J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick has an MA in Christian Apologetics from Biola University. His interests include theology, philosophy of religion--particularly the existence of God--astronomy, biology, archaeology, and sci-fi and fantasy novels.
J.W. Wartick has written 745 posts for J.W. Wartick -"Always Have a Reason"

Really Recommended Posts 3/27/15- Star Wars, Aesthetics, Feminism, and more!

postAnother Friday, another dose of great reading for the weekend. Check out this week’s Really Recommended Posts which include aesthetics, Star Wars, feminism, science and Christianity, and David Hume.

How Modern Art Led Me To God- Can we derive anything objective from aesthetics? What might beauty tell us about the nature of reality? Here’s an interesting exploration of these and related topics. I’d like your thoughts on this one!

Star Wars: This Is Madness- How about some Star Wars themed March Madness? I’m in! Star Wars is hosting a battle royale to crown this year’s tourney champion among Star Wars characters. Now get over there and vote against anyone not in the original trilogy!

Second Wave [feminism]- Here’s an evaluation of Second Wave feminism from an evangelical viewpoint. Check out the Junia Project for all kinds of awesome posts!

Hume on Skepticism- Some brief insights into Hume’s evaluative tools for reason and whether they can stand up to his own skepticism.

Suggested Readings on the Relationship between Science and Theology/Religion- Here’s an interesting list of some recommended books to read on this issue. My own list would have some similarities but many differences as well. Maybe I’ll make one! Would you enjoy that? Oh! And I could annotate it! Well anyway, for now check out Eric Chabot’s list!

Book Review: “Luther on the Christian Life” by Carl Trueman

locl-truemanCarl Trueman’s Luther on the Christian Life is a very entertaining work highlighting Luther’s view of how we should live as sinner/saints.

Understanding Luther, argues Trueman, means at least in part to understand his own life and the pressures that exerted on his thought. Thus, in the first chapter (and throughout), readers get a picture of what Luther’s own Christian life was like and how that impacted his thought. Then, Trueman traces Luther’s theology of Christian life through various themes including theology of the Word, Sacraments, righteousness, government, family, and more.

The insights into Luther’s life and theology abound throughout the book, and the way that Trueman skillfully weave the two together is impressive. This is a highly readable and, yes, entertaining book. There is much to learn, but it is a joy to read. Luther’s doctrine of the Christian life is intertwined not only with his own life, but also with his sacramental theology. Trueman draws this out in extended fashion, showing how these ideas are related to readers who may not be familiar with such a way of thinking about the world.

Trueman puts forward a tremendous effort to be sympathetic in his reading of Luther. The sacramental theology of Luther is put forward as part of his understanding of the Christian life without any efforts to undermine or thwart the power of that same message. Trueman is Presbyterian (or so I gather from his Introduction), and admits to serious disagreements with Luther on sacraments and other areas. But he presents in this book Luther’s view, not his own critique, and he does so generously with a spirit of trying to understand and convey Luther’s meaning. This is exactly the kind of Christ-like attitude towards those with whom we disagree that we should all have as Christians, and as a Lutheran I was taken aback by how well Trueman accomplished it.

Luther on the Christian Life presents readers with exactly what they should expect: an exposition of Luther’s thought (and life) on how we should live as sinners and saints. But he goes beyond the merely expected to make this an incredibly readable, insightful, and entertaining work as well.

The Good

+Surprisingly sympathetic reading of Luther from a non-Lutheran
+Many insights into Luther’s broader patterns of thought
+Focus on Christian life in Luther’s work is highly interesting
+Constantly brings up strong insights

The Bad

-Not really anything to put in this category

Conclusion

Luther on the Christian Life is an extremely readable and insightful work that is well-worth the time put into reading, marking, and inwardly digesting it. Luther’s prowess as a theologian concerned with the lives of Christians–not just their beliefs–comes to the forefront. It is a phenomenal work.

I received a review copy of the book from Crossway. I was not required to give any kind of review whatsoever. My thanks to the publisher for the book.

Links

Be sure to check out the page for this site on Facebook and Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies and more!

Book Reviews- There are plenty more book reviews to read! Read like crazy! (Scroll down for more, and click at bottom for even more!)

Source

Carl Trueman, Luther on the Christian Life (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2015).

SDG.

