I was inspired to write this piece since my husband suffers from the disease himself and has additional disorders because of it. This is not a Christian article particularly (though it’s obvious from internet comments that Christians can be just as unsympathetic in their ignorance of the disease as anyone else), but one that many found useful at the now defunct Yahoo! Voices, where it had been published. It was my most viewed and used article, by far, there. So, instead of trying to republish it elsewhere, I’m posting it here. I hope you find it informative and of value to pass on! We hope that a cure may be found some day.
___________
UC is not a disease with localized symptoms only, as many believe
Ulcerative Colitis is not just ulcers in the colon due to stress or eating habits, as many people mistakenly believe. It is an autoimmune disease that is controlled through medication, if possible, and the removal of the colon if medications fail.
My husband has moderately severe ulcerative colitis (UC) and, despite being on medication, has frequent symptoms. Difficult for him, then, is his encounters with people who think this disease is no big deal or it can be self-cured. While some people with UC respond so favorably to medication that they remain in remission for very extended periods, for many this is not the case, and, there is no such thing as curing yourself of UC.
It seems hard to lead people to understand that UC is an autoimmune disease that has very little to do with controllable factors in a person’s life. About 500,000 people in the U.S. have UC, and about 50% of these have milder cases that respond well to medicines. The other 50% have more symptoms, have to go through difficult treatments, and may even have to have their colon removed.
The white areas are ulcers (image is from author’s husband’s colonoscopy).
What is Ulcerative Colitis?
Ulcerative colitis is a single disease, but it does vary significantly in its manifestation. It can be quite mild if found and treated early, or it can be deadly if not treated. The colon is an upside-down U-shaped organ, and UC can affect just the lower part of it (“proctitus”), the left side of it (“distal colitis”), or all of it (“pancolitis”). My husband has pancolitis, and no doubt this is partly due to a late diagnosis.
What happens with UC is that, for reasons currently unknown, the body attacks things in a person’s colon–and the colon itself–because it mistakenly views these things as infections. The colon becomes chronically inflamed, and this in turn further damages the colon. Left untreated the colon can become completely nonfunctional (called “toxic megacolon”), swell significantly, perforate, and cause death.
Ulcerative Colitis Symptoms
All of the symptoms listed below can range from mild to severe, and keep in mind that not everyone experiences all of these symptoms.
In children, a slowed growth rate
Abdominal pain and cramping; diarrhea
Blood and pus in stool
Weight loss; loss of appetite
Fever
Fatigue
Swelling and pain in joints
Nausea and vomiting
Lumps in skin that become ulcerated and then spread; mouth sores
Swelling of the iris of the eye
Complications from Ulcerative Colitis
Malnutrition, caused by malabsorption and/or medications
Bone loss and low bone density, caused by medications. (My husband had a foot break from only exerting normal pressure on it, and at a later point was found to have basically no vitamin D in his system.)
Anemia, and in some cases, massive internal bleeding
Colorectal cancer; cancer risk significantly increases each decade
Blood clots (especially in the legs, and clots formed there may travel to the lungs)
Kidney stones and liver abnormalities
Weight gain from certain medications, and emotional distress
Toxic megacolon, which leads to death if the colon is not removed
How is Ulcerative Colitis treated?
There are varying treatments, depending on the severity of the disease. They include proper nutrition relative to UC, prescribing “aminosalicylates” for mild to moderate UC, “immunosuppresents” for more severe levels of UC, and more difficult to handle drugs for emergencies or very nonresponsive cases. Please see Ulcerative Colitis: Medications for a detailed overview.
The ultimate treatment is the removal of the colon, or proctocolectomy. There are two different surgeries relating to proctocolectomy: the outcome of one is having an exterior bag that collect stool; the outcome of the more difficult procedure is that stool is expelled through the anus, made possible by a surgeon forming an interior “bag” from the small intestine. To read more about these procedures, see Removing the Colon: Surgical Options and Opportunities.
The CCFA: An Advocacy and Support Group
The CCFA, or Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America, is a nonprofit organization that funds research into inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) and publishes the scientific journal “Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.” The group not only has local chapters, but all kinds of information for coping with UC and other IBDs, research information (including clinical trials needing participants), leads to support groups and doctors, and an online community. If you want to find out more about UC and IBDs, or if you want to help find a cure through giving, the CCFA would be a great place to start.
English: An early engraving by Blake for the Book of Job (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Our God is amazing: He revealed to Job much of His distant future plan of Jesus as our redeemer, mediator, and savior. There are basically three ways that you can see Jesus in Job. First, Job suffered even though he was righteous; he didn’t suffer as a result of sin. This concept leads the way for the understanding of the suffering nation of Israel and the suffering savior. Second, utterances Job made that directly relate to Jesus’ role in our lives, including our bodily resurrection. Third, though seemingly controversial, is the role of Elihu as mediator.
So, how long ago was it that God revealed these things in what is now the Book of Job? While it is not known exactly when the book itself was written down, there are a great many reasons to accept the patriarchal period as its setting (it is thought to be the oldest book of the bible): there was no priesthood yet, since Job had acted as priest for his family; wealth was measured by livestock; and, Job lived to be over 200 years old. Other little details, too, point to the period described in the first part of Genesis. So Job spoke spiritual truths relating to salvation and end-times glorification long before Jesus came to us, or the Holy Spirit instructed the apostles in such matters.
Now let’s explore each of the three ways that Jesus is foreshadowed through Job. In the beginning of Job we are shown this scene: angels presenting themselves to God, when one in particular—Satan—insults Him. Satan accuses God of, basically, bribing people to believe in Him. “Does Job fear God for nothing?” “You have put a hedge around him . . . . You have blessed the work of his hands . . . . But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face” (1:9 -11). Even though God told Satan that Job was “blameless and upright” and that “there was no one on earth like him” (1:8), God allows Satan to destroy virtually all that Job has. This is Job’s first test. It is a test of faith, and Job passes. After all of his children, and most of his servants livestock are killed, Job declares: “The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; may the name of the Lord be praised” (1:21b). Job suffered for all those righteous who came after him so that they would not need to feel guilt over suffering. It is established here that suffering is not necessarily a sign of sin in a believer’s life. Our Lord Jesus was blameless and he suffered much for our sake. Also, future believers needed to be ready to accept a suffering Messiah.
Poor Job, however, is given a second test. Some would say that he didn’t completely pass this second test, yet after God came and spoke with Job, He said that Job was right and his three friends erred (42:7). At any rate, the second test was an attack by Satan on Job’s personal being. Satan claimed that if Job felt that he was going to die, he certainly curse God (2:3-8). After his illness begins three of his friends come to comfort him, but they also end up trying to convict him of sin. They felt that he must be harboring some secret sin, or else why would he be suffering so? Job gets more and more angry with his friends because he can find no sin within himself that he needs to confess, and he finds their logic wrong: righteous people do indeed suffer at times. In Job’s responses to his friends’ accusations he speaks prophetically.
In verse 9:33, Job stated: “If only there were someone to arbitrate between us, to lay his hand upon us both.” Job is referring to himself and God. Job’s friends aren’t helping at all (they are, in fact, making things worse), so Job wishes for someone to accompany him to God’s court—a mediator. But when we get to verses 16:19-21, we find that Job realizes that there is in fact a mediator! “Even now my witness is in heaven; my advocate is on high. My intercessor is my friend as my eyes pour out tears to God; on behalf of man he pleads with God as a man pleads for his friend.” We now know that the name of our mediator—our friend in heaven—is Jesus.
A few chapters further, and Job gets downright glorious. He boldly said to his irksome friends: “I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand upon the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God; I myself will see him with my own eyes—I, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!” (19:25-27) Doesn’t that sound familiar?
The third way that Jesus is hinted at in Job is through Elihu. Elihu is not one of Job’s friends that came to visit him, but someone who had been listening to the dialogues. In Elihu’s discourse, he makes the point that Job justified himself at the expense of God (32:2, 33:8-11, 35:1-3, 14-16), and another point that his friends could not answer Job’s predicament and anguish (32:3, 12). He seems like a young upstart, yet he takes on the role of a bridge between Job and God (34:31-33). Indeed in verses 32:18b-19 he states: ‘the spirit within me compels me; inside I am like bottled-up wine, like new wineskins ready to burst.” The only other place in the bible where new wine and wineskins are discussed is in Jesus’ dialogue concerning the old and new covenants (Mt 9:17, Mk 2:22, Lk 5:37-39). Jesus, our bridge and mediator, is so strongly associated with wine that I couldn’t help thinking of Him as soon as I read Elihu’s exclamation. Jesus made wine for the wedding in Cana (Jn 2:9-10); Jesus told us wine is symbolic of his shed blood which is for the forgiveness of sins (Mt 26:28, Mk 14:23-24, Lk 22:20, Jn 6:53-56); and, Melchizedek, who gave wine and bread to Abraham, is viewed as a type of Christ (Gn 14:18, Ps 110:4, Hb 7:11-25). Elihu also brings up “a ransom” being found to save a man (33:24).
