From Deadly Serious to Humorous, Science to Sorcery

The third installment of my interview with my friend Dr. Shahnaz Ahmed. We talk about my experiences with death, about funny books, about great science writing and about my favorite fantasy series. The link to her podcast and her website is here.

Aim Higher

The scriptures referred to are Luke 6:27-38.

I had to go to pre-school to pick up a certain someone who had hit a couple of kids. So since I had to watch that person the rest of the day, we had a long earnest discussion of the foundational principle of interpersonal ethics, the dictum included in the oath I and every nurse and doctor takes: first do no harm. It doesn't matter if someone takes the toy you wanted to play with or if someone was mean to you, you don't try to hurt that person. When you get older, they don't just call your parents to have someone collect you from school; they call the cops and put you in jail. Sadly some adults have learned or conceived of other ways to hurt or harm people, ways that may or may not be legal but which are definitely immoral. Thus big corporations, when blocked from doing something by individuals, will file dozens of nuisance lawsuits against such folks to bankrupt them. Politicians will smear their opponents with innuendo or false accusations that fall just short of libel or slander. Whistleblowers will endure character assassination and be called disgruntled employees so it is hard for them to get another job.

So “first do no harm” is a good start in how to act towards others. And I like using the word “harm” because as a nurse, you sometimes to have to cause pain to make the person better. Some dressing changes are painful because tissues stick and cleansing a wound can smart. Physical therapy can hurt but you need to do it if you are, say, going to walk again. Harm has to do with injuring the person. That's what you want to avoid.

But if that were the sole moral principle you followed, you would still fall short of being a good member of the community. The next step ethically would be to do what you can to see that no one is harmed by other persons or other means. You cannot stand by while injury and injustice is being done to someone else. We understand this when the person being harmed is a family member or friend. Hopefully we will step in to defend a loved one. But as Jesus says in today's gospel, “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them.”

In fact some people regard those they love as an extension of themselves. So they are not so much defending the other person as they are defending their possession. A lot of abusive partners are hyper-jealous, seeing their girlfriend or wife not as an individual but as wholly theirs. Whenever you hear of the murder/suicide of a woman by her ex, it is because he did not see her as a person in her own right. He cannot bear the thought of her outliving him or even having a separate life apart from him. The same is true if he also kills their children. Fortunately most of us do evolve morally to the point where we acknowledge that our loved ones are not “Mini-Me”s but people with the right to make their own choices.

So the next step in being an ethical person is to regard and treat everyone in the world as an individual having the same rights as yourself. And that idea is easy to accept if that other person is an abstraction. It becomes more difficult when you try to apply this to specific people you don't care for. It may be those who are of a different race or political party or sexual orientation or religion. They may belong to a different culture or country. They may speak a different language or speak with an accent or use different grammar or jargon than you do. When we lived in tribes or clans, we considered ourselves safer among those who looked, spoke and acted like us. The birth of the kingdom or the nation challenged that deep-seated assumption. We had to expand the circle of those we trusted. And in a world as intimately interconnected and mobile as ours, the challenge is to not stay mired in the parochialism of the past.

But let's say you have internalized the concept of accepting all of your fellow Americans, regardless of race, creed, gender, national origin, or sexual orientation. And let's say you have even gotten to the place where you think of yourself as a citizen of the world, not just the geographical place in which you live. The next step in being a good person is not just to not harm others, or not let them be harmed, but to work for the good of any and all. The priest and the Levite who walked past the beaten man in the parable of the good Samaritan did nothing to make the man worse but they took no positive steps to help him. The Samaritan went out of his way to help the man and get him healed.

Today we would just call 911. But that was not an option then. The Samaritan had no way of summoning aid. He was the mugged man's only hope. And he rose to the occasion. He got his hands dirty and his clothes bloody. He bandaged the man's wounds, pouring on oil and wine, the only disinfectants they had then. He put the battered man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. Then he paid the innkeeper to take care of the man in his absence, promising to reimburse him for any extra expenses. (Luke 10:25-37) He went above and beyond. If we had a world where everyone did that for any in need, the kingdom of God would have arrived.

But there is an important detail that we tend to forget when we examine that parable. As it says in John, “...the Jews do not associate with Samaritans.” (John 4:9) The Jews considered the Samaritans heretics and half-breeds. They were the descendants of the poor people of the ten lost tribes of Israel not taken into exile by the Assyrians. They had intermarried with the non-Hebrews who were brought into the land from other nations. The Samaritans had their own temple on Mount Gerizim, which the Jewish high priest John Hyracanus destroyed during the Maccabean Revolt. And in 52 AD Samaritans massacred Galilean pilgrims heading to Jerusalem. The two peoples were enemies. And in his parable Jesus made a Samaritan, an enemy of the Jews, the hero.