——

The preceding post is the property of J.W. Wartick (apart from quotations, which are the property of their respective owners, and works of art as credited; images are often freely available to the public and J.W. Wartick makes no claims of owning rights to the images unless he makes that explicit) and should not be reproduced in part or in whole without the expressed consent of the author. All content on this site is the property of J.W. Wartick and is made available for individual and personal usage. If you cite from these documents, whether for personal or professional purposes, please give appropriate citation with both the name of the author (J.W. Wartick) and a link to the original URL. If you’d like to repost a post, you may do so, provided you show less than half of the original post on your own site and link to the original post for the rest. You must also appropriately cite the post as noted above. This blog is protected by Creative Commons licensing. By viewing any part of this site, you are agreeing to this usage policy.

Enter [Science] Fictional Messiah – “Wind and Shadow” and “Daystar” by Kathy Tyers

daystar-tyersKathy Tyers’ Firebird series is renowned by many for its explorations of worldview questions in a stirring science fiction setting. I have written on the Firebird Trilogy before. Here, we’ll take a look at the two concluding books in the series- Daystar and Wind and Shadow. Specifically, I’ll be analyzing them from a worldview perspective. There will be SPOILERS for the whole series below.

Human Nature

Both books have much to say about human nature. In particular, questions about the extent and nature of our free will abound as we as readers are confronted with different concepts of determinism and free choice. Although this theme is never, perhaps, fully developed in philosophical terms, the very activity of the characters makes a kind of argument towards the notion that we have free choice that is genuine, though the question of whether this might be compatibilist–set alongside determinism–or not is left open.

Daystar also raises major questions about the nature of humanity itself–are we purely material beings; or perhaps purely spiritual and trapped within a material body; or are we a unified center of body and soul? The organization known as the Collegium puts forward a kind of mystic view that we are eternal souls which, when we die, go back to the infinite, impersonal divine. There are strong elements of both Gnosticism and Platonism to be found in this teaching, and it is one which resonates with New Age type beliefs and other worldviews today. We need to think on this for ourselves: when it comes to the very concept of what it is to be a human, are we essentially matter, or is there something more? Christians need to think on such issues deeply and consider our own standing in the universe.

The Powers

There is a fantastic meld of science fiction technology and the reality of the spiritual realm found throughout the Firebird series. Wind and Shadow, in particular, moves the concept of spiritual warfare front-and-center. A Shadow being possessed Kiel, a kind of priest, and attempted to convince him that he ought to proclaim himself as the coming Messiah. In this way, the spiritual being sought to gain control over the course of events. The interplay of the spiritual and physical was something that was interwoven throughout the Firebird series, and it is important to reflect as Christians on how that might play out in our own lives.

Not long ago I read an excellent book on spiritual warfare which presented several views on the topic. I think we need to be prepared to dive into such challenging topics and see what the Bible has to say about them.

Messiah

Daystar reads much like a lengthy biblical Gospel. The story therein is that of the coming Messiah. But it is far more complex than that. It is also a story of the attempt to exterminate an entire people group; the story of religious conflict; of materialism; and more. However, the core of the book, and much of the series, is the hope for the coming Boh-Dabar, the Messiah. That Boh-Dabar ends up being Tavkel, a herdsman from a secluded place.

Tyers brings forth themes about the Messiah in surprisingly insightful ways. First, she integrates several parables into the text as Tavkel instructs people in the faith. (See a recent Sunday Quote! post for one of the parables from the book.)Some of these parables find parallels in those Jesus taught; others are clearly inventions of Tyers’ mind to try to put forth spiritual truths. All of them are unique and engaging. Second, Tavkel is very explicit about his own nature as divine. I think this was a good move on Tyers’ part because sometimes it can be easy to miss how clear Jesus’ own claims of divinity were. When Christ claimed the authority to arbitrate and expand the Mosaic Law, that would have been astonishing. In Daystar, Tavkel points to himself as a divine figure.

One conversation with Meris, a character who is a foreigner and who holds to rival beliefs, depicts Tavkel explaining the notion of being fully divine and fully human. Tavkel explains it by pointing out that “My father created the human form. He has mastery over it…” Meris objects by arguing that it doesn’t make sense that Tavkel can be “one hundred percent” human and one hundred percent God. She asks “Which [are you]?” Tavkel responds, “Both.” When Meris says “That’s not possible,” Tavkel responds: “Is light a wave or a particle Meris?” (426). Though the analogy is not perfect, it does help us to envision how we might assume to much in our own ability to comprehend reality.