In his dialogue and by the placement of it, Elihu foreshadows both God coming to speak with Job and wringing Job’s repentance out of him, and God’s judgment that Job’s friends did not speak what was right (42:7; in regard to suffering in general and in regard to why Job in particular suffered). Elihu was intermediate between Job and God, and it seems that he probably prepared Job somewhat for God’s confrontation with him. In the end, Elihu is different too. God’s view of Elihu is unknown. He says of the three friends: “I’m angry with you . . . because you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has.” It seems that God’s spirit was indeed speaking through Elihu.
This brings to the end my writing about Jesus in Job, but I would like to present some additional comments on the difficult passage just presented. Why did God say that Job spoke of Him what was right when God Himself came down and sought a more humble Job? There are two things going on in Job when you think about it. One is Job’s tests and how he and his friends viewed God’s role in suffering. The other is Job’s relationship with God. Concerning the first subject, Job spoke what was right of God, and even prophesied. But concerning the second subject, Job’s spirit and relationship with God were taxed and Job ended up sinning. When God came to Job He never told him the reasons for Job’s suffering (subject one), but He did restore Job to a proper relationship with Him and saved Job from suffering more spiritually (subject two).
So, Elihu was a bridge between Job and God. Then Job, once restored, prayed for his friends so that God’s anger was turned away from them; Job thus became a mediator as well. Amazingly, you could say at least in a small way, that Job ended up being a suffering savior for his friends.
[In case you’ve seen this before, I had it posted at our withchristianeyes.com site]
Anastasis, symbolic representation of the resurrection of Christ. Panel from a Roman lidless sarcophagus of the “Passion type”, ca. 350 CE. From the excavations of the Duchess of Chablais at Tor Marancia, 1817-1821. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Below is the second half of a relatively long (but actually concise) treatment of evidences or evidential steps for the view that the Christian faith is rational, and even desirable, to hold (the first half is here). The introductory paragraph is repeated for clarity. Thanks for reading, and may the God of all creation bless you.
______________
For the person who wants to know that there is reason to believe a holy book–that there is evidence to back it up–different areas of apologetics have those answers. In fact, there is more evidence for the truthfulness of the Bible today than ever before, excepting when the events actually occurred. This essay assumes that the person searching for a legitimate holy book already believes that there is a deity of some sort; it does not cover arguments for the existence of God. What this essay does cover, in concise form, are the issues of reliability of the Old and New Testaments, fulfilled prophecies, miracles, and Christ’s resurrection.
Miracles
What is a biblical miracle, and what is its purpose and meaning? In the Judeo-Christian context, a miracle is a work of God outside of the patterns of normalcy. Miracles of healing and of being saved from death obviously show the intervention of a God who loves. Biblical miracles consistently show three things. One, they display God’s glory (they also have the effect of showing to God which persons react faithfully to His glory, and which do not). Two, they are proof that the person “performing” the miracle is from God (the source is God, not the person). And Three, they display God’s benevolence. Some examples of such miracles are found in Exodus 14:13-18, Daniel 3:16-30, Mark 2:1-12, and John 11:38-44.
Do miracles happen today? Yes, they do! Most people think they don’t because they aren’t reported in mainstream media. I knew a lady personally, one of the most stable and intelligent ladies I have ever met, who told me the story of her daughter being healed from a terminal illness. The Lord did an emotional healing of myself, and I felt His work in my whole body (I will not explain further here). Open Doors USA reported on its website, in 2002 (April 7), a cancer completely healed in China: “one young woman was healed from cancer. The doctor treating her had fainted from the shock of seeing the cancerous growth gone. We all laughed at that.” Pastor Andrae Crouch was healed of cancer (Nappa 1999). In September 2001, The Voice of the Martyrs wrote of a healing in its magazine/newsletter: a young Pakistani Muslim man was hit by a car while riding his bike, and his leg was broken. A woman came out of the crowd and prayed for him, in Jesus’ name. He felt energy move throughout his body and his leg was healed (later, she gave him a bible and was never seen again, and he became a follower of Christ). I have read of many other miracles, too, occurring at the time of a person’s salvation and others that happen that save a person from death. Some medical miracles can be read about at the World Christian Doctors Network.
What about miracles outside of the Judeo-Christian faith? There are some amazing and unexplained things that happen in the world that people might say are miracles, but which do not meet the criteria that show that they are from God. Some of these may not be explained yet, and others may be the activity of fallen angels. The magicians of Pharaoh’s court in Exodus 7 performed seeming miracles. A girl had a spirit that told the future in Acts 16 (16-24), but the spirit in her was not from God. The book of Revelation foretells of someone who will perform ungodly miracles (13:11-14). So, if “miracles” happen that do not seem like they are from God, that may in fact draw people away from God, we should not be surprised.
There are some Buddhist scriptures with interpretations that record possible miracles, but since the miraculous activities are self-aggrandizing and do not point to God (such as the changing of physical things to other physical things, flying, reading minds, passing through solid matter, etc.), they are not Godly miracles. A modern day Hindu “miracle” happened in 1995, which was apparently reported from all over the world (Hinduism Today, November 1995 [as cited in Powell 2006]). A man in New Dehli dreamt that the Hindu god Lord Ganesha wanted milk. So the man went to the temple and told a priest, who then gave the statue of Ganesha some milk. The statue “consumed” the milk. People heard of it and started offering milk to Ganesha statues all over, and the statues “consumed” the milk. This went on for 24 hours in India, but longer elsewhere. The “miracle” seems useless and it lacks benevolence; indeed, God is not transcendent in Hinduism belief and so any such displays are supernormal, not supernatural. In the Quran, it is written that Muhammad did not perform any miracles.
The Resurrection of Jesus Christ
I wonder if other Christians feel the same as I, that for some odd reason Jesus’ resurrection does not need explaining? The reality of Christ’s resurrection is a very significant topic in apologetics, however, since it is such a hard to believe event for the unbeliever. A subissue is the disharmony of the differing gospel accounts as to what happened at the empty tomb. (This issue had led me to read Mary Magdalene and Many Others: Women Who Followed Jesus [Carla Ricci 1994], and I highly recommend it!) Women were very involved in Jesus’ ministry, he taught them much as disciples, and women were the first witnesses of His resurrection. This happens to play an important role in showing the reality of the resurrection, explained below, along with other rationales for accepting the resurrection as fact.
If the resurrection did not happen, how can anyone explain the beginning of the church? That may seem like an overly simple question–after all, there are many religions today that begin and grow for what seem to be very shallow (and unreasonable) reasons. Well, today, people in the Western World, at least, do not become lion chow in a public arena, are beheaded, or are crucified, for having beliefs counter to those of the government or religious elite. In conditions like that, one would be much more careful about choosing one’s beliefs!
Today, Muslims die (kill themselves) for a belief they think is true. People will die for the truth (and, in fact, Christians do die perhaps every day in countries that are hostile to their faith). But if some critics are correct that the Apostles were promoting false beliefs, why would they die for a lie (almost all were killed for their faith)? Who would do that? The Apostles and very many early believers died for their faith, knowing it to be true; it would be absurd to die for a cause that you knew to be false. Paul, as an apostle, is very hard to explain indeed, if the resurrection had not happened. Paul was not one of Jesus’ followers, but an ardent persecutor of Christians! He had a great education and was a Roman citizen—in short, he had a privileged life and his future was bright prior to his conversion. Because of his encounter with the living God and after convincing the other apostles that he was sincere, Paul served His Lord (and thus His church), and for this he was eventually beheaded by Nero.
So there was an empty tomb . . . that doesn’t prove Jesus was resurrected, or does it? A lot of people must think the evidence pointing to Jesus’ resurrection is good, since they try and come up with all kinds of explanations countering the event. Some, like the alien theory, are down-right silly. But what of the evidence? It’s interesting that the Jews tried to cover up the resurrection right from the beginning, knowing that Jesus’ body was gone. This is more significant when one considers that the tomb had been guarded by Roman soldiers who would forfeit their lives for this kind of negligence, and, that the Jews never did find Jesus’ body (you can bet that they tried) (Matthew 27:62-65, 28:11-15).