So small wonder Jesus articulates an even higher ethical standard than merely helping any person you can. He expects us to love our enemies as well. The Greek word literally means those you hate and even those who are hostile to you. You could render this command “love the hateful.” And in case we don't get the full import of that, Jesus elaborates: “...do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.” So Jesus doesn't mean “be nice to the person you're not that crazy about”; he means “love the person who has set himself against you.”

I do have a quibble about the translation here and it is more the fault of the way the English language has evolved recently. The Greek word underlying “abuse” does not refer to what we call domestic abuse, sexual abuse or child abuse. Its root is the Greek word for “insult, slander, accuse.” Jesus is talking to his disciples and thinking about religious persecution. 

Jesus then goes on to spell out how this looks in action. “ If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also...” Again he is not talking about intimate abuse but the kind of religious intolerance he himself encountered in Nazareth. (Luke 4:22-30) Indeed at his initial trial before the high priest, Jesus was struck and insulted and did not retaliate. (Luke 22:63-65; John 18:22-23) He practiced what he preached.

Jesus then says, “...and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt.” The words translated “coat” and “shirt” mean “outer garment” and “undergarment” respectively. So Jesus is saying let them strip you naked. Again this happened to Jesus at his crucifixion. (John 19:23)

Why is Jesus counseling this extreme pacifism? I think he is painting a picture of what his disciples will face when they are persecuted for following him. But notice he is not saying, “They will slap both of your cheeks” but “When they strike one cheek, offer the other.” “When they take your outer garment, don't stop them from taking your undergarment.” In other words, don't cower and pull away. Stand your ground and let them know you are not afraid of them or of what they can do.

Some commentators make much of the fact that in Matthew the right cheek is mentioned as the one slapped. That would be a deliberate insult in that honor/shame culture, especially since it would be presumably be done with the left hand. And the aggressor could be taken to court. Similarly, a creditor could not legally take and keep a debtor's outer garment. (Exodus 22:26-27; Deuteronomy 24:12-13) If the debtor was poor, it might be the only garment he has. By being overly cooperative with such an aggressor, you would be underlining how they are clearly doing wrong. And you would be shaming them. Essentially that is how Gandhi got the British Empire to capitulate and how Martin Luther King Jr. got the United States to recognize the civil rights of black citizens: by not fighting back and exposing the shameful behavior of a supposedly morally superior government. Many of us can remember how bad it looked when people in their Sunday best walking peacefully were attacked by dogs and knocked over by water cannons and beaten with billy clubs. Both the British and the Americans considered themselves mostly Christians but what their governments were doing to people merely asking for their rights were the opposite of what Christ commanded us to do to the oppressed. They shamed us into acting as we knew that we should.

Jesus then says, “Give to everyone who begs from you.” Some people balk at this. Will not the person begging just use the money for drugs or alcohol? In some cases, yes. But they may truly need it for food. And you can instead take the person to a grocery store or to a fast food place and buy them a meal. Some folks carry little homeless care kits in their car, consisting of tuna salad and crackers or peanut butter crackers, plus a single serving snack like trail mix or nuts or beef jerky, and a water bottle. Other items homeless people often need is wet wipes, toothbrushes and toothpaste, nail clippers, bandaids, and sunscreen. In cold areas, socks are the number one request, followed by gloves. (See more about this here.) There are a lot of homeless people where we live. This is a practical way to do what Jesus told us to.

Jesus then says, “...and if someone takes away your goods, do not ask for them again.” This reminds me of the chapter in Les Miserables where Jean Valjean, offered shelter by Bishop Myriel, runs off with his silverware. He is captured by the police and brought to the Bishop who then acts as if he had intentionally given the silverware to the ex-convict. He also gives him two silver candlesticks that Jean had “forgotten.” This act of pure grace inspires Valjean to change his life and become a good man.

But is this practical—to not resist when someone takes your belongings? Again Jesus may be thinking of religious persecution. But I also think Jesus is challenging us to do the extraordinary. In verse 36 Jesus says, “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.” According to the notes in the NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, to which I am indebted for much of this material, there is an Aramaic word that can mean both “merciful” and “perfect.” Since Jesus was probably speaking in Aramaic, that word may underlie both this saying of Jesus and that in Matthew 5:48, where he says, “So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” Jesus is urging us to rise above the ordinary response of a moderately good person and aim for perfection.

