The Scandal of Easter

The early Christian community spoke of the scandal of the particular–the God of the universe revealed in flesh and blood. They felt the strange, incongruous power of this idea. They felt too the awful strangeness of beholding the very image of God in a human being broken and beaten and hanging on a cross. The scandalous, revelatory power of the particular. It has a special claim on the Christian imagination. It shapes and refracts what we find significant, how we live, against what powers we struggle.[1]

–Douglas Burton-Christie

18Ā For the message of the cross is foolishnessĀ to those who are perishing,Ā but to us who are being savedĀ it is the power of God.Ā 19Ā For it is written:

ā€œI will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.ā€

20Ā Where is the wise person?Ā Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age?Ā Has not God made foolishĀ the wisdom of the world?Ā 21Ā For since in the wisdom of God the worldĀ through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to saveĀ those who believe.Ā 22Ā Jews demand signsĀ and Greeks look for wisdom,Ā 23Ā but we preach Christ crucified:Ā a stumbling blockĀ to Jews and foolishnessĀ to Gentiles,Ā 24Ā but to those whom God has called,Ā both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of GodĀ and the wisdom of God.Ā 25Ā For the foolishnessĀ of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weaknessĀ of God is stronger than human strength.

–I Corinthians 1:18-25

The Christian is no stranger to strangeness; indeed, it might even be said that the Christian is no alien to the foolishness and weakness of the things of God in Christ. It is this theme, the scandal of particularity, the foolishness and weakness of the cross, the notion that the very God who upholds all of seen and unseen reality by the Word of His power, became flesh and dwelt among us; that He dwelt among us even as a mere man, obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. It only takes a matter of moments of meditation, spirated by the Holy Spirit, to become consumed by this tremendum mysterium et fascinans, the majesty and reality of the cosmic Christ; the notion that the eternally triune God freely and graciously became ensarkos. I think if most people, especially Christians, allowed this fact to become the very grist of their daily lives, that all there would be left to do is worship. How does this God of gods squeeze Himself into the flesh and blood of a particular human being, into a man from the squalors of the Galilee in Nazareth? It remains a miracle; for some to the point that it is the ultimate skandalon upon which they cannot get past; and instead, indeed, they inhabit a stumbled-existence all the days of their vain lives. God forbid it if this becomes the trajectory of the professing Christian.

Barth writes presciently on this particular scandal of Eastertide,

It is content simply to tell the story—this is how it was, this is how it happened. There is interpretation only in the lightest and sometimes rather alien strokes, of which we have to say much the same as we did of what we called the softenings occasionally found in the first part. The real commentary on this first part and the whole is, of course, the Easter story, which we can describe as the third and shortest part of the Gospel history. This tells us that God acknowledged this Jesus of Nazareth, the strange Judge who allowed Himself to be judged, by raising Him from the dead. It tells us of forty days in which this same One—whose history this was and had to be—was again in the midst of His disciples, differently, but still actually in time and space, talking with them, eating and drinking with them, beginning with them a new Gospel history, the time of His community, the time of the Gospel as the good news about the Judge who allowed Himself to be judged, the time of the proclamation of this event. He Himself was and is this event, the origin, the authority, the power, the object of the proclamation laid on the community. He Himself, He alone: He who was alone and superior and majestic in Galilee; He who was again alone but beaten and humiliated in Jerusalem, in the very midst of Israel. He, the Judge who allowed Himself to be judged, lives and rules and speaks and works. He is Himself the word which is to be proclaimed to all creatures as the Word of God. That is what the Easter narrative tells us. It gathers together the sum of all that has been told before. Or, rather, it tells us how the sum which God Himself had already gathered together in all that had gone before was revealed as such to the disciples—again by Jesus Himself. The Easter story is the Gospel story in its unity and completeness as the revealed story of redemption. The Easter story is the record of how it became what it was (in all its curious structure a history of redemption) for the disciples—not by their own discovery but by the act of God in the word and work of Jesus Himself. It tells us, therefore, that this history, Jesus Christ Himself as He exists in this history, is significant in and by itself. It tells us that all the significance which Jesus Christ as the subject and subject-matter of this history can acquire for individual men by means and as a result of proclamation (which has Him as its origin and object), has its basis and truth and practical and theoretical power in the fact that He is significant in and by Himself—even as He exists in this history. What is significant in itself has the power to become significant and will in fact become significant. But only that can become significant which is already significant, and in such a way that this being is the power of the corresponding becoming.[2]

Ī§ĻĪ¹ĻƒĻ„į½øĻ‚ į¼€Ī½Ī­ĻƒĻ„Ī· Christ is risen! He is risen!

