What Carnival Games Teach Us About Knowing the Truth

When I was a kid, my favorite part of any fair or carnival was the Midway.  I was enraptured by the allure of the potential of winning an over-sized stuffed animal from a seemingly simple game.  My parents, however, wouldn't give me any money to play the games - I had to save up and use my own.  So off to the Midway I went whenever my family visited the Minnesota State Fair, usually with about $10.00 of my own hard-earned money burning a hole in my pocket.  Usually, all it took was about 5 minutes and a few failed attempts at achieving over-sized-stuffed-animal-glory for my money to be gone.  When this happened, I remember always feeling flabbergasted that I couldn't win the game.  After all, the game operators made it look and sound so easy - what gives?

The problem was, of course, that I was being deceived (plus I'm not any good at carnival games).  The game operators were assuring me that winning the game was easy, and that I could certainly be successful at it if I just put my money down and gave it my best shot.  Of course, they didn't actually believe that, but that's what they told me to draw me in.  Once in a while, one of them would even complete the task of the game as an example of how easy it was.  The truth, however, was quite different: those games are not easy, and they are mostly rigged to create losers rather than winners.  I was duped.  I believed the lie that I could win the game and achieve over-sized stuffed animal greatness.

Don't get me wrong: it was nobody's fault but mine that I got suckered in to shelling out my lawn-mowing money for no return.  I should have known better.  I should have learned from all of the empty hands and wallets of other Midway goers that the dream of being a King of the Midway was not easily fulfilled.  But when you're a kid with money in his pocket and no over-sized stuffed animal waiting for you at home, it's hard to tell a lie from the truth.

This is similar to the challenge that we face as Christians in navigating all of the truth claims that are perpetuated by our society.  We are constantly assaulted with various, and some times conflicting, truth claims.  And just like the promise of an over-sized stuffed animal will entice a 10 year old boy to believe the lie that winning the carnival game is easy, the truth claims offered by our society and other religious systems are often attractive and appealing - even if they aren't true.  It can be hard to see the truth through all the lies.

The same was true for the church to which the Apostle John wrote the first letter that bears his name.  There were false teachers influencing the church and teaching doctrines that did not accord with Christ and the gospel.  In order to help them know what was true and what was false, John instructed his readers to "test the spirits." (1 John 4.1)  By "spirits" John means "truth claims."  If you want to know what is true, you just can't accept something on its face.  Its veracity needs to be tested and verified before you should believe it.  John gives his readers a two-part rubric for testing truth claims, and some counsel as to how they can overcome false truth claims in their lives.  This text was the focus of our message at Riverview this past week.  Check it out here.

In John's day there were several false teachers who denied certain things about the humanity and divinity of Jesus.  You had some false teachers who claimed that Jesus never came in the flesh.  His body wasn't real - it was just a mirage.  And you had other false teachers who claimed that Jesus was not fully God, or that he wasn't actually divine at all - he was just a man.  Because of these false teachings, John instructs his readers to evaluate the truth claims of those who would purport to be teachers by asking this question: "Did Jesus Christ come in the flesh?" (1 John 4.2)  The answer to this question, John says, will help his readers and early Christians to evaluate the truthfulness of the claims made by the teachers in their day.  While the question may have changed a bit here and there between John's day and our own, the principle is the same: when someone makes a truth claim, find out what they believe about Jesus.  What they believe about him will either authenticate or disqualify other spiritual truth claims they make.

A second test that John instructs his readers to perform is to ask the question: "Will they listen to us?" (1 John 4.6)  By "us" John means "the church."  In other words, if someone comes along teaching about spiritual things, will that person submit his teaching and himself to the authority of the church?  God has given the church the authority to stand in judgment over theological truth claims.  Those who would make such claims will willingly submit themselves and their teachings to the authority of the church and the word of God.  The messages and claims of those who will not submit to this authority are to be rejected.  In these ways, John says that we can "test the spirits" in order to know the Spirit of God.

In addition to the two tests that John gives, the early church began to develop other ways that they could test truth claims - especially truth claims about spiritual things - namely, creeds.  A creed is a solid, stated position of doctrine and beliefs - the foundational parts of the Christian faith.  The early church developed creeds as a way of knowing and standing upon the foundations of the faith - those things they knew for sure to be true.  This way, when someone came along with a new idea or teaching, that idea or teaching was compared to the creeds.  If the new idea or teaching matched the core beliefs of the church as expressed in the creeds, it was accepted.  If not, it was rejected.  Creeds were essential for early Christians to be able to know truth from falsehood.  Throughout church history, several creeds were developed in order to help the church "test the spirits." (For a deeper exposition on the various elements of the Apostle's Creed, see here.)

