Doing History for the Glory of God

Below is an article that I wrote for the Totomundo Newsletter back in the Winter of 2009.  I wanted to keep a record of it here, since this fourfold filter has continued to shape the way I view all kinds of subjects.  By applying the filter of Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics, and Aesthetics, one can arrive at a personal philosophy of any topic - history, science, arts, business, etc.  Using these four categories will help beg questions that may otherwise go untapped and unanswered.  I hope that these thoughts are a benefit to any reader who is seeking to apply a consciously comprehensive worldview to their work, their interests, their relationships, and their total life.

...............

Doing History for the Glory of God  (Totomundo 2009)

Does the Bible have anything to say about the academic study of History? Does a Christian have anything unique to offer the field of historical studies compared to a scholar writing from another view? If so, how does a Christian “do history” for the glory of God? Is Church History the only kind of history in which God’s character and presence in the world has been displayed? Or, do political, artistic, and technological histories have stories to tell about our great God and King?

To answer these questions, one must have an idea of Christianity as a total worldview. Francis Schaeffer often exclaimed, God’s truth is “true truth.” He meant that the worldview found in the Bible and in Jesus, over all other worldviews, best accounts for all of reality. A conscious application of a biblical worldview to history involves four areas: metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and aesthetics. These four areas make up the essential components of a worldview.

First, let’s discuss the metaphysical aspects of historical inquiry. Metaphysics is the answer to these two questions: What is real? and, What is the nature of reality? So if God, humans, and the earth exist, metaphysics still asks what kind of God exists, what are humans in essence, etc.

History is greatly impacted by the underlying metaphysical beliefs every historian carries with him or her. Beliefs about the origins and purpose of the universe affect historical investigations and accounts.

The particular philosophy of history one uses is a metaphysical issue. For example, a historian may look at events in a very mathematical fashion, more in tune with a mechanistic or naturalistic view of the universe. People and events and dates are merely cogs in the machine of history, jumbled together in a deterministic way to produce inevitable results. Or, he may read into history patterns and cycles which are more in line with an Eastern religious view of the universe – history repeats itself, without exception.

The Bible does not allow for a completely deterministic view of history. The historical accounts in Scripture concern real people and take place in a personal universe under the holy and loving reign of an infinite-personal God. Humans are agents in the world, and exercise freedom and choice underneath God’s sovereignty.

Likewise, the cyclical pattern of history in Eastern traditions does not account for the obviously purposeful view of human history described in the Bible. Despite the common experience of “history repeating,” the biblical view is that history truly is linear, not cyclical. As Christian students and teachers, we must beware of unconsciously building on a false metaphysical base of impersonal determinism or meaningless cycles.

Also, the Christian who is researching the past, whether the subject is explicitly religious or not, should give ample thought to what lies beyond the physical subject matter he or she is addressing always keeping the infinite-personal God, as revealed in Scripture, at the center.

Many history textbooks look with skepticism upon the impact of Christian beliefs and thought on historical events, like the founding of the American Republic. For example, consider the “inalienable rights” described in the Declaration of Independence. One historian may emphasize the deism of Jefferson and the apparently humanistic origin of his (borrowed) phrase. Another historian may link this concept to the stream of Reformation principles coming down from British Common Law, founded on the existence of a Law-giver who has endowed His image-bearers with inherent dignity and rights. More often still, historical accounts which should include the activity of God and his people are summarily deleted from the story. One textbook may have a chapter on the Great Awakening of the 18th century. Another may have just one sentence. This is metaphysical bias at its worst.

The second dimension of historical inquiry is Epistemology, the study of knowledge. Epistemology answers the questions: How do you know what you know? And, What amount of confidence can we have about our knowledge?

Epistemology has been the focus of recent conflict within history. The conflict has centered around the well-known “revisionist” theory, which has both positive and negative aspects. Revisionist history does allow for free inquiry into the historical status quo, cultivating new interpretations that may actually be closer to the truth than commonly held assumptions. One bright example has been David McCullough’s resurrection of John Adams as perhaps the central character on the stage of the American Revolution.

The detrimental side of revisionist theories is that they have led some so-called historians to deny the existence of major events, like the Jewish Holocaust. Although this example is rather extreme, some of these theories have become wildly popular. For instance, Dan Brown’s goddess-worshiping version of Christian history can still be found in bookstores worldwide.

