What a Glorious Day!

Today we celebrate Jesus' victory over sin and death, a victory that His Church shares because of our union with Him. We can celebrate what Hosea prophesied, "[Christ] will ransom them from the power of the grave; [Christ] will redeem them from death. Where, O death, are your plagues? Where, O grave, is your destruction?" Hosea 13:14

In The Valley of Vision (a collection of Puritan prayers) there are a few prayers that I would like to share that express well what we celebrate on this day.

Love lustres at Calvary (pg. 76)
My Father,
   Enlarge my heart, warm my affections,
   open my lips,
   supply words that proclaim ‘Love lustres
      at Calvary.’
There grace removes my burdens and heaps them
      on thy Son,
   made a transgressor, a curse, and sin for me;
There the sword of Thy justice smote the man,
      Thy fellow;
There Thy infinite attributes were magnified,
   and infinite atonement was made;
There infinite punishment was due,
   and infinite punishment was endured.
Christ was all anguish that I might be all joy,
   cast off that I might be brought in,
   trodden down as an enemy
      that I might be welcomed as a friend,
   surrendered to hell’s worst
      that I might attain heaven’s best,
   stripped that I might be clothed,
   wounded that I might be healed,
   athirst that I might drink,
   tormented that I might be comforted,
   made a shame that I might inherit glory,
   entered darkness that I might have eternal light.
My Savior wept that all tears might be wiped
      from my eyes,
   groaned that I might have endless song,
   endured all pain that I might have unfading health,
   bore a thorny crown that I might have
      a glory-diadem,
   bowed His head that I might uplift mine,
   experienced reproach that I might receive
      welcome,
   closed His eyes in death that I might gaze
      on unclouded brightness,
   expired that I might for ever live.
O Father, who spared not Thine only Son that Thou
      mightest spare me,
All this transfer Thy love designed and
      accomplished;
Help me to adore Thee by lips and life.
O that my every breath might be ecstatic praise,
   my every step buoyant with delight, as I see my
      enemies crushed,
   satan baffled, defeated, destroyed,
   sin buried in the ocean of reconciling blood,
   hell’s gates closed, heaven’s portal open.
Go forth, O conquering God, and show me
   the cross, mighty to subdue, comfort and save.

Resurrection (pg. 86)
Great was the joy of Israel's sons,
   when Egypt died upon the shore,
   Far greater joy
   when the Redeemer's foe lay crushed
   in the dust.
Jesus strides forth as the Victor,
   conqueror of death, hell, and all opposing
      might;
He bursts the bands of death,
   tramples the powers of darkness down,
   and lives for ever.
He, my gracious surety,
   apprehended for payment of my debt,
   comes forth from the prison house of the grave
   free, and triumphant over sin, satan, and death.
Show me herein the proof that His vicarious offering is accepted,
   that the claims of justice are satisfied,
   that the devil's scepter is shivered,
   that his wrongful throne is leveled.
Give me the assurance that in Christ I died,
   in Him I rose,
   in His life I live, in His victory I triumph,
   in His ascension I shall be glorified.
Adorable Redeemer,
   Thou who wast lifted up upon a cross
   art ascended to the highest heaven.
Thou, who as Man of sorrows
   wast crowned with thorns,
   art now as Lord of life wreathed with glory.
Once, no shame more deep than Thing,
   no agony more bitter,
   no death more cruel.
Now, no exaltation more high,
   no life more glorious,
   no advocate more effective.
Thou art in the triumph car leading the captive
   Thine enemies behind Thee.
What more could be done than Thou has done!
   Thy death is my life,
   Thy resurrection my peace,
   Thy ascension my hope,
   Thy prayers my comfort.

May these words from saints of old bless your heart on this glorious day. May we all remember that His death is our life and His resurrection our peace.

By His Grace,
Taylor

It's Friday...

