Life on Loan

March 24, 2010

The parable was told in response to a request; a request that Jesus refuses. A man asks for Jesus to arbitrate an inheritance dispute. Having asked the rhetorical question who made me a judge or arbitrator over you, Jesus concludes with a warning: “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12:15, ESV). Then Jesus tells the story of the rich fool.

The rich fool has a problem – a problem that many of us would like to have. He has so much that he is struggling with where to put it all. What do you give the man who has everything? Answer: storage containers. The rich man decides to tear down his barns and build bigger ones. That is where many modern readers struggle to understand the story. We hear the word barn and think a large, red wooden structure. Barns in the ancient world were often underground granaries that were plastered or bricked. “Tear down” likely refers “to the deliberate taking down of the barns in such a way that the material can still be used.” This rich man has abundance, and he plots a way to keep it all.

The parable gives the rich man’s inner dialogue.

 …and he thought to himself, ‘What shall I do, for I have nowhere to store my crops?’ And he said, ‘I will do this: I will tear down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.’ (Luke 12:17–19, ESV, emphasis added)

It is interesting to count the number of times the words, “I” and “my,” occur. If all the world’s a stage, this man acts if he is in a one man play.

But the rich fool has his exit. “But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required of you, and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’” (Luke 12:20, ESV). The word for “required” is interesting. It means to demand something back or as due as in the case of a loan. Jesus has given us the image that our life is on loan from God.

What happens when I view my life as on loan from God? It changes everything. My life, my time, and my resources are matters of stewardship. I will have to give an account. I must view things from God’s perspective and priorities.

This changed perspective makes the warnings understandable. The abundance of possessions is not the most important thing; God is most important. If I haven’t laid up treasures in heaven, I have nothing that will ultimately last. God will demand my life back someday. My life is on loan.


Only Jesus

March 18, 2010

Tom likes to think of himself as a good person. He works hard, pays his taxes, and raises his family. People like him; he’s a good neighbor. Oh, he has his moral lapses. Doesn’t everybody? He lies on occasion—mostly little white lies. He swears like a sailor when he’s stressed—like last weekend when he hit his thumb with a hammer. But usually he watches his language around his kids. He’s honest, although he’d almost forgotten that time as a teenager when he shoplifted the cigarettes on a dare.

When Tom thinks about the bad things he’s done, he immediately reminds himself of the good things he’s done. He’s just not that bad. He is certain that his good deeds outweigh the bad. He has gone out of his way to help people. He’s even done some volunteer work and made charitable donations. Why last week he stopped and helped an elderly lady with a flat tire.

Tom isn’t into organized religion, although he still believes in God. Admittedly he’s never read the Bible—he really doesn’t know anyone who has. But he’s sure that some of the things in the Bible are true. Tom is just convinced that a good God couldn’t send him to hell. After all, his good deeds outweigh his bad deeds.

Tom isn’t alone. According to a Barna Research poll: “Half of all adults (50%) argue that anyone who ‘is generally good or does enough good things for others during their life will earn a place in Heaven.’”

Although this is a popular point of view, it underestimates the seriousness of sin. Paul wrote, “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23, ESV). One sin separates us from God for eternity left untreated, and there is nothing that we can do to balance the scales in our favor by our own good deeds. Any sin avoided and any good deed done are simply what we should be doing. They can’t earn a good standing that has been lost by sin.

Thinking that good deeds outweigh bad deeds trivializes the death of Jesus. Why would Christ endure the cross, if it is only a matter of us balancing the scales? Part of the explanation for the cross is found in Romans 3:26: “It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus” (ESV). Forgiveness places God’s own justice at risk if the penalty for sin is not taken seriously. We would not re-elect a judge who routinely frees criminals, because we would say he is unjust.

Jesus paid the penalty that was our due for sin. He did that so that God may be just and also justifier (one who forgives sinners). But note the condition: “the one who has faith in Jesus” (Romans 3:26). We can’t balance the scales of justice for ourselves. Only Jesus can satisfy justice and bring forgiveness.


A Lasting Name

March 9, 2010

Maybe you read it in the news. A massive granite head was found in the sands of Egypt. The statue represented Amenhotep III. The eight foot tall head was intact except for the ceremonial beard which was broken off. Archaeologists hope to find it buried in the sands of Luxor.

I’ve had the privilege of seeing some of the great monuments of Egypt including colossus statues of pharaohs. They are impressive sights even when broken and lying on their sides.  But this find reminds me of the poem, Ozymandias, by Percy Bysshe Shelley.