Third, there is also much discussion over how the Boh-Dabar may fulfill some prophecies in unexpected ways and that even some preconceptions of what the Messiah figure should be or what verses are even about him might be mistaken. This finds its parallel in some ways in Jesus, who, being the Messiah, yet did not come as a military leader as many expected. To see the people in Daystar figuring out the implications their Messiah has for their understanding is a unique insight into how the Christian story itself might have played out during its earliest days. Confronted by the reality of a risen Lord, notions of what the Messiah should be had to fit this risen Savior.

Daystar is filled to the brim with interesting conversations and speculations like this, and the best part is that they point beyond themselves to the truth of God’s word.

Conclusion

Daystar and Wind and Shadow are excellent works in a fantastic science fiction series. I highly commend the whole series to you, dear readers, not just as a great way to think about worldview, but also simply as excellent science fiction by a bestselling author of the genre.

Links

Be sure to check out the page for this site on Facebook and Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies and more!

Kathy Tyers’ “Firebird Trilogy”- Faith, Humanity, and Conflict in the Far Future- I look at a number of worldview issues in the Trilogy in this post.

Microview: “The Annotated Firebird Trilogy” by Kathy Tyers- I review the trilogy with a brief look at the plot and some positives and negatives in the book.

Popular Books- Check out my looks into other popular books (scroll down for more).

Sunday Quote!- A Science Fiction Parable- What might a parable look like in the future? Well, not too much different from one now. Check out this post on Tyers’ speculative parable in Daystar.

Sources

Kathy Tyers, Wind and Shadow (Colorado Springs, CO: Marcher Lord Press [Now Enclave], 2011).

Kathy Tyers, Daystar (Colorado Springs, CO: Marcher Lord Press [Now Enclave], 2012).

SDG.

——

The preceding post is the property of J.W. Wartick (apart from quotations, which are the property of their respective owners, and works of art as credited; images are often freely available to the public and J.W. Wartick makes no claims of owning rights to the images unless he makes that explicit) and should not be reproduced in part or in whole without the expressed consent of the author. All content on this site is the property of J.W. Wartick and is made available for individual and personal usage. If you cite from these documents, whether for personal or professional purposes, please give appropriate citation with both the name of the author (J.W. Wartick) and a link to the original URL. If you’d like to repost a post, you may do so, provided you show less than half of the original post on your own site and link to the original post for the rest. You must also appropriately cite the post as noted above. This blog is protected by Creative Commons licensing. By viewing any part of this site, you are agreeing to this usage policy.

Sunday Quote!- Does 1 Corinthians 15 teach a Millennial Gap?

kc-stormsEvery Sunday, I will share a quote from something I’ve been reading. The hope is for you, dear reader, to share your thoughts on the quote and related issues and perhaps pick up some reading material along the way!

Does 1 Corinthians 15 teach a Millennial Gap?

Sam Storms’ Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative is a major work written in defense of amillennialism–the eschatological (end times) position that there is no 1000 year earthly reign of Christ but rather that the millennium is the church era (among other things). One argument premillennialists use to defend one aspect of their position is that 1 Corinthians 15:22-28. Because there is a gap between Christ’s resurrection and the resurrection of believers, premillennial believers argue that there can also be a gap between the resurrection of Christ’s people and “the end” in verse 24.

Sam Storms analyzes this argument in extended fashion. Here’s a snippet of his discussion:

The premillennialist argues that the “end” [in verse 24] is the end or close of the millennial age, 1000 years after Christ has returned to earth. The amillennialist argues that the “end” is the end or close of the present church age… all one need do is demonstrate which of these two options is correct… So, does Paul tell us when death dies? …As I read 1 Corinthians 15:50-58, the defeat of death occurs at the second coming of Christ… (145, cited below)

If it is the case that Christ’s second coming is indeed the “end,” then it follows that the premillennial interpretation is mistaken and indeed, Storms argues, the whole system mostly collapses on itself. Storms concludes that 1 Corinthians 15 cannot be used to support the notion of a millennial gap.

What do you think? Does 1 Corinthians allow for such a lengthy gap in between parts of the text? What eschatological position do you hold to? How damaging is this text–if at all–for various eschatological positions?