It’s Friday
   Jesus is praying
   Peter’s a sleeping
   Judas is betraying
   But Sunday’s comin’

It’s Friday
   Pilate’s struggling
   The council is conspiring
   The crowd is vilifying
   They don’t even know
   That Sunday’s comin’

It’s Friday
   The disciples are running
   Like sheep without a shepherd
   Mary’s crying
   Peter is denying
   But they don’t know
   That Sunday’s a comin’

It’s Friday
   The Romans beat my Jesus
   They robe Him in scarlet
   They crown Him with thorns
   But they don’t know
   That Sunday’s comin’

It’s Friday
   See Jesus walking to Calvary
   His blood dripping
   His body stumbling
   And His spirit’s burdened
   But you see, it’s only Friday
   Sunday’s comin’

It’s Friday
   The world’s winning
   People are sinning
   And evil’s grinning

It’s Friday
   The soldiers nail my Savior’s hands
   To the cross
   They nail my Savior’s feet
   To the cross
   And then they raise Him up
   Next to criminals
   It’s Friday
   But let me tell you something
   Sunday’s comin’

It’s Friday
   The disciples are questioning
   What has happened to their King
   And the Pharisees are celebrating
   That their scheming
   Has been achieved
   But they don’t know
   It’s only Friday
   Sunday’s comin’

It’s Friday
   He’s hanging on the cross
   Feeling forsaken by His Father
   Left alone and dying
   Can nobody save Him?
   Ooooh
   It’s Friday
   But Sunday’s comin’

It’s Friday
   The earth trembles
   The sky grows dark
   My King yields His spirit

It’s Friday
   Hope is lost
   Death has won
   Sin has conquered
   and satan’s just a laughin’

It’s Friday
   Jesus is buried
   A soldier stands guard
   And a rock is rolled into place

But it’s Friday
   It is only Friday
   Sunday is a comin’!
~ S.M. Lockridge's famous sermon, from John L Jefferson, pastor of Del Aire Baptist Church, in Hawthrone CA.

I do not have anything deep to say to go along with this. I just wanted to post this short sermon because it gives me chills every time I hear it. I like to listen to it on Good Friday because it reminds me that Sunday is coming...

By His Grace,
Taylor

Justice Demands

"The Good Shepherd lays down His life for the sheep, and pleads that they must therefore go free. The Surety is bound, and justice demands that those for whom He stands a substitute should go their way." ~ Charles Spurgeon, Morning and Evening, Morning March 26

There is an anecdote (which I cannot confirm) that tells the story of a conversation between Spurgeon and one of his congregation. As the story goes, the member came up to Sprugeon, after a particularly good sermon on the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ being the only way to obtain eternal life, and asked him, "Pastor Spurgeon, what would you do if you got to the gates of heaven and God did not grant you entrance." Without missing a beat Spurgeon replied, "I would demand to be let in!"

Whether the story is true or not, it brings up an interesting point. Could we ever make demands of God? Could we demand to be let into heaven? If you have placed your faith in the propitiatory sacrifice (satisfying God's wrath) of Christ then you could. I John 1:9 says, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." God is not only faithful to forgive our sins if we come to Him on the basis of the righteousness of Christ; He is just in doing so. In fact, it would be unjust for God to refuse if we come on the basis of Christ's righteousness alone. Why? Romans 3:23-26 tells us the answer,

²³[F]or all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, ²⁴and are justified by His grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, ²⁵whom God put forward as a propitiation by His blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in His divine forbearance He had passed over former sins. ²⁶It 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.

The emphasis in the last verse is my own, which I added to bring attention to the part of the verse that I want to focus on. Because of the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, God can both justify sinners (declare them not guilty and righteous on account of Christ) and be just in doing so. It is just because Christ took the punishment for our sin (became a propitiatory sacrifice for us) and imputed to our account His perfect righteousness. Since Christ took our punishment and we have His righteousness it would be unjust for God to do anything other than declare us not guilty and righteous--to justify us. So Christians can confidently before God because, as Spurgeon says above, "justice demands that those for whom He stands a substitute should go their way."

