MARCH 2011

In this edition . . .

Welcome to the March 2011 edition of The Eclectic Kasper. This month we'll continue our study of “The Essentials of the Faith” by exploring some of the most distinctive doctrines of Christianity, and I'll review my favorite movie soundtrack. I will discuss the relationship between chronology and inspiration in this month’s article on “Bible Interpretation.” Also, how many of your U.S. taxpayer dollars do not stay in the U.S.? You may be surprised as we investigate that question question in the article, “A Global Welfare State.” We have some responses to your feedback and thoughts at the bottom, so keep that feedback coming! And give us a "like" on our The Eclectic Kasper Facebook page and we'll try to get some good discussions going on that site as well!

THE ESSENTIALS OF THE FAITH: Part 3, Virgin Birth and Substitutionary Atonement

This series highlights eleven essential doctrines and practices of Christianity that are demonstrably significant in the Bible and that have been important over two millennia of church history. We started in the January edition with the most fundamental and distinctive doctrine of Christianity, specifically, the Trinity.

Last time, we discussed the first of five “Fundamentals,” namely, verbal plenary inspiration. The next two essentials include the virgin birth/ deity of Christ and the vicarious or substitutionary penal atonement of Christ. That may sound to you like a lot of theological mumbo-jumbo, but these doctrines are critical to the believer’s faith and practice and they represent ideas that distinguish Christianity from all other faiths. As before, these are presented in confessional (“I believe that . . . ”) form since I am adapting these from my personal statement of faith.

The Virgin Birth/ Deity of Christ. I believe in the full deity of the Lord Jesus Christ as well as His full unfallen humanity. That Christ is fully divine is affirmed by the New Testament authors (John 1:1-3, 18; 10:30-33; Rom 9:5; 2 Cor 4:4; Phil 2:6-11; Col 1:15-17; Titus 2:13; Heb 1:3, 6, 8; 2 Peter 1:1; 1 John 5:20; Rev 1:7-8; 22:13), and even foreseen by the Old Testament prophets (Is 9:6; Jer 23:5-6). It is His existence as undiminished deity that allowed Him to live a sinless life as the God-man (Heb 4:15).

Against the onslaught of early church heresy, which denied that Christ is God, the Nicene Creed (325 CE) uses at least six different phrases to affirm Christ’s deity: 1) Jesus Christ the only Son of God, 2) God from God, 3) true God from true God, 4) begotten not made, 5) of one being with the Father, 6) through Him all things were made. Pastors and professors of the early 1900’s upheld Christ’s virgin birth as one of the five “Fundamentals” of the faith. They professed that such a miraculous birth affirmed not only the supernatural character of the event itself, but also the divine nature of the One being “born.” Throughout history, the confession that Christ is indeed God has distinguished true believers from the many false religions and cults who reject this assertion.

The Vicarious or Substitutionary Penal Atonement. I believe that Christ’s death on the cross served as a vicarious penal atonement for the sins of the world (John 3:16; 4:42; 1 Tim 4:10; 1 John 2:2), and this atonement is particularly applied by God the Father to the elect (Rom 8:29; 1 Peter 1:1-2).

The three words of the phrase “vicarious penal death” are each significant on both a doctrinal and practical level. The fact that Christ’s death was “vicarious” means that He died “in our place” for each of us personally (Rom 5:6; 1 Cor 15:3; 1 Pet 3:18). Therefore, faith must be personally placed in Him by each individual who wants to receive forgiveness from God and eternal life. That it was a “penal” substitution means that Christ by Himself appeased the full force of God’s wrath toward our sin and completely purchased our pardon from God (Rom 3:25; Heb 2:17; 9:27-28; 1 John 2:2). Therefore, no work or merit on our part is necessary to receive forgiveness and salvation (Rom 3:21-26). The fact that this was a “death” demands that by placing our faith in Christ, the believer also dies to the concerns and cares of the world and lives eternally to bring glory to God (Gal 2:20; 5:24-25; 6:14).

