Does the Bible teach bad Cosmology?

Anyone else catch the the scientific implications in Isaiah 40:22? "It is [God] who sits above the circle of the earth..." Apparently, at least God and Isaiah understood that the earth was not flat but round, even though it took a couple millenia for everyone else to figure it out! Upon some brief internet research however I discovered that many skeptics actually accuse the Bible of supporting a flat earth view. There's actually a lot more controversy about the way the Bible presents the earth, sky, etc, than I was aware of. Interesting...

I didn't really spend the time to be able to write up a whole summary of this controversy, but if you are in to this sort of thing, the following article from Tektonics Apologetics Ministries seems to give a pretty thorough and biblically faithful point of view on this discussion:

http://www.tektonics.org/af/earthshape.html#circle

A Theology of Brokenness

I recently downloaded The Ambassador's new CD called The Chop Chop: From Milk to Meat (In case you don't know William "Duce" Branch, AKA The Ambassador is a Christian hip hop artist, and also and one of the teaching pastors at Epiphany Fellowship in Philadelphia.) While I've always been more of a rock-n-roller as opposed to a hip-hopper, I find the theological depth that the Ambassador packs into his lyrics to be irrestible, and far superior to a lot of Christian music out there these days. The great thing about hip-hop is that it allows for so many lyrics...so you can practically preach a sermon in one song. It's great...maybe I'm more of a hip-hopper than I thought. Not sure I should start free-stylin' yet though.

Anyway, track 11 on the CD is an interlude entitled "A Theology of Brokenness". I think basically what it is is a clip of him preaching, overlayed onto some cool piano music and beats.

It's better to listen to it with the music and everything, but the content is hard-hitting, and hits me right where I'm at, so I wanted to share it with you guys.

Here it is:

...A lot people blame a lot of things on Satan.
It's easy to deal with the reality of the fact that Satan is against you and all that stuff, and he's your problem.
But there's a whole other category and issue to let sink into you, when it's not Satan who's your problem, but God who's your problem.

Listen, if you're going to walk in the implications of the gospel then you're going to have to be marrried to the principle of brokenness.

Brokenness is the mark of a person that is qualified to be used by God.
At the end of the day people that are actually being used by God in a crazy way- in an off the meter way, are people that have been cracked up, who have been lunged at by God, and God has done something to them. Broken can mean:

Shattered,
Crushed,
Maimed,
Devoid of arrogance,
Wounded,
Contrite,
Injured,
Smashed,
Grieved,
Anxious,
Distressed,
Crippled,
Wrecked,
Demolished,
Fractured,
Handicapped,
Disabled.

Brokenness, based on the scriptures: The spiritual state by which one is disarmed of one's self-dependence and pride, therefore leaving one disabled and in desperate need of help, thereby making one a viable conduit for the glory of Christ.

We're not massochists, but we do kinda have a theology of brokenness.

The Implications of the Resurrection (or lack thereof) #2

What if the resurrection didn't happen? Would the Christian faith fall apart?

Many today are attempting to find ways to say "no" to this question. In a lecture by D.A. Carson entitled Rumors of Resurrection he recounts a recent response by a prominent religious leader in Australia (I think it was an Anglican bishop). In an interview with the media, this bishop was asked if it could be proven that Jesus' body was found and that the ressurection was nothing more than a legend, if that would ruin his faith? The bishop responded with a confident "no" explaining that it would not change the fact that "Christ had risen in his heart."

While this kind of metaphorical reading of the resurrection may be very attractive to many (mostly because it is a safe, non-threatening interpretation that fits in nicely with a post-modern worldview that detests the idea of absolute truth or an exclusive savior), it is important for us and those we interact with to understand that this is not the biblical position.

Apparently the bishop I mentioned earlier had not spent much time in 1 Corinthians (or simply ignored it). In 1 Corinthians 15 (which by the way is the earliest report of the resurrection- within 15-20 years of the crucifixion), Paul answers the question with undeniable clarity:

15:14 "And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain."