No matter what you think, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative is cogently argued and something that anyone interested in eschatology should own and read.

Links

Be sure to check out the page for this site on Facebook and Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies and more!

Sunday Quote- If you want to read more Sunday Quotes and join the discussion, check them out! (Scroll down for more)

Source

Sam Storms, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative (Scotland: Mentor, 2013).

SDG.

Really Recommended Posts 3/20/15- Blood Moons, Jupiter Ascending, and more!

postWhat’s this!? Weather that is above freezing? I cracked my windows last week when it hit 33 degrees Fahrenheit  because I was warm. Then it hit 65! SCORCHING! I think maybe I’ve adapted to life in Minnesota. Anyway, I also took the time out of this beautiful week to provide you, my dear readers, with what I hope will be some most edifying material. Here we have posts on Blood Moons, women’s church history, creationism, Jupiter Ascending, and (!) a great apologetics resource.

Jupiter Ascending- A worldview-minded look at the flick “Jupiter Ascending.” Largely blasted by critics, the film is an attempt at a science fiction fairy tale. What does this “fairy tale” about the future teach us?

Trillions of Stone Artifacts: A Young Earth Anthropology Paradox- Are there more human artifacts than there should be, if we grant young earth creationist assumptions about the age of the Earth? Check out this post for an interesting challenge to this paradigm from the perspective of anthropology.

Blood Moons: An End-Times Sign?- Should we view the fact that there are Four Blood Moons happening as a sign of the end-times? Here’s an examination of the claim that we should.

Women’s History Month: The Early Church- Here are some women in the early church who had profound impacts on the faith.

Apologetics 315- Here’s a site to follow if you don’t already. It features interviews with top apologists, book reviews, resource links, and more! It is one of the first sites I ever followed and it still pays dividends.

Book Review: “A Matter of Days” by Hugh Ross, Second Expanded Edition

amd-ross-2

Hugh Ross is one of the most influential Old Earth Creationists alive. The founder of Reasons to Believe, he has had a profound influence on putting forth Old Earth Creationism from a concordist–that is, the notion that the Bible and science will agree where they overlap [often including the notion that the Bible explicitly speaks on scientific issues]–perspective. A Matter of Days is perhaps the magnum opus of his position.

The book provides a huge amount of material for those wanting to interact with topics of creationism. Ross begins by surveying the contentious way the issue is often argued and noting that we as Christians ought to strive for more tolerant attitudes towards each other. Alongside this, he notes various statements by evangelicals allowing for some openness on the topic.

The book covers a massive range of arguments for and against young earth creationism, but the real meat of the text is dealing with various scientific arguments on either side. These are surveyed in a kind of question and answer or objection and rejoinder format in which Ross clearly explains a huge amount of scientific data for an ancient universe and deals with the major objections to such a position from the young earth creationist perspective.

Ross also confronts textual issues in a number of places, including much discussion on the concept of “day” and its meaning in Genesis 1. This, he covers from different perspectives including historic theology, exegesis, and science. He also puts forward a canonical view of how to see Creation in the Bible rather than limiting it simply to Genesis 1-2. There are a number of other texts that he argues also teach on creation.

Although he is an “Old Earth” believer, Ross is also clearly a creationist and puts forward several brief arguments about the faultiness of evolution. This is not a focus of the work, but through such arguments he establishes a clearer picture of his own position related to origins of both life and speciation.

One issue that might be raised with the book is whether the seemingly strict concordism Ross advocates is necessary. For example, rather than arguing that entropy and decay are spoken about in the Bible (100-102), could one not simply note that the human biblical author almost certainly had no concept of entropy and therefore was not addressing it? That is to say, a concept of divine condescension might be easier to hold to than one of future scientific knowledge revealed in the Bible.

The new edition is expanded and has noticeably featured references to some recent works as well as more arguments. It is a rather large re-write with much new information. Readers considering purchase should get this edition.

