More on Blood: Cain & Abel

Another of Doré's woodcuts.

So...the first death recorded in the Bible is the death of some non-specific animals to provide a covering for Adam and Eve.

The next death is also a sacrifice: Abel offers a sacrifice to God from his sheep; Cain, an unbloody sacrifice from his crops:

Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, “I have gotten1 a man with the help of the Lord.” 2 And again, she bore his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, and Cain a worker of the ground. 3 In the course of time Cain brought to the Lord an offering of uthe fruit of the ground, 4 and Abel also brought of vthe firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions. And the Lord whad regard for Abel and his offering, 5 but xfor Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his face fell. 6 The Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? 7 yIf you do well, will you not be accepted?2 And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. zIts desire is for3 you, but you must rule over it.” --Genesis 4:1-7

 We aren't told here exactly why Cain's sacrifice was not accepted, but Abel's was.  There are several theories (I like how Richard Harris in John Houston's The Bible skimps on what he gives), but none explicit here in Genesis.  But the author of Hebrews mentions this:

4 By faith hAbel offered to God ia more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. --Hebrews 11:4

So what is the difference?  Faith.  Though maybe there's a point about Abel offering blood and Cain offering grain, the distinction brought out in the New Testament is not this (even though the writer of Hebrews talks a lot about blood--the word 'blood' occurs 21 times in that book alone).  Evidently, Cain's faith was deficient; Abel's faith was sufficient.

So here a new concept is introduced in the redemptive history of the Bible: faith.  In the first sacrifice, we saw how God Himself made the first offering to cover Adam and Eve.  Now, we see their children offering sacrifices from the fruit of their labors.  But one offered by faith, and was accepted; whilst the other did not have this faith...and was not accepted.

But what is faith?  So often today, in religious contexts, "faith" simply means "belief".  However, this is the merest necessity for faith.  Sure, faith includes belief, in the same way knowledge includes belief.  But it's not faith merely to believe in the existence of something.  Faith, rather, is placing one's trust in someone or something else.  It is not always a wise choice; faith can be betrayed or unfulfilled.  Mere belief does not necessitate faith--I can intellectually believe in someone's trustworthiness--but entrusting them with something of value demonstrates that I have faith in them.

The question of belief in God is rarely addressed in the Bible (it's generally presumed, but note Heb 11:6); but the question of faith is something else entirely.  Evidently, Cain heard God's voice, so it's doubtful that he disbelieved in Him...but it's also evident that he didn't trust Him.

Though one can certainly have faith in an impersonal object, we generally don't use that term.  And in the Bible, faith is placed in persons (or more specifically, a Person).  Biblical faith is inherently relational.  God is there, saying 'I am your God.  Put your faith in Me.'  Rich relational imagery is used in Scripture--God the Husband, God the Father, even God the Mothering hen.  Our faith is not a cold calculation, like tentatively stepping out on a bridge to see if it will support our weight; no, it is like a marriage, where we become willingly vulnerable to Another.

With God, it is both easier--and harder--than putting faith in another human.  It is easier, if we believe that He is fundamentally good, and looking out for our highest good.  It is harder, in that He is so utterly more powerful, more vast, more unsearchable than anyone else.  To trust in God is diving into a sea without a shore:

Yet in the end, we have no recourse.  We are subject to His power, whether we trust in Him or not.  And trusting in Him challenges us to re-examine our time-bound preconceptions and any sense of entitlement we might have.  He is not your President, or your Therapist, and He certainly isn't your divine servant doing whatever you ask.  He is King of kings and Lord of lords.

He isn't an American, nor is He the Champion of liberal democratic virtues.  Our concepts of right and wrong, justice, and value (which are continually changing) are nothing in His sight.  Do not be surprised if you don't find Him cheering for your favorite cause de jour.

So...this element of faith is also central to the divine narrative.  But there's also much more; we've barely begun looking through the Bible on this concept of the Atonement.

Long Hiatus...Clothes for Adam

Sorry for not posting much recently; I'm in the middle of a (hopefully) short-term move.  We're renting out our home, and moving to a new place, for (again, hopefully) just a year or two.  The other night I was working on refinishing a hardwood floor in our new place.  (Looking at that after I wrote it, it makes it sound like I'm some sort of handyman; I am not.  But it's amazing what you can do if you're willing to learn and make mistakes.)

But I digress.  Last post, I spoke of the blood of Christ.  In the New Testament, this is the essential element of salvation.  The cross was not just spoken of as a great example of love (though it is certainly that--but also much more); the cross is at the very center of the Christian concept of salvation.

But why, some might ask?  Why should the shedding of blood be so central to the Christian faith?  Isn't that some kind of bizarre pagan holdover, or a twisted vision of an angry god who must be placated by death (and the death of an innocent bystander is ok, as long as someone--anyone--dies)?

