What I have included in this post is an article written by N.T. Wright on the fallacies surrounding the idea of the rapture. N.T. Wright is rated as one of the world's top evangelical New Testament scholars. He is very well known for his work on the doctrine of the resurrection and the so-called "new reading of Paul."
Farewell to the Rapture
(N.T. Wright, Bible Review, August 2001. Reproduced by permission of the author)
Little did Paul know how his colorful metaphors for Jesus’ second coming would be misunderstood two millennia later.
The American obsession with the second coming of Jesus — especially with distorted interpretations of it — continues unabated. Seen from my side of the Atlantic, the phenomenal success of the Left Behind books appears puzzling, even bizarre[1]. Few in the U.K. hold the belief on which the popular series of novels is based: that there will be a literal “rapture” in which believers will be snatched up to heaven, leaving empty cars crashing on freeways and kids coming home from school only to find that their parents have been taken to be with Jesus while they have been “left behind.” This pseudo-theological version of Home Alone has reportedly frightened many children into some kind of (distorted) faith.
This dramatic end-time scenario is based (wrongly, as we shall see) on Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalonians, where he writes: “For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout of command, with the voice of an archangel and the trumpet of God. The dead in Christ will rise first; then we, who are left alive, will be snatched up with them on clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17).
What on earth (or in heaven) did Paul mean?
It is Paul who should be credited with creating this scenario. Jesus himself, as I have argued in various books, never predicted such an event[2]. The gospel passages about “the Son of Man coming on the clouds” (Mark 13:26, 14:62, for example) are about Jesus’ vindication, his “coming” to heaven from earth. The parables about a returning king or master (for example, Luke 19:11-27) were originally about God returning to Jerusalem, not about Jesus returning to earth. This, Jesus seemed to believe, was an event within space-time history, not one that would end it forever.
The Ascension of Jesus and the Second Coming are nevertheless vital Christian doctrines[3], and I don’t deny that I believe some future event will result in the personal presence of Jesus within God’s new creation. This is taught throughout the New Testament outside the Gospels. But this event won’t in any way resemble the Left Behind account. Understanding what will happen requires a far more sophisticated cosmology than the one in which “heaven” is somewhere up there in our universe, rather than in a different dimension, a different space-time, altogether.
The New Testament, building on ancient biblical prophecy, envisages that the creator God will remake heaven and earth entirely, affirming the goodness of the old Creation but overcoming its mortality and corruptibility (e.g., Romans 8:18-27; Revelation 21:1; Isaiah 65:17, 66:22). When that happens, Jesus will appear within the resulting new world (e.g., Colossians 3:4; 1 John 3:2).
Paul’s description of Jesus’ reappearance in 1 Thessalonians 4 is a brightly colored version of what he says in two other passages, 1 Corinthians 15:51-54 and Philippians 3:20-21: At Jesus’ “coming” or “appearing,” those who are still alive will be “changed” or “transformed” so that their mortal bodies will become incorruptible, deathless. This is all that Paul intends to say in Thessalonians, but here he borrows imagery—from biblical and political sources—to enhance his message. Little did he know how his rich metaphors would be misunderstood two millennia later.
First, Paul echoes the story of Moses coming down the mountain with the Torah. The trumpet sounds, a loud voice is heard, and after a long wait Moses comes to see what’s been going on in his absence.
Second, he echoes Daniel 7, in which “the people of the saints of the Most High” (that is, the “one like a son of man”) are vindicated over their pagan enemy by being raised up to sit with God in glory. This metaphor, applied to Jesus in the Gospels, is now applied to Christians who are suffering persecution.
Third, Paul conjures up images of an emperor visiting a colony or province. The citizens go out to meet him in open country and then escort him into the city. Paul’s image of the people “meeting the Lord in the air” should be read with the assumption that the people will immediately turn around and lead the Lord back to the newly remade world.
Paul’s mixed metaphors of trumpets blowing and the living being snatched into heaven to meet the Lord are not to be understood as literal truth, as the Left Behind series suggests, but as a vivid and biblically allusive description of the great transformation of the present world of which he speaks elsewhere.