As Easter approaches consider this: "³³Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. ³⁴Who is to condemn?" ~ Romans 8:33-34a. If you are His, then you can rejoice because nothing can separate you from His love... nothing (Romans 8:35).

By His Grace,
Taylor

Galileo's Trial: An Epic Struggle of Science Against Religion?

"The notion that Galileo's trial was a conflict between science and religion should be dead. Anyone who works seriously on Galileo doesn't accept that interpretation anymore." ~ Thomas F. Mayer

It has long been held in popular media and high school textbooks that the trial of Galileo in 1633 was the righteous stand of science against the oppressive, outdated traditions of the Roman Catholic Church. It is said that this started the unstoppable rise of science that would soon overtake and make irrelevant church tradition. This conception provides an exciting story; the only problem is that it did not actually happen that way. The popularized view is simply incorrect, as stated above in the quote by Dr. Mayer taken from this popular article. It has been overblown by those who want to exaggerate an alleged chasm between science and religion. Any good history of science book, like Science and Religion edited by Gary B. Ferngren (relevant article by Richard Blackwell), will give a more accurate picture of the Galileo affair.

So what really happened? The Aristotelian, Ptolemaic geocentric view of the solar system had dominated the scientific and theological discussions of the solar system for centuries. Then, in 1543, the heliocentric view developed by Nicolas Copernicus was published over 70 years before Galileo came on the scene.

In 1610, Galileo built his first telescope and began using it to observe the sky. He used it to gather all sorts of data on stellar objects like caters on the Moon, the Galilean moons orbiting Jupiter (named for him, of course) the phases of Venus (like we see with the Moon), and spots on the Sun. His observations, particularly the moons orbiting Jupiter and the phases of Venus, brought him to question the dominant geocentric model and start to look more seriously at the heliocentric model. Though the growing body of data supported the the Copernican model, Galileo could not conclusively prove that it was correct. (This is a fact that is often missed. All theological discussions aside, the scientific community of the time was not fully convinced of the heliocentric model. It did not gain full acceptance until many years after Galileo's death.)

Being a devout Catholic, Galileo knew that the model he was developing should agree with Scripture, so in 1616 he went to the Scriptures in order to reinterpret several key passages so that he might harmonize his model with God's Word. This is where things started to get hot and when we consider this we cannot forget what time Galileo was doing this. This was the early 17th century, only about 100 years after Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of Wittenberg. The Reformation had taken the sole authority to interpret Scripture away from the clergy and the Catholic Church was intent on taking it back. The Protestant Reformation and the following Catholic Counter Reformation over the past century had heightened sensitivity in the Roman Catholic Church. The Council of Trent had just reaffirmed that only bishops and church councils count interpret the Bible. In this first trial, Galileo was not as much in trouble for his heliocentric view (though that certainly was a factor) but because he tried to prove it by interpreting Scripture at a time when the Catholic Church was really sensitive about that. The impact of this drama between the Reformation and the Counter Reformation on the whole Galileo situation cannot be overstated. Blackwell states in Science and Religion:

If Copernicus’s book had been published either one hundred years earlier or one hundred years later, the Galileo affair would probably not have happened. But, in fact, it was published in 1543, when the Reformation was in full bloom and the Counter Reformation was just beginning. Hence it was that by 1616 all of the actors and cultural forces were in place for the drama of the Galileo affair to begin.

To be blunt about it, both Galileo and the Catholic Church were at the mercy of really bad timing.