This understanding of Christ’s work on the cross was critical for the Protestant Reformers of the 1500’s and was encapsulated in five “solas” (meaning “only” or “alone”). These were phrases in Latin that summarized the Reformation’s theological principles about salvation and the atonement which stood in contrast to Medieval Roman Catholicism’s erroneous teachings and practices. The five “solas” of the Reformation are:

Sola Gratia – Salvation is granted “by grace alone.”
Sola Fide – Salvation is received “by faith alone”
Solus Christus – Redemption is accomplished by the atonement of “Christ alone”
Sola Scriptura – This redemption and atonement of Christ is only properly understood “through Scripture alone.”
Soli Deo Gloria – The entire plan of salvation is engineered “for the glory of God alone.”

Even today, some prominent “Christian” teachers and authors marginalize the doctrines of Christ’s virgin birth and penal substitutionary atonement. But these doctrines are not optional, or tangential, but rather, central and critical to our faith and to who we are as Christians.

SOUNDTRACK REVIEW: Batman (1989) by Danny Elfman

The soundtrack for the 1989 rendition of Batman presents majestically complex music for a conflicted hero. Listening to it again recently convinced me that this is by far Danny Elfman’s most brilliant and mature work integrating themes that are brooding, heroic, and even at times playful.

Elfman, the uncle-in-law of Jenna Elfman from Dharma and Greg fame, has participated in a broad range of musical projects from the new wave band Oingo Boingo, to composing scores for popular hero and vigilante movies (Dick Tracy, Darkman, Spider-man, Spider-man 2). He has composed themes for TV shows such as The Simpsons and Desperate Housewives, and also participated in projects that were a bit more on the silly side of the spectrum (Pee-wee's Big Adventure, Mars Attacks!).

His frequent collaboration with director Tim Burton has made Elfman no stranger to the bizarre and morbid, including slightly strange remakes (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and more recently, Alice in Wonderland) as well as darker films (Edward Scissorhands, The Nightmare Before Christmas, Corpse Bride), including darker films that retain comic overtones (as in Beetlejuice). Many of Elfman’s scores, either because of their vigilante motifs or because of their proximity to directors like Burton or Sam Raimi, tend to be murky and brooding. However, none scale to the height (or depth!) of his work on the soundtrack for Batman.

The first track, “The Batman Theme,” has become the standard for what an anti-hero vigilante theme song should be, mixing motifs that are gloomy, heroic, intense, and urgent. The score often reflects the singularity of resolve of the title character, as in the “Roof Fight,” or “Charge of the Batmobile.” Other tracks vividly accompany the cacophony of battle, as in “Batman to the Rescue.” Still other songs betray complex and tortured ruminations of the Dark Knight, as in “Flowers” and “Childhood Remembered.” My favorite song, “Descent into Mystery,” is chillingly delightful and brings together all of the haunting and heroic mysterium that makes Batman a perennially compelling character.

The genius of a great vigilante theme melody is how it can be re-sculpted in different contexts to demonstrate the depth of the character, but to also show that it is his heroic alter-ego, represented by the melody, that governs all of what he does. A great example of this is how Elfman integrates the Batman theme melody into the sorrowful track, “Flowers,” and how it is hinted at in the haunting, “Love Theme.”

Tim Burton’s rendition of Batman and his most assiduous antagonist is stylistic and bold. Elfman's music reflects these bold attributes of its characters such as Batman’s dauntless tenacity in “Attack of the Batwing,” or the Joker’s slightly-insane, screen-filling performance in “Waltz to the Death.” Burton’s movie combines diverse elements that are gothic, surreal, and even at times film noir. Elfman’s Batman score perfectly fits this eclectic mix, and songs such as “Descent into Mystery,” “Childhood Remembered” and “Waltz to the Death” exemplify his diversity and ability as a composer.

The “Batman Theme” has forged a legacy of its own. It was utilized in the sequel, Batman Returns, and was also the theme for Batman: The Animated Series (1992-1995). I stumbled upon something else that shows the legacy of this soundtrack. My kids recently acquired the Wii version of Lego Batman. When I am passing through the room while they play, I have noticed that all of the background music that I have heard comes exclusively from the Batman soundtrack, and does not integrate in music from any of the other movies or TV shows in the franchise.