The Good

+Major point-by-point explorations of evidence for and against an old earth
+Strong defense of the Old Earth Creationist/Concordist position
+Many technical issues explained in understandable ways
+Charitable tone
+Excellent index
+Expanded arguments and new information for the new edition
+Really cool cover

The Bad

-Some questions about concordism remain
-Perhaps too brief on some objections

Conclusion

A Matter of Days remains a tour de force for old earth creationists. It is one of the broadest yet clearest defenses of the old earth creationist position which both answers young earth arguments and puts forth in brief an OEC perspective. Moreover, the updated edition is a true update rather than just having some corrections throughout. This is a book worth having for anyone interested in the controversy over origins in the Christian world.

Disclaimer: I was provided with a review copy by the publisher. I was not required to write any sort of review whatsoever thereby. 

Links

Be sure to check out the page for this site on Facebook and Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies and more!

Origins Debate- Read a whole bunch more on different views within Christianity of the “origins debate.” Here I have posts on young and old earth creationism, intelligent design, theistic evolutionism, and more!

Source

Hugh Ross, A Matter of Days (Covina, CA: Reasons to Believe, 2015).

SDG.

——

The preceding post is the property of J.W. Wartick (apart from quotations, which are the property of their respective owners, and works of art as credited; images are often freely available to the public and J.W. Wartick makes no claims of owning rights to the images unless he makes that explicit) and should not be reproduced in part or in whole without the expressed consent of the author. All content on this site is the property of J.W. Wartick and is made available for individual and personal usage. If you cite from these documents, whether for personal or professional purposes, please give appropriate citation with both the name of the author (J.W. Wartick) and a link to the original URL. If you’d like to repost a post, you may do so, provided you show less than half of the original post on your own site and link to the original post for the rest. You must also appropriately cite the post as noted above. This blog is protected by Creative Commons licensing. By viewing any part of this site, you are agreeing to this usage policy.

Sunday Quote!- Does Concordism Fail?

ec-lamoureuxEvery Sunday, I will share a quote from something I’ve been reading. The hope is for you, dear reader, to share your thoughts on the quote and related issues and perhaps pick up some reading material along the way!

Does Concordism Fail?

Denis Lamoureux argues in his book  Evolutionary Creation against concordism–the view that there is correspondence between science and Scripture. His argument proceeds by tracing various difficulties found in the biblical text for those who want to argue that it is scientifically accurate. This argument is lengthy, so interested readers should go to the book itself, but he basically appeals to things like the apparent belief in a 3-tiered universe, the notion of the “firmament” as a solid dome across the sky, and more in order to try to demonstrate that the attempt to show that concordism must reinterpret these texts rather than allow them to speak to their background worldview.

After rather exhaustively making this point, he asserts:

It is obvious that scientific concordism fails. There is no correspondence between the conceptualization of nature in the Book of God’s Words and our common knowledge of the Book of God’s Works. (149)

Lamoureux’s argument is lengthy and challenging. I think it presents at least two major difficulties for concordists. First, his argument demands that we who are concordists take the texts seriously at what they are teaching. If we want to affirm that the Bible is scientifically accurate, then we cannot simply dismiss these apparent discussions of a three-tier universe, firmament, and more as “background understandings” of the ancients. Instead, for the sake of consistency, we must explain how these texts will be in concord with a right scientific understanding. This task is one I will not undertake, but I think some have done an admirable job in this regard, particularly groups like Reasons to Believe.

Second, it provides a direct attack at the roots of the concordist position: can the concordist justify their position through the Bible rather than falling into the danger of misrepresenting what the Bible actually teaches and what the authors’ understanding actually was?

I do not take these challenges as insurmountable, but they do provide food for thought. I am wary of arguing the Bible should be anything like a science textbook, and particularly wary of thinking that it might have some kind of prophetic 21st century science written into the background. However, I am equally wary of acting as though the Bible has nothing to say about the natural world and that we can just blithely dismiss anything it might say as background understanding.

What are your thoughts? Does concordism fail? What is the best way to treat the interplay between Christianity and science?

Links

Be sure to check out the page for this site on Facebook and Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies and more!

Sunday Quote- If you want to read more Sunday Quotes and join the discussion, check them out! (Scroll down for more)

Source

Denis O. Lamoureux, Evolutionary Creation (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2008).

SDG.

Really Recommended Posts 3/13/15- Fantasy, Feminism, and Formations, OH MY!

postIt feels like summer! It’s in the 60s here in Minnesota and it’s gorgeous. I’ve been taking Luke on walks all over. But fear not, dear readers! That does not mean I’ve neglected my sworn duty to you to provide the best reading on the web. Here’s a great and diverse list for your reading pleasure!

