelation. 

What is a Christian to make of Psychics, Mediums, etc.?

My article from this week's newspapers answers a question about psychics, mediums, and other similar practitioners:  

Q:  How should a Christian understand the existence of psychics and mediums?  Are their services genuine, and if not, what is their source?

The two typical reactions to psychic phenomena and those practitioners who engage with such things is either to embrace it as real and genuine, or on the other hand, to reject it as fantasy or mythology.  However, it seems that a fair treatment of this question must acknowledge that there are several explanations for this sort of experiences. 

The criticism that these experiences are pure imagination is certainly plausible, and on several occasions is probably an accurate analysis.  A person who believes herself to have psychic powers or communicate with another realm of spirits could potentially be imagining her experiences, but convinced in her own mind that they are genuine.  Legitimate mental illness is also a possibility, as is the individual simply misinterpreting otherwise natural phenomena as more than they really are. 

It also must be acknowledged that there are those practitioners who are skillfully fabricating these paranormal experiences.  They may be adept at reading their clients or subtly mining them for details that they can use to better create the desired experience and give the appearance of a psychic connection.  In such a case, nothing spiritual is occurring, but simply a fraudulent manipulation. 

On other occasions, these logical explanations do not seem adequate.  Perhaps the medium knows something that they could not have possibly known, or the psychic makes a prediction that is ultimately found to be accurate, making it necessary to explore spiritual causes. 

The Christian can rule out that genuine communication with the spirits of deceased humans has occurred, because Jesus description of the Rich Man and Lazarus from Luke 16 describes a gulf that cannot be breached between the habitation of the deceased and the world of the living.  Hebrews also explains that “it is given man once to die, and then to face the judgment.” 

It can also be ruled out that the revelation is angelic, as every instance of angelic revelation in Scripture is unmistakably clear, and not concealed or mysterious.  Nor is the Holy Spirit a plausible source, as Scripture’s record of the His role never describes Him working in the ways seen in relation to psychic experiences, and when Jesus Himself describes the Holy Spirit’s work in Gospel of John, He describes a work of pointing to Jesus and reminding of Jesus words – and not one of revealing anything new or hidden. 

Assuming that a chance guess is not a satisfactory explanation, it would be necessary to explain the source of such knowledge, which is the more challenging task – and one that brings potentially unwelcome conclusions. 

If an experience cannot be explained after ruling out human, divine, and angelic sources, only one option remains – the demonic world.  Although we may be hesitant to make such claims, Scripture’s revelations about the demonic world do make this a plausible explanation. 

We know that demons are immortal spirits and so have knowledge that reaches beyond that available to living generations, making it possible for them to reveal events and details of the past that could not be known except by an eyewitness.  We also know that their goal is lead people away from Jesus by any means, which allows that they may even provide appealing and comforting revelations for the sake of distracting a person from Jesus. 

So, it is possible that a demon might impersonate a deceased spouse or parent, revealing little-known details to the psychic, because the demon witnessed the life and relationships of the deceased.  Or perhaps a demon can reveal the location of a body or weapon to a psychic who has been asked to help with a murder investigation because he was the one who inspired the murderer to commit the crime in the first place. 

Ultimately, the Christian can be certain that Mediums, Psychics, and similar practitioners, no matter how sincere, are not what they seem, and that there is no cause to consult them.  Even when it is difficult to discern what is happening in the spiritual world, the Christian can be sure that through Baptism they are protected from those spiritual forces which would seek to harm or deceive them.  God’s promises, having been applied to them through the water, defend them from the devil, his angels, and even death itself with the certain and unconquerable power of the Cross of Christ.  

No other has ever known how Jesus lives within the unseen things above my heart...

My article from this week's newspapers about feeling God within us:

Q:  Sometimes, I feel so certain that God is real and with me.  Other times, I don’t feel Him, or He feels so far away.  Since God is unseen, how can we be sure that He is real and with us?

This question has been a challenge for Christians for generations.  Sensing has been such a prominent element throughout the history of religion that in the academic study of world religions, one of the categories most religion textbooks use is “Characteristic Emotional Experiences.” 

At times in Christian history, this has also been emphasized by well-meaning Christian preachers.  One example of this was 2 generations after the Reformation when people began to feel that Reformation theology was too dry and unemotional and wanted to reinvigorate it with a more personal emotional experience.  This same intention also motivated the Wesleys in a later generation to begin the movement that led to those we call Methodists today. 

Here in the United States, we also saw this current driving the revivals of the 19^th century, and it is still with us today as many of that era’s popular hymns and songs, or those inspired by that era, are still with us today. 