Throughout this series about movie soundtracks, we will highlight many great musical efforts. However, despite my affection for the work of John Williams, Howard Shore, James Horner, and a few others, I have to admit that Danny Elfman’s score for Batman, which earned him a Grammy, is probably my favorite. It is a joy to listen to, and the crown jewel of any movie soundtrack collection.

DEVOTIONAL THOUGHT: The Grandeur of Christ, 2 Peter 1:16

If you had five minutes with Jesus Christ and could experience a glimpse of his full glory, how do you think you would summarize that encounter? What words would you use that could possibly express such an opportunity?

The Apostle Peter spent several years with Christ as his disciple. His belief in Christ’s ministry, death and resurrection so impacted him, that he spent the rest of his life spreading that faith, and church history suggests that he even died for that belief. His first-hand knowledge and experience of the truth and wisdom of Christ made him that much more disturbed by the heresy and error that permeated the early Christian communities, and he writes powerfully against false teachers and false teaching in 2 Peter.

In 2 Peter 1:16, Peter says, “For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty” (NASB). Here Peter contrasts his own ministry with that of the false teachers, who act in deceit and are motivated by gain, and Paul makes similar contrasts with false teachers relative to his own ministry (2 Cor 2:17; Gal 1:10-11; 1 Thess 2:4). Peter’s assertion that he and his associates did not try to push tales upon his audience foreshadows those whom he will discuss in 2 Peter chapter 2 that have done so. They have replaced the gospel with falsehood, half truths, and feely-good sentiments, as do many in our own day.

What is amazing here, however, is how Peter summarizes his perspective of Christ and his earthly ministry, but especially as he reflects on the Transfiguration of Christ. In 2 Peter 1:16, he uses the Greek word megaleioteti, “majesty” or “grandeur,” to describe this remarkable event where Jesus supernaturally appeared in unveiled glory with Moses and Elijah. This event was so remarkable that it almost left even Peter speechless (Mark 9:5-6). This word was used often to describe a manifestation or indication of God's power, greatness, and blessing (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 1:24; 8:111; 1 Clement 24:5). Luke uses it in 9:43 to refer to the crowd seeing the majesty of God in Jesus after he drove out a dangerous demon that was possessing a boy. Acts 19:27 records a pagan using it to refer to the "magnificence" of Artemis, and this is certainly intended by the inspired author to be ironic. The word megaleioteti used in 2 Peter 1:16 is similar to the word megaloprepes used in the phrase “Majestic glory,” referring to God in verse 17.

While some other religious founders and leaders have exhibited wisdom, influence or bravery, none have exhibited in themselves the grandeur that Christ, the God-man, inherently exemplifies. Peter, as a reliable eye-witness of Christ's amazing ministry and his unveiled glory could only describe the Savior with the word, "grandeur." Everything grand and magnificent about the universe is brought together and finds its ultimate expression in Christ (Eph 1:10; Col 1:16; Rev 22:13).

The good news is not just that Jesus died as a perfect atoning sacrifice for the sins of humanity and rose to give those who trust in him new life. The good news includes the reality that we will have more than five minutes with Christ, and more than five millennia. The believer who puts their trust in Christ will have all eternity to bask in his grandeur – and it may take just that long to fully enjoy it all!

POLITICS: A Global Welfare State

Riddle me this, Batman: How much American tax-payer money goes directly to foreign countries every year? Millions? Hundreds of millions?

The uprisings in Egypt as well as those in other Middle-east countries have made the public more aware that the United States sends $1,500,000,000 to Egypt and have “aided” them at that level or higher for a decade. Since that amount is a bit beyond the comprehension of most of us non-Mensa folk, I’ll put it in other terms.

This $1.5 billion in annual aid is the equivalent of a $1,500 bonus to 1,000,000 American teachers or policemen. It’s the same as a $15,000 scholarship to 100,000 worthy and needy U. S. college students. It could provide $150,000 grants toward 10,000 science or medical projects within our borders. It’s the same as a $1.5 million dollar contribution given to 1,000 promising U. S. small business to stimulate production or hiring, or it's a $1.5 billion grant that could be given to one web journal author!