And this is backed up by what Jesus says in the next paragraph: “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again.” We already have a world that is in the state it is because, in addition to a few people doing very bad things, there are lots of people who aren't deliberately evil but who do the bare minimum of what society expects of them. We will be good so long as it doesn't call for too much sacrifice on our part. We don't want to go too far out of our way.

And yet who, going into the Olympics, doesn't aim for the gold? Nobody sets out to win the bronze, or trains for the silver. Everyone is doing the best they can, seeking to transcend being just good and achieve excellence. Jesus is saying “Aim higher!” Even if we don't manage perfection, we should be pushing ourselves to do better than merely mediocre. Why is it we encourage people to do amazing physical feats but not superb spiritual ones? Why do we see Jesus' command to “Do to others as you would have them do to you” as the pinnacle of morality, rather than the most basic level of ethical conduct? Jesus wants us to transcend being simply decent, and instead try imitating the amazingly gracious God in whose image we are made.

Thus he says, “...love your enemies, do good, lend, expecting nothing in return. Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.” As God is, so he expects his children to be. Even human parents expect their child to behave at least as well as they do, if not better. God wants us to be better than just harmless. He wants us to grow to be people who do his will on earth as it is done in heaven, who make the world a better place and so bring it closer to his kingdom which is to come.

Finally Jesus says, “Do not judge, and you will not be judged; do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven; give, and it will be given to you.” We tend to treat others as they actually treat us. Jesus doesn't want us to take our cues from what others do but from what God does. On the night he was betrayed and taken to die for us, Jesus said, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.” (John 13:34) We are not merely to refrain from harming others; we are not only to prevent others from getting harmed; we are not simply to help one another as we would like to be helped; we are, if necessary, to step into harm's way to save others. We are to take the hit, take the bullet, for others. We are to take up our cross and follow Jesus wherever that takes us and whatever that requires we sacrifice.

But it takes faith. We need to trust that God will reward our efforts even if the world does not. We need to trust that the real stakes are not our life but our soul. We need to trust that the seeds planted today will come to fruition, if not now then in God's time. As Jesus says, “A good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over will be put into your lap; for the measure you give will be the measure you get back.” We can afford to be generous because God is generous to us. As Paul says, “He who did not spare his own son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?” (Romans 8:32) In other words, don't be miserly in sharing your time, your talents, your treasure, or even your life. There's a lot more where that came from.

Books (and One Other Thing) That Made an Impact on Me

My friend Dr. Shahnaz Ahmed has released the second part of the hour long interview she did with me earlier this year. It covers a book I highly recommend and a book I am working on. You'll find it here. 

Meet the Man Behind the Curtain...of Night!

On my recent trip to my hometown I was interviewed by my good friend Dr. Shahnaz Ahmed for her podcast Living a Life Through Books. It's not a collection of book reviews so much as thoughts on reading: books that stay with you, the pleasures and snares of genre books, the place of bookstores in the community, programs that encourage you to read more. It's delightful as is its host. The average episode is between 7 to 10 minutes. I am afraid I broke that average. so she has created 4 episodes out of our interview. You will find the first of them here. I hope you enjoy them and all of her other episodes! 

A Blessing or a Curse?

The scriptures referred to are Luke 6:17-26.

When you deliver the same speech over and over, you nevertheless vary it depending on the audience. When I was working for the Rural Health Network, I created a little standard presentation of what we did and how people could support us. I started with a joke and while I followed the same basic structure, I would change the presentation somewhat for whichever audience I was facing. When speaking to a woman's group I would emphasize different services than those I would mention before a men's group. Politicians have stump speeches which they tailor to the city and state and organization they are addressing. Comedians hone their material on the road, experimenting with the set ups, delivery and punchlines as they tour, so that what they performed at their first venue will have changed either somewhat or drastically by the time they do their final venue. And as an itinerant preacher, I am sure that Jesus did the same. And today we have words that sound like the beatitudes from the Sermon on the Mount but not quite.

We know this is not the same sermon because Luke says Jesus was standing on a level place and so this is often called the Sermon on the Plain. But the structure of the sermon is very like that in chapters 5 through 7 of Matthew. It starts with some beatitudes, touches on loving others, not judging people, bearing good fruit and concludes with a metaphor about being a wise builder.