The Apostle's Creed - the earliest known creed of the church (which we recited together at Riverview this past week) - was in use as early as the fourth century A.D., but was probably written much earlier than that.  Other creeds, such as the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed have helped the church identify false teachings and teachers and protect the truth of God throughout the church's history.

Creeds are still used in the church today, although more as a liturgical act of worship than as a defense of the faith or as an aid for determining the truth of various claims and worldviews that circulate in our world.  Instead, we now have access to the greatest truth-filter of all time: the word of God.  If we are knowing the word and what it says about the story of God through Christ, we will be able to navigate the truth claims that we encounter in this life.  That being said, we still affirm much of what is written in the creeds of church history, and there is value to knowing them.

This world provides us with a multitude of different truth claims and worldviews that challenge what we believe and how we see the world, and many of them are false, yet are hard to identify as being so.  The world is very good at making lies look good, and at convincing us to believe things that are simply not true.  Thankfully, God has given us a timeless standard through his word to be able to "test the spirits" and know him in truth.

The Power of a Shared Meal

1 John 3.11-24 is a section of scripture that details the love that Christians are to have for one another.  All of us would affirm that love for brothers and sisters is an integral part of the Christian life, however knowing how to express that love can be more difficult, especially in our individualistic and autonomous society.  We have grown to be accustomed to staying within our bubbles and not venturing out unless we know that it is safe, and retreating quickly back inside the bubble when things are new or different.  While many of us find this mode of operation as familiar and comfortable, it severely inhibits our ability to come alongside our brothers and sisters and show them the love the New Testament talks about.

Most of the time, it's not that we don't want to be loving toward others, but simply that we infrequently have the occasion to do so.  We're busy, and getting to know new people takes time and effort - time and effort that we usually don't have.  Thankfully, there's a very practical way to show love to brothers and sisters in Christ, and to do so through a very simple way that's already a part of our daily routines: eating.

Believe it or not, the act eating meals plays a significant role in the gospels.  Jesus is recorded in the gospels as sharing several meals with all different sorts of people.  Some scholars have even referred to this trend as Jesus "eating his way through the gospels." (For a handy chart of meals that Jesus shared with others in the gospel of Luke, for example, see here.  For a more in-depth treatment of Jesus' use of the shared meal in his ministry, see this book.)  Indeed, quite frequently, Jesus can be founding munching and snacking with people within his sphere of influence.  Each of these shared meals afforded him an opportunity to enter into the lives of the people with whom he was eating.  Many of the meals that Jesus is recorded as eating in the gospels are also accompanied by times of teaching, healing, or other such miraculous work.  Put simply, there is power in the time of a shared meal.  How so?

1. You get to know people you otherwise wouldn't.  Several times Jesus ate with people who were "off limits" or out of bounds for him to be eating with.  Consider the sinful woman of Luke 7.36-50.  She was considered a cultural taboo because of her unnamed sin.  A meal afforded Jesus the opportunity to meet her, get to know her, see past the pre-conceived notion of her, and speak into her situation.  Who do you know (that you don't really know) that you could get to know better through a shared meal?

2. You get to know people you otherwise wouldn't.  Beyond just a surface knowledge of someone, like the kind of relationship you have with a casual acquaintance, a shared meal allows you to go deeper.  Consider the meal that Jesus shared with Zacchaeus in Luke 19.  After Jesus' initial interaction with Zacchaeus, Jesus invited himself to Zacchaeus' house for supper.  Presumably, during that time, Jesus "went deeper" with Zacchaues through the conversation afforded by a shared meal.  This deeper level of intimacy led Zacchaeus to significant life-change.

3. You get to encourage people in Christ.  In Mark 2 Jesus is eating with the newly converted Levi (Matthew) and his friends (tax collectors and sinners).  These were people who were in a bad place in life and needed encouragement.  In fact, Jesus says that's why he was there (verse 17).  Who do you know who might benefit from some encouragement over a shared meal?

4. You get to know how you can serve and pray for people.  When Jesus celebrated passover with his disciples for the last time, the evening began with him washing their feet - a debased task reserved for the lowest of slaves.  Although the disciples didn't realize it, this is exactly the kind of service they needed at the time (John 13.7-8).  Getting to know someone over a shared meal exposes how you can serve them in practical ways and pray for them on a regular basis.