The root problem with revisionism is that it is set on a relativistic base. It does not accept any criteria or guidelines for establishing the validity of any claim and any proposed criteria are quickly dismissed. The revisionist may operate out of pure skepticism, but the raging sea of perpetual doubt will never land us on the fixed shore of certainty (James 1:6).

Now, history is not a completely scientific endeavor. We can’t use the scientific method or repeatable experimentation to pin down a historical theory. “By the standards of science, it makes a lousy laboratory,” says Wilfred McClay. “But the problem is, it is all we have. It is the only laboratory available to us for assaying the possibilities of our human nature in a manner consistent with that nature.” That is the key phrase. The revisionist says that perpetual skepticism is the manner consistent with our nature. The Bible disagrees.

Scripture provides a balance of epistemic inquiry that sees human knowledge as substantial, but not exhaustive. This balance replaces the revisionist’s skepticism with a humble, yet confident footing. In fact, this balance provided the catalyst for the modern scientific revolution which began with Isaac Newton. While early scientists like Newton understood they could never know exhaustively, they took confidence from the existence of a transcendent Law-giver, who gave such order to His universe that substantial knowledge of it could be obtained through careful study.

Today, however, the relativist denies all absolute truth-claims, and to an extent we can understand his frustration. The plurality of truth-claims we face is overwhelming. How can anyone, including a historian, say with any certainty that something has truly happened? The scientific method, useful in many other situations, does not apply to history.

But, the biblical worldview does ground historical methods of inquiry in our image-bearing capacity for reason and in the logical order of the natural world. The physician-historian Luke displayed this kind of epistemic confidence when he wrote the following introduction to his history of the life of Jesus:

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught. (Lk. 1:1-4)

Luke provides some first steps toward a Christian epistemology: (1) multiple sources, including eyewitnesses and even the personally invested, are sufficient for trustworthy evidence; (2) close examination is required, for the truth will not always be obvious in a fallen world; and (3) an orderly account is a fit vehicle for the narrative to make sense to the reader. The historian can investigate the past with integrity through these kinds of methods. The results will be knowledge that is absolutely true, however finite it may be. We can therefore make conclusions about our research with substantial confidence, even to the point of forming penetrating critiques and serious moral applications. This feeds directly into the ethical questions that face historians.

The third realm of inquiry is the realm of Ethics. We have already touched on some ethical ideas in the first two realms. Historians have a moral responsibility with regard to metaphysical bias and epistemic integrity. What is left to be said? Well, the historian plays another ethical role in the area of assigning moral judgments, implicit and explicit, to the subjects he or she is writing about. Whether his thesis is to vilify some historical figure, or he is just leaving a vague sense of disgust about a character while claiming moral neutrality, the realm of ethical judgment is powerful and relevant to the Christian historian.

The Christian may immediately feel the pull to condemn the unrighteous and vindicate the godly of the past. This is a natural instinct which is often inversely shared by non-Christians, especially atheists. However, these ethical pronouncements are a great opportunity to display sincere civility. Christians indeed have a duty to uphold the reputation of godly men and women throughout history. We should be grateful for the special role that church historians play in this regard, yet the arm of fellowship should be extended to historical characters and events which are not “sacred” or church-related, but do display goodness and aspects of true humanity. As Christians, we are called to cultivate, draw out, and emphasize true humanity whenever possible.

Christian historians have a responsibility to hold up their subjects to the light of God’s Word and see what shines and what does not. This is the opportunity to paint human nature in a way that is in tune with the biblical balance: mankind is noble, but fallen. We cannot fall into extremes here, in either our individual judgments or in the body of our work.

For example, the student of Nazi Germany may come away from his studies with incredible despair over the realities he is facing. Mechanized murder. Sterilized ethnic-cleansing. Will to Power. These are very real and deserving of our moral condemnation. But generally speaking, the Christian must be careful in the body of his work to paint both sides of human nature. Even in the darkest of moments there have been slivers of light and beauty.

This is not naïve optimism, but an absolute necessity in today’s academy, which is driving thousands of young Christians from zealous faith into abject despair. This unbalanced emphasis on the fallenness of mankind is often held by believers who have held to the self-deprecating extreme and thought that such attitudes were increasing admiration for the holiness and grace of God. I wish it were the case. More often, the absence of any inherent dignity in mankind, rooted in the image of God, has driven believers to despair of life itself.