The biggest difference is not so much the things omitted as the opening beatitudes and their corresponding woes. So let's look at them.

First a word about a word. The Greek word for “blessed” means fortunate or happy. This is a good state to be in. Yet the things Jesus says are a blessing seem to contradict it. We shall see why.

“Then he looked up at his disciples and said: 'Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.'” Remember what we said about altering your speech so it is pertinent to your audience. Here we are told that Jesus is addressing his disciples. So Jesus is not saying that poverty in general is a good thing or that poor people should be content with their lot. He is saying that his disciples will be rewarded for doing without while serving God. He says the same after his famous observation that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. When Peter points out, “We have left all we had to follow you!” Jesus says, “No one who has left home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God will fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life.” (Luke 18:24-30)

In Matthew's version Jesus adds, “But many who are first will be last and many who are last will be first.” (Matthew 19:30) And that seems to be the key to today's gospel reading. The world's values are the inverse of God's values. In the kingdom of God things seem topsy turvy but in fact they are finally in the right order.

“Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled.” We are told that Jesus and the disciples didn't even get a chance to eat at times because so many people were coming and going, probably to be healed. (Mark 6:31) We've all been so busy we had no time to eat. Often it is our job that has us so occupied that we can't take a lunch. But we are being paid and the reason we don't take a break is that we feel such dedication is expected of us. Plus we don't want to endanger our employment. But the disciples weren't being paid. They were following Jesus. And they were healing and helping other people. They were being selfless. Jesus said their sacrifice will be rewarded.

“Blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh.” In other places Jesus talks about the groomsmen fasting when the bridegroom is taken from them. (Luke 5:35) But I don't think that Jesus is talking about mourning him here because of the word “now.” So why would the disciples weep now, after he had just chosen them? (Luke 6:12-16) One thing that could weigh on them is all of the people in pain they are encountering. Seeing people who are suffering has an effect on you. It's what leads to burnout in doctors, nurses, social workers, cops, clergy and others whose job is helping people. It is hard to face tragedy and trauma over and over, even if it is not yours. Compassionate people are especially affected. But we have a God who one day “will wipe away every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” (Revelation 21:4) It is a mistaken idea that God is anti-laughter. God just understands when it is inappropriate. As Ecclesiastes says, there is “a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance.” (Ecclesiastes 3:4) God is planning to take away all the causes of weeping and mourning and that will be the time to laugh and to dance with joy.

“Blessed are you when people hate you, and when they exclude you, revile you, and defame you on account of the Son of Man. Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, for surely your reward is great in heaven; for that is what their ancestors did to the prophets.” This may sound like it was inserted later when the church was being persecuted but in Jesus' day there were many Jewish factions. And Jesus knew of the rivalries and the different kinds of power they had: popular support (the Pharisees), support of the religious establishment (the Sadducees), and violent extremism (the Zealots). Jesus also knew of the opposition his small movement was going to encounter. He had encountered it himself in his own hometown. (Luke 4:28-30)

He also uses the title “Son of Man,” a messianic reference from the book of Daniel, where it says, “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given glory, authority and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will never pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.” (Daniel 7:13-14) In the religious and political tinderbox that was 1^st century Galilee and Judea, it wasn't hard to foresee that anyone held up as the Messiah would be a target, as would those who followed him.

But Jesus reminds his disciples that the prophets were also persecuted for proclaiming God's word. Moses, Jeremiah, Elijah, Micaiah, Elisha, Amos and others stood up to pharaohs and kings and were often opposed by their own people. Nobody wants to hear unpleasant truths. Jesus said the pushback to his message would be a sign that once again people don't really want to hear what God has to say.

Which brings us to the woes. “But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation.” In other words, you have gotten all the comfort you will get. What is interesting is that the Greek word translated “consolation” or “comfort” can also mean “encouragement.” Perhaps Jesus means that their prosperity only motivates the rich to live the life they have now. Unlike the poor, they have no motivation to look forward to the life to come. Whereas those who have made sacrifices for the sake of God's kingdom will find out it was a blessing after all, those who have not given till it hurts will know what that is like in the next world. And, as we shall see, Jesus is still talking about disciples.

