Check Your Theology At The Door

Have you ever wondered whether or not you should take the whole Bible literally? There are many schools of thought. I can't tell you which is correct (though I'm sure some of you think you could), but I can give you something to think about. 

Long after Charlton Heston told Yul Brynner to "let my people go", God gave the people (through Moses) what has been titled "The Ten Commandments" (NOW do you get the joke?). Another name for The Ten Commandments is "The Great Shalt Nots":

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image . . . Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain . . . Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy . . . Honour thy father and thy mother . . . Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness . . . Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's (stuff) . . ." (Exodus 20:3-17 [KJV])

Now, Jesus came along and gave us a more positive spin on the list: "'Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?' Jesus said to him, '"You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind." This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.'" (Matthew 22:36-40 [NKJV])

Being that the religious are never satisfied, He was asked, "'. . . And who is my neighbor?' Then Jesus answered and said: 'A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a certain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and looked, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion on him, and went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said to him, "Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you." So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among thieves?' And he said, 'He who showed mercy on him.' Then Jesus said to him, 'Go and do likewise.'" (Luke 10:29b-37 [NKJV])

Sounds pretty simple, doesn't it? The Samaritan (a person who was despised by the Jews) showed compassion on what appears to be a Jew (being the person was travelling FROM Jerusalem at the time), where other Jews, even a priest and a Levite (one of the 12 tribes of Israel - who happen to be the line of the priesthood) didn't want to become "unclean" by becoming involved.

What does Jesus say? "Go and do likewise." Be the neighbor. Realize, this follows the whole, "What is the greatest commandment?" conversation. Or, more accurately, it ties directly into the "What is the greatest commandment?" conversation.

Now I ask you: what if the man who fell among thieves was a known homosexual?

"But, J.P., he wasn't."

Wasn't he? There is no information about the man outside of where he was travelling from and travelling to. Was he an outstanding member of his church? Did he tithe? Was he homosexual? We don't know. Why? Because, apparently to Jesus, it didn't matter. 

Now, I know many who will say that homosexuality is an abomination, and they will quote the Bible to prove it. Here is where the theological rubber meets the road: How do those verses line up with what Jesus HIMSELF told us were the two greatest commandments?

Okay, I lied. I CAN tell you whether or not you can take the whole Bible literally. Ready? 

Whenever you read something that lines up with the two greatest commandments, that is big "B" Bible. If it doesn't, it is small "b" bible. 

"What about what Paul wrote in the epistles regarding homosexuality being an abomination?"

Small "b" bible. 

Nowhere in the two greatest commandments or the "Ten Shalt Nots" do you read anything about homosexuality. For God, it is simply not an issue. For (religious, hyper-controlling) people? You get the idea.

©Emittravel 2020

The Holy Quartet

I fall into the Trinitarian viewpoint concerning God. Discussions of the Trinity have a tendency to either create deep conversations, or a glazed panic to fall over an individual's eyes. Not surprising, as the idea of a triune Godhead fills some folks with complete bewilderment.

Putting it simply, the basic viewpoint of the Trinity is one God represented in three separate and distinct individuals. Not three separate gods. One God, but three representations. You have the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost), all functioning in three different roles, but as one entity.

I think the best explanation I've ever heard was the simplest, and it came from a comedian named Mike Warnke. He said that understanding the Trinity was as simple as cherry pie. Now, a good cherry pie is runny in the middle, with a light and flaky crust on top. If you have ever had such a pie, you know that if you try to remove a slice, you have to WHIP the piece from the pie pan to your plate, or the filling falls out. Now, take a freshly-made cherry pie, take a knife, and make three slices - or, slice the pie into three pieces. When you look at the crust, you can see three separate pieces of pie, but the runny filling inside moves back and becomes essentially one pie inside. Three pieces - one pie. Same with the Godhead. One God, in three separate "pieces". Why? Mike's reasoning was that we finite individuals couldn't swallow that pie whole, so we have to take Him in slices. Simple as cherry pie.

(I love that analogy, though I have to admit: I really don't like cherry pie! Not enough ice cream in the world . . . )

Some Christians have gone beyond the Trinity to the worship of the "Holy Quartet": the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Bible. They have placed the bible on equal footing as God. I've even heard people take "The bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it," to the extreme of "The bible says it, and that settles it whether I believe it or not," and that is dangerous. It's "the word of God" this, and "the word of God" that. They put so much emphasis on "the word" that they miss the meaning of it. The "word" is not the bible. The bible does not refer to itself as "the word".

There are two commonly used Greek words for "word" in the New Testament (you know, the part written in Greek): logos - the sum total of God, and rhema - the word of God expressed. Many Christians take the word "logos" to mean the bible. Unfortunately, that is a bit off base.

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was WITH God and the Word WAS God. HE was in the beginning WITH God." (John 1:1 NKJV - emphasis mine)

"And the Word became FLESH and dwelt among us, and we beheld HIS glory, the glory as of the ONLY BEGOTTEN of the Father, full of grace and truth." (John 1:14 NKJV - emphasis mine)

Seems pretty straight forward to me that John was referring to Jesus as "the word", and not the yet-to-be-written-and-compiled-into-a-leather-bound-book known as the bible. The word "word" used is logos. What was the definition? The sum total of God. Jesus is the sum total of God according to John, not the bible. As an exercise, look up the Greek word for "word" when you come across it in the bible. If it is the word logos, substitute it with "Jesus". But be prepared for your bible-worship theology to be shaken.