In my encounters with Muslims and Islamic literature, as well as my encounters with liberal Christians, this is a frequent question.  Why, indeed, is the cross so necessary?  Couldn't God--if He is all powerful--simply say "your sin is no more; I forgive; you are free from its penalty."

It is a very good question.  For some Christians, the cross is merely some kind of psychodrama, a demonstration of love, but in and of itself of little or no value.  Or is perhaps a concession to a common worldview at the time of Christ that the gods needed blood to be happy, but in more enlightened times we can see through this as folly and simply use the story of the cross as a useful myth?  (By "myth" I don't mean falsehood, though some might believe it to be false.  Rather, I mean a story that teaches us a greater truth, though the specific facts aren't that important.  And this--this mythological view of the Bible--is one of the key differences between conservatives and liberals in the church.)

Let's start at the beginning, in what caused the need for redemption in the first place.  We read of Adam's sin, and the consequences of that.  After the curses are pronounced, and before the ejection from the garden, there is this little verse:

21 And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them. --Gen 3:21

Garments of skins...why is this even recorded?  Why is this important enough of a detail to include in the Bible?

Remember, Adam and Eve made garments of fig leaves to cover their now-apparent nakedness.  I doubt if these hasty garments were of much value, so God gives them new ones.  Now, remember He had just finished making an entire universe in just six days, just by speaking His word.  He fashioned humankind out of lifeless dust.  But, to make a covering for Adam and Eve, what does He do?  Simply speak, and make garments ex nihilo?  Or does He take some never-living dust and form that into suitable garments?  Or ask the sinful pair to make better, more permanent garments, a work to demonstrate how sorry they were?

No; God, the giver of life, takes the skin of a living animal to cover the sinful pair.  He kills in order to make this specific creation.  Not words, not dead matter--no, the first death in Scripture is recorded not as a punishment to a deserving sinner, nor as an inevitable consequence of a degraded creation; no, an innocent life is taken--for what?  To cover the naked sinner; to cover the guilty by the flesh of the guiltless.  And this was no work of the sinners themselves; they sinned, but God provided the covering.  God did not tell Adam and Eve "You did a lousy job sewing your garments!  Try harder to show true repentance!"

And this theme is revisited again and again in Scripture.  Lord willing, we will continue on this in future posts.

"Behold, a God Who Bleeds..."

The Jig is up, Danny

 

 

One of my favorite movies of all times is The Man Who Would Be King staring Sean Connery and Michael Caine (and the ever-lovely Shakira Caine), written and directed by John Houston.  It was based on Rudyard Kipling's short story, which in turn was loosely based on the actual stories of  James Brooke and Josiah Harlan.  The movie is a perfect picture of arrogance and hubris, with the inevitable downfall of a man who started believing his own myth.

 

I would hate to spoil the movie for you, if you haven't seen it yet--read no further, rent it immediately, then come back here.  I'll wait.

 

Done?

 

Ok, through a freak arrowshot in battle that produced no blood, Danny Dravot (played by Sean Connery) is proclaimed a god, the son of Iskander (Alexander the Great), and made king of Kafiristan (not fully explained in the movie, but eastern Afghanistan.)  Everything goes swimmingly, until Danny decides to marry a mortal woman.  This is quite unseemly, because mortals and gods are not supposed to marry.  Roxanne (played by Shakira Caine) bites Danny, and low and behold, he bleeds!

 

With this revelation, Danny's erstwhile subjects are more outraged, and kill Danny and almost kill Peachy (Michael Caine), but he survives to tell brother Kipling (they are all Masons) the tale.

 

All good fun action, with some memorable lines such as:

 

Billy Fish: He wants to know if you are gods.

Peachy Carnehan: Not gods - Englishmen. The next best thing.

Or this:

Daniel Dravot: You are going to become soldiers. A soldier does not think. He only obeys. Do you really think that if a soldier thought twice he'd give his life for queen and country? Not bloody likely.

Masterful movie, among the best.  When your Dear Heart is watching the latest Romantic Comedy, endure it--and then have her watch this with you.  (Followed by other manly movies, like Zulu, Glory, or Master and Commander.)

But let's look at the key plot turning: Danny doesn't bleed, and proclaimed a god.  He bleeds, and then dismissed as not a god.  Among the inhabitants of Kafiristan, gods do not bleed.  And, at least in fiction, many cultures believe this.  (Even extraterrestrial ones, according to Star Trek).

 

The Jig is up for you, too, "Kyrock."  Also about a woman.

 

In the realm of Greek myths, gods indeed did "bleed" but it was a golden substance known as ichor.  And if a mortal made contact with ichor, that moral would instantly die.  (For a visual treatment of this, though mixed-up with Egyptian mythos, see the 2016 movie The Gods of Egypt.)