The point is, no matter how you slice it, that money could do a lot of good here, if it stayed within our borders, and could, perhaps, even be used to alleviate the festering union vs. state government conflicts that are spreading across our country.

So how’s that $1.5 billion investment working for us in Egypt? Well, it has funded a tyrant who doesn’t like us and a government who doesn’t care about us, which has now been toppled by a public that hates us. That is, over $15 billion in the last decade that has provided very few benefits to the average American tax-payer.

That’s not all: the United States annually sends about $65 billion in a variety of forms of foreign aid (a.k.a., “your tax dollars”) to other countries, too (see, U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2011 and State Department 2010 Budget Request). The top recipients include Egypt, Israel, Pakistan, Jordan, Kenya, West Bank/ Gaza and Mexico. And for those of you who are keeping score, yes... we are giving money both to countries like Jordan, Gaza, and Egypt, which hate Israel, and to Israel to defend themselves against countries like Jordan, Gaza and Egypt. One gets the feeling that we are single-handedly funding both sides of middle-eastern warfare. Maybe if we stopped sending these countries money for their military equipment and weaponry, they would have to settle their hostilities via thumb-wrestling.

But that’s still not all. This does not include the enormous amount we spend to station U.S. armed forces all over the world. The latest Defense Department stats that I could find on troop deployment are from 2009, but I don’t think that they have changed that much since. According to that document and a few other sources from CNN and Global Security, out of about 1,400,000 active U.S. service women and men, there are over 285,000 U.S. troops stationed in foreign countries including over 53,000 in Germany, over 30,000 in Japan, about 30,000 in South Korea, and almost 10,000 in both Italy and the UK.

I have no problem with the strategic placement of troops, but I’m not sure that spreading our fighting troops around the globe under the guise of “protecting national interests” isn’t just letting other countries mooch off our tax-funded military forces. I am grateful for the valor and nobility of those in our military who protect and aid the helpless around the globe. But this must be balanced with the reality that global policing and humanitarian activity is done at an extraordinary cost to U.S. tax payers. It is easy to say that having a military presence in almost every country in the world protects our allies and promotes American interests, but I’m skeptical. I’m not certain that we’re safer for sending our money all over the world to protect other countries, but I am certain that we are poorer.

Do you remember when you were in grade school and there was that kid on the playground? Yeah, that’s the one. The one who would offer you his favorite marble, or a baseball card, or a glimpse at his dead roach collection just so you would be his friend. While you may have given in to him out of an insatiable desire to see those dead roaches, his offer did not inspire any admiration or respect of him. In fact, you probably perceived him as rather pitiful on account of his pathetic and exorbitant attempts to gain your friendship.

America has become that kid on the playground. That kid that will provide any amount of aid, troops, or military weaponry to have foreign allegiances, fleeting though they may be. We are not forging stable friendships around the world, but rather, we are buying tenuous alliances. This does not make us an example of strength to the world, but it only makes us look like global chumps. It does not make us kings of the world, but only pawns. We should not be surprised when, despite our military might and muscle flexing, other nations write us off for being as cowardly and pathetic as a Wisconsin Democratic legislator.

Some Americans complain that we have created a welfare state in this country. I believe that the problem is far worse than that: we have created a welfare globe, and American tax-payers are footing a mind-numbingly exorbitant bill. Foreign nations will only want and expect more and more from us, and will push harder for us to buy their “friendship” at higher prices. Policing the world and purchasing alliances are extremely expensive, and sets the priorities of other countries above the needs of our own people. Do we really expect that we can have a strong economy and police the world at the same time?

I am not an isolationist. I am not saying that we should stop trading, communicating, or allying with other nations in strategic ways. I am, however, against funding these other countries’ economies and militaries when we should be putting these funds into our own economy and military. Which founding father ever definitively declared that America is obligated to bail out and police the entire planet? “A shining city on a hill”? Maybe. A global enforcement brigade? Never.

And, what good is it to be a shining city on a hill that stops shining and simply slides off the hill in an avalanche of its own problems, burdened by the weight of its own poor economic and moral decisions? But if more of our resources remained within our borders, then this would help drastically reduce our deficit, and our own people would be better cared for, protected, and educated so that our country would be more competitive in the global economy.

