Strength vs. Hardness: A New Years Resolution for Mr. al'Thor

I received the latest book in The Wheel of Time (WoT) saga for Christmas. (Thanks, Amy!!) I've been reading it in gulps since Christmas (in the midst of prepping for the new spring term---that was a WoT joke) and am almost 300 pages into it.

There's a theme in WoT that has always haunted me since I started reading it: "Men become hard when they should become strong." The contrast (which is all over this latest book) is primarily illustrated in Rand al'Thor, the story's main character, who thus far has opted for hardness instead of strength.

What an amazingly astute and (I would say) biblical insight into the human condition! What a difference it makes in difficult times to seek the strength that God supplies via our faith in His grace instead of walling up our own defenses. And what a picture Jesus is of that strength, without a shred of hardness to be found.

I hope that 2010 finds Rand, and me, and all of us, seeking strength instead of hardness, faith instead of fear.

How have you seen this contrast make a difference? How do you think we can change from being hard to being strong? (And no WoT spoilers---I'm not done reading yet!)

The Terminology of Talking About Humans

In teaching The Parables of Matthew last Fall, I ran into an interesting question while discussing the two parables found in verses 44-46 of Chapter 13:

The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid again; and from joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking fine pearls, and upon finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it.

The question comes from the two possible interpretations of these parables.

One interpretation (the standard interpretation) is that the searcher in these verses is Jesus' followers and that the treasure/pearl is Himself. This makes sense, given the suffering that the disciples were beginning to encounter (thereby "selling all that they had).

The second interpretation is that the searcher is Jesus and that the treasure/pearl is His people. This interpretation also makes sense, given that the rest of the parables in Matthew 13 feature Jesus as the active party and His people as the passive recipients.

(Of course, there's no reason they can't both be correct, and one astute member of the class---thanks, John!---noted that, given the wording that follows, "The kingdom of heaven is like," in each parable, one could argue that the first interpretation is true of the first parable, and that the second interpretation is true of the second parable!)

I'll admit, that second interpretation is attractive to me. I like reading about Jesus being the hero in a story, and I like envisioning the lengths to which He went/goes for His people.

But that interpretation does lead to an interesting question: What does it mean, in the second parable, for the pearl to be "of great value?"

Proponents of the first interpretation say that, because of our sin and His self-sufficiency, God has no need of us, and therefore doesn't view us as valuable; Jesus, after all, in John 17, clearly indicates that He is going to the cross because the glory of God & His relationship with the Father is so valuable to Him. One of the key points in the gospel, to them, is the emphasis of the centrality of God in the gospel, and the supremacy of grace and mercy. While these are invaluable points, these folks run the risk of devaluing humans (and sometimes appear quite cantankerous).

Proponents of the second interpretation say that of course humans have value to God because they are created in His image; Jesus, after all, in Matthew 6 assures His disciples not to worry because God considers them valuable. One of the key points in the gospel, to them, is to help other see how valuable they are in the scheme of things, and to inspire them to turn to God to live out their created & redemptive purposes. While these are also invaluable points, these folks run the risk of inflating the value of humans (and sometimes appear no different than the world's self-esteem gurus).

I'm not going to claim to answer this dilemma! However, I think it's important to note that these two camps seem to be attaching a different meaning to the word, "value."

When this debate emerged in my class, I asked the debaters to consider what they meant when they used the term, "value." Did they mean worth? significance? importance? worthiness? worthwhile-ness? loveliness? When we realized we were at a terminology impasse, the debate died down, and everyone seemed to have something new to think about.

I think it's important that we pursue a clear understanding of our terminology when we talk about human beings. We are, after all, finite beings somehow created in the image of God and one of the greatest paradoxes (a la Pascal) in the universe. No wonder it's very easy for our statements about ourselves to be misunderstood!

When have you run into this terminology problem? How can seeking a clear definition of your terms help you understand what truths the Bible claims about humanity? How can seeking a clear definition of your terms help you communicate those truths to others?

Best Books for Undergrads -- From The Emerging Scholars Blog

http://blog.emergingscholars.org/2009/12/best-books-for-undergrads-your-picks/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EmergingScholars+%28The+Emerging+Scholars+Blog%29

Enjoy!

Merry Christmas!

I hope you enjoy this season of celebration! I'll be back with blogs next Tuesday!