On Being a Jesus Feminist- My wonderful wife has been published over at the Junia Project with her thoughts on being a “Jesus Feminist.” A what? Read on and find out.

A Ranking of 1980s Fantasy that would please Crom himself!- I love fantasy books and movies but was distressed to see this list and realize I’ve only seen two movies on it! WHAT? Thus, I have embarked on a quest to watch the rest of them. Check out my quest, and check the list yourself to see your 80s fantasy knowledge.

Creationism and the Grand Conjectural Canyon- Were you there? Can we know the history of the Grand Canyon? Was it formed at some point in the last 6-10 thousand years because of Noah’s Flood?

Modern Idolatry (Comic)- What is it that we are dedicating our lives to? It’s too easy to get caught up in the multi-tasking of the “everyday” and neglect the God who made us. Check out this poignant reminder.

The Last Man on Earth: Becoming the Person We Hope to Be- A look at the new TV series “The Last Man on Earth” as it stands so far, written from a worldview perspective. I very much recommend you follow Empires and Mangers–the site this link is on! It’s fantastic.

Debate Review: Al Mohler vs. Chris Date on “Should Christians Rethink Hell?”

IMG_0691

Not hell. But it is a pretty picture I took with a kind of intriguing/ominous path.

I want to preface this post by saying I am by no means an expert on the topic of hell. I’ve only read two books on the subject and listened to several lectures. I approach this as one who is still learning and seeking understanding. I hold to what would be called in this debate the “traditional” view of hell as opposed to a literalist view of hell. That is, I believe hell is a place (spiritual? physical?) that is eternal; but I am unconvinced that the fire references made in the Bible are to be taken literally (i.e. how are they literal flames and yet the place is in darkness? – seems to me to be metaphorical language).

I was very interested in listening to this debate between the traditional view, as espoused by prominent conservative theologian Al Mohler and the conditional view (that of annihilationism–those who are unsaved are annihilated at the judgment [typically–please correct me if I have misportrayed this) as put forward by Chris Date. Here, I’ll offer a brief summary of major statements in the debate, followed by my own analysis. Note that these are my summaries of what was said, not necessarily direct quotes. I welcome critique and comments. Let me know if you listened to the debate, and feel free to offer your own thoughts! The debate may be found here.

Summary

Justin Brierly asked Mohler to speak on what he thought about the biblical basis for conditionalism.

Mohler- Anyone who speaks on a doctrinal question sees their side as more biblical, and I find the evidence for conditionalism wanting. We must also present the picture of hell which is that which should be presented to others–we have to see what the biblical picture of hell is. The biblical “meta-narrative” points to dual everlasting destinies–eternal life in a New Heaven and New Earth–and also for eternal punishment. The unified consensus reading of Scripture for the history of Christianity has been the traditional position.

Date- Regarding Matthew 25, the question is not the duration of the punishment but the actual nature of the punishment. The context suggests that the wages of sin is death, physical death and not living any more. At judgment, the conditionalist holds that the second death will be just that–death. Moreover, the alleged consensus opinion on hell has not been completely on the side of traditionalism, and in the last few centuries conditionalism has gained support. [Outlines the biblical evidence for conditionalism while citing a huge number of texts.] The preponderance of Scripture points to conditionalism. The concept of eternal punishment is correct; the question is what the nature of this punishment is.

Mohler- The normal Christian reading of Matthew 25 has been eternal conscious torment, not destruction. The infinite wrath and infinite grace of God are each being experienced. To say that eternal punishment is not an eternal state but just something that endures until it is taken away does not seem to be what the text itself implies. Humans have a life beyond this life–not an inherent right to immortality of the soul but because of the image of God in humanity–we are made for eternal life.

Date- Saying that Christ purchased eternal salvation for us in Hebrews does not imply a continued state of Christ forever redeeming; it was an act in time with eternal consequences. Eternal life is something only experienced by the saved–the punishment is death and its effect lasts forever.

Mohler- It is difficult to square this view with the actual texts. Rather than appealing to a different passage in Hebrews, Date must explain the parallelism in Matthew 25 regarding the phrase eternal–does it mean two things in the same context?

Date- Eternal means forever in both cases–eternal life and death which lasts forever.