So what do you think: Should the U.S. be funding dictators and policing the world? Have we successfully established a global welfare state? Send us your thoughts at feedback@eclectickasper.com and we’ll put it in a future feedback segment. Or, you can give our The Eclectic Kasper Facebook page a “like” and post comments or questions there.

BIBLE INTERPRETATION: Theology over Chronology in Scripture

Some of our clever The Eclectic Kasper readers may have picked up on a statement in the February 2011 edition about the Authority and Reliability of Scripture. In the article “The Essentials Of the Faith: Part 2, Verbal Plenary Inspiration,” the comment was made, “I also acknowledge that the primary concern of Scripture is theology, and not history, and that under the auspices of the Holy Spirit’s inspiration the Biblical writers occasionally rearranged chronological events in order to advance a theological principle.” My Statement of Faith included a footnote after that comment, which was not included in the article. So, before some of you write me off as a complete liberal, I figured that I should take a minute or three to explain.

First, we need to have a perspective of inspiration that is flexible enough to allow the human author, as well as the divine “Inspirer,” to rearrange chronological events if doing so promotes their theological or even literary agenda. If our definition of inspiration and inerrancy demands that everything must be in chronological order, then such a definition can be invalidated with just a single example of a chronological discrepancy. The clearest such example is the three temptations of Jesus by Satan in Matthew 4 and Luke 4. Both begin with Satan tempting Jesus to turn stones to bread (Matt 4:1-4 and Luke 4:1-4). But then, Matthew lists the Temple of Jerusalem temptation followed by the kingdoms of the world temptation, whereas, Luke switches this order and lists the kingdoms temptation before the Temple. If inerrancy demands strict chronological adherence, then clearly one of our gospel authors is wrong in the way they order these events!

Another example in the gospels (and there are many) is Jesus’ cleansing of the temple. The Synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) place this event at the end of Jesus’ ministry (Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46), but John places this event at the beginning of Jesus' ministry (John 2:13-17). The different placement of the cleansing in John as well as many different elements in his retelling even prompts theories that there were two cleansings, one at the beginning of Christ’s ministry and one at the end.

So let’s go back to the order of temptations in Matthew and Luke. We naturally want to ask the question, which one is “right” in his chronology. Answers include:

1) Matthew is right and Luke is wrong,

2) Luke is right and Matthew is wrong,

3) Both are wrong, or,

4) Chronological order is not as important as theological significance.

This fourth option yields a theologically interesting reason for each Evangelist’s arrangement of these temptations. The order in Matthew climaxes with the potential for Jesus reigning as king over the kingdoms of the world, a theme which is important throughout Matthew’s Gospel. He refuses to take this easy path to leadership because he knows that his only legitimate path to true kinghood is through Calvary. However, Luke places the temptation on the temple in Jerusalem in the climactic third position in his account since Jerusalem plays a strategic rhetorical role throughout both Luke and Acts: in Luke the activity draws in toward Jerusalem, and in Acts, it moves away from Jerusalem. Thus, the authors, under the inerrant guidance of the Holy Spirit, rearranged chronological events to advance a theological and literary point.

What about the cleansing of the temple? Well, same kind of scenario: either,

1) John is wrong by placing the temple cleansing at the beginning of Jesus’ earthly ministry, or

2) The Synoptic gospels were wrong by placing it at the end of his ministry, or,

3) There were two temple cleansings, one at the beginning recorded by John and one at the end as recorded by the Synoptics, or,

4) Our definition of inspiration is too narrow, and the chronological placement of the event is not as important to the gospel writers as is the theological and/ or literary significance of the event.

I prefer to stick with the view that this event only happened once. John moves it to the frontend of Jesus’ ministry to show from the beginning that Jesus rejected the importance that the Jews placed on the Temple and rather focused on the critical importance of his own forthcoming death and resurrection (Leon Morris, John, 167). And I’m simplifying a much bigger issue, but you get the point: To demand that inspiration ensures exact chronological order is to demand more on this doctrine than is necessary.