Paul’s misunderstood metaphors present a challenge for us: How can we reuse biblical imagery, including Paul’s, so as to clarify the truth, not distort it? And how can we do so, as he did, in such a way as to subvert the political imagery of the dominant and dehumanizing empires of our world? We might begin by asking, What view of the world is sustained, even legitimized, by the Left Behind ideology? How might it be confronted and subverted by genuinely biblical thinking? For a start, is not the Left Behind mentality in thrall to a dualistic view of reality that allows people to pollute God’s world on the grounds that it’s all going to be destroyed soon? Wouldn’t this be overturned if we recaptured Paul’s wholistic vision of God’s whole creation?
Friday, February 12, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
On Doubt
One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Protestant theologian, Paul Tillich. He says, "Doubt is not the opposite of faith; it is one element of faith." I believe this is very true. While there are many kinds of doubt, two of the most general ones regarding the character, nature, or plans of God and the other being the existence or presence of God, both are something we all must reckon with. Doubt, for us Christians, is a very real problem, but it is one that is seldom talked about. Perhaps we seldom speak about it in honest, personal terms because we are afraid of what others will think of us. Our other Christian friends might begin to believe we are closet atheists or on a slippery slope to liberalism. I think in some situations, we are even afraid that voicing our doubts and fears will make us look less spiritually mature. What I would like to do in this post is just share some very general thoughts on the phenomenon of doubt.
"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see," Hebrews 11:1 says. Faith is something that we choose to do in spite of having no concrete knowledge of what we hope for. To be quite honest, there are many days and times in my life when I have a hard time believing in the existence of God. When I look at the world around me and see the extent of suffering and pain that goes on, I just have a hard time reconciling that with the existence of a good God. I've heard and studied all of the reasons why the state of the world is as it is, but still the seeds of doubt remain. There are also many things in the Bible that just present huge obstacles for me in terms of belief. However, I shall not delve into them at present.
I have read and watched thousands of apologetic videos and books that seem to promise to give you an airtight defense for your Christian belief. They sound very good at the time, however, it does not take me long until I hear someone poke a hole in their argument. I then wonder if I have put my faith in the right thing. Is this all just an illusion? Is God and Christianity just a projection of my mind meant to fulfill a need I have? These are the questions that rack my brain.
So why am I a student of theology still? Why do I still plan on entering the ministry if I struggle so hard with belief? Because as I study, I see that all worldviews have insurmountable problems at some point. I also see that Christianity makes a lot more sense than most worldviews. My faith is based in the person of Jesus Christ and His work, not in my intellectual capabilities to answer all questions. I realize that to be a finite human being means having imperfect knowledge. Therefore, faith is letting the arguments take us as far as they can, but then making a decision to believe despite our unanswered questions. That is why it is "being certain of what we do not see."
Along our Christian journey, faith is something we must work on. As one of my professors says, "Doubts are like headaches; everybody gets them, and they don't last forever." Christian Mystical Theology calls this process The Dark Night of the Soul. It is a time in the Christian journey where everything we "know" is disassembled. We go through times of inner struggle as we seek to understand God. Prayer, Bible study, and other religious practices may seem hard or unhelpful, but we continue to do them anyway. It can't be said how long this "dark night" will last. Perhaps weeks, months, years? Mother Theresa went through this process for most of her adult life. She struggled with feeling the presence of God. Some, like Christopher Hitchens, called her a closet atheist. However, despite her doubts, she kept the faith. The good news for us in the pit of doubt is that one day, we shall emerge from the dark night into a beautiful and glorious morning. Our faith in Christ will be stronger and more personal. Our job, then, is simply to continue walking where we cannot see.
Let us remember that God is big enough to handle our doubts. By working through them, entrusting them to God, and soldiering on, we can live the Christian life. So by now, those of you who are reading this are probably either freaking out and thinking I have lost my faith or am in the process of doing so, or are feeling blessed because you have gone through the same thing at some time or another. I encourage the church to begin to be more open about our existential and intellectual struggles. Share them, contemplate them. Weather the Dark Night of the Soul together.