Another bit of evidence comes to us in a less obvious way. Some critics try to claim that the story of the resurrection was made up and developed through some time by the gospel writers. Even though there is good argument against this in general, we know that in fact Paul wrote of the resurrection early on, within 20 years, at the most, after Jesus died (and prior to the gospels being written). This is in 1 Corinthians 15:3-6, where Paul tells of the many witnesses to the resurrected Jesus, many of whom were still living at that time (readers and hearers of his letter could go and ask these people if what Paul said was true).
One of the evidences is of a type that people of today cannot appreciate unless they know the historical context of New Testament times. At that time, women were held in very low regard amongst the Jews. Sometimes it is hard to see or fathom this from the texts, since women do not seem to have trouble following and supporting Jesus. But women at that time did not testify in court as the men deemed them unworthy witnesses. Yet here, women are indeed the first witnesses to the resurrection. The men at first dismissed what the women had to say about the resurrected Jesus. One can imagine, in this social context, that the men had a very hard time writing the gospels with the women’s stories included. At that time, including their witness would be the opposite of what one would present in order to prove something, and something as important as Christ’s resurrection. The fact that the women’s accounts in each of the gospels varies is also telling—it shows that the writers did not collaborate to try and come up with a totally coherent and slick story that sounded official and convincing (Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-8 [and perhaps 9-11]; Luke 24:1-12).
Sir Lionel Luckhoo, who during his lifetime won 245 consecutive murder trial acquittals (for this he is in the Guinness Book of World Records), is not alone in his thinking and assessment of Jesus’ resurrection:
“I have spent more than 42 years as a defense trial lawyer appearing in many parts of the world and am still in active practice. I have been fortunate to secure a number of successes in jury trials and I say unequivocally the evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt” (Anon 2012).
Chong, Timothy. “Bible, Canonicity.” In The Popular Encycolopedia of Apologetics, by Ergun Caner Ed Hinson, 101-102. Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 2008.
Copan, Paul. Is God a Moral Monster? Making Sense of the Old Testament God. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2011.
Dowley, Tim, Editor. Eerdman’s Handbook to The History of Christianity. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1977.
Garrett, Duane A, General Editor. NIV Archaeological Study Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.
Geisler, Norman, and Ed Hindson. “Bible, Alleged Errors.” In The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics, by Ergun Caner Ed Hindson, 97-100. Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 2008.
Hart, David Bentley. Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2009.
Keller, Timothy. The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism. New York: Dutton, 2008.
Kennedy, D. James. “Christ: The Fulfillment of Prophecy.” In The Apologetics Study Bible, by Ted, General Editor Cabal, xxviii-xxix. Nashville: Holman, 2007.
MacDonald, William. “Prophecies of the Messiah Fulfilled in Jesus Christ.” In Believer’s Bible Commentary, by William MacDonald, xviii-xxiii. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995 (1989).
Nappa, Mike. True Stories of Answered Prayer. Carol Stream: Tyndale House, 1999.
Powell, Doug. Holman QuickSource Guide to Christian Apologetics. Nashville: Holman Reference, 2006.
Ricci, Carla. Mary Magdalene and Many Others: Women Who Followed Jesus . Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1994.
Sailhamer, John H. Biblical Prophecy. Grand Rapids: ZondervanPublishingHouse, 1998.
Yates, Gary E. “Bible, Transmission of.” In The Popular Encycolopedia of Apologetics, by Ed, and Ergun Caner Hindson, 107-110. Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 2008.
“All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well,” so quotes Lewis (p 65) near the end of his published journal entries that relate to the loss of his wife, Helen. (Lewis doesn’t give the author of the quote, but it’s from Julian of Norwich’s Revelation of [Divine] Love.) When I finally got to reading this little book, I found it to be a gem of thought, writing, and emotion. In it Lewis confronts God, then affirms His love for us—even if it’s like the tough love of a dentist or surgeon. One of his stepsons (Douglas Gresham) wrote so aptly in the introduction: “It is true to say that very few men could have written this book, and even truer to say that even fewer men would have written this book even if they could, fewer still would have published it even if they had written it (p xix).
Yes, indeed. My response after reading entries in which Lewis describes his wife’s character was: “What a guy!” Lewis eulogizes, “H. [Helen] was a splendid thing; a soul straight, bright, and tempered like a sword” (p 42). He adds later: “I see I’ve described H. as being like a sword. That’s true as far as it goes. But utterly inadequate by itself, and misleading. I ought to have balanced it. I ought to have said, ‘but also like a garden. Like a nest of gardens, wall within wall, hedge within hedge, more secret, more full of fragrant and fertile life, the further you entered.’ And then, of her, and every created thing I praise, I should say, ‘In some way, in its unique way, like Him who made it” (p 63).
These laudatory quotes belie the overall tone of A Grief Observed, however. While the end is a happy one, the heart of this book includes the racking grief over the loss of a lover, the struggle with faith when God seems absent but is most needed, and the questioning of God’s goodness. Lewis put it this way: “Talk to me about the truth of religion and I’ll listen gladly. Talk to me about the duty of religion and I’ll listen submissively. But don’t come talking to me about the consolations of religion or I shall suspect that you don’t understand” (p 25).
At the beginning, in the first of only four chapters, Lewis asks, “Where is god?” He likened God’s perceived absence during his desperation as a silence behind a door, which had been slammed in his face, and then bolted. He struggled with this lack of comfort from God, writing that “the conclusion I dread is not ‘so there’s no God after all,’ but ‘so this is what God’s really like. Deceive yourself no longer” (p 7).
Lewis is angry with God and tries to understand “goodness” in His terms. He concludes that the real problem is his own shallowness of faith. His faith is like a rope that didn’t bear him when needed, he claims, being just a “house of cards.” He connects true faith with outwardness: “If I had really cared, as I thought I did, about the sorrows of the world, I should not have been so overwhelmed when my own sorrow came. It has been an imaginary faith . . .” (p 37). Amazingly, this response to grief is coming from a man that many consider the greatest Christian apologist of the 20th century.
Being a great Christian thinker, Lewis couldn’t help but comment on consolations he received from various people. He derides the feeble platitude, “She will live forever in [your] memory” (p 20, and negatively considers the ideas we hold of the dead being both joyous and brought immediately into God’s presence. His commentaries relate to his desperate perplexity over Helen’s continued existence. His prayers to God meet only silence; his questions to Him about Helen are unanswered. Lewis felt that there was a “sort of invisible blanket between the world and me” (p 3), but this blanket appears to have enveloped his spiritual life as well.
A little over half-way through his journal, Lewis experienced not only a lifting of the blanket, but a strong sense that Helen was indeed “still a fact” (p 51). When he stopped worrying about how much he remembered of her, she seemed to be, in a certain sense, everywhere. His relationship with God began to reopen and he surmised that God had needed to show him what a flimsy house his faith really was.
He realized that he should have been praising God more, knowing that the act of praise brings joy. He realized more fully that we need to love God, not our own ideas of Him, and to duplicate this in all our relationships. He accepted that there are mysteries that will be solved only in heaven, and that “our apparently contradictory notions . . . will all be knocked from under our feet. We shall see that there never was any problem” (p 71).
But Lewis leaves us with something that some people may find hard to accept: an experience of Helen, her mind meeting his. He says of it, “I had never in any mood imagined the dead as being so—well, so business-like. Yet there was an extreme and cheerful intimacy. An intimacy that had not passed through the senses or the emotions at all” (p 73). He reports more of the encounter than this quote, of course, and analyzes it in relation to intellect, love, emotions, and the resurrection of the body. As he himself concludes, “We cannot understand. The best is perhaps what we understand the least” (p 75).
Psalm 21, Initial D. In: Albani-Psalter (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
This post, which is the third of three, is a summary of sorts of C.S. Lewis’s work, Reflections on the Psalms (1955; the edition of this book used here is found in The Inspirational Writings of C.S. Lewis, published in 1994 by Inspirational Press). Note that word spellings as found in the book are kept in this essay. I hope you are blessed by Lewis’ insight and these easily accessible summaries (click here for the first in the series and here for the second).
[This is a slightly edited version of the article I originally published at Examiner.com.]