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: “Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
`My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!’
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away”.

Ozymandias is but another transliteration from Greek of the name Ramesses who was pharaoh of the nineteenth dynasty of Egypt. Both archaeologist and poet remind us of the decay of human endeavors even while attempting to leave a lasting name.

Is it worth it to build buildings, create art, to invent and strive? I think the answer must be yes. These impulses are God-given, but we must view such things through a lens of humility. The things of this world decay, and we must give glory to God. Otherwise, we are but attempting to build the Tower of Babel all over again crying out to one another, “Let us make a name for ourselves.” The Tower of Babel and the lines from Ozymandias are but different verses of the same rebellious song.

To have a lasting name is to have one’s name written in the book of life (Revelation 3:5). To build for eternity is to store up treasures in heaven (Matthew 6:19-21). If these things be true, then let us create and build. The decay of this world doesn’t matter, because it is God who gives us a lasting name.


Forever Life

March 3, 2010

“For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes… All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls…” These are biblical metaphors for the brevity of life. Our physical life is fragile. Death has no minimum age requirement, but this isn’t the entire story.

Two different eternities stretch out before us depending on our choices in life.

He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. (Romans 2:6–8, ESV)

We must understand the “patience in well-doing” of the previous passage as pointing to faith in Jesus (Romans 3:21-31). Jesus makes all the difference.

Jesus is also our reason for believing in life after death. We have several lines of evidence that converge: the Old Testament prophecies and the eyewitness testimony of the gospels. The alternate explanations – growth of legend, hallucinations, stolen body, wrong tomb, and Jesus merely swooning on the cross and not dying – fail to convince even many skeptics. As someone has observed, we need something the size and shape of the resurrection to explain the dramatic transformation of the disciples and the conversions of James and Paul.

So we have someone who can speak authoritatively about life after death – Jesus, the Risen One. We have two different eternities stretching out before us depending on our choice about Jesus.

Jesus used a number of images to describe hell – “outer darkness, unquenchable fire, weeping, and gnashing of teeth.” Whatever surface contradiction is contained in these words is resolved in human experience excluded from God. Even in the worst moments of this life, there are snatches of beauty and glimpses of goodness. To be excluded from God is truly death.

A marriage banquet of the Lamb, a glorious Jerusalem, and an exalted Garden of Eden with Trees of Life aplenty are the images of eternal life with God. Love, goodness, and beauty are God’s gifts and tokens of his presence. If two eternities stretch out before us, give me that which can truly be called forever life.


Life Is Fragile

February 18, 2010

A time existed as innocent children when we knew nothing of death. It never occurred to us that animals died, or worse, that we die. It intrudes on us at the first sight of a dead animal, and we ask our parents our first questions about death.

Awareness of death may come at the death of a family member. The childlike questions of why don’t they get out of that suitcase are met with adults straining to give an answer – to find just the right words.

If death came to the aged and infirm only, death might be easier to explain. Yet, a grim reality exists: life is fragile. It is fragile to all of us regardless of age or station in life. Youth may be the time of life when we feel invincible, but such feelings are mistaken. I’ve been to funerals of children and the elderly and those in between. Death knows of no minimum age requirement.

If death came only after a very long life, death might be easier to explain. Although I’ve known ninety year olds who still wanted more of the gift of time, somehow, we take comfort when the deceased has had a long and full life, but it doesn’t always happen that way.

None of us can say to God, you owe me so many years. Even the 70 or 80 years found in Psalm 90 are but round numbers not guarantees. That means each day of life is a gift from God. I’m not trying to be morbid reflecting on the frailty of life. I simply want to be aware that each moment is precious. Each moment is a gift.

The gift of life also has purpose. God grants me this wonderful gift so that I might know him and glorify him. We each have an expiration date. Usually we don’t know when it will be. We are not like gallons of milk with it printed on our sides. That gives urgency to spiritual things.

The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil. (Ecclesiastes 12:13–14, ESV)

The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” (Acts 17:30–31, ESV)

Life is a gift. Life has purpose. Life is fragile.


Encourage One Another

February 13, 2010

The Christian life can be compared to a journey with obstacles and trials. The goal is to finish the journey in faith. The danger is always present that we will stop along the way and maybe even choose a different direction for life – a direction that leads away from God. That means the Christian needs encouragement to persevere and live a life worthy of his calling. It is in the context of our need to persevere that Hebrews gives its command to encourage one another.

And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. Hebrews 10:24–25, ESV

Translators attempting to give us a smooth English sentence can on occasion loose an important idea. The above translation of verse 24 is all too common.