"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see," Hebrews 11:1 says. Faith is something that we choose to do in spite of having no concrete knowledge of what we hope for. To be quite honest, there are many days and times in my life when I have a hard time believing in the existence of God. When I look at the world around me and see the extent of suffering and pain that goes on, I just have a hard time reconciling that with the existence of a good God. I've heard and studied all of the reasons why the state of the world is as it is, but still the seeds of doubt remain. There are also many things in the Bible that just present huge obstacles for me in terms of belief. However, I shall not delve into them at present.
I have read and watched thousands of apologetic videos and books that seem to promise to give you an airtight defense for your Christian belief. They sound very good at the time, however, it does not take me long until I hear someone poke a hole in their argument. I then wonder if I have put my faith in the right thing. Is this all just an illusion? Is God and Christianity just a projection of my mind meant to fulfill a need I have? These are the questions that rack my brain.
So why am I a student of theology still? Why do I still plan on entering the ministry if I struggle so hard with belief? Because as I study, I see that all worldviews have insurmountable problems at some point. I also see that Christianity makes a lot more sense than most worldviews. My faith is based in the person of Jesus Christ and His work, not in my intellectual capabilities to answer all questions. I realize that to be a finite human being means having imperfect knowledge. Therefore, faith is letting the arguments take us as far as they can, but then making a decision to believe despite our unanswered questions. That is why it is "being certain of what we do not see."
Along our Christian journey, faith is something we must work on. As one of my professors says, "Doubts are like headaches; everybody gets them, and they don't last forever." Christian Mystical Theology calls this process The Dark Night of the Soul. It is a time in the Christian journey where everything we "know" is disassembled. We go through times of inner struggle as we seek to understand God. Prayer, Bible study, and other religious practices may seem hard or unhelpful, but we continue to do them anyway. It can't be said how long this "dark night" will last. Perhaps weeks, months, years? Mother Theresa went through this process for most of her adult life. She struggled with feeling the presence of God. Some, like Christopher Hitchens, called her a closet atheist. However, despite her doubts, she kept the faith. The good news for us in the pit of doubt is that one day, we shall emerge from the dark night into a beautiful and glorious morning. Our faith in Christ will be stronger and more personal. Our job, then, is simply to continue walking where we cannot see.
Let us remember that God is big enough to handle our doubts. By working through them, entrusting them to God, and soldiering on, we can live the Christian life. So by now, those of you who are reading this are probably either freaking out and thinking I have lost my faith or am in the process of doing so, or are feeling blessed because you have gone through the same thing at some time or another. I encourage the church to begin to be more open about our existential and intellectual struggles. Share them, contemplate them. Weather the Dark Night of the Soul together.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Church and Real Men
I am going to vent today. After this video by Mark Driscoll, I realized even more how badly the church needs real men. The church has done a good job reaching out to women, and is even somewhat appealing to more effeminate men. In fact, it seems a lot of younger, Christian men tend too be more feminine than the ones outside the church. Perhaps it is just that society today likes metro-sexual men. Sadly, the metro-sexual thing is a disgrace to manhood. We have young men in the church (and out) who have never worked a real job in their lives. The styles of dress are meant to make men look more like women. Seems like 90% of these guys can't change a tire, change their own oil, much less do any real car repair. They can't do a hard day's work. Back in the day, if you were a young man, you would be working in a coal mine, or logging trees, or farming, maybe even working in a factory. Nowadays, there's a taboo against hard labor. I think it's up to the church to start reaching out to the manly men; the ones who like to hunt, fish, work on cars, and shoot guns. Let's get some more ministries that reach out to that kind of man. Let's make sure all of the other young men in the church can learn how to be a man. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with enjoying the finer things in life, but I do think that manhood is losing its masculinity.