“Woe to you who are full now, for you will be hungry.” In Jesus' day, you could tell a rich person even without their fancy clothes. They weighed more. If you look back even just a couple of generations, you will see in old photos that the average person then was thinner than the average American today. They didn't eat meat every day; they didn't have high fructose corn syrup in everything; they didn't eat snacks whenever bored. And those are our great-grandparents. Imagine what it was like in Jesus' day. The basic staples were bread, wine and olive oil (Deuteronomy 7:13; 2 Kings 18:32), supplemented by figs and dates, grapes and pomegranates, and legumes. If you were poor you only got to eat meat at major festivals, or maybe a wedding, so only a few times a year. Jesus' disciples were fortunate to be fishermen and able to eat fish, which was otherwise an expensive food, due to the cost of preserving and transporting it. It reminds me of a family story about my wife's Polish grandmother who was the village butcher's daughter and therefore got to eat meat once a week! 15 million US households—nearly 12%—don't always know if they will have enough to eat. In Jesus' day, the proportion who were food insecure was much higher.

“Woe to you who are laughing now, for you will mourn and weep.” People do not laugh when persecuted. How could any true disciple of Jesus in those days avoid that?

“Woe to you when all speak well of you, for that is what their ancestors did to the false prophets.” Kings of ancient Israel and Judah had their own schools of prophets, often telling the king what he wanted to hear: that there would be great military victories and wealth and prosperity during their reign. (1 Kings 22:6) They knew they had to keep their leader happy to keep their jobs and their lives. But even the general populace didn't always want to hear what the prophets said. Isaiah writes, “For these are rebellious people—they are lying children, children unwilling to obey the Lord's law. They say to the visionaries, 'See no more visions!' and to the seers, 'Don't relate messages to us about what is right! Tell us nice things, relate deceptive messages.” (Isaiah 30:9-10, NET) And sure enough some of the biggest churches in the US are those telling people that God wants them all to be rich and have always joyful, always triumphant lives. They think Jesus said “If any want to follow me, let them indulge themselves, take up their gold cross necklaces and follow their desires.”

Now Jesus is not condemning all rich people. He had wealthy benefactors, like the women who supported his ministry. (Luke 8:1-3) But the problem is that the affluent tend to make a number of assumptions that go against biblical wisdom.

First, they tend to think they got wealthy on their own efforts alone. That's not as common as we've been led to believe. Bill Gates' parents were wealthy. That's how he could drop out of an ivy league colleague to work on software. Jeff Bezos' grandfather owned a ranch and was a regional director of the US Atomic Energy Commission. Bezos went to Princeton and was senior vice president at a hedge fund when he quit to start Amazon. Warren Buffett was the son of a Congressman. 52% of the wealthiest people in the world were either born to wealth or to a comfortable family background with connections which helped them get started. Studies show that where you grow up, what your parents earn and whether they were married is a major determinant of where you end up economically. In other words, rich kids tend to stay rich and poor kids tend to stay poor throughout their life. But we have so inculcated the Horatio Alger/“rags to riches” myth into society that we think that most rich folks got there by sheer hard work alone. It isn't true now and it wasn't true in Jesus' day.

Secondly, the assumption that socio-economic status is a meritocracy can make certain non-perceptive rich folks think they are better and more deserving than others. Wealth is often dependent on factors over which we have no control. Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone, right? But inventor Elisha Gray submitted his patent application for the telephone on the very same day that Bell's lawyers did and there has always been a dispute as to who filed it first. Had the US patent office ruled differently we might have been talking about Ma Gray for the last century. Again the patent office initially ruled that Thomas Edison's patent for the electric light bulb was actually based on the work of William E. Sawyer. Only after 6 years in court did a judge rule in Edison's favor.

Thirdly, often the honest hard work was not done by the person who became rich. In 1903 Elizabeth Magie created The Landlord's Game to show how our economy unfairly favors monopolies. She patented it and self-published it. In 1932 a man named Charles Darrow played the game for the first time with friends at a dinner party. That night he pirated the game, called it Monopoly and began selling it himself. Parker Brothers bought it and then realized Darrow didn't own the patent. So they bought Magie's rights saying they would distribute her version but printed and sold thousands more of Darrow's version, making it much more popular and making Darrow rich. And the stories of how Steve Jobs took credit and money for programs and chips he didn't actually create are well known. Wealth can be created legitimately or not, and so cannot be used to infer someone's virtue.

In the same way, being poor doesn't mean you are lazy or immoral. The ALICE or Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed report for Monroe County says that 42% of people living in the Keys can't afford basic living expenses such as food, housing, healthcare, transportation, and childcare. Across the state of Florida that jumps to 46%. And these people are employed. But 67% of jobs in Florida pay less than $20 an hour, whereas you need to make at least $27 an hour to cover the basic costs of living. A person's virtues or lack of them do not determine if he is rich or poor.