 …and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,…Hebrews 10:24, NASB

 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Hebrews 10:24, NIV

 The problem with the above translations is that the actual object of “let us consider” in Greek is “one another” as in the NKJV.

 And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works… Hebrews 10:24, NKJV

The command to encourage then has one another as its focus. It is first of all selfless, and it is at this point also countercultural. We live in an age of the consumer mentality: what do I get out of it? We never get the worship assembly right if we begin with ourselves. We must always begin with God and the need of others.

A Korean parable about a visit to heaven and hell gives insight to this difference of perspective.

The visitor peeped in at the door of hell and saw an enormous banquet hall. In it were a number of long tables with bowls of rice and delicacies on them, well-flavored, smelling delicious, and inviting. The guests were sitting hungrily, opposite one another, each with a plate of food.

The guests all had chopsticks to use, but these were so long that, however hard they tried, not a grain of rice could they get into their mouths. This was their torment; this was their hell. “I’ve seen it, that’s more than enough for me,” said the visitor. Departing hell, he entered into heaven.

Inside, he saw the same banquet hall, the same tables, the same food, and the same long chopsticks. But the guests were joyful. All were smiling and laughing. Each one, having put the food onto his chopsticks, held it out to the mouth of his companion opposite, and so they managed to eat their fill. Joy, love, and fulfillment were found in heaven.

Following Jesus often involves paradoxes: losing our life to save it, the last shall be first, and greatness comes by humility. This is but one more. To be encouraged, we must encourage one another.


Under the Knife

February 4, 2010

The tabloid press has recently reported on beautiful people who have gone under the knife to be more beautiful. They went under the knife of cosmetic surgery pursuing a vision of outer perfection. Although such surgery seems extreme, all of us would willingly consent to surgery when our life or health is at stake. None of us like it, but we are willing to go under the knife.

But there is a surgery more important than the ones to enhance outward beauty or repair physical health. This surgeon wields more than a scalpel. He wields a sword.

Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience. For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account. Hebrews 4:11–13, ESV

The message about the sword is bracketed by some important ideas. We are to strive to enter the rest which is heaven itself, and we are warned that this rest can be missed by disobedience. At the end, we are told that everything about us is exposed to God before whom we must give account. God has already seen all our spiritual x-rays, CAT scans, and MRIs. There is nothing about us that he doesn’t already know. We shouldn’t play games or think we can hide. Faking it leads to disaster even if others buy our sham.

The point of sword is that it pierces. The sword of the word can pierce all the way to our thoughts and intentions. God has always wanted our hearts (Deuteronomy 6:5). God has always wanted his law written on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). This is surgery to make us more beautiful on the inside. This is surgery to correct our failing spiritual health. Without it, we will spiritually die. The surgeon wants us more obedient, more holy. The word’s penetration into our heart is to make us more like the one we are following – Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith (Hebrews 12:2).

Hebrews reveals all too clearly that there have been others who have heard the word and responded with hardened hearts (3:7-8). We have a spiritual surgeon who wants to penetrate all the way to thoughts and intentions. He wants to make us more beautiful on the inside. He wants to make us more like Him. Are we willing to go under the knife?


A Bad Trade

January 28, 2010

Steve Jobs and Apple have been in the news: the announcement of the iPad, good quarterly earnings, and a stock price over $200 a share. But when Apple Computer began in 1976 it was a simple partnership with Steve Wozniak (45%), Steve Jobs (45%), and Ronald Wayne (10%).

Apple had released the Apple I, but the partners still kept their day jobs. They weren’t making that much money yet. Wozniak did design work in his apartment. Jobs worked out of his bedroom in his parent’s house, and the Apple I was put together in the garage of the Job’s home. It was in these early days of the business that Wayne wanted out. He sold his 10% stake in Apple Computers to Jobs and Wozniak for a whopping $800. Industry analysts calculate that if he had held on to this 10%, it would have been worth $1.5 billion dollars. Yes, that’s billion with a “B.” It turned out to be a very bad trade. 

But I know of a worse trade, a worse exchange. Listen to the words of Jesus:

Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.  For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done.  Matthew 16:24–27, ESV

The whole world is a grand thing to have – wealth beyond imagining. But the soul is worth more. One dictionary defines the soul “as the seat and center of life that transcends the earthly.”1 It is my spiritual life, and it is life in the age to come.

Ronald Wayne made a bad trade selling 10% of Apple for $800, but we can sympathize with the mistake. He didn’t know the future. He didn’t know what was ahead. He didn’t know what he was trading.