One of these centers around the line, “You ask me how I know He lives; He lives within my heart” – directing Christians to look within their hearts to find the risen Christ.  The Apostle Paul, on the other hand directs Christians in 1 Corinthians 15 to look outside of themselves to the Cross of Christ and His empty tomb.  Instead of directing the Corinthians to find the risen Christ within their hearts, he catalogues Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances and the eyewitnesses who observed them as the foundation for the Christian’s belief that Jesus rose from the dead. 

Another similar song begins, “I love to tell the story; of unseen things above…” but this also differs from the way that the Gospels and Paul point Christians to Jesus.  Instead of concentrating on the unseen things of God, they repeatedly direct their readers and hearers back to the events that occurred here on earth as the foundation for their hope and the source of their righteousness before God, and to the eyewitnesses who observed them as evidence, rather than within themselves or into the unseen reaches of heaven. 

A final song, and one of the favorites of a certain generation, describes the relationship between God and the Christian as an experience “…no other has ever known.”  This is certainly an appealing and sentimental image, but again, one that arises out of 19^th century popular culture expressions rather than Scripture.  The New Testament Epistles, the ancient Church Fathers, and the Reformers never direct Christians within to any kind of personal experience as the evidence for faith – because those feelings come and go, leaving the Christian to wonder if their Savior or their trust in Him has also come and gone. 

Instead, they direct people first to the empty tomb of the Resurrected Christ and the eyewitnesses who saw it.  Then they direct them to the Church where this message is proclaimed and applied to individual Christians through the preaching of the Word, through Baptism, and through the Lord’s Supper.  These are the methods through which God desires to assure us of His promises for us, and these are the sure foundation which cannot be shaken (Hebrews 12:27-28)

Miracles and other Religious Experience

My article from this week's newspapers about Miracles and other types of Religious Experience:

Q:  If I feel something supernatural in worship or experience an extraordinary spiritual event, how can I know whether it was from the True God or some other source?  What about miracles – are they always from God, or can they come from another source?

During the life of Jesus, the Gospels record numerous miracles performed by Jesus, and even after He ascended into heaven, we read about a few miracles associated with the Apostles in the book of Acts.  The Old Testament also has its share of miraculous events pointing forward to Jesus.  Christians believe these miracles to be authentic, because their history and source were recorded by the eyewitnesses to the events, and there is no record that opponents argued against them. 

The most significant and extraordinary of these miracles is the resurrection of Jesus on the third day after His death.  This is the central event of Scripture, and the foundation of Christianity.  If we inquire about the possibility of modern miracles, it is fairly simple to conclude that God is capable of doing them – after all, being all-powerful is part of the very definition of being God.  However, we also have to admit that there is no promise guaranteeing miracles to Christians of all generations. 

This makes it necessary to closely examine any claims to present-day miracles.  One important assumption that must be challenged is that because a miracle was helpful, it must be divine.  In contrast to this assumption, we see that the Bible describes several occasions of false miracles.  From Pharaoh’s magicians in Exodus to the sorcerers and fortune-tellers in the book of Acts, we see miraculous acts which do not have their source in the True God, and whether these acts were merely illusions or were done by the power of demonic forces, they force us to admit that what we observe may be from another source, which is why both Jesus and Paul warn Christians about false miracles that will be done to deceive Christians.

Religious experiences are much the same.  There is simply no promise in Scripture that Christians will experience ecstatic feelings or have sensory confirmation – whether natural or supernatural – of God’s presence.  Instead, it seems that the lives of the Apostles, as recorded in the New Testament, are characterized by suffering and trouble more often than victory and emotional highs.  Even Paul, to whom Jesus appeared personally, prefers to point His readers to the eyewitness reports of Jesus’ resurrection rather than to His own personal experience of Christ on the Damascus road. 

Some spiritual experiences can easily be ruled out as fraudulent because they contradict known facts of Scripture and Christian doctrine.  Other experiences might turn out to be natural emotional responses without spiritual origins, while still others are less clear because, even though they are not demonstrably false, they also cannot be verified as true. 

Experience is a tricky thing, because the spiritual world is not all good.  Instead, there is both good and evil in the spiritual world, and the difference is not always apparent, because evil does not always declare itself as such, but instead prefers to disguise itself as good. 

So, it is entirely conceivable that an evil spirit or force might give a person an emotional high, grant earthly desires, or even perform miraculous signs.  This could be merely for the purpose of distracting a Christian toward the experience or miracle instead of Jesus, or the assault may be less direct.  Perhaps Satan and His forces might create a series of positive experiences or miracles, and even allow the Christian to give God credit for them, so that at an opportune time, they could then disappoint their victim and give the appearance that God had failed them. 