(Note: this would not let me publish the video, so go to Youtube and type in "Mark Driscoll Macho Man")
(Note: this would not let me publish the video, so go to Youtube and type in "Mark Driscoll Macho Man")
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Haiti and God's New World
This week for my New Testament class, as part of our meditative Bible reading, I have been meditating on Isaiah 65:17-25. This passage (read it on your own; it's short) deals with the hope of the new world Christ will create at His Second Coming. This is the oft-cited passage filled with the imagery of lions lying down with lambs, and the world being filled with prosperity, longevity, and close communion with God. This is a picture of the future hope that we are all looking forward to. We acknowledge, along with scripture, that Christ has been exalted to God's right hand where He rules the world as His kingdom is established (Phil. 2: 9-10, Acts 2:33). As Christians who are in Christ, we have become part of the new creation that God is undertaking. We get to look forward to the bright future ahead as both hope and motivation for doing the work of God on earth.
Strangely, I am meditating on all this within the week that a huge earthquake has struck the island of Haiti and killed thousands of people. While we could ask hundreds of questions concerning the goodness of God in allowing this to happen or the origin of evil, including natural disasters, what I would like to consider is how to evaluate this with the coming Kingdom in mind. How do we understand this sort of tragedy that occurs based on simple plate tectonics? Will the coming kingdom involve such tragedy? I do not know. I do not believe we can assume all natural processes will stop when God restores the world. The Isaiah passage itself suggests that natural life cycle processes will still occur (Is. 65:20), while at the same time making the world seem rather safe through the use of the lion and the lamb metaphor. I do not think this passage is to be taken literally, because if it is, then we have a terrible contradiction (people will die, but soulless animals will not?). I believe that everything God created is good, including the forces of nature. What I think this passage is trying to show is the extent of cosmic restoration the world will undergo. So will events like this occur in the new creation? Perhaps, but with no widespread destruction like what we see there. In our resurrected bodies, I imagine we shall be immune to the effects of death and destruction, because that is the final enemy that will be conquered (1 Cor.15).
So, as we see the effects this earthquake has had on the island of Haiti, let's do the work of the coming kingdom. While we live in these present bodies that are subject to the laws of death, let's look ahead to a better time. It is the job of a Christian to help out those who cannot help themselves. The poor, the oppressed, the hungry, those who have been displaced, these are the ones who God is calling into his kingdom. Failure to assist these people is failure to participate in the mission of the kingdom of God. Sending money, help, or prayers is the least we can do as beneficiaries of God's grace. While we may not understand why God allowed such evil to happen, we do know what His will is in it. His will is for us to show the people Christlike love.
Strangely, I am meditating on all this within the week that a huge earthquake has struck the island of Haiti and killed thousands of people. While we could ask hundreds of questions concerning the goodness of God in allowing this to happen or the origin of evil, including natural disasters, what I would like to consider is how to evaluate this with the coming Kingdom in mind. How do we understand this sort of tragedy that occurs based on simple plate tectonics? Will the coming kingdom involve such tragedy? I do not know. I do not believe we can assume all natural processes will stop when God restores the world. The Isaiah passage itself suggests that natural life cycle processes will still occur (Is. 65:20), while at the same time making the world seem rather safe through the use of the lion and the lamb metaphor. I do not think this passage is to be taken literally, because if it is, then we have a terrible contradiction (people will die, but soulless animals will not?). I believe that everything God created is good, including the forces of nature. What I think this passage is trying to show is the extent of cosmic restoration the world will undergo. So will events like this occur in the new creation? Perhaps, but with no widespread destruction like what we see there. In our resurrected bodies, I imagine we shall be immune to the effects of death and destruction, because that is the final enemy that will be conquered (1 Cor.15).
