A Defense of Terms

I enjoy writing immensly. Toward this end I also enjoy words. I actually probably enjoyed words before I enjoyed writing. I have even written before in this blog regarding my fascination for language, words and meanings. Two recent interactions have reminded me of the importance of language and words in our society.

The first interaction is a growing socio-political division relating to various divisive issues. These issues pop up in personal conversations or in any perusal of news. Whether it is the recent Chick-fil-A debate, or a personal discussion on the difference between a God of love or the God of the Bible, difficult conversations are had most every day. In addition I have recently read some work by Francis Schaeffer. In addition to being a great writer, he was one of the most brilliant men of the past century. He wrote in his book "The God Who Is There" (1968) a perspective on culture at the time which has continued to be true.

"People in our culture in general are already in process of being accustomed to accept nondefined, contentless religious words and symbols, without any rational or historical control. Such words and symbols can be filled with the content of the moment."

This reality is exhibited by terms and phrases being shaped and fitted constantly with new definitions in order to support or question various philosophies. The term Jesus for many in my own circles carries with it certain meaning mined from years of reading and understanding the Bible. However, to others, the term Jesus conjures other sorts of images or meaning. And culture seeks to assign the most useful definition or meaning to what Schaeffer calls contentless symbols. It is important to remember that as you engage in discussions or read/watch the news, be very wary of the usage of terms or presupposed shared definition of terms.

Nine on 9

June 9th was a long day and included a funeral for my father-in-law's mother. However, at the end of the day, we decided to sit on the beach of Lake Michigan and watch the sun go down (or technically the earth rotate so that the sun is no longer visible). It was a reminder of God's continued sovereignty over all of creation and his sustaining of life and the promise of eternity.

The End of My Paper

I am working on finishing a paper for school. The paper is about the speeches of God offering an understanding of the whole book of Job. Here is a draft of my closing arguments.

Since then the book is not about fairness or suffering primarily, it is important to grasp the scope of the book of Job. The unique format of the book and the distinctiveness of Job as a character serves to separate the book of God from the rest of the Old Testament. Job as a character and a book then become a timeless lesson. Timeless here means that the message extrapolated from the book of Job can stand the test of time since the characters and cultures have been removed.

            The remaining aspects of the book of Job exist for all people in all ages in all cultures. Job is a man living a life which becomes beset by drastic material hardship. Such a concept is understood by all because all men know pain and loss. The speeches of God then add a timeless answer because they reflect and point back to nature. No matter the person, the scope of God’s speeches reflects realities at some level that all men can understand and grasp. It is reflected in the book of Romans when the writer points out that the universe displays the attributes of God.

            Therefore, the speeches of God offer by contrast the timeless understanding to the timeless problem of Job. It is then imperative to measure the response of God to those timeless circumstances. It is by so doing that you see one of the keys to understanding Job in light of the rest of Scripture. God, as the controller and orchestrator of nature, displays for the ever changing seasons of man, that His power and plan transcend the short lives of men and demonstrates as such through the constancy of nature. Mankind then should recognize and formulate their worship and sorrow through the active knowledge of an unchanging yet careful caring God.

          By so learning, the book of Job offers for all men a perspective on the world and God of constant power and unchanging action. This formulation can serve to separate God and show His transcendence. Yet it is from this transcendence over nature that this sovereign God acted in the sending of His son Jesus Christ to initiate suffering. Job serves as an example of God for displaying the power of man’s love for God. And Jesus serves as an example of God for displaying the power of God’s love for man.

Art and Meaning

Recently I was reading in Francis Schaeffer's book The God Who Is There. In the opening chapters of this book he evaluates the degradation of philosophy and art past what he calls "the line of despair." Specifically I found his evaluation of art particularly enlightening. He move through an evaluation of Van Gogh, Gaugin and Cezanne as they search for what Schaeffer calls the "universal." In short this concept is an attempt by the artist to capture and depict beauty and meaning outside of cultural moles and in a form that is open to all people at all times. Unfortunately this attempt moved slowly away from understandable forms until the attempt reached new heights in Picasso. Schaeffer aptly describes the conclusion. "If you go far enough, your abstracted women can become 'all women' or even everything. But the difficulty is that when you get to that point the viewer has no clue what he is looking at.You have succeeded in making your own world on your canvas, and in this sense you have become god. But at the same time you have lost contact with the person who views your painting. We have come to the position where we cannot communicate."

It is clear that such progression has and will continue to manifest itself in many forms of art or communication medium. When mankind wants to be greater than man or to manifest his own meaning, the end result is a lessening of communication. What God started at the Tower of Babel practically plays out as people seek their own fulfillment and meaning on their own power. Art (and its manifestation in commercialism) continues to appeal either to the senses (thus sensual) or to pride. Some art wants a response or to entertain while others supposes itself high art. This art appeals to people's pride as they seek to understand it when in actuality the emperer has no clothes but nobody is willing to say so. Beauty and art will always be most profitable when it attempts to depict reality based upon cognizant realization of order and meaning. God's creation at the beginning of time was good in its form and function and communicates the artist's nature. We must not become wise in our own minds and seek by our own power to manifest new meaning and reality but shape our lives and actions upon pleasing God while living in His creation.

Be Consistent

In a recent class discussion, we examined the chapter of Ezekiel 40-48. In these chapters, the prophet Ezekiel details the dimensions and decorations of a new temple to be erected sometime in the future. Likewise, in these chapters, a renewed system of killing animals similar to that described in Leviticus is described. The basic discussion was to evaluate whether each aspect of these chapters both the temple and the "sacrifices" were to be understood literally or figuratively and when their completion would be realized.

I found that a large majority of my class felt that the temple was a as yet future literal building. Due to various reasons, they almost unanimously stated that this temple was an actual building to be realized sometime in the future of the nation of Israel. However, when the discussion moved to the "sacrifices," they almost equally unanimously stated that these were to be seen as figurative. Their reason was that due to the death and resurrection of Jesus such actions were obviously no longer necessary. Thus these described actions were a figurative picture of something else.

As I read these comments and arguments I realized how shallow many people are when it comes to difficult hermeneutics. It is easy to interpret what fits your beliefs. However, in this case, it was clear that these people had not thought it all completely through. When the temple and the "sacrifices" are described together, it is not appropriate to interpret one as literal and another as figurative just because it makes the most sense immediately. You have to be consistent with your interpretation, even with difficult passages.

It was a stark reminder that I need to evaluate the flippant way in which I approach passages which I think I know very well. It is not wise to trust my own wisdom and intuition when it comes to teaching or interpreting the Scriptures. Careful study and diligent prayer should accompany the reading and study of the Word of God so that man's wisdom does not cloud the revealed truth of God.

(P.S. - If people are interested, I can post my answer to the interpretation and understanding of those chapters of Ezekiel.)