_____________
Psalms and the Christian: The Law and Second Meanings
Sweeter Than Honey (the law)
How can God’s laws, His statutes, be truly thought of as “sweeter than honey,” as stated in Psalm 19:10, or something that “rejoices the heart” (19:8), when a starving person is told not to steal? Lewis could not understand this at first. To say that obeying the law brought about these joyful thoughts and feelings, as some have suggested, is to miss the psalmist’s intentions.
By “the law” is meant all that is in Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, not simply the Ten Commandments. Psalm 1:2 says that the law is a delight and to be exercised day and night (in more modern translations, the word used is “meditate”). This is not referring to constant obedience, but continual study and meditation. So what is meant by delight in the law is akin to loving a certain subject, like astronomy, for instance.
Of course, there can be a danger in having your favorite subject be something sacred. It can lead to spiritual conceit. See John 7:49. The pride that grew amongst Israel’s leaders led them to attach more and more conditions to the laws until finally no one could do them all. Or, if some claimed to fulfill all the conditions, then this bred self-righteousness.
Moving on from this note of warning, another aspect of the psalmist’s understanding of Gods laws is that they’re “true.” They aren’t “true” in the same sense that “apples grow on trees” is true, but that they are righteous and rock solid: “Their delight in the Law is a delight in having touched firmness; like the pedestrian’s delight in feeling the hard road beneath his feet after a false short cut has long entangled him in muddy fields” (162-163). This has more meaning when viewed in the light of Israel’s neighbors and enemies. Pagan practices abounded, like ritual sodomy and the burning to death of babies. But when horrific danger pressed in on the Israelites, say from the Assyrians, many were tempted to appeal to the “gods” of these rituals. To the person who saw the harm and horror of these pagan practices, God’s laws indeed would be “sweet.”
Second Meanings: Writings in General, and in Scripture
In the last three chapters of Lewis’ book, he presents ways to view second meanings in (1) pagan writings, (2) how second meanings may be viewed in scripture generally, and lastly, (3) second meanings in the psalms. The purpose of this exercise is to determine if it is legitimate to even consider meanings apart from what the writer apparently intended. And if so, how can we know a second meaning is something we should take seriously?
In relation to pagan writings, Lewis explains how Virgil’s poem Eclogue IV* (written shortly before Christ was born)–which uncannily resembles the birth of Christ and its meaning–can be considered an amazing “coincidence.” Whereas Plato’s description of what the world would do to a man of perfect goodness, where he describes a scene like Christ’s passion before the event came to pass, is akin to a very educated guess. Plato was in tune with the subject because of his teacher Socrates’ execution, and after contemplating it all, perfected his thoughts on the matter. And so it happened that Plato was quite correct in his assessment! (While reading Lewis’ work one can surmise that he did not think, really, that Virgil’s poem was mere coincidence or that Plato’s work lacked divine inspiration, but Lewis is making an argument apart from immeasurable heavenly influence.)
Lewis reasons: “If even pagan utterances can carry a second meaning, not quite accidentally but because, in the sense I have suggested, they have a sort of right to it, we shall expect the Scriptures to do this more momentously and more often. We have two grounds for doing so if we are Christians” (187). The two grounds are:
(1) Aside from direct prophecy, the OT is filled with all kinds of different writings. Ecclesiastes is basically pagan, so why is it scripture? The Song of Songs is basically secular, so why is it scripture? Lewis describes those OT as having been worked upwards, or divinely upgraded. “All [have been] taken into the service of God’s word. . . . On all these I suppose a Divine pressure; of which not by any means [the authors] need have been conscious” (188).
Just as not all see (believe) that the human animal has been up-graded to hold the divine, not all will see the divine in the up-graded words of the Bible. “For what is required, on all these levels alike, is not merely knowledge but a certain insight; getting the focus right” (190). He likens this to the printed page: for those who do not know what it is, apart from ink markings on paper, a person who tells them it is a poem may not get far in convincing them.
(2) The second ground for acknowledging other meanings in scripture is far easier to explain: Jesus Himself said so. He had scolded the disciples going to Emmaus for not realizing, from scripture, that the anointed one would suffer. He told them of the scriptures that referred to Himself in the OT (Luke 24:25-27). From NT verses, we know positively that the following OT passages referred to Jesus: Isaiah 53 (Acts 8:27-38), Psalm 22 (Mark 15:34), Psalm 110 (Mark 12:35-36), Psalm 91:11-12 (Matt 4:6), Psalm 118:22 (Mark 12:10), Psalm 16:[10] (Acts 2:27). As Lewis states: “He [Jesus] accepted—indeed claimed to be—the second meaning of Scripture” (191).
* Lewis had not provided the name of the poem, but I include it for the readers’ information.
Second Meanings: The Psalms
“Here (to speak in ludicrously human terms) we feel that it needed no Divine guidance to give the old texts their second meaning but would rather have needed a special miracle to keep it out” (196).
As Lewis explains it so clearly, and as I think that clarity is necessary here, I will quote him at length concerning the overall view of “second meanings” in scripture:
“In a certain sense Our Lord’s interpretation of the Psalms was common ground between Himself and His opponents. [The example of] how David can call Christ ‘my Lord’ (Mark 12, 35-37), would lose its point unless it were addressed to those who took it for granted that the ‘my Lord’ referred to in Psalm 110 was the Messiah, the regal and anointed deliverer who would subject the world to Israel. This method was accepted by all. The ‘scriptures’ all had a ‘spiritual’ second sense. Even a gentile ‘God-fearer’ like the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8, 27-38) knew that the sacred books of Israel could not be understood without a guide, trained in the Judaic tradition, who could open the hidden meanings. Probably all instructed Jews in the first century saw references to the Messiah in most of those passages where our Lord saw them; what was controversial was His identification of the Messianic King with another Old Testament figure and of both with Himself.
Two figures meet us in the Psalms, that of the sufferer and that of the conquering and liberating king. In 13, 28, 55 and 102, we have the Sufferer; in 2 and 72, the King. The Sufferer was, I think, by this time generally identified with (and may sometimes have originally been intended as) the whole nation, Israel itself—they would have said ‘himself’. The King was the successor of David, the coming Messiah. Our Lord identified Himself with both these characters (193).
So, as Lewis remarks, allegorical readings have been viewed as normal and this by the highest authorities–but, not all interpretations are fruitful or even rational. One has to be discerning and open to the possibility that an interpretation can be wrong, based on historical blindness or wishful thinking.
He finishes the chapter, and his book, with examples of second meanings in some psalms based on interpretations in the NT itself (not all are summarized here). The first is Psalm 110, and Lewis explains it in the context of it being used for Christmas day in his church’s prayer book. This psalm is about a coming king who will be victorious over his enemies, and not about a sweet helpless newborn. We already know that David’s “Lord” is Jesus (verse 1), from Mark 12, and this Psalm is wholly messianic. It is about conquering in wrath the kings of the earth, not about individual salvation. Verse 4b says, “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek,” which is discussed at length in Hebrews 7. For a Jewish convert this is very important, since Jesus could not be a priest in the order Aaron; right there in a psalm of David, a messianic psalm, is the reference to a priestly order prior to Aaron’s. But regarding Jesus as conqueror and king, see also psalms 45, 89, and 132 (for Lewis’ fantastic treatment of Psalm 45, where Christ is also bridegroom, lover, and father, see pages 197 – 198).
Psalm 68 was read on Pentecost. It rejoices at the Lord’s victories over His enemies as well, but also presents how God loves and defends those in need. This is truly an astonishing messianic psalm! In verse 2, there are said to be a great host who spreads the word that the Lord gave; this suits Pentecost and seems to refer to all His followers. In the NT, Paul (Eph 4:7-8) gave a meaning to verse 18 that was no doubt new to many, and that was of the giving of the Holy Spirit (which of course Jesus told them about in John 16:7).
Paul wrote of another Psalm, 8, that had a new revealed meaning (Hebrews 2:6-9, 1 Cor 15:20-28). Instead of the psalmist meaning humanity in verse 5, “You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor,” it became known to the early church (maybe through Christ Himself) that that verse referred to the Lord Jesus Christ. Psalm 8 also speaks of the “son of man,” which Christ so-often called Himself. Lewis observes,
“And it is this, I believe, that most modern Christians need to be reminded of. It seems to me that I seldom meet any strong or exultant sense of the continued, never-to-be-abandoned, Humanity of Christ in glory, in eternity. We stress the Humanity too exclusively at Christmas, and the Deity to exclusively after the Resurrection; almost as if Christ once became a man and then presently reverted to being simply God. We think of the Resurrection and Ascension (rightly) as great acts of God; less often as the triumph of Man. The ancient interpretation of Psalm 8, however arrived at, is a cheering corrective. . . . As I have already indicated, there seems to me to be something more than analogy between the taking up of animality into man and taking up of man into God” (199-200).