This leads directly into the fourth and final category of inquiry, that of Aesthetics. Aesthetics answers the question: What is beautiful? The realities of beauty and ugliness are recurrent subjects in historical study. In a world that says “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” the Christian historian has an awesome responsibility to show forth a standard of beauty in the subject matter of his work. The basic litmus test for absolute beauty is whether the subject accords with what is True and what is Good. For example, a courthouse that is aesthetically pleasing on the outside may be home to gross injustice on the inside. In this case, despite subjective appeal, this courthouse could never be truly beautiful.

In addition to being an aspect of a subject, the research, study, writing, and composition itself is an opportunity for beauty (or ugliness). The historian has a wonderful role to play as painter of human nature, covering his canvas in a way that is fitting to the medium. This task calls for creativity, diversity in methods and forms, and opens up a world of possibilities. Evangelicals too often cringe at these concepts because of their unswerving commitment to absolute truth and the authority of God’s Word. Instead of cringing, we must grow in our appreciation of the diverse forms of beauty in God’s good creation. In general revelation we find the spectrum of light as it passes through the changing phases of water (a rainbow!). We see nebulae, galaxies, worlds without number, apparently created for the pleasure of God alone. In special revelation we find the amazing story of God’s relationship with mankind, told through a diversity of literature: psalms, narratives, parables, visions, letters, and more. And all of them are history!

Finally, the historian must impart his vision of beauty in a form that is fitting. He must be winsome in argument, colorful in illustration, and civil in all moral pronouncements. These efforts will make historical endeavor deeply personal, taking the names and dates off the dusty shelf and animating them into an unforgettable and intimate encounter.

It is my hope that the academic field of history will be greatly impacted by a generation of Christians who consciously apply a biblical worldview to history– who see the God-centered purpose of human history, the hope of substantial certainty in inquiry, the both noble and fallen nature of its subjects, and the wonderful diversity of its form.

And, may God receive all the glory.

The Heart of God

John 8:58

Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”

...............

We have seen that the purpose of John's gospel is to define who Jesus is and then describe who we are by faith in Him. Another unique aspect to John's account is that it defines a Christian view of metaphysics more clearly than the other three gospels. Where Luke's gospel sought a strong epistemic basis for faith, gathering an orderly eyewitness account of Jesus' historic mission, John is more intetested in defining and interpreting who Jesus is and what that means for our lives.

By metaphysics we mean what is beyond the physical world - what is the nature of God and what is the nature of man. The answers to these two questions are the foundation of the Christian worldview - that God is by nature both infinite and personal, and that man was created in His image and is now both noble and fallen.

So far, John has defined Jesus in the following ways:

- The eternal Word, who created the universe, now made flesh and dwelling among us (chapter 1)
- The lamb of God who takes away sin (chapter 1)
- The temple who would be destroyed and raised again (chapter 2)
- The Son of Man raised like the serpent in the wilderness (chapter 3)
- The Son of God sent into the world that those who believe would have eternal life
- The bridegroom (chapter 3)
- The living water that takes away thirst (chapter 4)
- Equal with God his Father (chapter 5)
- The bread of life who takes away all hunger (chapter 6)
- The Christ, whose teaching and authority is from God (chapter 7)

Now, in chapter 8, we see a surprising act of compassion, followed by several incredible self-descriptions, where Jesus further declares that he is none other than God in the flesh. This chapter describes many ways that Jesus is in fact God Himself:

- He says what God says (8:28-29)
- He does what God does (8:28-29)
- He comes from where God is from (8:23)
- He offers a promise that only God could offer (8:50-51)
- He claims to be God (8:19, 58)

This is the metaphysical nature of God on display in Jesus. His infinite power in word and deed. His miraculous offer of eternal life. His claim to be older than Abraham. His unity with the Father. He is the infinite God.