In the Abrahamic religions, Christianity is unique in having at its very core the belief that yes, God does bleed--but only in the incarnation of the Son, because He was both fully God and fully man--His human nature bled.  And that bleeding is one of the essential hallmarks of the Christian faith.

In Hebrews we read:

14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise hpartook of the same things, that ithrough death he might jdestroy kthe one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and deliver all those who lthrough fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. 16 For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he mhelps the offspring of Abraham. 17 Therefore he had nto be made like his brothers in every respect, oso that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest pin the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For because he himself has suffered qwhen tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted. --Heb 2:14-18

But not only that He partook of this nature, but also that the shedding of His blood was key to our redemption:

11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest gof the good things that have come,5 then through hthe greater and more perfect tent (inot made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he jentered konce for all into the holy places, not by means of lthe blood of goats and calves but mby means of his own blood, nthus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if othe blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with pthe ashes of a heifer, sanctify6 for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will qthe blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit roffered himself without blemish to God, spurify our7 conscience tfrom dead works uto serve the living God. --Heb 9:11-14

 For the writer of Hebrews, the blood of Christ was absolutely essential to seal the New Covenant.  Indeed, in the words of Christ Himself:

22 dAnd as they were eating, he took bread, and after eblessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, “Take; fthis is my body.” 23 And he took a cup, and when he had ggiven thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. 24 And he said to them, f“This is my hblood of the3 covenant, which is poured out for imany. 25 Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” --Mark 14:22-25

 In some ways, this is the exact opposite of The Man Who Would Be King:  Danny was proven to be a mortal by bleeding, then killed...Jesus' death was the way by which He demonstrated His power, even over death:

15 iHe is the image of jthe invisible God, kthe firstborn of all creation. 16 For by6 him all things were created, lin heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether mthrones or ndominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created othrough him and for him. 17 And phe is before all things, and in him all things qhold together. 18 And rhe is the head of the body, the church. He is sthe beginning, tthe firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19 For uin him all the vfullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and wthrough him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, xmaking peace yby the blood of his cross. --Col 1:15-20

In Greek mythology, ichor brought instant death.  In Christ, the blood of the Son of God would bring everlasting life.

The defeat of death was the path of preeminence.  The shedding of blood, the seal of reconciliation.

And when we see that the Inescapable God Who could stop all evil with a word chose to destroy evil--He chose to do it not with a spoken word but the Word that spoke all into existence--being silent before the slaughter, to shed blood and bear evil itself.  The Word, in His silence, spoke death to evil as He Himself died...and in that death, bringing life anew.

So the solution to evil was not destruction of all evil--for that would destroy all.  Rather, it was the bringing of life anew through death.  And we shall speak of this more, God willing...





The Goodness of God and the Power of God: Paul's Optimism

Paul: "I'm just a cock-eyed optimist"

 

 

Paul knew suffering.  In his own words:

 

23 Are they bservants of Christ? cI am a better one—I am talking like a madman—with far greater labors, dfar more imprisonments, ewith countless beatings, and foften near death. 24 Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the gforty lashes less one. 25 Three times I was hbeaten with rods. iOnce I was stoned. Three times I jwas shipwrecked; a night and a day I was adrift at sea; 26 on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, kdanger from my own people, ldanger from Gentiles, mdanger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers; 27 nin toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, oin hunger and thirst, often without food,2 in cold and exposure. 28 And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for pall the churches. --2 Cor 11:23-28

Gee, Paul...haven't you heard of positive affirmation?  Such a downer to talk about all that suffering.  You really need to Ac-Cent-Tchu-Ate the Positive!

Never fear, friends!  Paul puts it into perspective:

3 We zput no obstacle in anyone’s way, so that no fault may be found with our ministry, 4 but aas servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: bby great endurance, cin afflictions, dhardships, calamities, 5 ebeatings, imprisonments, friots, labors, sleepless nights, hunger; 6 gby purity, hknowledge, patience, kindness, ithe Holy Spirit, jgenuine love; 7 by ktruthful speech, and lthe power of God; with mthe weapons of righteousness for the right hand and for the left; 8 through honor and dishonor, nthrough slander and praise. We are treated as impostors, and yet are true; 9 as unknown, and oyet well known; pas dying, and behold, we live; qas punished, and yet not killed; 10 ras sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; sas poor, yet making many rich; tas having nothing, uyet possessing everything. --2 Cor 6:3-10



Uhh...not exactly the angle I was looking for...