Pluralism and Relativism in December

I think there's a bit of confusion in terminology in the church. I hear a lot of Christians praying against "the evils of pluralism in our society," especially during the holiday tidal wave during December. I think the problem is that Christians often confuse pluralism with relativism.

Pluralism simply means that the holder of a worldview tolerates the existence of other worldviews. If a person has an attitude of pluralism, it means that he doesn't interfere with others' rights to believe differently than he. That doesn't mean that the person cannot think of other worldviews as wrong (in fact, he wouldn't have much of a worldview if he didn't), nor does it mean he cannot dialog with others about their worldview and try to convince them of his (again, he wouldn't have much of a worldview if he didn't); it means that he affirms for others the freedom that he enjoys. It's like the saying that arose around the time of the American Revolution: "I may not agree with your beliefs, but I will fight for your right to believe them." To put it pointedly, pluralism is what Christians are thankful for every time we praise God for our freedom to worship Him (which I think comes up in most church services on a regular basis).

Relativism, on the other hand, goes a step further (quite a few steps, really) and says that all worldviews are equally valid. Because we're all equally finite, the relativist says, each of our worldviews is equally flawed. Thus, no one worldview is better than any others. (The irony, of course, is that relativists hold onto their relativism very dogmatically, and are rather intolerant of non-relativists.)

The key difference is that the pluralist can still think that other worldviews are wrong. The key difficulty (and the one that, I think, makes Christians think "pluralism" is evil) is in discerning how pluralism should be lived out.

A big example this time of year is what holiday benediction Christians should use in a secular environment.

• Should we say, "Merry Christmas," because, to us, "Happy Holidays" is empty and meaningless?
• Should we say, "Happy Holidays," because we acknowledge that the other person might not celebrate Christmas, making that benediction empty and meaningless to them?
• If we know the person celebrates a holiday other than Christmas, should we specifically wish them to enjoy in that holiday?
• Should we not say anything, and run the risk of appearing uncaring?
• Should we just respond with whatever the other person says to us?
• If we're in academia, should we just wish them a "Happy Break," since that's the primary benefit we're all looking forward to, anyway?
  

I'm not entirely sure how to answer this question; thus, I alternate between answers depending on how a given situation feels. (Does that make me a good pluralist or a bad pluralist?)

But I think we can keep in mind that pluralism---when rightly defined---is a good thing. It's the basis for our beloved freedom of religion. Whatever we say between now and December 25, let's not lose this precious distinction.

When have you seen the difference between pluralism and relativism played out? What do you see as the difference between pluralism and secularization?

Undergraduate Corner: What do you want to be remembered for?

On this blog, the first and third Tuesday of each month are dedicated to presenting discussion geared toward undergraduate students, in a series called, "Undergraduate Corner."

I managed to go all semester without referring to Tim Tebow on this blog, but here goes...

At the lunch before the Heisman trophy award ceremony, there was a friendly conversation between Florida's Tim Tebow and Texas' Colt McCoy. McCoy---whose team is off to the national championship game---said something to the effect of, "Even if I win the Heisman, and even if my team goes on to win the national championship, I still don't have a plaque at my stadium. How do you do that?"

The conversation led me to think of a question I often ask myself: "How do you want to be remembered?" I think it's a worthwhile question, especially for college students who are in their university culture for such an interesting length of time. It seems like four years is just long enough for someone else to be able to remember you for the rest of his life---for good or for bad.

So how do you want to be remembered? Do you want to be remembered as the person who won all the awards and received all the accolades? Or do you want to be remembered as someone who cared about others and brought out the best in them? Do you want to be remembered as the "religious" person who knew all the right verses? Or do you want to be remembered as someone who lived out the gospel is humility, love, and faithfulness?

McCoy's statement also led me to think of a similarly-structured statement made by Paul in 1 Corinthians 13: "If I speak the languages of men and of angels, but do not have love, I am a sounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so that I can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I donate all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but do not have love, I gain nothing."

It seems Paul didn't want to be remembered for his actions, his gifts, and his accomplishments, but for his love.

So what do you want to be remembered for?

Thoughts About the Incarnation

I was intrigued by this article in Image that talks about the significance of the Incarnation, centered around the quote by Saint Irenaeus: “The glory of God is man fully alive.” It should make some good reading as Christmas approaches.