There is the striking difference with Jesus’ invitation. Jesus has made clear what is at stake. Jesus’ claims need to be seriously evaluated, because what is at stake is everything near and dear to us, our very soul. Don’t make a bad trade.

1Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed.) (1099). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.


A Criticism of Functional Equivalence

September 24, 2009

Functional equivalence in Bible translation attempts to elicit the same meaning of the original in language forms that are natural to the receptor language. Formal equivalence attempts to be as literal (word for word) as possible. A great emphasis in functional equivalence occurred in Bible translation for third world countries. In some cases, these languages had no written alphabet, dictionary, or grammar. Translators were undertaking a tremendous task.

From these third world experiences, functional equivalence procedures began to be applied to translations in English. The past half century has seen greater use of functional equivalent methods, but the approach is not without critics.

Leland Ryken in his book, The Word of God in English,* points out a number of fallacies to this approach. One fallacy strikes at the heart of translation issues. It is the fallacy that all translating is interpretation.

Ryken notes a failure to distinguish linguistic interpretation from thematic interpretation. By linguistic interpretation, Ryken means the choice between what word best translates the original term. Translators may have to choose between wilderness or desert to describe the area of Israel’s 40 years of wandering. They may choose between descendant or seed to render the Hebrew term zerah.

Word choices like this do involve interpretation, but functional equivalence frequently goes beyond this into what Ryken calls thematic interpretation of the meaning of the text. For example, note the following two versions of 2 Peter 1:20.

 

Formal Equivalent/ESV Functional Equivalent/NIV
knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation.

The NIV has given us an interpretation of this verse. It has specified the “someone” in the passage. This is a case where I think the interpretation is correct. However, someone could come along and say, “This is not what Peter said, and I don’t think it is what he meant.” We would have to resort to the more literal translation and make our case.

In addition, this raises the issue that translators may make the wrong thematic interpretation in various passages. Thematic interpretation gives rise to much greater variation in translations. It is a case of readers beware.

*The Word of God in English is available as a free PDF download at http://www.esv.org/translation/woge.


The Gender Neutral Language Controversy

September 10, 2009

The NIV has been in the news this past week. Plans are underway for a revision of the NIV to be published in 2011. The plans include the discontinuation of the TNIV, which was first published in 2002. The biggest battle over the TNIV, and the greatest concern over revision of the NIV involves gender neutral language.

To be honest, the Bible is not an egalitarian book. In other words, feminists will never be satisfied with the Bible as written. To illustrate, one only needs to look at the Inclusive Bible’s handling of Colossians 3:18-19: “You who are in committed relationships, be submissive to each other. This is your duty in Christ Jesus. Partners joined by God, love each other. Avoid any bitterness between you.” That is a rewrite of Paul and not a translation. The Bible affirms the equal value of males and females, but it does allow for differences in gender roles.

English usage has become more gender sensitive in recent decades, although usage has not solved all issues. The third person singular personal pronouns are still he or she.

Most modern translations (e.g., NKJV, NIV, and ESV) attempt to be somewhat gender neutral. When words like all, anyone, or everyone occur even thought they have masculine grammatical gender in Greek but there is no word for man in the text, they are rendered in a more gender neutral way – “all” instead of “all men.” The occurrence of man when it is understood generically of human beings is often translated persons or human beings instead of man.

Romans 3:9

“for I have already charged that all men, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin” RSV

 For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin. NKJV

 We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. NIV

 Matthew 5:15

Nor do men light a lamp and put it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. RSV

Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. NIV

But the question arises; can we go too far in the pursuit of gender neutral language? That has been at the heart of the controversy over the TNIV, and it will be one of the issues in the NIV revision. I think it is possible to go too far. Two areas have been of principle concern. First, we should not remove reference to males in historical passages when those references are present. Some translations have. Notice the following examples:

 Acts 1:21

Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us  NIV   (TNIV)

Therefore it is necessary to choose one of those who had been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us.  NIVI  

 1 Timothy 3:2

the husband of one wife  RSV

married only once  NRSV

The second concern has to do with the third person singular pronoun. The TNIV and the NRSV substitute third person plural pronouns for third person singular pronouns. In other words, they change “he” to “they.” Problems arise especially in the Old Testament. We can obscure Messianic references doing that. For example:

He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken. Psalm 34:20, ESV

he protects all their bones, not one of them will be broken. Psalm 34:20, TNIV

This is an important issue. How does your translation handle gender language? The preface of some translations will tell you. Comparison with other translations may be helpful.