This is why Christianity has traditionally approached experience with skepticism, preferring instead to focus on the verifiable historical events of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, and the sure and certain promises of forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation dispensed through God’s Word and the Sacraments – because they provide a solid foundation that cannot be mistaken for an evil deception disguised under the veil of positive feelings or earthly blessings.

Did the Lord Really Tell You That? - How Can You Be Sure?

My article from this week's newspapers about things "The Lord Told Me..." and other such claims to direct revelation:

Q:  If I feel like God has spoken a message to me personally, is that possible?  How can I know if that message is genuine and whether or not to trust it?

Extraordinary revelations, personal experiences, and spiritual perceptions have been a topic of debate among Christians for centuries.  Some of these are more extraordinary than others, varying from reports of an audible voice from heaven complete with bleeding or crying statues to the simple feeling within the Christian that God desires them to take a certain course of action or beware of certain dangers. 

Some of these instances have been heeded while others have been ignored, and some have been understood as accurate while others have failed to play out.  With this sort of inconsistency, direct, personal revelation is a topic to be handled with great care. 

To begin with, we have to ask whether it is possible.  Since God has directly revealed Himself to people, such as Peter, Paul, and numerous Old Testament prophets, we would have to conclude that God is capable of revealing Himself directly to individuals.  At the same time, we also have to note that He has never promised that He will reveal Himself directly to all believers, nor did He ever instruct us in the New Testament writings to seek such revelations.

On some instances, we can rule such revelations as certainly inauthentic because they contradict a known fact about Christian doctrine or God’s character – for example, if a revelation encouraged murder or directed one to trust in other gods.  Even for those that do not fail on those grounds, we still lack positive verification of their origin.  So, for any particular instance of suspected direct revelation, the most positive answer we could possibly give is, “Maybe.”

Another question that must arise from this is what warrant is there for anyone else to believe the revelation or act according to it.  In this case also, unless there can be positive verification of the revelation, others would be unwise to accept its validity, lest they be deceived.  So here it would be limited, at best, to only the person who received it. 

Even if such revelations prove to be accurate, their accuracy does not necessarily equate to authenticity.  For example, since the demonic world possesses great knowledge (although not perfect knowledge, like God) of events in the world, it is entirely within the realm of possibility that a personal revelation, even when accurate, is a deception intended to distract a person from God’s promised means of revelation or to open the door for them to later accept a deceptions which threaten to undermine faith. 

In contrast to these uncertainties, we do have promises that God will reveal Himself in certain ways and instruction on where to seek Him.  The most explicit and detailed of these is the Bible.  God has promised that the words we find there will prove authentic, and directed us there to seek Him. 

Even the authors of the New Testament directed their readers back to the Old Testament, and not to their own experiences, to authenticate their claims about Jesus.  And even the Holy Spirit, who often receives credit in cases of direct revelation is inseparably connected to the written Word of Scripture, as in the Gospel of John, where Jesus most detailed teaching on the Spirit describes the Spirit’s work as reminding the Apostles of the things that Jesus has already said – and not in revealing anything new. 

God also reveals Himself as He washes away sin through Holy Baptism and feeds believers with His Body and Blood for the forgiveness of sins and to sustain faith in the Lord’s Supper.  When we seek Him where He has promised to be, we can have confidence that it is Him we have found and His gifts we have received, rather than being left to wonder about feelings and intuitions which we have no assurance are authentic.

School Prayer and other Free Exercise of Religion in the Public School

My article from this week's newspapers answering questions about school prayer and other religious exercise in public schools:

Q:  How should Christians approach the question of school prayer?  What about other religious acts and speech in public schools – are there limitations on these things, and how should Christians respond if they believe their rights are being violated? 

Exercising religious freedom in public schools has been a touchy subject over the past few decades of the American experience.  The tendency has been to take either side of an all-or-nothing approach.  This is probably a result of the transition from a former era, which several generations of readers might remember when public schools commonly held teacher-led prayers during the school day. 

Upon being challenged, most instances of such prayers ceased.  Interesting to note is that it is not only atheists or religious minorities who oppose school-sponsored prayer.  Rather many Christians actually oppose prayer in the public schools as well, usually because they do not desire that their children be led in prayers which might contradict the doctrinal position of their church, because the adult leading the prayer is led by a Christian with differing doctrinal convictions. 

In the wake of the school prayer prohibitions, there then occurred an overcorrection of sorts.  Many citizens who were uninformed about the legal reasoning involved began to mistakenly conclude that all religious speech and action are forbidden in public schools.  On the contrary, courts have consistently held that it is acceptable to read various scriptures as world literature or to describe religion in the context of history and the social sciences. 