Sources
Kaiser Jr, Walter, et al. “Does God Seem so Angry in the Old Testament & Loving in the New?” In Hard Sayings of the Bible. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.
Lewis, C. S. “Reflections on the Psalms.” In The Inspirational Writings of C.S. Lewis. Inspirational Press, 1994 (1955).
KJV of 1611 (Psalms 23:1,2): Occurrence of “L ORD ” (and “God” in the heading) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
This post, which is the second of three, is a summary of sorts of C.S. Lewis’s work, Reflections on the Psalms (1955; the edition of this book used here is found in The Inspirational Writings of C.S. Lewis, published in 1994 by Inspirational Press). Note that word spellings as found in the book are kept in this essay. I hope you are blessed by Lewis’ insight and these easily accessible summaries (click here for the first in the series)!
[This is a slightly edited version of the article I originally published at Examiner.com.]
___________
Psalms and the Christian: Death and Seeing God
Death in the Psalms
Do you know what the Pharisees and Sadducees believed about the afterlife during Jesus’ time? Do you know what the Jews believed about this 1000 years earlier? When it comes to interpreting the Psalms it’s important to know that the Jews, through time, had differing beliefs about life after death. This is because God chose to reveal his plan for our eternal souls slowly.
“. . . in the Old Testament the idea of an afterlife was only partially revealed and even that revelation comes toward the end of the Old Testament period. Most of the time people thought of death as going down to the shadow world of Sheol where there was no praise of God and at best only a semi-life. What they hoped for was to die at a ripe old age with a good name, having seen their children and grandchildren . . .” (Kaiser, et al., p 46).
So this was basically the idea of the afterlife when most of the Psalms were written, which was between about 1400 BC and 430 BC. By the time of Jesus, the Jews were split in their beliefs. The Pharisees believed in an afterlife that included a resurrection, the Sadducees did not. As my old pastor occasionally said, “That’s why they were sad, you see.” At this point I think it well to make a note that while this is the view that Lewis took, and many or most scholars still take (i.e., the quote above), other scholars disagree. They argue that based on (1) the taking of Enoch and of Elijah, (2) the views expressed in some of the psalms, and (3) on the book of Job, that the Jews believed in an afterlife directly with God. While some references to Sheol say that God is present there, others do not, and in any case Sheol did not represent what we understand as heaven.
Here are some examples of the ancient Jews’ views on the afterlife: Psalm 89:47 – “Remember how fleeting is my life. For what futility you have created all men!” Psalm 30:9 – “What gain is there in my destruction, in my going down to the pit? Will the dust praise you? Will it proclaim your faithfulness?” Psalm 6:5 – “No one remembers you when he is dead. Who praises you from the grave?” Psalm 88:5 – “I am set apart with the dead, like the slain who lie in the grave, whom you remember no more, who are cut off from your care.”
Lewis does not deny that there are some verses in the Psalms that speak to us today about God’s plan of redemption, but he is pointing out in this topic that we have to be careful about applying Christian theology to ancient texts. Lewis feels that God kept thoughts of the afterlife to a minimum with His chosen people so that they wouldn’t get too caught up in it. The pagan nations around them, like the Egyptians, were very much concerned with the afterlife, indeed. One can be TOO concerned about it, where it becomes simply a selfish ambition. It was enough during this time that people sought after God to help them simply survive in a difficult world. God also wanted the Jews to learn to love Him for what and who He is, not just for what He could do for them. When they learned to love Him, they then would begin to desire to be with their God forever. It is only when God is at the center that the desire for heaven or the fear of hell really make sense, or any lasting sense, anyway. If we try to imagine what either heaven or hell is like, we don’t get very far; in the end it is a choice of whether one wants to be with God or not.
Worshiping God, Seeing God
Lewis finds that it is useful to think about how Jews worshiped God when the view of heaven was absent, which would be so foreign to us. He says the worshipful aspect of the Psalms is one of mirth, and “If we think ‘mirth’ an unsuitable word for them, that may show how badly we need something which the Psalms can give us perhaps better than any other book in the world” (p.154). What tempers our mirth relative to the Jews’ is that while we believe that the Messiah has already come, he died a gruesome death for us which we are called to remember every time we have communion.
Which brings us to important differences between the Temple and the synagogues, and how they relate to our current church practices. When the Temple existed, it was the place of worship and festivity, slaughter and barbeques. The synagogues were different, being local places for scripture readings and education. In our churches, we combine all: worship, slaughter (the Eucharist), scripture readings and education – we may even have an occasional barbeque.
But there’s a difference between the Temple festivals and our weekly services. Lewis says, “The most valuable thing the Psalms do for me is to express that same delight in God which made David dance” (p. 155). When people came to the temple for a holy time, it was also a fun time. If you didn’t live in Jerusalem, then it was kind-of an adventure (at least for kids). You socialized, had roast meat, listened to music and danced. You might come to think of God in that way, that he equaled those things. This is what Lewis tries to get at. Probably for the “common man” God was all of those pleasant things; the ancient peasant Jew was not an analytical Greek – all was one with him, and that one was God (however, do not think that he was a pagan or pantheist, either).
So when the psalmist talks of seeing the Lord, or longing to see him, he most often meant seeing him through worship in the Temple. Psalm 68 is an example: “Your procession has come into view, O God, the procession of my God and King into the sanctuary. In front are the singers, after them the musicians; with them are the maidens playing tambourines” (vv. 24-25). He wouldn’t say, like we might today, that he “felt” the presence of the Lord, but that what he saw was the Lord’s presence.
Considering the historic contexts shown in the essays so far, Psalm 27 (vv. 4-6) takes on new or added meaning:
One thing I ask of the Lord,
This is what I seek:
That I may dwell in the house of the Lord
all the days of my life,
to gaze upon the beauty of the Lord
and to seek him in his temple.
For in the day of trouble
He will keep me safe in his dwelling;
he will hide me in the shelter of his tabernacle
and set me high upon a rock.
Then my head will be exalted
Above the enemies who surround me;
at his tabernacle will I sacrifice with shouts of joy;
I will sing and make music to the Lord.
And make music they did. The psalms are full of the longing for God and for declaring it through music. Examples can be found in: 9(2); 42; 43(4); 47(1); 50(2); 57(9); 63(2); 65(4); 81 (1-2); 84(3); 97(1); and, 150(5). Since the writers of these psalms did not know the salvation of the Lord like we do, it is all the more amazing that they worshiped with such gusto. Granted, our worship has the somber counterpoint of Jesus’ death, but we should be able to seek the beauty of the Lord and the “pleasures” of his house today. (It seems that the church as a whole actually has moved more in this direction since Lewis wrote his work in 1955.) Lewis concludes: “. . . I find [in the Psalms] an experience fully God-centered, asking of God no gift more urgently than His presence, the gift of Himself, joyous to the highest degree, and unmistakably real” (p.158).
Sources
Kaiser Jr, Walter, et al. “Does God Seem so Angry in the Old Testament & Loving in the New?” In Hard Sayings of the Bible. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.
Lewis, C. S. “Reflections on the Psalms.” In The Inspirational Writings of C.S. Lewis. Inspirational Press, 1994 (1955).
English: The Psalms scroll, one of the Dead Sea scrolls. Hebrew transcription included. English translation available here. Français : le rouleau des Psaumes, l’un des manuscrits de la mer Morte. Une transcription en hébreu moderne est incluse. Une traduction anglaise est disponible ici. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
This post, which is the first of three, is a summary of sorts of C.S. Lewis’s work, Reflections on the Psalms (1955; the edition of this book used here is found in The Inspirational Writings of C.S. Lewis, published in 1994 by Inspirational Press). Note that word spellings as found in the book are kept in this essay. I hope you are blessed by Lewis’ insight and these easily accessible summaries!
[This is a slightly edited version of the article I originally published at Examiner.com.]
___________
Psalms and the Christian: Judgment and Cursing?
Judgement in the Psalms
Judgement itself is not too controversial since there are, in fact, many verses related to it in the New Testament. Jesus is the “judge of the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), and we expect Him to return and judge the earth: “. . . He has set a day on which He is going to judge the world in righteousness by the Man [Jesus] He has appointed. He has provided proof of this to everyone by raising Him from the dead” (Acts 17:31).