Yet, this chapter pairs Jesus' infinite nature and divine claims with his personal care and compassion. Verses 1-11 are perhaps the most radical picture of compassion found in scripture. The Jewish worldview was built on law and justice, and anyone claiming divine power would surely judge sin as the law demands. And when called upon him to judge a woman caught in adultery, Jesus did step up and judge - it just wasn't the judgment they expected:

When they persisted in questioning Him, He stood up and said to them, “The one without sin among you should be the first to throw a stone at her.”  Then He stooped down again and continued writing on the ground. When they heard this, they left one by one, starting with the older men. Only He was left, with the woman in the center. When Jesus stood up, He said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you? ” “No one, Lord,”  she answered. “Neither do I condemn you,”   said Jesus. “Go, and from now on do not sin anymore.”

Consider the heart of God on display in Jesus. Infinite in his ability and divine claims. Personal in his intimate care for sinners.

Then consider how you are to respond to his life and his claims. How does it change our priorities? Our dreams? Our plans? Our day today? What does it mean for us to have life in his name?

Follow him and find out.

Then Jesus spoke to them again: “I am the light of the world. Anyone who follows Me will never walk in the darkness but will have the light of life.”

The Well That Satisfies

John 4:13-15

Jesus said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again,  but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”  The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I will not be thirsty or have to come here to draw water.”

...............

Time for some honesty.

There are many times and many days when I do not see Jesus as very satisfying. I may hear someone talking about the Bible or Christian life and it sounds like religious jargon. All talk. All abstract concepts and theological acrobatics. On these days I am tempted to find my comfort and satisfaction in whatever my eyes and ears crave. I know that the source of all pleasure is God, but I prefer his creation over the creator. I scan the internet for whatever is new and shiny. I get lost in a new song or film or game or tech gadget. These things appear more tangible, more immediate, and more fulfilling than going to God via prayer or scripture reading. Seeking him seems less like a priceless privilege and more like a tedious effort.

In John 4, a Samaritan woman just wants some water. A simple basic human need.

Jesus sees more.

He sees before him a human being made in His image. He sees her birth, childhood, adulthood. He sees her broken past and hopeless present. He sees that she has been thirsting for more than water.

That woman was not unlike myself. She had 5 husbands, probably in a tireless effort to quench that deep deep longing for companionship that cannot be met by anything in this life. She thought the "next thing" would finally meet that need. The grass was always greener on the other side, and she did not hesitate to jump the fence and put her hopes in the next best thing. But, what she really needed, more than anything else she was thirsting for, more than another husband or another drink from the well, was to be fully known, fully understood, and to connect with the One who knows her true self.

You see that as the chapter progresses. When Jesus tells her about the adultery he sees in her life, that is the point where she is taken aback. She may have been surprised by his willingness to talk with her, but his prophetic omniscience was unbelievable. That was the thing that she went on to tell the whole neighborhood about, and it's what convinced the whole town that Jesus was the Savior of the world:

So the woman left her water jar and went away into town and said to the people, “Come, see a man who told me all that I ever did. Can this be the Christ?” They went out of the town and were coming to him....Many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the woman’s testimony, “He told me all that I ever did.” So when the Samaritans came to him, they asked him to stay with them, and he stayed there two days. And many more believed because of his word. They said to the woman, “It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world.” (John 4:28-30, 39-42)

Being fully known and understood is what we really thirst for, even if that reveals our deepest fears and sins. That is what can satisfy and cause us to believe. And that is what Jesus offers. Not only that, but he approaches us and initiates that relationship, seeking us out even while we cling to earthly wells. He knows all about that and still wants to claim us as his own.

And we must respond to his initiation with worship. As Jesus answered this poor woman's questions, he called her to worship God in spirit and in truth. This transcends the trivialities of which temple site (or music style) is right or wrong. Jesus was calling her to connect with him personally, not just religiously. He was the omnicient God almighty right there in the flesh. He knew the real truth about her. And that's how we need to see him and approach him. As real people, with real struggles and temptations, seeking a real savior who really wants to know us and welcome us into his family.

That is a deep well that truly satisfies.

The Definite Article

John 1:1-3, 14

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made....And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

...............

If Luke's gospel is primarily concerned with how to know the truth (epistemology), then it is equally fair to say that John's account of the life of Christ is all about the question of what or who is ultimate in the universe - what is above and behind the physical reality we see around us (metaphysics). I can say this with confidence because of the two purposes statements that bookend his account.

In the beginning...

The opening statement of John should give you pause and draw immediate associations with Genesis 1. This is not unintentional. John is bringing up ultimate questions about the nature of existence, of reality, of who or what is the first cause of all that we experience in the world. And the answer is something he refers to as the "Logos" or "Word."