In 1616, when Galileo’s case was brought to trial before the Roman Inquisition, they issued a precept that ordered him to cease to promote and defend the heliocentric model, which Galileo promised to obey. Fifteen years later, there was a newly appointed Pope and Galileo decided to ask the new Pope if he could publish a review of the heliocentric and geocentric views. The new Pope, unaware of the previous trial, granted him permission. Galileo, however, failed to mention the precept during his request and it was this omission led to Galileo’s second trial, his conviction, and his house arrest. During this second trial, the trial that ultimately led to Galileo's recanting, the issue was not the two solar system models but Galileo's disregard for the precept. As Dr. Mayer has shown in his paper on the subject and talks about in this popular article, the issue of the precept was raised in very narrow legal terms and was compounded by sloppy records of the earlier trial and Galileo's own testimony. Mayer argues that the Inquisition was actually trying to give Galileo a way to negotiate a settlement, a common practice with precepts at the time, but Galileo dug himself a big hole by first claiming not to have received the precept, then saying he did not violate the precept (the one he just claimed he did not receive), and then quoting from the precept (again, the one he just claimed he did not receive). In the popular press Dr. Mayer said, "When push came to shove in the second part of trial, [Galileo] made every imaginable mistake."

So, this event in history, which has long been hailed as the clash of the science and religion, is really more about who has the authority to interpret Scripture (because of the drama of the Reformation) in the first trial and a legal matter in the second (compounded by sloppy record keeping and Galileo's inconsistent testimony). Rather than being a monumental clash between science and religion, where the Catholic Church is painted as a "monolithic, omnipotent organization conspiring to bring down the astronomer", Galileo’s final conviction was a legal matter confused by sloppy record keeping and handled poorly by Galileo himself.

By His Grace,
Taylor

First Century Codices or Media Hype (Again...)

"The mainstream media need to do a much better job of checking in on academic blogs and other social media tools that are readily at their disposal. They need to be more skeptical, in general, and specifically when dealing with obvious problems. Antiquities fraud is a serious issue and the model of hyping a discovery in the press is a common route for less-than-savory characters involved in the trade. It’s understandable that a reporter and editors can be had, but when they discover they’ve been had, they need to correct quickly." ~ Mollie Ziegler in her recent post: "It’s all Greek to me(dia)?"

I assume that most of you have seen the media hype about some alleged codices discovered in a Jordanian cave that could be the "earliest Christian writings in existence". I will admit, when I first saw the article I got pretty excited because discovering documents from the first century would be an incredible find. However, I was a little wary when I read the BBC reporter saying, "They could, just possibly, change our understanding of how Jesus was crucified and resurrected, and how Christianity was born." No such claims were being made by any of the people who actually had seen the relics. After some waiting and reading, it seems I should have been even more skeptical.

Recently several of the scholars quoted in various articles have stated that they were misquoted to make the discovery sound genuine when they retained a healthy attitude of skepticism awaiting further confirmation. Others have called into question David Elkington's credentials (the man who is making grand claims about this discovery). Still others have pointed out the discrepancies in the claims. Peter Thonemann of Oxford has even staked his career on them being forgeries and has backed up his statement with pretty good evidence. He actually received pictures of the codices from Elkington last year, analyzed the Greek, and concluded that "the text on the bronze tablet was copied directly from the inscription in the museum at Amman by someone who did not understand the meaning of the text of the inscription, but was simply looking for a plausible-looking sequence of Greek letters to copy." Elkington failed to mention that in his press release and the media did not do much digging before it reported the find.

It still remains to be seen if Dr. Thonemann is right (the Greek in the images is really hard to read so I cannot confirm his transcription) but the case for the codices authenticity is not looking good. Again, we have another example of hype in the media. Unfortunately, the outlets that ramped up the hype have not retracted anything or even given air-time to those who doubt the authenticity of the codices. I agree with Mollie Ziegler's conclusions in her post. In general, the media does need to be more skeptical of claims, they need to not claim more than the scholars who present discoveries claim, they need to report the dissenting views, and they certainly need to have the courage to retract claims they have made when serious doubt is cast on discoveries they report on (though they rarely do).

By His Grace,
Taylor