However, the psalmists tend to have a different focus than we do when it comes to judgement. As Christians, we know that we are sinners and that if we had to go before a court to be judged, we would be defendants, not plaintiffs. We look to Jesus to have our “case against us” dismissed, and we speak to others of this salvation. But the Jews rarely used judgement in this context; rather, they were the plaintiffs and they wanted God to bring their enemies into judgement. They wanted justice, if not vengeance, and they didn’t often see themselves as part of the problem.
There is one verse in the New Testament that is more like the Old Testament’s focus on judgement, and that is found in Revelation 6:9-11:
“When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, ‘How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?’ Then each was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed.”
At first, this is pretty shocking (well, it was for me), since the New Testament teaches us to forgive and pray for our enemies, and to leave vengeance to God. The martyrs here do leave vengeance to God, but they do not seem forgiving and they are not rebuked by God. I thought I had a clever explanation for this before I studied what others had to say about it. It is reckoned that these are the prophets of the Old Testament and that the others to be killed are the tribulation saints. If this is correct, then they are expressing the exact sentiments we see in the Psalms and there is no need to reconcile them with New Testament teachings.
Most calls for judgement, however, are very morally sound. Some examples are:
“For he who avenges blood remembers; he does not ignore the cry of the afflicted” (9:12); “A father to the fatherless, a defender of widows, is God in his holy dwelling” (68:5); “He will judge your people in righteousness, your afflicted ones with justice” (72:2).
The psalmists cried out in this way because, simply put, peoples in biblical times did not have honest judges! Well, a judge may have given a good ruling, but you had to pay him for it. One of Jesus’ parables, which provides some instructing us regarding prayer, illustrates this norm about judges in Luke 18:1-8. A widow kept pestering a particular judge for justice, and he finally gave her a ruling—not because she was wealthy and could pay him, but because he didn’t want to be bothered by her anymore. Normally, only the wealthiest people were able to obtain a judgement and get justice. Of course there were no international courts either; people needed a hero to act on their cries for justice. So justice is sought from God.
What is more difficult to swallow and understand than calls for judgement in the psalms are the cursings, which we look at next.
The Cursings
If God is in all of the bible, how do we take the cursings? As Christians, we are called to forgive, not curse, so how do we use the verses that contain curses? Examples of “curses” are:
“May the table set before them become a snare; may it become retribution and a trap. May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever” (69:22-23); “May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered before the Lord; may the sin of his mother never be blotted out” (109:14); “O daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us—he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks” (137:8-9).
First, we can look at the culture in which these were written. At that time, it was considered OK to express your anger in this way; it wasn’t considered crazy or rude. Another aspect of their experience is that the times were more violent (at least compared to those of us who live in “the west” today) and definitely more bloody. Remember, blood sacrifice was a common occurrence.
Second, these cursings help us to remember a simple fact: when a person is hurt by someone, the natural reaction is to do a hurt back. A hurt person may never fully recover from the wrong done to them. Even if that person forgives, and forgives again, the hurt is not obliterated and there are consequences or repercussions from the hurt. Though it is a natural feeling to curse or want vengeance, it is wrong for the Christian. It is possible that hurtful actions will cause a lifetime of difficulties for another person, difficulties that can lead them to sin, and this Christians are to avoid.
Another aspect of the cursings shows that the Jews were closer to God than many Pagans, or people today. “What?!,” you’re thinking. Let me explain. Very simply, the Jews expressed indignation: righteous anger. And they expected God to act on it since He is a righteous God. There are many people in the world who, when confronted with evil, shrug their shoulders and say, “Well, that’s just the way things are.” They don’t care about evil much, and they certainly don’t get offended on God’s behalf, as the Jews did. As Lewis stated: “If the Jews cursed more bitterly than the Pagans this was, I think, at least in part because they took right and wrong more seriously” (p. 147).
The article below is now in two parts (I and II). The first part deals with the Beta and what I learned about the game at that time. The second part shares notes about various good and maybe not-so-good aspects of the game pre-DLC (last updated 10-07-14).
A view of the crumbling but future earth in Destiny (beta). Image from Destiny game page at Amazon.com (copyright Bungie).
I. What the Beta Spoke to Me
During the 4th weekend of July, 2014, I was fortunate to be able to play the public beta of Destiny. My son and I both played it quite a bit, getting a feel for the game. I’m glad I played as much as I did but had hoped to play more! I didn’t expect the beta to end so soon, especially not on Sunday afternoon instead of evening. That my son and I played so much, and wanted more, goes to show what a good game Destiny appears to be.
I say Destiny “appears” very good since the beta provided very little of the story and there was no indication as to the actual level of role-playing (can true choices be made or is the quest line only linear?). For me, the role-playing aspect of games is important and I buy them for that reason. I’m hoping for the best regarding the depth of the game’s story and the level of player immersion into it. The game is rated T for teen and has various game-play modes, including player vs player, making it both widely accessible and no doubt desirable to a large audience.
Leaving the formal talk aside for a moment, I can say that we loved the game so far (with some qualifications) and ended up preordering one of the special editions. Basically, it’s a new type of futuristic fantasy game that’s lots of fun!
Is it an RPG or Action-Adventure MMO, or . . . ?
Destiny is set to release on September 9, 2014, so I can’t say from experience all that this game truly encompasses, but the makers of the game describe it this way: “The next evolution of the first-person action genre that provides an unprecedented combination of storytelling, cooperative, competitive, and public gameplay, and personal activities that are all seamlessly woven into an expansive, persistent online world. Venture out alone or join up with friends. The choice is yours. Personalize and upgrade every aspect of how you look and fight with a nearly limitless combination of armor, weapons, and visual customizations. Take your upgraded character into every mode, including campaign, cooperative, social, public, and competitive multiplayer.”
Playing the beta revealed much of those elements, and from the quote above it can only be guessed that the game is not a true role playing game (RPG). It seems that it’s getting difficult these days to categorize games as true RPGs, where you develop your character via choices and action that is not simply linear (in other words, you don’t just choose your class, looks, and armor, but make choices within a branched story that have effects on your character and on other aspects of the game). This is a “first-person action” game with “storytelling.” So, it doesn’t sound like your choices change you or the story. But, we will all know after the game comes out and is played through. It’s a lot of fun in any case – I’m just not getting my hopes up that it’s a true RPG.
The MMO aspect of this game is not at all like one might think. There isn’t a horde of 100s or 1000s on one map, or area of a map. Destiny appears to allow only so many people on a map area at a time. When you are on a quest you will be doing it by yourself, essentially, unless you specifically ask someone to join you; and when playing the COD type of shooter modes, there are of course a maximum number of players on each team. There is a central area where very many (all?) players can be on at one time and interact, and this is the area where the shops and guilds are. You can interact with other players here, ask them to play with you, dance and play ball with them, and just hang out and be silly (if desired).
Gameplay: Quests, Exploration, Multiplayer, Social Tower
Note: According to the official game site, there is a game mode that has not yet been revealed. Stay tuned!
Story Quests and Exploration. For the beta, part of earth (and for a very short time, the moon) was available for quests in the main campaign and for exploration. Venus and Mars are in the Destiny environment as well. The quests were short but had increasingly long end battles. I, for one, hope that future quests have more to them besides simply running around (“busy work”) and fighting hordes at the end. Exploration mode is fun. Apparently, the whole world can be accessed through explore mode (parts were blocked during beta), where enemies respawn quickly, loot chests are hidden here and there, and “community events” randomly appear. These events involve fighting enemies, of course, and confer a daily reward when finished. I experienced many of these community events and while many were duplicates, there was one unique event that was totally insane.
Social Tower. The Tower is a large place holding the shops and guilds, where people can socialize. It overlooks The Traveler (the large orb hovering over the Earth) and the last inhabited, free city. Not all areas of the Tower were open during beta.
Multiplayer. There are two modes of multiplayer, at least so far. “Strike” involves three players fighting a boss type of situation, and the other is a team of players vs another team, called “Crucible.” The Crucible maps are very nice, but my son thought there was something missing (or the mode was lower-quality somehow) in this capture-the-point mode that he couldn’t put his finger on.
Characters Played During Beta Weekend
There are three classes of characters and three “species,” but all are “Guardians” to what remains of earth’s civilization. As mentioned earlier, both my son and I played the beta and between both of us we played all three classes of characters (but not every species) and leveled two up to the beta high of eight. All characters jump, heal fast, have their own special type of grenade, use floating (but ground-hugging) vehicles for fast travel, and have a little flying mechanical fellow that helps them out, gives them hints, etc. For an as-yet unknown reason, these little guys are called “ghosts.” Regarding physical weapons, all characters have access to the same multitude of weapons. I very much enjoyed many of the firearms, particularly the sniper rifle and the machine gun. These weapons come in different varieties, of course, which have different upgrades. All characters have a very satisfying punch attack; I’ll let you experience that yourself to understand what I mean.