Mohler- Substituting death does not explain away the parallelism in the text. The Christian church has long understood that this passage means eternal torment.

Date- That’s why it’s called the traditional view!

Mohler- The traditional view does not rest on isolated texts of Scripture but on the church’s understanding of the weight of the texts as a whole. There is no indication in various depictions of hell in which there is an end to the torment as spoken.

Date- Mohler’s interpretation is incorrect; the Greek can be taken in different senses in the places he cites.

Mohler- These interpretations are based on arguing that when we look at a text, we have to say it doesn’t mean what it looks like it means.

Date- Many Christians held to a conditionalist view in historic Christianity. Moreover, we should not forget that we come to the text with presuppositions, and such giants of the church as Augustine who held to the traditional view had a Platonic view of the soul which influenced their interpretation of the Bible.

Mohler- There was development of the doctrine of hell. Regarding Augustine, if we argue that Augustine’s view was due to Platonism, we have to see that his entire picture of reality was Hellenized and so his view of other important doctrines like the deity of Christ is undermined.

Date- Nobody is claiming that everything found in the Platonic view or the Hellenistic view is wrong. Scripture is the authority, however, not the culture. The Platonic view specifically imported mistakes into the view of the soul and its indestructible nature according to that view.

Mohler- Jesus held to what we call the traditional view. However, Jewish thought at the same time didn’t have much developed thought regarding hell, which is largely a distinctively Christian view.

Date- Jesus’ language speaks of destruction and seemingly endorsed the view of annihilationism through his use of language of destruction and burning up.

Mohler- Gehenna does not point to Jesus endorsing an annihilationist view because the use of that term was a reference to continued endless fire, despite being a distinct historic view. …Jesus spoke more about eternal punishment and hell than about heaven. Our understanding of the Gospel is impacted by a different view of hell. The urgency of the Christian message is undermined by the conditionalist position because it effectively removes any urgency for conversion because the materialist already believes they will just cease existing.

Date- Atheists often reject Christianity because they see the traditional view as unjust, which means that a conditionalist view has greater apologetic value. Moreover, the Gospel can continue to be presented as either the gift of life or the punishment of death. Conditionalism does not undermine urgency of spreading the Good News.

Analysis

It was edifying to listen to both presenters on this program and get a better idea about the differing views related to hell within Christianity. The speakers were each respectful and gracious–something that should be the case!

Chris Date cogently argued for and defended his position against major objections. I think one of the most pressing issues for the conditionalist/annihilationist remains the notion that, on their view, there really is no major difference between the end of the unsaved and that which the materialist believes will happen. However, it should be noted this is less a biblical challenge than it is a philosophical/theological one. Date’s defense of the biblical capacity for conditionalism was challenging to my paradigm as I think he presented some passages which do possibly read more easily on his view than on the traditional view.

I do think, however, some of Date’s claims were a bit of a stretch. For example, his assertion that Jesus endorsed conditionalist teachers perhaps goes beyond the evidence we have. Moreover, his style of argument in some sections was problematic because he simply through a number of texts out (without quoting the text, simply citing the locations) without giving any sort of context. Of course, this latter issue is more due to the format than a defect of his position.

One of the biggest problems with Al Mohler’s defense of the traditional view is how much he appealed to, well, tradition. It seems to me like the traditional view has a solid scriptural basis, and to appeal to the notion that the church as a whole has largely leaned towards the traditional view is inadequate as a defense. Thus, it was his method which I think was greatly problematic. However, towards the end he got deeper into the issues and I think made some solid points, particularly in regards to whether Gehenna necessarily entails the conditional view and on the seeming parity of the unsaved on the conditional view vs. their own position. That said, I think a stronger focus on exegesis would have been more compelling rather than a continued appeal to traditional church teaching.

Overall, I came out of this debate feeling challenged to consider my own position. I also think the conditionalist view is not, as some assert, clearly unbiblical. If one wants to continue asserting that, I think they must deal very closely with the texts Date and others cite for their position. One can’t just cite a single proof text and say that other texts must be reinterpreted in light of a single text.

What are your thoughts? Please let me know in the comments.

Links

Should Christians Rethink Hell?- The link for the audio of the debate along with some related links from Premier Christian Radio.

Be sure to check out the page for this site on Facebook and Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies and more!

*The image in this post was taken by me. I claim the copyright as noted below.