15:17 "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

15:19 "If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied."

A resurrection-less gospel is not a gospel at all! If Christ only died but did not rise, we have no good news. As Paul points out later in the chapter, without the resurrection, we may as well live by the philosophy "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die." If Christ was only a good teacher, or an admirable martyr, we are still in the dark, without hope. Even if we lived our lives following his good example, if he is not a living savior, he is not a savior at all, and we are all just fooling ourselves-- like cancer patients imagining we will be cured by lifting weights and keeping a healthy diet!

But if the resurrection is true, we have a living savior who conquered death and sin! For those who are in Christ, this victory has already been applied to us positionally as Christ's righteousness is credited to us by grace through faith. We see the effects of this victory gradually in this life in the process of sanctification. But the best is yet to come, when we will finally be able to fully taste the victory that Christ accomplished in his death and resurrection when we are united with him after death or upon his return.

The good news of Jesus Christ is truly "a glorious gospel" (1 Timothy 1:11) worth living for, and dying for.

The Implications of the Resurrection #1

As we ramp up towards Easter, I'm going to try to put up several posts on the implications of the Resurrection- why the event is essential to the Christian faith and what it means for us as Christians in the 21rst century.

While preparing for tonight's Sojourn topic, "The Reality of the Resurrection", (which by the way, you should come to, 7:30 @ Webster's) I realized that I have kind of taken the resurrection for granted in the past. Growing up in the church, the idea has never been strange to me, and as far as my own doubts, I've struggled more with foundational things like the existence of God and the validity of scripture. So it makes sense that if I came through those foundational doubts and came to the conclusion that God is real, and that the Bible is his inspired word of God, that there isn't much room left for doubting the resurrection.

However since it is often my doubts that propel me to study things out, I have never spent a lot of serious time dwelling on, dissecting, or questioning the resurrection. My unbelieving friends have also not seemed overly concerned with the topic. They seem to be primarily concerned with the existence of God, the validity of scripture, hypocrites in the church, the problem of evil, the arrogance of exclusive religious claims etc.

What I've realized though as I've prepared to lead the Sojourn discussion is that in the resurrection is a deep theological well that I've barely dipped into. And so these next few posts are as much for me as they are for you.

To kick things off here's a great quote by N.T. Wright that Tim Keller ended "The Reality of the Resurrection" chapter with:

The message of the resurrection is that this world matters!
That the injustices and pains of this present world must now
be addressed with the news that healing, justice, and love
have won...If Easter means Jesus Christ is only raised in a
spiritual sense- [then] it is only about me, and finding a
new dimension in my personal spiritual life. But if Jesus
Christ is truly risen from the dead, Christianity becomes
good news for the whole world- news which warms our hearts
precisely because it isn't just about warming hearts. Easter
means that in a world where injustice, violence and degredation
are endemic, God is not prepared to tolerate such things- and
that we will work and plan, with all the energy of God, to
implement victory over them all. Take away Easter and Karl Marx
was probably right to accuse Christianity of ignoring problems
of the material world. Take it away and Freud was probably right
to say Christianity is wish-fulfillment. Take it away and Nietzsche
probably was right to say it was for wimps.

I used to rule the world....

Have you guys read Isaiah 13-24 yet?

Does anybody else think that Coldplay's "Viva La Vida" would be the perfect soundtrack to this section? As I read, I couldn't help but hear the song in my head, especially the first 3 verses:

I used to rule the world
Seas would rise when I gave the word
Now in the morning I sleep alone
Sweep the streets I used to own

I used to roll the dice
Feel the fear in my enemy's eyes
Listen as the crowd would sing
"Now the old king is dead! Long live the king!"

One minute I held the key
Next the walls were closed on me
And I discovered that my castles stand
Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand

After reading this portion of scripture, it's amazing to me that anyone (look up open-theism) could question God's sovereignty over human history.

I'd recommend reading the whole portion at once, and also reading chapter 25 so you can rest in God's goodness, and see the beauty of his redemptive purposes after all of that judgement and carnage.