[1] Douglas Burton-Christie, ā€œThe Scandal of the Particular,ā€ Spiritus: A Journal of Christian SpiritualityĀ 2.1 (2002) vii-viii.

[2] Karl Barth,Ā Church Dogmatics IV/1 §59 [227] The Doctrine of Reconciliation: Study EditionĀ (London: T&T Clark, 2010), 220–21.

An Eastertide Break from Blogging

Dearest readers, I am going to take a break from blogging, at least through Easter Sunday (April 20). My blogging has slowed anyway, from my typical pace, years past. I am not feeling as motivated to post like I used to. It has become more like work, than a joy; even though I appreciate the fellowship that it fosters with you all (especially, Richard B., my most faithful interlocutor over these last many years). I just need a time to step back, and refresh. I just deleted my X/Twitter accounts as well. I love Jesus Christ, and the Father, by the Holy Spirit; and I think I need to take a time away from this platform in order to think through my various priorities, before Him, and how those interface with my blogging career (ongoing since 2005). I don’t necessarily think this is the end of my blogging habit, but it surely is going to be a time of reflection and some type of reorientation as it comes to my writing here.

I pray for you all, that you have a blessed time during this forthcoming Eastertide season. I hope the power of Christ’s resurrection is set ablaze in your hearts, ever afresh ever anew. Maybe Jesus will come again, once and for all, for all of us, and we will finally meet personally in eschatological glory, before I make my way back here; I pray for that everyday! He is risen!

PS. If you support me financially for my blogging, please feel free (of course!) to cancel that (since I won’t be blogging). Again, I don’t think this is the end, but at the same time, and at the moment, I’m not totally sure. Blessings in Jesus Christ.

Happy New Year! What to Expect from the Blog, 2025

A relatively recent picture of me. I can’t fake smile (I do actually smile and laugh a lot in real life, FYI). šŸ™‚ But I’m also rather serious when it comes to theological matters, in a joyful way.

Happy New Year, my readers! Hope to have another great year growing in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ, and the triune God we are participating with through the lively mediation of our High Priest Jesus Christ; as He always lives to make intercession for those who will inherit eternal life.

A little bit on what to expect of the blog for the forthcoming year. I have suspended my read through of Barth’s Church Dogmatics for the remainder of the year. I am about 2/3 through the whole of it. I need a break, and time to read other thinkers. Expect to hear more from TF Torrance, as this year unfolds. He used to be the bread and butter of my blogging days, but had to fall off a bit given my commitment to read Barth’s Dogmatics through. Further, I am going to be doing a Philosophy of Religion class through the University of Oxford starting January 13th (it goes through April). I was made capable of pursuing this through a generous gift from one of my readers here (he has been a reader for the last 10 years, is an MD and entrepreneur in Australia, and has a deep passion and abounding love for the triune God—as do all of my readers!)—I still have some funding left from his gift, so I’ll let you know what else I find with reference to pursuing continuing studies (at some institute). I like to keep learning. The Philosophy of Religion class is an introductory class to Philosophy of Religion, which is for academic credit (it is undergrad level, which eventually turns into graduate level credit, interestingly). I thought it would be good to refresh on this matter, since it has been years and years since I worked through this type of stuff in any formal way. I’m obviously not all that amped by philosophy, but it is still helpful to have a grasp on the lay of that land in order to engage with such things more informedly. I spent probably a decade or more steeped in philosophy of religion, back in the day, for apologetics reasons mostly. So, a refresh anyway.