So, as we see the effects this earthquake has had on the island of Haiti, let's do the work of the coming kingdom. While we live in these present bodies that are subject to the laws of death, let's look ahead to a better time. It is the job of a Christian to help out those who cannot help themselves. The poor, the oppressed, the hungry, those who have been displaced, these are the ones who God is calling into his kingdom. Failure to assist these people is failure to participate in the mission of the kingdom of God. Sending money, help, or prayers is the least we can do as beneficiaries of God's grace. While we may not understand why God allowed such evil to happen, we do know what His will is in it. His will is for us to show the people Christlike love.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
World Without End
Currently I am reading a really excellent book. It's called "World Without End" by Ken Follet. It is the sequel to his 1989 novel "Pillars of the Earth." The story follows the lives of a group of peasants and merchants living in the town of Kingsbridge in the 14th century. The story revolves around the constant struggled between the Kingsbridge priory and the ordinary folks who are trying to make a living in a harsh time period. The Hundred Years War is raging and the bubonic plague is wrecking havoc on Europe. The church officials are corrupt and the lords and kings are selfish oppressors. It is not a time I would want to live in. However, it is an excellent novel and at over 1000 pages, it still feels too short. The only complaint I have against it is that at certain points it is far too sexually graphic for my taste. Sometimes it just seems Follet could have been a little more subtle and left more to the imagination. Otherwise, I would suggest it to anyone who loves a good historical novel.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
God, Satan, and Suffering # 1
I have been reading a lot of Dietrich Bonhoeffer lately and my attention has been turned to the problem of suffering in the world. Perhaps it is because suffering is a major theme in Bonhoeffer's work; he proclaimed a Christian life that embraces suffering for the cause of Christ. His adult life consisted in much suffering as he faced Nazi persecution and time in a concentration camp where he was hanged. His work, I believe, is very relevant to today's American Christian, not because we face suffering, but because we do not. Our Christian life is comfortable and easy. We do not face persecution like many in other countries do. Rather, we live our lives happily in our multi-million dollar churches, driving our new cars, wearing our Christian T-shirts, listening to preachers tell us that it is God's will for us to have material success and to live a happy and comfortable life. While I could delve into that subject, my purpose today is to address a certain idea (heresy?) that I came across yesterday evening.
I was surfing around youtube watching some John Piper and Paul Washer videos. My attention turned to suffering, as I still had Dietrich Bonhoeffer on my mind and I thought I would watch some videos on that subject. Not wanting to be one-sided, I looked up some videos done by a well-known pastor who has a huge church in the Redding area. What I heard from him on the problem of suffering sounded great in my head, but ran in direct contradiction with scripture. His argument followed as such: "God is good, Satan is bad. Cancer is bad, therefore, Satan causes cancer." He went on to explain how it is always God's will that we do not have any sickness in our lives. That God never allows sickness into our lives so that we may grow in Him and provide sympathy and support to others. All problems we have stem from Satan, and if we are truly Christians, we'll have a life free from suffering.
This is not the first time I have heard this argument. I have heard it many times before from his followers. They have made claims such as, "I would never make one of my kids suffer in order to teach them something, that's child abuse. The standards I have for what is good, I need to apply that to God, because God is good." This sounds very nice at first, but it does not line up with scripture. When we look at this theory closely, we see that it strips God of His sovereignty.
The first problem I would like to point out in this post is with the first premise that Satan is the cause of all of our problems. I would like to point out that we live in a fallen world where death and sickness is a reality for human beings. Ever since man was removed from the Garden of Eden and lost access to the Tree of Life, he has been cursed with death and disease that he did not have before. We live in a world of suffering that is awaiting the time when God will restore it completely and do away with human suffering. In the meantime, we will get sick and get injured. This is where the controversy starts. If God is good, then he cannot allow us to suffer. He wants us to be happy. This is a really great idea that is popular in countries like America that have no suffering. However, Christianity means embracing suffering as discipline from God (note I said discipline, not punishment. Discipline means training.). Lets look at what the Bible says...
Job 1-2: Satan comes into God's presence and God asks him if he has "considered My servant Job?" Satan then proceeds to torment Job, but only doing what God allows him to do. What is he argument here? God is in charge of our suffering (in this instance he initiated it). I is also interesting to note that at the end, when God finally answers Job, He does not say the reason for the suffering is Satan being bad, He simply says Job is merely a man, and God is in charge of what happens.