Why I Dislike Memorization

One of my favorites aspects of physics is that it requires very little memorization. In fact, if you spend your time in a physics class (intro, upper-level undergraduate, or graduate) memorizing the material, you'll most likely fail the exam. I'm a big fan of open-book open-notes exams because it allows the student to show how well she understands the material---i.e., how closely she has come to personally know, internalize, and relate to it. Learning physics is about personally owning the material, not memorizing facts, numbers, or equations.

Of course, you inevitably come to memorize some things. But even when I recite an equation or derivation from memory, I'm always checking it for reasonableness, making sure the dimensions are correct, and analyzing it to see if there's a better way to express or write it. It's never a rote memorization and regurgitation. That's what makes it beautiful and exciting.

I feel much the same way about memorizing Scripture.

I dislike rotely memorizing verses. Doing so doesn't help me understand them---again, meaning to closely know, internalize, and relate to them. I'd rather personally own the truth, instead of memorizing without understanding.

I think 1 John 2:24 illustrates this contrast well:

See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father

John wants the truth of the gospel to remain in them, in the same way that they remain in the Son and in the Father. This is more than memorization of facts and verses---just like us remaining in Jesus is more than Jesus "memorizing" us.

How have you experienced the difference between memorizing and understanding? How do you think we can pursue both to foster our growth as believers?

Clearing up Misconceptions about Fear

I mentioned last time that I wanted to try reading some alternative Christmas texts this December. I started with Isaiah 11, which provides a great description of who Jesus is and what He seeks to accomplish.

I was astonished by how twice it describes Jesus as being characterized by "the fear of the Lord."

This is a phrase that many Christians (present company included) tend to step lightly around and that skeptics love to hate. "How can you have a loving relationship with God," they both ask, "and be afraid of Him?"

It's certainly a difficult question to answer (and not one I'm going to attempt to answer here), but here's the more astonishing fact about this passage: It says that Jesus (God Himself, in human flesh) would have "the fear of the Lord."

If it's difficult for us to explain how we can be called to love and fear God, it's even more difficult for us to begin to fathom how God the Son can perfectly love and fear God the Father!

A couple of thoughts based on this:

First, if we're confused or uncertain about what "the fear of the Lord" looks like (and we very often are), we should look to Jesus. He's our example of everything else that human life should be---why not the fear of the Lord? As a prime example, we can see right away in this text that Jesus "delight[s] in the fear of the Lord."

Second, look at what this attitude of fear toward God (however it is harmonized with everything else in Jesus' divine psyche) produces.

1. Judging the poor with righteousness.
2. Treating victims with fairness.
3. Faithfulness to His people.
4. Peace.
   

Shouldn't these results be appealing to our socially-concerned skeptical friends? Better yet, do we show them this connection between fearing the Lord (something they don't understand or agree with) and caring for the needy and the hurting (something they often think we don't care about) by living it out?

Undergraduate Corner: Some Alternative Christmas Readings

On this blog, the first and third Tuesday of each month are dedicated to presenting discussion geared toward undergraduate students, in a series called, "Undergraduate Corner."

If you're like me, one of the biggest challenges you face as you head into winter break is the familiarity of it. The familiarity can be very comforting---heading home, eating Mom's food, going to church with your parents, hanging your favorite ornament on the tree (if your younger brother hasn't already!)---but it can also be very detrimental.

I've written about this before, but the scenario goes like this: If you're a typical undergraduate who's grown up in the church, you've heard the Christmas story read to you upwards of 100 times now. The wording that Luke and Matthew use roll through your ears without really touching your brain or your heart like a song that was popular ten years ago, especially since your home church's pastor is probably reading from the same version he's read from those other 100 times you've heard it. Before you know it, the beginning of the Spring semester hits, and you haven't really felt spiritually refreshed.

So, here's a challenge both for you and for me: Let's try reading on our own some alternative Christmas-related texts from the Bible this month.

Here are a few suggestions; please add your own in the comments section, and we'll build a list to last us all Christmas!

Isaiah 11

Philippians 2:1-11 (You might even just read the entire chapter!)

1 John 1:1-5 (You might even just read the entire letter!)

Revelation 12

Exodus 29:45-46, Leviticus 26:11-13, Ezekiel 37:24-28, Revelation 21 (Note the similar theme with John 1:14.)