Of course, I have a berth of other books to read as well. So, you can expect to see me engaging with those as I oft do here at the blog. Ranging from biblical studies, Christian Dogmatics, history of ideas, history of interpretation, so on and so forth. I intend on writing more posts on historical theology loci as well; like I used to. I am continuing to read through Peter Lombard’s Sentences; almost done with Book 2 (there are a total of 4 ā€˜books’ or volumes). Expect to see more from this foundational mediaeval operator in days to come. My passion, really, is historical theology, but in a way that brings that into the present in order to pollinate the contemporary church in ways that might produce the fruit she needs to survive our cancerous times (i.e., ā€˜this evil age’ as it is pouring more and more into the walls and halls of the evangelical churches worldwide). I like to think that Listening to the Past, as Stephen Holmes as wont to say, provides a guidelight for the church present and future, as the past bears witness to our shared risen and ascended Lord, Jesus Christ. The church needs fortification and measure in these apostate times, and I believe by participating with our now dead (but alive in the triumphant) brothers and sisters, especially those that Christ raised up to be teachers for His church, that we can gain the type of red-meat nourishment we all need as growing grasshoppers in the Kingdom of Christ.

Anyway, just wanted to touch base with the readership (you all!) As always, I appreciate your presence here, even if you only lurk (I still see the stats for my blog). I hope to pick up the number of posts I write each week as well, we’ll see. As I age (I’m 50) my energy levels seem to be lessening (LOL); I guess, I’ll have to press into the resurrection energy of Jesus harder in order to keep the blog afloat. I’ve been sick with covid or something this last week, which is another reason why I haven’t posted here for a bit. I look forward to another fruitful year of reading and writing and sharing with you all, as the Lord leads. What I am really hoping for is that this is the year, 2025, that the ascended Christ finally comes again, and makes everyday Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost by sight! Maranatha

Incarnation&Atonement, The Reason for the Season and Everything

Merry Christmas!Ā Incarnation and Atonement; these are of apiece as we celebrate the coming of the Son of Man as a babe in a manger. The trajectory of His freely elected life to be us that we might be Him, by grace, through union with Him, in His vicarious humanity for us, is a cruciform trajectory that first confronts us in the womb of Mary; and then in the wood of the manger. He was born that we might have life, and that more abundantly. He became God with us, Immanuel; not by might, nor by power, but by the Spirit. It is by this same Spirit that as He unioned with us,Ā  we might now union with Him in the eternal bosom of the Father. This is the Good News of Christmas! I hope all of my readers, and all of yours, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

stole the picture from Christianity Today

The Father’s “Love Child” for the World

The *world* even the *churches* speak of love, as if all it needs is love. This is true. But only God *is* love. Only God *is* Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There is no other independent category of “love,” that is not first a predicate of God’s eternal life within itself. So, when the world, and even the churches, speak of love, they ironically bear witness against themselves; that is, if they claim that all we need is love, but are thinking of that in purely horizontal, human, and profane ways (which they are). The world’s only salvation is to be š‘–š‘›ā„Žš‘Žš‘š‘–š‘”š‘Žš‘”š‘–š‘œ š·š‘’š‘– (inhabiting God); this is, finally, to inhabit true love; this is what the world, and even the churches need. They speak this word over themselves, as the high-priest prophesied about Jesus and didn’t know it. The world’s hope, our only hope, is to be unioned with the Father’s “love child” for us; even so, as He came as a babe in a manager.

Christ is Risen! As the Basis for Freedom Before God and Others

The following is a post I wrote quite a few years ago where I reflect on the implications of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is both devotional, personal, and a little academic in orientation; but I think it’s fitting for today. Christ is risen!