Everything we have—wealth, talent, intelligence, energy—comes from God. He expects us not to hoard or to use these gifts to enrich ourselves but to help others. J.K. Rowling, a Christian, was once the wealthiest author in the world and yet in 2012 she was dropped from Forbes list of billionaires because of the fact that she gave $160 million to charity and the fact that unlike some, she pays her taxes. She does the later because when she wrote the first Harry Potter book, she was a single mother on welfare and now she is paying that financial help from the government back with interest.

While there is nothing inherently wrong with being rich, there are, as Jesus, James and Paul point out, a wealth of temptations that go along with it. We can think our largess is due to our personal excellence or that what we have is ours to do with as we wish. We can even see it as a sign of God's approval. As Paul writes to Timothy, “Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life.” (1 Timothy 6:17-19)

Nothing we have is truly ours. Accident, age, disease or ultimately death will take everything, except that which they cannot take: the eternal life of those who live in Christ. And one way the world shall know them is by their fruit. Those who share in the life of the God who is love will share God's gifts with others. His grace will flow through them like a river, bestowing blessings on all whom they touch. And by blessing others they will find themselves blessed by the the one who is the source of all blessings and of every good gift.

Can I Get a Witness?

The scriptures referred to are 1 Corinthians 15:1-11.

One thing you think would be a casualty of the internet would be conspiracy theories. With access to most of the knowledge in the world in a computer you can carry in your pocket or purse, you would think people would be better informed. But the problem is that not only can you look up what experts say on a matter, you can also look up crackpots. On You Tube and other websites you can read about or listen to or watch obsessed folks present their case that vaccines do more harm than good or that 9/11 was an inside job by the government or that the moon landing never took place. There are people who think that the earth being flat is more plausible than the fact that it is a sphere, deduced thousands of years ago by the ancient Greeks and confirmed by satellite imagery. There are still folks who think it makes more sense that President Kennedy was assassinated by Jimmy Hoffa and the Mafia or Fidel Castro or anti-Castro Cubans or CIA or the Soviets or LBJ or the Federal Reserve rather than by an unstable ex-Marine marksman.

The problem isn't that one can't find the facts; the problem is that people have always believed what they wanted to and cherry-picked the facts or theories that support them. The JFK conspiracy theory began long before the internet, as did the moon landing. Google just makes finding birds of a feather easier, even if the birds are cuckoos.

Before mass media, the way to verify that something happened was to hear it from people who were there. One of the Great Courses I am listening to is one where key points in history are examined in detail using eye witness accounts whenever possible. I am also reading Rodney Stark's The Triumph of Christianity, which frequently explodes myths about Church history simply by citing documents of the times. For instance Stark demolishes the idea that the Middle Ages was the “Age of Faith” by quoting bishops and even Martin Luther about how seldom people went to church and how little the average person knew about the faith. Stark similarly refutes the label “The Dark Ages” by citing how much innovation took place during that period. He also shows that far from being suppressed, science was supported by the Church and was largely done by devout Christians and especially clergy, and in particular, bishops. They felt that since the universe was created by a rational God and since humans were created in his image, it was possible to examine nature and figure out the principles behind it. They believed that all truth is God's truth. Behind these mistaken beliefs about earlier eras were the assertions of secular Enlightenment figures who wanted to show that their rationalism and sciences were the results of a revolution against the benighted Catholic church rather than the outcome of a natural evolution of human thought, observation and innovation that had been going out ever since the fall of the Roman Empire.

Whereas usually historians do take the word of those who lived through an historical experience, there is a tendency to doubt everything when it comes to the writings of the Bible. That is especially true when it comes to Jesus. Skepticism about him is so high that New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman felt compelled to write a book called Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth. He did it to counter those who claim that not only wasn't Jesus divine, he was entirely fictional. Ehrman is not a believer but he is too good a scholar to believe that the central person on whom the world's most successful faith was built was a figment of the imagination. Unlike, say, King Arthur, whose first mention appears 400 years after he would have lived, accounts of Jesus appear within 20 years of his earthly life. And it took Arthur several more centuries to go from a battle leader to a full fledged king. It would be unprecedented for Jesus to go from crucified carpenter to Creator God in a mere 2 decades.