As I sense my sabbatical drawing to a close, I felt it worthwhile to get at least one more blog written concerning bible worship. I've grappled with "intellectual Christianity" - the impetus for the sabbatical (why I couldn't sit through anymore sermons, for instance) - and have come to the conclusion that it is not necessarily discussions of Christianity or religion, but misplaced worship of the bible in Christianity that has pushed me away. Now I need to determine if I am ready to once again attend church on a regular basis. I've gone back to my "home church" several times as of late, but have left after the worship has taken place (at the beginning our services). I've visited the church of some long-time friends and played with their music team - and have NOT left afterwards (I'm a guest - that would be RUDE!) I find I'm not squirming in my seat as much, but do find I have to focus. I also am trying to not get so disturbed when I hear references made as to the bible's importance. You know, being more "tolerant" of other people's beliefs (even if I disagree with them).

As I have written before, I believe the bible CONTAINS the words of God, but is not of itself THE word of God. That honor belongs to THE word of God: Jesus.

Remember: The Godhead is a trinity. If you want a quartet, go to a barbershop.

© Emittravel 2015

Martha, Martha

"Now it happened as they went that He entered a certain village; and a certain woman named Martha welcomed Him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, who also sat at Jesus’ feet and heard His word. But Martha was distracted with much serving, and she approached Him and said, 'Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore tell her to help me.'

And Jesus answered and said to her, 'Martha, Martha, you are worried and troubled about many things. But one thing is needed, and Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her.'” Luke 10:38-42 (NKJV)

The above passage from the Gospel of Luke is well-known as a reminder to keep one's focus on Jesus and to not let oneself become overburdened with lesser things. Well, at least it's been taught as such.

My wife and I belong to a small group in our church for married folk. As a lot of these groups go, there is usually a book that is used as a tool to guide the group along a topic or special concern for the group. In the book we are using, the passage from Luke was used. The questions asked were, "What kinds of avoidable pressures was Jesus trying to get Martha to release? How did He help her get a more accurate perspective?" My answers? "The business of trying to be the hostess with the mostess (intentional misspelling). He pointed to the one she was complaining about and told Martha that Mary was actually right. And I'm sure Martha 'appreciated' THAT!"

Apparently, I'm not as spiritually intuitive as others, and failed to see the wisdom that so many previous teachers had come up with concerning it. One of the people in the group was honest enough to admit that he wasn't really sure either what the passage meant, so he took some time to do some research and stated what some commentators of the passage had said. Things like, in that time, a meal was multi-coursed and it was socially expected to produce such a meal when entertaining. That was why Martha was so busy - it was expected! Now, I'm sure such commentators are learned individuals with many initials following their names, but I think they are full of hooey!

If you take a moment to look at the passage, you will notice that it stands alone. There really aren't any previous details in the verses before it to give you context. The verses following it shoot off in a different direction as well. So, when looking at the passage, you only have what you have to work with. And it gives me trouble.

Here is a bit of what we know, and don't know, looking at the passage (and I will be using the New King James Version as quoted above - if you look at other translations, you really won't read too much different):

In verse 38 we have "they went", "He entered", and "welcomed Him". In verse 40 we have "she approached Him and said". The "they" refer to Jesus AND His twelve disciples. "They" were traveling together. Did that mean that Jesus entered the village alone, or was His disciples traveling with Him? It's kind of like saying that "we put in a new driveway", but really mean, "we paid someone to put in new driveway".  Since Jesus is the main person, it can either be assumed that He went alone because Martha "welcomed Him", or that the disciples where there as well because "she approached Him and said" - which communicates she stepped through a GROUP to specifically talk directly to Him.

"… Martha welcomed Him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary …" (verses 38 and 39) Who's house? It says "Martha". Really? This is WAY before the ERA. I'm not saying it's possible or not. Just that we really don't know the makeup of the household. Was Martha married? Did Mary live in the house? We read in other passages that they have a brother named Lazarus. Did he live there as well? If Martha wasn't married, was this the family home? Were there parents? The reason for the questions is this: How many people was Martha serving? From the passage we can count three to be certain (Martha, Mary, and Jesus). But that number could be fifteen (Martha, Mary, Jesus, and His twelve disciples) - or greater with Lazarus, parents, and friends and neighbors. We don't know.

Now, we can make an assumption that Martha had servants (see "new driveway" comment above), but the pronouns and the comment from Martha pretty much convey that she was alone doing all of the preparation. If Mary, Martha's sister, lived there in the house (again, we don't know from the passage), Martha's annoyance with her would be more than reasonable.

What about the preparation? I really don't think Martha had ovens with timers, microwaves, or even gas grills to use as tools. Not having a lot of biblical references to meal preparation, we do know it took longer to cook something then than today. Regardless of the number of courses. I direct you to Genesis 18:1-8 where Abraham receives three visitors and they agree to a meal. I wonder how long it took to prepare a calf - without modern-day cooking equipment?

Now, let's add time to get ready for the meal to the mix. Do you think Jesus emailed Martha a couple of weeks in advance of His arrival? Probably not. In the passage concerning a tax collector named Zacchaeus, a man of minimal stature who climbs a tree to see Jesus' parade float, finds himself host when Jesus says to him, "Zacchaeus, make haste and come down, for today I must stay at your house." (Luke 19:5b NKJV) Jesus seemed fond of inviting himself over for meals.

So now you know why I have trouble when Jesus basically scolds Martha and tells her that Mary was right to stay out of the kitchen (verses 41 and 42). I fail to see the "lesson".

What IS the lesson of this passage? In the small group my wife made a comment that I think really captures the essence (and being a "time" junkie, it really spoke to me): Live in the now. It is more important to focus on who you are with, than what you are doing. I think that's a lesson we all can take to heart.

© Emittravel 2013