I really struggled with a false sense of guilt and condemnation for particular sins from my past for years upon years. The enemy of my soul kept me living under ā€˜a yoke of bondage’ that Jesus said I ā€˜would be free indeed’ from. The Lord did not leave me as an orphan though, by the Spirit he ministered to me through a sort of rigorous exercise of training me to think rightly about reality as declared in the evangel of His life as borne witness to in Holy Scripture. After many years of anxiety and depression, particularly stemming from living under this false yoke of condemnation the Lord used the reality of creation and recreation to bring the freedom that I so desperately desired. I am sure that I am not alone in this walk, and so I thought I would share a little bit of how this ā€˜training’ from the Lord looks; at least the way it looks for me.

As I just intimated a doctrine of creation and recreation, along with God’s sovereign providential care of all reality, played the required roles for me to finally see that I truly was and am free (for God and others). As already noted this sort of education from God was motivated by a crisis—we might refer to it as a theology of crisis—a crisis that brought the realization home that I did not have the resources in myself to bring the freedom that God alone could bring.[1] So how does this relate to God being Creator; and not just in an intellectual sense, but how does that reality relate to these real life spiritual issues in a existential felt manner?

In order to help explain what I’m attempting to detail let me offer a very brief definition of the theological concept creatio ex nihilo (ā€˜creation out of nothing’). Keith Ward offers this definition:

Creatio ex nihilo (Latin for “creation from nothing”) refers to the view that the universe, the whole of space-time, is created by a free act of God out of nothing, and not either out of some preexisting material or out of the divine substance itself. This view was widely, though not universally, accepted in the early Christian Church, and was formally defined as dogma by the fourth Lateran Council in 1215. Creatio ex nihilo is now almost universally accepted by Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Indian theism generally holds that the universe is substantially one with God, though it is usually still thought of as a free and unconstrained act of God.[2]

There are many important theological implications we could explore simply based upon this brief definition, but for our purposes I wanted to inject this definition into this discussion to elevate the idea that God is the Creator, and thus all of creation is contingent upon his Word. It was this idea that God started to use in my life, years ago, before I ever had any understanding of ā€˜creation out of nothing’, that I could have freedom from my past. This concept, before I knew the theological parlance was captured for me in this Bible verse, ā€œ3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exactĀ representation of His nature, andĀ upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had madeĀ purification of sins, HeĀ sat down at the right hand of theĀ Majesty on high….ā€ (Heb. 1.3). Interesting how even in this verse the concept of being purified from sins and God’s ā€˜upholding all things by the word of His power’ are connected. It was this connection that God used to bring freedom for me. The lesson took many years, and was full of ā€˜anfechtung’ (trial-tribulation). The Lord allowed me to existentially feel the weight of what this world might look like without him as the One holding it together. It is very hard for me to verbalize the sense that I experienced, but it was as if I was questioning all of reality; even physical reality. I would look out at the world and based upon the sort of nihilistic logic that had infiltrated my mind (as a Christian!) over the years I would have this excruciating condition of feeling the transitoriness of all of reality. It was living in this reality, accompanied by ā€˜intellectual doubts’ (not spiritual) about God’s existence, that of course!, threw me into great pits of despondency and despair. But it was also through this that my perception of reality was transferred from one contingent upon my word—and this world system’s word—to God’s Word. It was this process, ironically, that allowed me to finally understand that ā€œIf GodĀ isĀ for us, whoĀ is against us?Ā 32Ā He whoĀ did not spare His own Son, butĀ delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things?33Ā Who will bring a charge againstĀ God’s elect?Ā God is the one who justifies;Ā 34Ā who is the one whoĀ condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who wasĀ raised, who isĀ at the right hand of God, who alsoĀ intercedes for us.ā€ (Rom. 8.31–32) Again, like with the Hebrews passage, we see here in Paul’s theology that a connection is made between freedom from condemnation and the creational reality of God’s Word; except here what is emphasized is not creation in general, but creation in particular as that is particularized in the re-creation of God in Jesus Christ’s resurrection. Once I’d been schooled enough with the reality that ā€˜reality’ is God’s reality based alone upon his given and sustaining Word; once I could ā€˜feel’ that weight, not just intellectually, but spiritually-affectively, the resurrection and re-creation therein had the real life impact I personally needed to be ā€˜free’ and stand fast in the freedom that the Son said I would be free within (Jn. 8.36); his freedom in the re-creation; the resurrection; the new creation; the new humanity that is his for us.