18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time nare not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for othe revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation pwas subjected to futility, not willingly, but qbecause of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that rthe creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that sthe whole creation thas been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have uthe firstfruits of the Spirit, vgroan inwardly as wwe wait eagerly for adoption as sons, xthe redemption of our bodies. 24 For yin this hope we were saved. Now zhope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we await for it with patience. --Rom 10:18-25

Ok, not only am I suffering, but all creation?!  Apostle Debbie Downer continues:

26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For bwe do not know what to pray for as we ought, but cthe Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27 And dhe who searches hearts knows what is ethe mind of the Spirit, because7 the Spirit fintercedes for the saints gaccording to the will of God. 28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together hfor good,8 for ithose who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he jforeknew he also kpredestined lto be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be mthe firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also njustified, and those whom he justified he also oglorified. --Rom 10:26-30

 Whoa, now that is putting it on a bit thick now, Paul!  I mean, let's not over do it.  Do you really mean all things?

In all seriousness, this is very hard.  In the midst of suffering--losing your job, having a frightening medical diagnosis, having a child go through an illness you're not sure he will ever recover from...these things work for good?!

If one has been told that no, God is not in control, these things just happen, it's part of being in a fallen world, don't blame God--well, such a sentiment of "all things working for good" seems meaningless at best, cruel and insensitive at worst.  But Paul is not done:

14 And we urge you, brothers, admonish pthe idle,3 qencourage the fainthearted, rhelp the weak, sbe patient with them all. 15 See that tno one repays anyone evil for evil, but always useek to do good to one another and to everyone. 16 vRejoice always, 17 wpray without ceasing, 18 xgive thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. --1 Thess 5:14-17

Give thanks in all circumstances?

 15 pLook carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, 16 pmaking the best use of the time, because qthe days are evil. 17 Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what rthe will of the Lord is. 18 And sdo not get drunk with wine, for that is tdebauchery, but ube filled with the Spirit, 19 addressing one another in vpsalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, 20 wgiving thanks always and for everything to God the Father xin the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21 ysubmitting to one another out of reverence for Christ. --Eph 5:15-21

Giving thanks for everything?! 

We reject this, we rebel against it.  We are often told "this is just evil, God didn't want it in your life"--given a few platitudes that refuse to accept the Inescapable God and call it comfort.  We would rather cling to a god who is surprised at suffering, who feels your pain (but cannot stop it)--than acknowledge that the God who holds burning suns in His hands actually is in control...because that idea is too frightening.  It is frightening because it turns over judgment to Another.  We give up our right to be offended at God.  We give up our right to be lords of our lives, and must acknowledge Another who we do not fully understand or comprehend.

Little gods are easy to comprehend, and we don't have to fear making them lords--they don't demand that.  They offer vague comfort, therapeutic help to guide us through our problems--but they are not truly like the God of the theists--they are the deistic gods, who do not dare do anything of which we do not fully approve.  Rightly this is called Moralistic Therapeutic Deism.

And yet...yet, if we accept it, if we say, "Yes, You are in control--though I do not understand"--in short, if we have faith--we can be free from the worry that the forces of chaos are truly in control.  God, Sovereign in times of plenty and in times of want, Sovereign in life, Sovereign in death--and trust that He is, ultimately and unreservedly, good--then we can rest in His arms.

But giving up our right to judge God does not come naturally.  Even if we do not believe in Him, we want to shake our fists in range against Him.  Indeed, it is the easiest thing in the world to reject the Inescapable God...and the hardest thing to accept Him.  Yet calling it "cutting off your nose to spite your face" is far too mild; it is cutting off your ground of being, your source of existence, because you are not in control.  I'll take my existential ball and go home--to annihilation, because reality is not what I want it to be.

Oh, of course--we have the best of motives.  We don't want to saddle God with responsibility for evil.  We want to present Him with a positive spin.  We want to be kind to those who are hurting (as if saying, in effect, "God is not in control" or "this evil serves no purpose, but God let it happen anyway" is somehow comforting).  We want to shield our minds from the realization that we are not as wise as we think we are, and we are not as strong as we pretend.  We deny our brokenness, and cut ourselves from the One who can restore the shattered vessel.

Yet this view seeks to deny the very reality we see: suffering is inescapable.  If the God of the Bible (even just the Red Letter Jesus) exists, then we cannot use rhetorical flourishes to dismiss His claim to be in control, that yes, bad things happen--very bad things.  And yes, God could choose to stop them--but does not.  This vaguely defined Jesus conforms neither to the reality we see around us, nor to the Bible.  It simply performs the service of an object to cling to.  In short, an idol.  And honestly, I cannot pretend to worship an idol that I myself know I created out of my own desires for a god that I can understand fully and control.  I do not want to worship my own creation; I yearn to worship the One who created me.

But more audacious to human dignity than the idea of a Sovereign God is a God who Himself will bear the suffering of His creation.  And this we shall continue, God willing...