Today's passage from 1 Corinthians is actually the earliest account we have for the facts of the resurrection, an event skeptics feverishly try to explain away. Paul's correspondence precedes the composition of the first gospel, Mark, by a decade or so. In the earliest letters we have from Paul, the two epistles to the Thessalonians, he is already calling Jesus the son of God who was raised from the dead. (1 Thessalonians 1:10) He mentions the resurrection in the first verse of Galatians, written soon after. (Galatians 1:1) And here in 1 Corinthians he gives us the very first rundown of who saw the risen Jesus. And he does so in a way that makes it really hard to deny.

Before getting into it I want to deal with a glaring omission. Paul doesn't mention the women, who are credited by every gospel as being the first witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus. It is possible that he didn't know. The gospels were written later and although one was written by Luke, one of Paul's companions, the traditional date of when it was composed is long after Paul's death. Paul does say that he is passing on what he received and what he received from the Twelve may have left out the women and the fact that when they returned from the empty tomb, no one believed them at first. At this time and in this culture, the testimony of women was not accepted in any court. In fact, it is more remarkable that the gospel writers included the women because this allowed critics to discount their report of Jesus rising from the dead. The fact that the gospels all include the women's account can only be construed to show that's what actually happened.

Paul begins by putting the resurrection in context: “For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures...” It's not that Jesus died a natural death and didn't stay dead. He died for a reason. He was executed in our place. He was a sacrifice for the sins of all.

A lot of people today get squeamish about this. Unlike the people Paul was writing to, animal sacrifice is not a normal thing for us. We also don't think of giving up something permanently when we sin. We do not generally see all the ways we violate God's laws as deserving of death. I think it is because we have the luxury of being able to distance ourselves not just from death but from the consequences of what we do. We live in a wealthy, very safe democracy. We don't know or see the animals we eat and we certainly don't have to kill them as the first step in preparing a meal. We also don't live in a society that requires almost military discipline in order to survive. If everyone in the tribe or the village didn't do their job—planting and harvesting the food, feeding the livestock, guarding the gate, etc—the whole community was in danger. Slack off in farming or storing food and everyone could starve. If someone forgets to close the city gates at night, the next thing you know a raiding clan or an army has seized the city, killed the men, and enslaved the women and children. Even in cosmopolitan Corinth, there was no police force, no welfare, no OSHA workplace standards, no disability payments, no effective healthcare, no women's shelter, and no adoption agencies—none of the buffers we rely on to help us in times of misfortune. The man of the family literally had the power of life and death not only over his slaves but over his children. Practically all unmarried women were fair game for any man's appetites. The way to survive was to scrupulously obey society's rules. And that merely increased your odds of living; it didn't guarantee it. It only made sense that even minor offenses against God would also have dire consequences.

But thanks to Jesus, that is no longer true. He died for all our sins, once and for all. His life and death reveal God's great love for all people. He is all forgiving and merciful. Those who trust Jesus live by grace. And Paul emphasizes it was “in accordance with the scriptures.” It is all there in the only scriptures early Christians had, the Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament. People did not see it until Jesus fulfilled them in ways that no one expected.

Jesus was buried and then he was raised on the third day. And again it was all predicted in scripture. God is playing the long game. This was not a fluke or Plan B. Even when his creatures killed his son, God was not stymied. He is the Lord of life and he used the death and resurrection of Jesus to give eternal life to all who live through Christ.

Of course, this is easy for Christians to assert. But if someone told you that God had become a man, died and rose again from the dead, you'd want evidence. And that's what Paul offers. He tells us that Jesus “appeared to Cephas.” That's the Aramaic version of Peter. Calling him Cephas would be like calling a celebrity by his or her real name, rather than the stage name they were known by. Jesus gave Simon his nickname, essentially "Rocky," and I imagine his wife and family and friends kept using the original form, rather than the Greek. This indicates Paul and Peter knew each other well. Paul is saying, “I know this guy and I believe him when he says he saw the risen Jesus.”

Then Christ appeared to the twelve, says Paul. I am assuming Paul is including Matthias who was selected to replace Judas as a disciple. He was “one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John's baptism to the time Jesus was taken up from us,” and he was “a witness with us to the resurrection.” (Act 1:21-22) So these were twelve men who lived with Jesus for 3 years and thus knew that who they saw on Easter Sunday was the same man who had died that Friday. None of them recanted, not even when they were persecuted. They are the reason that the Greek word “martyr” no longer merely means witness but one who is willing to die for his belief. When Paul wrote this, at least one, James, the brother of John, had been executed by Herod Agrippa. They all knew death to be a possibility. Nevertheless they kept proclaiming that Jesus was the risen Lord.