What is the Logos? Aside from how the word was used by other Greek philosophers of the time, there are several clues in this text as to what John means.

1. The Logos is eternal.
2. The Logos is with God.
3. The Logos is God.
4. The Logos became man.
5. The Logos is the Son of God.
6. The Logos is God.

One thing I can agree with Jehovah's Witnesses about is that the rest of the Bible hinges on how you translate John 1:1. Is there a definite article in the passage, making it clear that Jesus was not merely a god, but was in fact THE God of the universe? Unfortunately, JW's ignore the manuscript evidence and deny that Jesus was uniquely God. The reality is that John used the definite article to clearly identify Jesus as the eternal, pre-existent, sovereign God and Maker of the universe.

Why does this grammatical debate matter? Because words matter. You cannot have meaning without them. And everything about John 1 is pointing to Jesus' unique deity, which makes the incarnation all the more unexpected and amazing. This eternal Logos became flesh and made his dwelling among us. But we don't have to rely on this passage alone. John's other bookend seals the deal.

...Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God...

Near the end of his account, John gives a direct answer as to the purpose of his book, and it is clearly meant to answer the question of ultimate reality. Who is God? What is His nature? Who is man? What is man's nature?

Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (20:30-31)

If a book of the Bible gives you a clear thesis statement, or two bookend statements like this, it is your joy and responsibility to see every passage of the book through that lens. In other words, every chapter of John exists to answer these metaphysical questions about God and man. Every verse will point us to who Jesus truly is (the divine savior of man) and who we are in relation to him (made personally and uniquely in His image).

It is my hope to respond to each chapter of John's gospel account in this way. I pray that I see His power and person more clearly, and that by doing so I may believe with more certainty and "have life in his name."

(re)Learning Who God Is

Luke 11:11-13

What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent;  or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion?  If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!"

...............

This chapter begins and ends with passages that challenge us to relearn the nature of God.

The first passage, on the surface, is just about prayer. But it is also about the nature of the One to whom we pray. And that nature is summed up in the word "father."

We are so removed from this first century Jewish context, but this characterization of God is just as radical today as it was then. Why else would Jesus have to appeal to these contrasting examples of bad friends and bad fathers who know how to give good earthly gifts? He is having to help us unlearn and then relearn who God is - really learning for the very first time that God is an abundantly generous and attentive father who listens and cares for his children. The contrast is both quantitative ("how much more") and qualitative (fish/egg vs. Holy Spirit). God is not just a father, but the preeminent father par excellence.

The chapters closes with another passage that challenges prevailing notions of who God is:

While Jesus was speaking, a Pharisee asked him to dine with him, so he went in and reclined at table. The Pharisee was astonished to see that he did not first wash before dinner. (Luke 11:37-38)

At this dinner table, we are confronted with a vision of God that threatens our religious habits and preconceived notions of what is right and proper in the eyes of God. Ceremonial hand washing appears to have been so basic to Jewish decorum that neglecting to do so was astonishing. Again, what is really going on here is a revelation of God's character in contrast to the notions of the time, even among the religious leaders, who should have known better.

Why does this misconception of God really matter? It seems like a small matter to mistake some aspect of God's character, like his fatherhood or his distaste for extra-biblical rituals. But, in fact, these blind spots in our vision of God are paramount and have severe repercussions, which is why Jesus reacts so strongly to the Pharisees. In their case, he uses the hand washing topic as a springboard to describe how their false metaphysical position has resulted in a litany of injustices and sins, often committed in the name of the God they had so grossly misunderstood.

We must strive to see God for who He really is, and thus avoid the woes of the Pharisees ourselves. Do I really grasp the Fatherhood of God, his generosity and grace, or his version of justice? Have I searched and submitted to God's Word in order to have a more balanced and accurate view of God's character? Because of the fall and the lingering affects of our sinful nature, this will not come naturally. In fact, it takes an act of God's Spirit to open our blind eyes to the truth of God's love and justice displayed in Christ.

I pray for the humility and faith I need to unlearn and relearn who He truly is. Fortunately, if we ask, seek, and knock on this door, we have assurance that this request will be met by a gracious Father who wants us to know Him and receive the good gift of Himself.

And I tell you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.  For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.  (Luke 11:9-10)