Matt. 5:10: "Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven." Their is blessing in persecution and suffering.
2 Cor. 12: 7-10: Paul explains that he was given a "thorn in the flesh" to keep him from exalting himself. Whether this was physical or mental pain, he prayed three times to God that He might remove it. However, God tells him that "My Grace is sufficient for you" and that God is glorified through the sufferings of Paul. Did Paul not have enough faith? If it is God's will that we have no suffering and our healing is guaranteed, why did it not go away?
1 Peter 3:13-22, 4:1-2: Peter explains the role of suffering in the lives of Christians. He makes the argument that we are blessed in our sufferings because we are witnesses to Christ and his suffering. In 4:1, Peter even says that since Christ suffered, we should too, because it helps us to conquer our sin.
While the theology of material blessing, health and wealth is appealing to us comfortable Christians with itching ears, the Bible does not agree with that idea. So either the Bible is wrong and this new theology is right, or the theology is wrong and the Bible is right. I'll throw my lot in with the Bible. To say that it is not God's will for us to suffer so that we may share in the sufferings of Christ and grow closer to God as He guides us is wrong. I only quoted a couple verses on suffering, but would be happy to provide an extensive list. In my next post I shall explain how denying what the Bible says about God and suffering strips God of His sovereignty and leads to a shallow and insufficient faith.
I was surfing around youtube watching some John Piper and Paul Washer videos. My attention turned to suffering, as I still had Dietrich Bonhoeffer on my mind and I thought I would watch some videos on that subject. Not wanting to be one-sided, I looked up some videos done by a well-known pastor who has a huge church in the Redding area. What I heard from him on the problem of suffering sounded great in my head, but ran in direct contradiction with scripture. His argument followed as such: "God is good, Satan is bad. Cancer is bad, therefore, Satan causes cancer." He went on to explain how it is always God's will that we do not have any sickness in our lives. That God never allows sickness into our lives so that we may grow in Him and provide sympathy and support to others. All problems we have stem from Satan, and if we are truly Christians, we'll have a life free from suffering.
This is not the first time I have heard this argument. I have heard it many times before from his followers. They have made claims such as, "I would never make one of my kids suffer in order to teach them something, that's child abuse. The standards I have for what is good, I need to apply that to God, because God is good." This sounds very nice at first, but it does not line up with scripture. When we look at this theory closely, we see that it strips God of His sovereignty.
The first problem I would like to point out in this post is with the first premise that Satan is the cause of all of our problems. I would like to point out that we live in a fallen world where death and sickness is a reality for human beings. Ever since man was removed from the Garden of Eden and lost access to the Tree of Life, he has been cursed with death and disease that he did not have before. We live in a world of suffering that is awaiting the time when God will restore it completely and do away with human suffering. In the meantime, we will get sick and get injured. This is where the controversy starts. If God is good, then he cannot allow us to suffer. He wants us to be happy. This is a really great idea that is popular in countries like America that have no suffering. However, Christianity means embracing suffering as discipline from God (note I said discipline, not punishment. Discipline means training.). Lets look at what the Bible says...
Job 1-2: Satan comes into God's presence and God asks him if he has "considered My servant Job?" Satan then proceeds to torment Job, but only doing what God allows him to do. What is he argument here? God is in charge of our suffering (in this instance he initiated it). I is also interesting to note that at the end, when God finally answers Job, He does not say the reason for the suffering is Satan being bad, He simply says Job is merely a man, and God is in charge of what happens.
Matt. 5:10: "Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven." Their is blessing in persecution and suffering.
2 Cor. 12: 7-10: Paul explains that he was given a "thorn in the flesh" to keep him from exalting himself. Whether this was physical or mental pain, he prayed three times to God that He might remove it. However, God tells him that "My Grace is sufficient for you" and that God is glorified through the sufferings of Paul. Did Paul not have enough faith? If it is God's will that we have no suffering and our healing is guaranteed, why did it not go away?
