What's in the Bible? - Part one

The Christian Bible is considered to be one of the best-selling books of all time.  Though accurate figures are impossible to compile, there is no doubt that hundreds of thousands, if not millions of volumes are sold each year.  One translation alone, the New International Version, has seen more than 400 million copies in print worldwide since its introduction in the 1970s.

Despite its ubiquity in the culture, however, Americans in general, and American Christians in particular, are not especially well-informed about the contents of the Bible.  The Pew Forum, which is noted for its polling and statistics-gathering on matters religious, completed a survey in 2010 about religious knowledge among U.S. residents.  Seven questions in the survey focused specifically on very basic Bible knowledge.  For the total number of all respondents completing the survey, the average correct out of seven was 4.1; for Christians, the average was only a tenth of a point higher, at 4.2.  Best overall group score was achieved by Mormons at 5.7, followed by White Evangelical Protestants at 5.1.  Lowest scores came from Hispanic Catholics at 2.4 and Unaffiliated-Nothing in Particular at 3.2.

So, What's a Christian to Do?

Most of my blog posts begin life as columns for my local paper.  This one was no exception.  Because of the preponderance of conservative Christian thought in the area where I live, in this particular column I had two goals ~ to counter the bad theology that one hears used in support of climate change denial, and to give those Christians of good will who want to be good stewards of earth the faith language they need to justify moving forward.  I recognize that these goals will be of less relevance to some blog readers than to others.  I simply ask that readers recognize the context in which this was written.  This is not an end; these are the baby steps of beginning to address the terrible threat of anthropogenic climate change from a faith perspective.

The gospel reading for September 22 (the 18^th Sunday after Pentecost) for churches that follow the common lectionary was the Parable of the Shrewd Manager (also titled the Parable of the Dishonest Servant), as recorded in Luke 16:1-13.  Our pastors always provide a short introduction to be read by the scripture reader to set the stage.  So at Lititz Moravian we heard, “The parable of the shrewd manager can be interpreted in many ways. At its simplest, it reminds us that we have a Master who doesn’t want us to squander the Master’s property. What if the Master were to say to you, ‘What is this I hear about you? Give me an accounting of your management.’”

We could have stopped right there and had plenty to chew on and pray about for the coming week.  It’s a challenge which has occupied a considerable part of my consciousness in recent years.  My faith teaches me that the Master is God the Creator, and that all the universe is God’s property.  On the bit of the cosmos known to us as planet earth, human beings have emerged as the dominant species.  So in the language of faith, humans are the designated managers of our portion of creation.

Who Speaks for Christianity?

It is common today to read or hear someone claim to be representing “the Christian view” on any, frequently controversial, topic.  A recent example is the statement that Richard Land, newly appointed president of Southern Evangelical Seminary, made in an interview published July 25^th in The Charlotte Observer: “I’m an apologist in the culture for the Christian world view.”  Notice that he speaks of the Christian world view, not a Christian world view.  The clear implication is that there exists only a single Christian world view, and that Land, a Southern Baptist who lost his previous position last year when he was exposed as a plagiarist, represents it completely and accurately.

There are estimated to be 41,000 Christian denominations worldwide.  The 2006 Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches lists 217 denominations in our two countries.  Pew Forum studies completed since 2006 indicate that, in addition to denominations, there are in excess of 35,000 independent or non-denominational churches, representing more than 12 million adherents.  Given such a multiplicity of Christian groups, with their wide variety of creeds, doctrines, and belief systems, the idea that there is but a single Christian world view becomes an easy one to challenge.

The question then becomes, Who speaks for Christianity?  I would argue that the only logical answer is that no one person or group can make such a claim.  Despite that logic, however, many try to do so.  How well do those claims hold up to scrutiny?

Are Zombies Satanic?

Unlike most of my columns, this one addresses a specific, current controversy in the town where I live.  Usually my submissions run on the Religion page.  This one was given above-the-fold placement on the Editorial page.  I’m putting it on my blog because I think some of the points in it have general application.

When I first read about the Zombie run planned for October in Lititz, I had a mild reaction of “Eww, that’s weird,” and then thought no more about it.  No more, that is, until a friend called to ask what I thought, posing the question, “Are zombies satanic?”  That prompted me to do some research, the results of which I shared with my friend.  Letters to the editor make it clear that others have similar concerns, so I have done more research and am sharing the results here.

Response to Thomas Sowell

Syndicated columnist Thomas Sowell, whose writings are published regularly on our local newspaper's opinion page, made several statements in a recent column which demand a reply.  He opened the column by railing against American officials quoted in a New York Times article who stated that there would be a “proportional response” to any North Korean attack.  Calling it a “clever new notion,” Sowell made clear his contempt for the idea that a military response should be proportional to the original attack rather than massive and overwhelming.

The Choice Is Ours

And it came to pass that God walked out one morning to watch the sunrise.  Sipping a second cup of coffee, God wandered through the gardens of heaven and looked out over the universe, delighting in creation.  Suddenly one of the angels from the house staff came running up.

“Hey, boss!  Did you forget that you are hearing special petitions this morning?  You’re due in the Great Hall in ten minutes.  And I have to tell you, there is a huge crowd in the waiting room.”

Confession and Repentance

Updated: October 25, 2024

In recent months the Idle No More movement, which originated among First Nations activists in Canada and soon spread to the United States, coupled with the increasing prominence of First Nations and Native American voices among those protesting construction of the Keystone XL and Enbridge Northern Gateway pipelines, have helped to raise awareness of the many injustices which fill the history of relationships between the U.S. and Canadian governments and the Aboriginal peoples of North America.  I wrote this article in February 2008 when the Australian government was preparing to issue its first formal apology to Aboriginal people for the decades-long practice of forcibly removing Aboriginal children from their family homes and placing them to be raised by white families.  Current events make it apparent that it is still relevant in February 2013.

The Australian policy, in effect from 1915 to 1969, had been intended to compel assimilation of the indigenous people into the dominant white culture.  The wording of the apology was worked out in consultation with Aboriginal leaders.  It acknowledged the great harm done by past governments while refraining from ascribing any guilt to current political leaders.  Both sides were hopeful that this action would permit some healing and an improvement in relations between the Aborigines and the Australian government.

We Believe in Violence

If anything positive can be said to have resulted from the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, it may be that it has generated a national discussion about gun control that seems to have more seriousness and staying power than that which followed other recent mass shootings.  President Obama has set forth a concrete plan to address the issue, a combination of actions that can be taken immediately via executive order and legislative proposals which will require action by Congress.  Vigorous discussion is taking place in the news media and social networks.  One can only hope that reasonable and effective regulations will eventually be put in place as one step in efforts to reduce the slaughter.

It is not my purpose here to rehash the hundreds of arguments that are being made for and against the President’s plan.  Instead, I want to invite reflection on our attitudes toward violence.  For purposes of this discussion, I will focus on physical violence, while recognizing that verbal violence can also do substantial harm.