So I had this doctrine of creation out of nothing in place, in a ā€˜felt’ way; with the emphasis being upon the reality that God alone holds all of reality together. It was within this conceptual frame that the doctrine of re-creation and resurrection came alive for me; in an existential-spiritual-felt and lived sense. This is why Karl Barth’s doctrine of resurrection has resonated with me so deeply. It is tied into the type of ā€˜primordial’ thinking that creatio ex nihilo operates from—as part and parcel of God’s upholding Word—and then explicates that from within a theology of God’s Word wherein the primacy of Christ’s life is understood as the telos the fulcrum of what created reality is all about. Robert Dale Dawson really helped me to appreciate this sort of connection between creation out of nothing and Barth’s doctrine of re-creation as he wrote this:

A large number of analyses come up short by dwelling upon the historical question, often falsely construing Barth’s inversion of the order of the historical enterprise and the resurrection of Jesus as an aspect of his historical skepticism. For Barth the resurrection of Jesus is not a datumĀ of the sort to be analyzed and understood, by other data, by means of historical critical science. While a real event within the nexus of space and time the resurrection is also the event of the creation of new time and space. Such an event can only be described as an act of God; that is an otherwise impossible event. The event of the resurrection of Jesus is that of the creation of the conditions of the possibility for all other events, and as such it cannot be accounted for in terms considered appropriate for all other events. This is not the expression of an historical skeptic, but of one who is convinced of the primordiality of the resurrection as the singular history-making, yet history-delimiting, act of God.[3]

Threading out the academic technicalities (that are important in their original context), and focusing on the concepts that serve our purposes, what I draw from this is the significance of what Dawson identifies in Barth’s theology as ā€˜the primordiality of the resurrection as the singular history-making, yet history-delimiting, act of God.’ Can you see how all of this might provide the sort of apocalyptic freedom we are in need of in order to live the sort of ā€˜free’ life that God wants us to before him? It does seem rather mechanical and academic; I agree. Let me try to summarize and draw together the themes I’ve been attempting to highlight in order to provide you with a maybe-way forward in your own spiritual walk and life as a Christian.

The Conclusion. It is actually rather basic, but deeply profound; at least for me. What is required is that we ask for eyes of faith to see what God sees in Christ. He will school us in his ways as we seek him first in the Scripture’s reality in Christ. He will work things into our lives that will shorn away the accretions of the ā€˜worldly-system-wisdom’ with his wisdom; the wisdom of the cross. He will allow you to ā€˜feel’ the existential weight of his life, and the reality that that upholds, and within this, this apocalyptic reality of his in-breaking life into ours, the reality that the God who could rightly condemn us has broken into the surly contingencies of our sinful lives and become the ā€˜Judge, judged.’ If the God who holds all reality together by the Word of his power in Jesus Christ invades this world in the Son, takes his just condemnation of our sins (no matter what they are!) upon himself for us, puts that death to death in his death on the cross, and then re-creates all of reality in his resurrection; then there remains no space for condemnation. The One who could condemn me stands in the way and has eliminated the sphere for condemnation insofar that he has re-created a world wherein only his righteousness reigns and dwells in his enfleshed life for us in his Son, Jesus Christ. What I just noted is the key to grasp. There is another world in Christ; a world accessible by the eyes of faith, provided by the eyes of Christ, in his vicarious humanity which we are enlivened into by the Holy Spirit. This is the real reality that Christians live in and from; and it is this reality that I cling to whenever the enemy of my soul wants to bring me into a life of bondage that belongs to the world that he is king over; a world that is dead and no longer real by virtue of the reality of God’s new world re-created and realized in the primacy of Jesus Christ.