There are two primary distinctions that should be remembered, both by students and their parents, as well as by school employees, when considering the appropriateness of religious exercise in the public schools:

The first of these deals with who is leading the religious exercise.  Teacher-led or school-initiated religious exercise, such as prayer or proselytization, when held during school hours and within the exercise of their duties as school officials, are uniformly inappropriate, as they constitute government endorsement of religion.  At the same time student-led and initiated cases of religious exercise, including prayer, evangelism, or Bible reading, are generally protected, within one confine – that they do not violate another neutrally-applied rule of the school. 

This constitutes the second distinction regarding a student’s religious freedom in school – that students must obey the neutrally-applied rules of their school - meaning that the rule governs general behavior without targeting or singling out religious exercise. 

So, for example, a school could forbid all clothing that contained graphics or messages, and the rule would be neutrally-applied.  However, if they singled out t-shirts with religious messages, while allowing others, the rule would no longer be neutral.  

Similarly, a school could forbid all literature other than textbooks from a study hall period and have a neutral rule, but if the school allowed students to read popular culture magazines, books on hobbies or athletics or music, or other non-curriculum materials, but restricted students from bringing religious literature, the rule would no longer be neutral, and the district could even face potential legal implications for discriminating against the students. 

Of course, in such an emotionally-charged topic as religion, there will be occasions where the rules are abused, manipulated, or ignored, but Christians should resist the temptation to engage in such tactics.  Instead, the Christian is called to defend their rights as a religious citizen, while at the same time doing so in a legal, ethical, and non-malicious manner. 

The first step should always be to seek to work with the school and its officials to ensure students’ rights are protected, and even if such efforts fail and adversarial means must be used, to pursue the defense of their rights without spitefulness or a desire for revenge, but instead in the interest of protecting the liberty of their neighbors and community. 

Wedding Cakes, Pornography, and the Christian Conscience - Christians in the Marketplace, Part 2

My article from this week's newspapers is a follow-up to last week's answer about Christians in the marketplace:

What about a Christian business owner – should they participate in transactions that are related to events with which they do not morally agree?

This question addresses the other side of one that was begun in the previous question addressed in this column, and both deal with the question of how Christians live out their moral convictions in the marketplace.  When the Christian is the customer, it does not seem to be their responsibility to be their concern what the business owner’s incidental use of their income outside of the transaction in question. 

However, when the Christian is the service provider, the question is perhaps more complicated.  The Christian, as customer, agrees with the merchant for a product or service and is not substantially involved once the transaction is complete, but the Christian business-owner finds themselves in a more difficult position.

This begins with the business owner’s own conscience.  So, even though their name may not be associated with the immoral act and their service may not directly support the immoral act, they may face a trouble conscience over contributing to the act. 

I can think of an occasion where this was the case when I was working as a service technician repairing computers.  Some of our technicians were uncomfortable with servicing a computer whose use was related to pornography while others, while not supportive of pornography themselves, saw their service of the computer as separate from its use with pornography. 

This issue became even more complicated on an occasion where the computer was not used merely to access pornographic images, but was used in the actual production of pornography, and technicians who were comfortable working on the previous computers were troubled by the prospect of servicing this particular machine.

An even greater level of objection occurred when on on-site service call was received to install computer equipment at an adult entertainment venue near the store.  Technicians who had not been uncomfortable with the previous scenarios now found this to be beyond a level that their conscience could bear. 

This illustrates the variety of levels of involvement a Christian might have when providing a product or service in the marketplace.  Certainly the Christian merchant is not responsible for every action taken with the product they have sold.  Nearly every product can be misused in some sinful way, so the Christian business-owner would have to interview every customer about their intended use of the product, and even then would be confronted with the possibility that the customer had lied.  Obviously, the Christian merchant does not need to trouble themselves with these sort of concerns. 

Some services involve a higher degree of participation than others – either by the nature of or the proximity of the service.  So, for example there is a significant difference between the plumber who fixes the bathroom sink at a strip club and the audio-video technician who designs and installs a system for mass-viewing of sexually-explicit entertainment. 

Likewise, take the example that has made frequent headlines in the news in recent years where services are sought for weddings, but the merchant declines the job because they cannot support the marriage that is occurring.  It seems that here there is also a question of degree here.  The caterer who is providing a meal probably faces less uncertainty about the morality of their involvement than the owner of the venue which hosts the event, and the baker who is tasked with writing the message on the cake or placing the figures of the couple on top is most likely to face a question of conscience for their involvement. 

While I would be uncomfortable instituting church discipline to require or forbid individual Christian participation in business transactions which cause questions of conscience, it seems that it is certainly necessary to respect the weight which such decisions place on people of moral conviction.  One would hope that state and federal law would recognize this by protecting the conscience right of merchants, while at the same time those merchants ultimately have the obligation to follow Acts 5:29’s instruction to “obey God rather than man,” in matters of conscience, regardless of law to the contrary.