Let me repeat for emphasis: if someone asserts that inspiration and inerrancy does not demand strict chronological adherence, that does not make that individual a “liberal” nor does it mean that he or she is not taking the Bible "seriously." To the contrary, it means that we are trying very seriously to understand why an inspired writer would arrange his material out of chronological order; for there must be some theological, or at least, literary reason for doing so. In some cases, this reason is more apparent. In some cases... not so much. But what we can be certain of is that the text, the way it was when the inspired author finished his work, is inerrant, and is exactly the way the Holy Spirit wanted it.

The accompanying painting is "Jesus Driving the Merchants out of the Temple" (1788) by Jean Germain Drouais.

QUOTE FOR CONTEMPLATION: Burnout or Spiritual Death?

Burnout is an all too common phenomenon for people in any profession. The demands of life, work and family can sometimes be completely draining, and the everyday frustrations and difficulties of life can form a cesspool of distraction and disillusionment. We have all experienced some level of a “dark night of the soul”; but clawing our way back into a healthy perspective is sometimes difficult.

Henri Nouwen (1932 – 1996) was a Catholic priest and teacher, who emphasized practical and contemplative spirituality in his writings. After years of holding several teaching positions, he began to feel what he thought was spiritual burnout. This was significant in his decision to leave his prominent career and to live with and minister to mentally handicapped people at the L'Arche community of Daybreak in Toronto. The following quote about his attitude toward ministry leading up to that decision is a good litmus test for us as to whether we are just a bit too busy, or too preoccupied with life, or whether we are actually teetering on the edge of the kind of “spiritual death” that he describes:

After twenty-five years of priesthood, I found myself praying poorly, living somewhat isolated from other people, and very much preoccupied with burning issues. Everyone was saying that I was doing really well, but something inside was telling me that my success was putting my own soul in danger. I began to ask myself whether my lack of contemplative prayer, my loneliness, and my constantly changing involvement in what seemed most urgent were signs that the Spirit was gradually being suppressed.... I woke up one day with the realization that I was living in a very dark place and that the term “burnout” was a convenient psychological translation for a spiritual death.

- Henri J. M. Nouwen, In the Name of Jesus, p. 10

CLOSING COMMENTS: Reader Feedback!

After our article from the February 2011 edition regarding “The Origin of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes,” one reader asked about why we referred to the Sadducees as a “religious” group. This reader insightfully commented that they are really more of a secular and “humanistic” group and raised the issue of why, then, they would be concerned with or threatened by Jesus.

This is a great point. The Sadducees are definitely more secular and humanist than they are religious. The only thing that makes them religious in any way is that they were leaders of a nation that didn’t separate “church and state.” Also, they were interested in protecting their “Jewishness” from Hellenism, and preserving the Temple system. But again, this may have been more for nationalistic/ political/ economic reasons than for any real interest in God or their spiritual heritage. The Pharisees haunt Jesus' every step because of their religious concerns. The Sadducees, however, seem only interested in Jesus because of his claims to have authentic (divine) authority (Matt 16:1). Therefore, they try, somewhat pathetically, to trip him up on a theological tenant related to the resurrection (Matt 22:23-33). The Sadducees otherwise only seem interested in religious folks when they are stirring up the social order, as with John the Baptizer (Matt 3:7), Peter and John (Acts 4:1), and Paul (Acts 23:1-10).

At the end of our January 2011 issue we mentioned our series on “Tales of Trials, Failures and Entrails in the Bible,” which would examine some of the more gory, PG-13 episodes in Scripture (see our first installment, “The Piercing Initiative of Ehud” in the Feb 2011 edition). In response, another reader wrote in, “I'm especially interested in discussion on the darker (PG-13) biblical accounts of misbehavior (e.g., Judges 19, an R-rated episode of a Levite and his concubine) and the seemingly absent biblical commentary.” Indeed, the tale in Judges 19, and the ensuing tragedies in Judges 20-21 create a fascinating and very disturbing sequence of events. And, as was mentioned, it is presented with eerily little commentary on the morality (or lack of same!) of the situation. So what are we to make of this story? Maybe we’ll cover this one in the next few months!

Thanks for feedback; keep it coming! You can e-mail feedback directly to feedback@eclectickasper.com.