Warlock Class. My son started with a Warlock class female, choosing the “Awoken” species. Warlocks are described as “mystic warriors.” Since the Awoken have swirly light lines on their faces and are the opposite of the Fallen (an enemy type) by name, it seems very appropriate that they be Warlocks. She used powerful purple swirling energy in her attacks while wearing a fairly hideous helmet.
Titan Class. I started out with a Titan Class human female. I love this character, as does my son. Titans use electric-looking attacks, and their special power area attack is awesome. This attack can kill just about anything in the radius of the Titan’s ground slam.
The special ability of the Hunter class: a short-lived but extremely powerful “fire gun.” Image from Destiny game page at Amazon.com (copyright Bungie).
Hunter Class. I was able to get through level 6 of a male Awoken Hunter Class character before the beta closed down. The hunter seems to be basically an assassin. His first found weapon was a sniper rifle and his special power is a fire gun that seems to have the power of a rocket launcher. He has no area attack. However, the hunter has a nifty throwing knife trick.
II. Like, Love, or Meh?
What I like about Destiny so far
1) Game play with item acquisition. Since I’m playing Destiny all the time, I must like something about it, right? Well, yes. But, a good part of my time playing isn’t due to how much I like the action, but how much I want to acquire or improve certain items. Since the limited-time Queen’s Wrath activities had begun I’ve been doing a number of her bounties, and some missions, in order to gain her favor and her rewards. I’m a bit tired now of doing the same bounties every day, but since I put this much effort into it already, I’m going to continue on to her 2nd reputation level in order to buy a special weapon from her emissary. In order to reach the 3rd level of reputation in the time she’ll be around, a player would have to be very good at all aspects of the game and have the time to do all the types of bounties and missions.
Another temporary event, the Vault of Glass, hasn’t even been on my radar. Well, it blipped once. In order to do that limited-time event, you need to have 6 players, but the game doesn’t match people up for this event. You have to build your own team and spend many hours doing the event. I’ve seen a few rewards from it, and they’re awesome, but I’m just not into spending time getting people together to do that. So, this temporary event should be in the “don’t like” section, but obviously temporary events will keep interest in the game up. The game isn’t a draw in the way of role-playing, puzzle solving, or mystery, so it has to have a way to keep people coming back for more.
For me, it’s been pretty fun so far, but with the whole thing being about acquiring new and interesting clothes and weapons . . . it gets a bit old. However, it does feel good to work for something and get it, even though it’s all virtual. I think if anyone could work like that in real life and get those kinds of rewards, they’d want to.
2) The look and feel of gameplay. The game is stunning. Really. The detail in the environments is fantastic, and no doubt much is missed by the average player, but the weather, and lighting especially, are really great. I love being in the game, basically, especially being on Venus. There is much feeling in the control, too, with this game. Punching, zooming along on your hovercraft, flying through the air – these are all just fun things to do.
3) It’s first person, not third. This is a part of the gameplay “feel,” but it’s significant enough to be a separate like. Being in first person makes for a more personal game.
4) There’s no gore, sex, or swearing. I personally don’t mind some of those things (depending on how much and the context), but I know Christian players and parents might want to know about these things. The characters you shoot do not “bleed,” but some of them do have something come out when you get a head-shot. The Fallen have what looks like a purple vapor come out, and the Cabal have what appears to be black oil! The Hive are undead and the Vex are mostly mechanical, so nothing special comes out of them. If you’re going to become offended in the game, it will most likely be from selfish players you might run across.
What I don’t like about Destiny so far
1) The ridiculous limit of characters you can set up to play. You are limited to three, so right now, if you want to have more characters you have to have a second online account (through XBOX or Playstation). Only three people in your family can have a character, and of course you can’t experiment with other characters unless you’re willing to delete the one you already started. According to my son, this is a bogus limitation without any technical merit. If you know differently, please leave a comment.
2) Bungie’s “customer service” is simply atrocious, as in virtually non-existent. They even have put down their XBOX customers down online (on Twitter, an XBOX help person even came onto a Bungie thread and helped XBOX players while their own staff continued to ignore them). They would prefer to have only PS4 customers. When an error message comes up while you’re playing, it says to go to Bungie help and search for a certain word. I went there and there was NO explanation by Bungie of that error code, only people asking and complaining about it, since there’s no help. This company can’t even do basic customer service things . . . at least that was true at the time I’m writing this.
Today, 10-7-2014, Bungie is doing a multi-hour fix so hopefully connectivity issues will improve, and at least they Tweeted about it to let people know. EA has been a whole universe better about customer service and letting people know about downtimes (they put messages up IN-GAME), and even having information and help at their website. Given EA’s past reputation, this should really be a kick in Bungie’s pants– but as can be surmised, they very much don’t seem to care.
3) The incredibly bare-bones story. As in, virtually no story. The story that does exist in game is of course used to explain why you’re on a bounty or mission, but it’s really just a shoot and loot type of game, at least so far. Still, I look forward to writing more about the story in the future.
Right now it looks as though a basic good vs evil scenario was concocted–one that will have little chance of offending anyone. If you’re a Christian you could lament the main mysterious but benevolent power, “The Traveler,” since it helped man progress materially. The force it commands, “light,” seems like simply a force. It uses its power to bring your character back to life, with no mention of where your soul was while you were dead (or how it “refleshed” you). Destiny will have added content and is set to be a trilogy, so who knows what details will emerge about The Traveler and its power, and how they relate to the spiritual realm.
I need to mention something here that cracked me up when I found out and it has to do with Christianity–but the message seems quite mixed. There is a very hard to get exotic machine gun called “Super Good Advice.” It is obtained through the bounty called “A Voice in the Wilderness.” Yes, John the Baptist’s message was “super good advice,” but, he didn’t shoot you dead with a machine gun in order to get his message across. At first, I thought the developers were just having fun with saying something positive about Christianity, but now I’m not so sure.
Upon seeing the weapon’s color–red, white, and blue–and the description, “This weapon is full of it,” I think they could be using Christianity to put down America. It could be just my inclination, but it seems to be saying that America, which seems like a Christian nation, really just likes to solve problems with violence. I wouldn’t agree with that; I’d say that America manipulates through money, and that obviously, money is power. There are times that morally, we should intervene on the behalf of innocent victims, and we don’t–the opposite of this gun’s possible message.
4) The lack of match-making by the game in order to play certain part of the game. The need for self-made teams in order to win the best stuff, as mentioned concerning the Vault of Glass above, is obviously biased toward a certain range of players.
5) Team members that act like they’re not part of a team. Again, this is a shooting game, and good shooter players tend to be fast and in it for themselves (one person on my team yesterday was a completely selfish . . . ). If you’re more like me, someone who likes to scout and snipe before jumping into things, the teams are not great and the multiplayer shooter is . . . nonexistent for me right now (my son and I play on one account so if you ever find us, you’ll see he does just fine in the Crucible multiplayer). It would be a nice change of pace to be on a more none-autobahn-minded minded team (although, certain Destiny missions favor fast playing). For that to happen, you need to put your own like-minded team together.
6) As a shooter game, a significant amount of playtime is simply spent on shooting/attacking sub-bosses and bosses . . . for a long, long time. My son is faster at boss killing than I am so for him it’s not as bad. I’m still trying to learn the difference in our play styles so that I can go through boss battles faster, but no matter how good you are, it’s still “busy work.”
This bibliographic article was first at Squidoo and called My Christian Bookshelf: Apologetics (I). I removed it to my blog here and I hope you are informed by it!
_____________
Christian Apologetics Covers an Array of Topics
Apologetics is a term many more Christians know today since there’s been a publishing boom on the subject in recent years, and universities have added classes and degrees in it. I have a certificate in Christian Apologetics from Biola University, where, if a student is interested, credits from the low-cost certificate can be applied to a master’s degree. But what is apologetics? It’s not apologizing for one’s faith, as it might sound. Our modern word “apologetics” comes from the Greek “apologia,” which means “defense,” “answer,” or “vindication.” Of course, apologetics covers many topics and responds to whatever new fad of popular criticism crops up. There are a variety of topics that some people specialize in, like apologetics relating to science-based criticisms, or philosophical criticisms, or even textual criticisms.