SDG.

——

The preceding post is the property of J.W. Wartick (apart from quotations, which are the property of their respective owners, and works of art as credited; images are often freely available to the public and J.W. Wartick makes no claims of owning rights to the images unless he makes that explicit) and should not be reproduced in part or in whole without the expressed consent of the author. All content on this site is the property of J.W. Wartick and is made available for individual and personal usage. If you cite from these documents, whether for personal or professional purposes, please give appropriate citation with both the name of the author (J.W. Wartick) and a link to the original URL. If you’d like to repost a post, you may do so, provided you show less than half of the original post on your own site and link to the original post for the rest. You must also appropriately cite the post as noted above. This blog is protected by Creative Commons licensing. By viewing any part of this site, you are agreeing to this usage policy.

Sunday Quote!- A Science Fiction Parable

daystar-tyers

Every Sunday, I will share a quote from something I’ve been reading. The hope is for you, dear reader, to share your thoughts on the quote and related issues and perhaps pick up some reading material along the way!

Science Fiction Parable

Before I dive in here, I want to note that there are SPOILERS for the last book of the fantastic Firebird series by Kathy Tyers in what follows.

Kathy Tyers’ Firebird Trilogy was an amazing piece of science fiction which integrated issues of faith and worldview into a stirring narrative. In Daystar, book five of the Firebird series, the prophesied Messiah, the Boh-Dabar, has come. The book is in many ways a science fictional retelling of the biblical Gospels. The Boh-Dabar, Tavkel, is a clear parallel of Jesus in many ways, including the telling of parables. One of these parables was particularly striking, and I’ve amended it to quote it here[mostly took out other dialogue and place names]:

 “Once there was a little girl… She had a little pet that she loved… It was a kind of creature she’d never seen…. It had four stubby legs, a big head, ans sharp little teeth… She opened the bag of pet food the dealer sold them, she put the food into [the pet’s] bowl, and she stroked it while it ate with those sharp little teeth… After a few days, the girl noticed something. Her pet wasn’t getting any bigger. In fact, it looked thin… She found out that [its] species was strictly herbivorous–but the pet dealer had sold them dried meat pellets by mistake…

“It looked like a carnivore. So she asked her parents to buy the right food… And it sniffed the good food, but it wouldn’t eat. It walked away from the bowl and looked up at her with desparately hungry eyes. It had learned to like the wrong food. It refused to eat what would nourish it, because that food seemed strange and mysterious. One day it lay down at her feet, looking up at her with those hungry eyes, and it died.” (430-431, cited below)

The story is powerful and emotionally charged. Like the parables of Jesus, it also hints at much beyond the mere words spoken. For the rest of the book, Meris–the non-believing character Tavkel is telling the parable too–reflects on it and tries to draw out its meaning. The meaning, however, does not become clear until the Boh-Dabar fulfills the same kind of prophecies which Christ fulfilled.

Looking at this specific parable, there are many layers of possible meaning. How might we be eating food that doesn’t nourish us? Could it be a sinful habit, a practice, a temptation we give in to? Have we made ourselves used to bad food so that we don’t recognize that which is good? Do we need to ask God to help bring healing to our own habits of life? But the text could go in other directions as well. Have we seen others in ways that are mistaken? Perhaps we see something about someone else and think we do not want to associate with them. We see “sharp teeth” and think “predator.” We flee from that which is different.

Daystar is a wonderful piece of fiction which points beyond itself to something even better. Tyers has done a great service to readers by uniting themes of faith with stirring science fiction action and intrigue. This parable, I’m sure, will stick with me for some time, and that is exactly what good fiction should do–point you towards truth.

Links

Be sure to check out the page for this site on Facebook and Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies and more!

Sunday Quote- If you want to read more Sunday Quotes and join the discussion, check them out! (Scroll down for more)

Kathy Tyers’ “Firebird Trilogy”- Faith, Humanity, and Conflict in the Far Future- I look at a number of worldview issues brought up in the “Firebird Trilogy.” Be sure also to check out my review of the trilogy on my other site.

Source

Kathy Tyers, Daystar (Colarado Springs, CO: Marcher Lord Press [Now Enclave Press], 2012).

SDG.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,644 other followers

Archives

Like me on Facebook: Always Have a Reason
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,644 other followers