“Then he appeared to more than 500 brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died.” This is Paul's gutsiest claim. We are not talking about a conspiracy of 12 guys claiming their leader was alive again. The resurrected Jesus was seen by enough people to fill this church 5 times over. And most of them were still alive at the time Paul was writing. He is saying, “If you don't believe me, ask them.”

In fact, I think that is what kept the gospels from being written earlier than they were. At this time there were many living witnesses to Jesus' life and resurrection. They could come and speak to the churches. They were living gospels, if you will. But after the Great Fire in 64 AD that devastated 10 of the 14 districts of Rome, Nero blamed the Christians and started the first imperial persecution of the church. He is responsible for the deaths of Peter and Paul among many others. I think that is what motivated John Mark, who worked closely with both men, (Philemon 24; Colossians 4:10; 2 Timothy 4:11; 1 Peter 5:13) to write down a basic outline of Jesus' life. Later Matthew and Luke would build their gospels on Mark's and even use large sections of it, along with additional material they had access to. Finally John writes his gospel, barely touching on what the other gospels cover, as if it was unnecessary to repeat the same material, and instead adding things about Jesus he felt needed to be preserved.

This is really hard for skeptics to dismiss. It is difficult to say that Jesus' resurrection was made up, when not just his inner circle but 500 people saw the risen Jesus. And they did not encounter a ghost, which everyone back then believed in, but Jesus in the flesh, his wounds palpable. Even secular historians are at a loss to explain why, out of all the followers of all the messianic pretenders, those of Jesus did not melt away but grew exponentially despite the very real threat of torture and death. It takes really loopy conspiracy theories, like The Passover Plot, or that he never existed, to come up with a counterargument to the Occam's razor of “Jesus rose.”

Paul writes, “Then he appeared to James....” He is referring to the brother of Jesus. Our Lord's brothers were not believers at first. (John 7:5) Their reaction to hearing about his ministry is to go “to take charge of him, for they said, 'He is out of his mind.'” (Mark 3:21) Perhaps this is why Jesus bestows the care of his mother upon his beloved disciple. (John 19:26-27) But Jesus does not forget his kin and appears to James, and quite probably to all of his brothers and his mother, for they are listed in the first chapter of Acts as joining in prayer with the apostles and the women in the upstairs room. (Acts 1:14) James later becomes the head of the church in Jerusalem. (Acts 15:13-21) He too will die for his belief that the brother whom he grew up with was in fact God's son.

Paul says that Jesus then appeared “to all the apostles” possibly thinking of the time when Thomas was with them. (John 20:26) Paul then says, “...and last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared to me as well.” The awkward phrase “untimely born” usually means a miscarriage or abortion. Paul is comparing himself to a dead fetus. Seeing the risen Christ brought about a new birth for Paul. And Paul does count this not as a vision but as an actual bodily appearance of Jesus. But seeing as he persecuted the church and had Christians arrested and thrown into prison, and that he approved the stoning of Stephen, Paul calls himself “the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle.” His calling and all the work he has done is due entirely to God's grace.

So what does what happened 2000 years ago have to do with us today? For one thing we would not even know of this obscure carpenter and preacher had he not risen from the dead. But more importantly it vindicates what he said. Before his death, his disciples believed him to be the Messiah, albeit primarily in a prophetic role and possibly as the royal ruler of God's kingdom on earth. But they didn't see his role as the Lamb of God, not until they saw and touched and ate with Jesus over and over for 40 days. It was then that he opened to them the scriptures that foretold how the Messiah would die for the sins of the world and rise to give life to those who answered his call.

And the resurrection means this: there is no situation so hopeless that God cannot reverse it, nor any act so evil that God cannot use it to redeem people. When we, like Jesus at Gethsemane, pray in great distress about an ordeal we are about to undergo, when we, like Jesus at Golgotha, are stumbling and bearing our cross up a steep grade, when we, like Jesus at Calvary, are hanging in pain and suffering and even humiliation, we can know that not only will this pass but that we will know joy and triumph and new life again. As Paul says elsewhere, “...in all things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else is all creation, will be able to separate us the love of God in Christ.” (Romans 8:37-39) In the solid reality of the risen Jesus, the God of life and love, find your courage and go forth into a death- haunted world to sow the seeds of its resurrection.