Regarding textual criticism, there is so much evidence to show that the Old and New Testaments are reliable and unaltered, that it’s a bit odd that this area of criticism continues. Yet, this may be because this subject seems to have the least amount of publications readily available, or perhaps many people just don’t care to understand it as much as other Bible-related issues. It is certainly necessary to understand, since various cults, and even Islam, baldly and falsely claim that the Bible is unreliable. This is to justify their own later writings and to gain followers.
Presented below are some of my general apologetics favorites or those I find very useful. I’ll write about more resources in another post. Be aware that there are many more good apologetics books that I not only don’t have time to read, but don’t have the money to buy them with, or have room in my home to keep them all! If you have any favorites, you’re welcome to talk about them in the comment section near the bottom of this post.
The Apologetics Study Bible. This Holman Christian Standard Bible version is the entire Bible interlaced with 142 short articles (most are 2/3 to 1 1/2 pages long), many “twisted scripture” notes, bullet notes (dictionary/glossary), and more. With its numerous easily read articles that cover a very wide variety of apologetics topics, the Apologetics Study Bible is a great resource for beginners. It’s not a bad way to compare views and nuances on the various topics, either, since some articles overlap, add to a subject, or provide different views by different authors. Unlike some resources, the articles in this Bible come from many different authors, and their bylines are given so that you can look them up further if something intrigues you. In addition, since this translation is a newer one, it wouldn’t hurt to have a copy of it to compare it with other translations.
Holman Quick Source Guide to Apologetics. This colorful book by Doug Powell is one of my favorites, thus its place at the top here. In fact, I need to get the newer edition since mine is actually falling apart! Powell is a creative, art-oriented person (besides being an apologist, he’s a graphic designer, recording artist, and more, and has appeared on Conan O’Brien’s Late Night show), and this book is overflowing with photos, graphics, charts, and color text. This isn’t to say that the material is overly light. It’s not, but it does provide a great deal of good information in a fairly concise way. The topics run from the various arguments regarding the existence of God, to which God exists, to the reliability of either testament, and so forth, and it includes a valuable discussion on how God could allow evil.
Hard Sayings of the Bible. This is the most used book in my apologetics library. It is a compilation of four previously published books by different authors. As with just about any large resource with multiple authors, you’ll probably find some things that you disagree with in here. I disagree with some things. For anyone who has read the Bible and talked with a variety of believers, they will know that there are some subjects that are controversial; indeed, there are some things that are simply mysteries–things we can’t comprehend in our present form. And a lot of people like to argue about them, as if they have solved the mystery. In any case, as the title suggests, Hard Sayings of the Bible tries to help readers understand passages or topics that many people find confusing, and it mostly succeeds. Having this book along with a variety of commentaries will really help you understand the context of God’s word.
The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics. Published by Harvest House, this book is pretty much described in its title. It’s an encyclopedia of apologetics that is “popular” due, I think, to the brevity of the entries and, perhaps, as an excuse to leave certain topics out. I’m not trying to criticize the book too much here, as it is included for its usefulness, but it is not all-inclusive as far as topics are concerned. For instance, many religions are covered, yet Scientology is left out (“socinianism” is there, however – any guess as to what that is?). As for the length of the entries, they really aren’t all that short; it’s not a dictionary. In addition to covering many religions and philosophical ideas, there are many entries in this book about apologetics itself, Jesus, and God. Topics are easy to look up quickly in the accessible format.
True Reason: Confronting the Irrationality of the New Atheism. This book is now available in hard copy form instead of only Kindle, as I have it. This is a good thing for those who find that print documents not only help with retention, but are easier to mark with notes and are definitely easier to cite (since there are page numbers). Multiple contributors wrote about multiple subjects in True Reason, so the topics can be looked up and read about when interested or needed. I love the last chapters the most, 13 – 16, since those chapters interest me personally and they are topics not understood well by many people. One of these topics, from chapter 15, is about slavery in the Bible. There is a very big gap between biblical slavery and the worst examples of slavery found in the historic Southern U.S., or in many parts of the world today. However, from reading high sounding critics, you would completely think that biblical slavery was equivalent to the worst forms of slavery. Perhaps bible translators should sometimes choose different words for “slave” since it seems to have only one meaning anymore.
In any case, some “slaves” among the Jews were persons who today would be those who became too poor to pay their debtors. Someone would agree to pay their debt for six years (or fewer) of labor. After the time was over, the owner-employer sent them on their way, with funds and goods. This is more like indentured servitude and it was unique to Israel. This is due to God’s word; everywhere else, slaves were simply property, no matter the reason they had became slaves. Slaves in Israel were more like servants and were considered to be people, not property, and as such had the same protections against injury and murder as anyone else.
Slavery in the New Testament was not condoned, only made the best of in a time when the new, small Christian church had no power to change the entrenched Roman system. Author Glenn Sunshine gives us some context:
“. . . although a number of Pauline epistles and 1 Peter instruct slaves to be obedient to their masters, they also tell masters to treat their slaves with dignity and respect, in essence recognizing their humanity. This was a radical idea in the Roman world, more than we in the 21st century Western world can easily appreciate. Even more radical was Paul’s insistence on the spiritual and moral equality of all people when he says that in Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female (Gal. 3:28). Paul tells people to remain in whatever condition they were in when they became Christians, with the exception that should an opportunity to become free arise, slaves should take advantage of it (1 Cor. 7:21).”
A Tiny Bit of CS Lewis on Will
“There are two kinds of people: Those who say to God ‘thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says ‘All right then, have it your way.'”
Mere Christianity. On the back cover of the HarperCollins edition shown of Mere Christianity (which is an edited version of radio talks the author did for the troops during WWII), there’s a simply fantastic evaluation of this book and its context in history. I point you to it. C.S. Lewis, the author of Mere Christianity, is considered to be the greatest apologist of the 20th century. He basically started it all for us who are now in the 21st century. Lewis himself had been an atheist who eventually accepted Christ in his life, through both intellectual reasoning and personal experience. If you’d like to read a thoughtful piece by someone who had been an atheist and then accepted Christ through Lewis’ works, you can check out Philip Vander Elst’s engagingly informative article at bethinking.org: “From Atheism to Christianity: a Personal Journey.”
The Reason for God: Belief in the Age of Skepticism. Written by Timothy Keller of the well-liked Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City, this book continues much of Lewis’ earlier work. It is a very readable and friendly look at the Christian understanding of such topics as suffering, forgiveness, sin, science, and God’s interaction with us.
The Rage Against God: How Atheism Led Me to Faith. This book is of more interest than it perhaps generally would be because it is by the journalist brother of the late and popular anti-theist Christopher Hitchens. Peter Hitchens provides personal experiences and much history in explaining not only how he became a believer, but also how the new atheists ignore and/or twist history in their attempts to discredit belief in God and Christ. Besides being informative, it’s an interesting read, particularly if you want to know more about the relatively recent history of the United Kingdom.
The word of God came unto me,
Sitting alone among the multitudes;
And my blind eyes were touched with light.
And there was laid upon my lips a flame of fire.
I laugh and shout for life is good,
Though my feet are set in silent ways.
In merry mood I leave the crowd
To walk in my garden. Ever as I walk
I gather fruits and flowers in my hands.
And with joyful heart I bless the sun
That kindles all the place with radiant life.
I run with playful winds that blow the scent
Of rose and jasmine in eddying whirls.
At last I come where tall lilies grow,
Lifting their faces like white saints to God.
While the lilies pray, I kneel upon the ground;
I have strayed into the holy temple of the Lord.
In A Sacrifice of Praise, James H. Trott, editor (Cumberland House 2006; stanzas slightly modified)
_________________
The Rock (excerpt from Section X of Choruses)
by TS Eliot
О Greater Light, we praise Thee for the less;
The eastern light our spires touch at morning,
The light that slants upon our western doors at evening.
The twilight over stagnant pools at batflight,
Moon light and star light, owl and moth light,
Glow-worm glowlight on a grassblade.
О Light Invisible, we worship Thee!
We thank Thee for the lights that we have kindled,
The light of altar and of sanctuary;
Small lights of those who meditate at midnight
And lights directed through the coloured panes of windows
And light reflected from the polished stone,
The gilded carven wood, the coloured fresco.
Our gaze is submarine, our eyes look upward
And see the light that fractures through unquiet water.
We see the light but see not whence it comes.
О Light Invisible, we glorify Thee!
___
In T.S Eliot: Collected Poems 1909-1962 (HBJ 1963)
With Christian Eyes 