I hope this small reflection might help provide some liberation for some of you out there as well. I realize this all might seem pretty academic, but I don’t really see things that way; I’m hoping you’ll see as a result of this post why I don’t see things in terms of the ā€˜academic.’ I think good theology, whether people think it is ā€œacademicā€ or not can begin to see that at spiritual levels these ideas can have real life impact and consequences, and that God can use them for the good; he did so, and continues to work this way for me. Just recently, as recent as yesterday, the devil tried to bring me back into a sense of false condemnation and guilt, and I found relief in the very ideas I’ve just outlined. The process, in the head, can be somewhat mechanistic, when working through things this way, but, at least for me, it is what is required for to live a life of freedom that God wants me to live in and from his Son, and my Savior, Jesus Christ.Ā Soli Deo Gloria.

 

[1] This might also explain why I have so much resonance with Karl Barth’s theology. Early on Barth was known as a theologian of crisis. Martin Luther’s theology was spawned by deep angst, and his theology is often related to what is known in German as Anfechtung (trial/tribulation). This is why I have found these theologians, among others, as some of my most insightful teachers; they understand that the ā€˜wisdom of the cross’, that a theologia crucis and a theologia resurrectionis are the key components for knowing God and making him known to others. This is where God meets us; it’s where he knows we must be met if we are going to meet him.

[2] Keith Ward, Creatio Ex Nihilo (Encyclopedia.com), accessed 05-18-2018.

[3] Robert Dale Dawson,Ā The Resurrection in Karl BarthĀ (UK/USA: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2007), 13.

Holy Saturday: An Analogy on the In-Between of Now and Not Yet

Recycling a post that is probably around eighteen years old now.

holysaturdayHoly Saturday is the time that the “Western Church,” Protestants included (well some), contemplate the moment between the death and resurrection of Jesus. It is the contemplation of the burial in 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4:

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4. that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

What a time to contemplate the time between the now and the not yet. This time between Christ’s cross and humiliation of unspeakable depths, and the glory of His coming resurrection and ascension; analogically represent the time we inhabit now. We currently wait to fully realize the glory that Jesus has shared with the Father before the world began. And like the Apostles, Disciples, and hopefuls who followed Jesus to the cross, during this time of Jesus’ silence we can despair, be full of fear, angst, anxiousness, so on and so forth. We often wonder is this it? We face circumstances that seem overwhelming, that seem to eclipse and overcome the life of Christ . . . that make it seem as if Christ stayed in the grave. As Christians in this big world, some-times like the disciples of Christ (during this time in history), we can cower behind locked doors, scratch our heads, and wonder, “what now?”

If only the disciples would have remembered, and put 2 + 2 together, what Jesus had said to them in the past (easy for me to say):

As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus instructed them, ‘Don’t tell anyone what you have seen, until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.’ Ā Matthew 17:9

Maybe their despair, their bewilderment, would be turned to joy. Maybe their burden would have been light. Maybe they would have been grieving as ones with real hope. But they forgot, at that moment of time they became so gripped with fear they could not really function (at least some of them, His closest). Even though we know the story, because we can read about it at one sitting, don’t we live like Jesus’ end was the grave? We fall into caverns of unbelief that seem to eclipse and overshadow what we know to be true. If only we would remember the hope, the hope that Jesus spoke of in Matthew 17, and the hope that was realized in Matthew 28:1-10.

As we look forward to Sunday, lets not grow weary by the unanswered questions and grief of Saturday. Instead of forgetting what Jesus has said about the resurrection (i.e. His second advent), let’s glory in advance, in anticipation of the glory that will be revealed in us, as we are hidden in Christ. While we live in Saturday, in anticipation, let’s rest with Jesus, let’s, with Jesus say: ” . . . Father, into your hands I commit my spirit (Lk 23:46).”

I think the best thing about this analogy, of “Holy Saturday,” is that it breaks down at a point. We don’t despair as if there is no resurrection, in fact as Christians we have been brought into the heavenly places with Christ (cf. Eph. 1), now; we have intimate union with Him now (cf. I Cor. 6:17); we have been given the Holy Spirit now (cf. Jn 14–16); and a whole array of distinguishing factors from those disciples of the first century. So take heart, don’t forget, this Holy Saturday, Jesus’ words of glory in humility:

I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world. Ā John 16:33

Ā