1 Peter 3:13-22, 4:1-2: Peter explains the role of suffering in the lives of Christians. He makes the argument that we are blessed in our sufferings because we are witnesses to Christ and his suffering. In 4:1, Peter even says that since Christ suffered, we should too, because it helps us to conquer our sin.
While the theology of material blessing, health and wealth is appealing to us comfortable Christians with itching ears, the Bible does not agree with that idea. So either the Bible is wrong and this new theology is right, or the theology is wrong and the Bible is right. I'll throw my lot in with the Bible. To say that it is not God's will for us to suffer so that we may share in the sufferings of Christ and grow closer to God as He guides us is wrong. I only quoted a couple verses on suffering, but would be happy to provide an extensive list. In my next post I shall explain how denying what the Bible says about God and suffering strips God of His sovereignty and leads to a shallow and insufficient faith.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Charles Williams revisited
I have officially become a fan of Charles Williams. His science fiction is really hard to understand, but it is really enjoyable to read. He is one of the few authors that can have a story in which the supernatural is present and visible, but does not sound silly or corny. I've been impressed by two of his main thoughts so far. The first is the way one of the characters descends into Hell (hence the title "Descent Into Hell"). This character keeps having this recurring dream where he is crawling down this endless rope into Hell (presumably). The character, so far, is self absorbed and refuses to find love and joy in other people the way God (or the Omnipotence as He is called in the book) has willed it. This idea of us creating our own Hell is very similar to Williams' friend, C.S. Lewis and his book "The Great Divorce." I personally find this idea of Hell very convincing. Like Lewis says in his book, "In each of us there is something growing which will BE Hell unless it is nipped in the bud." Lewis and Williams both seem to argue that part of the horror of Hell is that we are consumed by our selfish sin. Lewis argues that Hell even begins with a grumbling mood. Imagine that, to lose every part of the common grace we have and be completely immersed in our anger, bitterness, lust, hate, addictions, complaints. That is Hell. By indulging these facets and focusing our attention on ourselves, we begin our descent into Hell, according to Williams. It is something I have felt to some extent myself, now that I consider this. When I am angry, arrogant, self-centered, cynical, or whatever, I feel that separation from God. The result is temptation to continue descending into it, even though it makes me miserable in comparison to doing something within God's will. I cannot imagine losing all faculties of love or joy and being abandoned into that Hell that I create. So I think Williams might have a point. Disclaimer: I am in no way trying to suggest Christians can lose their salvation and go to Hell, or that Hell is merely a figment of our imagination. I believe Hell is a real and physical place. Immersion into our sin and losing the image of God is the worst part of the punishment.
The second idea I liked of Williams is his idea of Substituted Love. In his novel, he argues that Christians should literally bear one another's burdens. When one is feeling oppressed we should not just offer them encouragement, but actually say, "I will carry your sadness for a while." How this happens, I don't know. What Williams says in this novel is that when the oppression comes, the person bearing the burden will take all the pain on himself and the victim will receive some rest. Perhaps we should try this. Perhaps that is what Christ really was getting at. I don't know, but it sounds nice. Disclaimer #2: I'm probably reading too much into this novel. These ideas that I am discussing in this blog post are purely hypothetical. By no means should anyone think that I am committed to them %100. They are just thoughts to ponder. If it turns out to be unorthodox, then I ask for your pardon. Please don't burn me at the stake.
The second idea I liked of Williams is his idea of Substituted Love. In his novel, he argues that Christians should literally bear one another's burdens. When one is feeling oppressed we should not just offer them encouragement, but actually say, "I will carry your sadness for a while." How this happens, I don't know. What Williams says in this novel is that when the oppression comes, the person bearing the burden will take all the pain on himself and the victim will receive some rest. Perhaps we should try this. Perhaps that is what Christ really was getting at. I don't know, but it sounds nice. Disclaimer #2: I'm probably reading too much into this novel. These ideas that I am discussing in this blog post are purely hypothetical. By no means should anyone think that I am committed to them %100. They are just thoughts to ponder. If it turns out to be unorthodox, then I ask for your pardon. Please don't burn me at the stake.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)