5. You get to know what people are dealing with in their lives.  Several of the meals Jesus shared with people dealt with some potentially hard subjects (see Luke 7.36-70, 10.38-42, and 14.1-24, for example).  Sharing a meal with someone - and the conversation that comes as a result - can lead to walls coming down and people dropping their guard.  In these times, we can open up to each other and discover what's going on beneath the surface, even when it exposes difficult situations and circumstances.  These times can afford us the opportunity to insert ourselves into the lives of others and see how we can help, support, love, and maybe even correct them during the hard times.

6. You get to celebrate the things you have in common.  One of the most joyful meals recorded in the gospels must surely come in Luke 24, when Jesus shares a meal with his disciples after his resurrection.  In that meal, all participants rejoiced in the commonality they had in the risen Savior.  When we share a meal with our brothers and sisters in Christ, we are able to celebrate our commonality in Christ, even if we have nothing else in common.  Followers of Christ are united in their commonality through him.  Because of this, the conversation at a meal shared between believers never lags.

These are just some of the trends that we see taking place when Jesus shares a meal with someone in the gospels.  There are certainly many other benefits to sharing a meal with someone.  For instance, it's a good time to catch up with old friends, tell stories, tell jokes, laugh, and of course, enjoy good food.  Sharing a meal with someone is probably the most basic and simple - yet practical and effective - way that we can show love to our brothers and sisters.  Indeed, there is power in a shared meal.  Invite someone over to your house tonight and find out for yourself.

Hymnals and Hyrnals

So, a few months ago a new website popped up called the Babylon Bee.  The Bee is a Christian satirical news site that posts fake, satirical versions of news stories, very similar to The Onion, but from a Christian perspective.  Needless to say, the stories produced at the Babylon Bee are hilarious and incredibly creative.  Some of my favorite stories from the Bee are here, here, and here.  And, as all good satire does, some of the stories have made me squirm a bit before I could chuckle at them.  Take, for example, this article, and this article.  Admittedly, you have to be a part of the Christian subculture to really appreciate the stories, but trust me: they're spot on.

The Babylon Bee also accepts reader submissions, so one night about a month ago, when I didn't have anything better to do, I thought I'd try my hand at a satirical article.  I typed it up and sent it into their submissions department, and that was that.  The submissions page on their website states that if they're going to use your submitted article, they'll contact you.  If they're not going to use your article, you won't hear back from them.  Time went by, and I never heard back from them, so I assumed they weren't going to use my article.

But then, this morning, I received an email in my inbox from the Babylon Bee with the message, "You're up" in the body of the email with a link to my article on the Bee site.  Have a look for yourself.

The Bee published my article on their Facebook and Twitter pages right away this morning.  This goofy, made up, satirical article is by far the most widely read thing I've ever written - including anything I've ever written on this blog.  In fact, if you counted up the views for all of the things I've ever written on this blog, that's still probably less than the number of people who have read my article at the Bee today.  After all, they have 27,000 followers on Facebook and about 7,500 on Twitter.  As I write this, the article has received 1,700 "likes" on Facebook and almost 500 shares, while on Twitter it has been retweeted almost 50 times.  The comments on the article on Facebook (of which their are 124) have been fun to watch unfold, as some people riffed on the article and made some more jokes, while others are horrified because they have yet to learn that the article is satirical.

So thanks to the Babylon Bee for publishing my article and making this an interesting day, as I've been able to watch people enjoy my article in real time.  Now that I've broken the ice on satirical Christian writing, I think I might try my hand at a few more.

What's So Good About Good Friday?

Good Friday is a paradoxical holiday, in that it labels something that is unquestionably horrific and evil as “good.”  After all, when we think of the events of Good Friday, we should think about spitting, beating, blood, torture, flesh being ripped and torn, hands and feet being nailed to wood, stabbing, and the most intense physical suffering that a human being can endure.  Indeed the Bible says of Jesus: “his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of the children of mankind…” (Isaiah 52.14)  In other words, Jesus was beaten so badly that you had seen him you’d have to do a double take just to know that he was, in fact, a human being.  To make matters even more undignified and horrible, some believe that when Jesus asked for a drink, the soaked sponge that was given to him to suck on was serving double duty from its regular job of being used as toilet paper.  

But when we move beyond the physical abuse that Jesus suffered and look toward the spiritual side of this day’s proceedings, things begin to seem even less “good.”  One of the thieves that was crucified with Jesus noted that he (the thief) was getting what he deserved: “…we are receiving the due rewards of our deeds.”  The shocking part is what he says next: “but this man has done nothing wrong.” (Luke 23.41)  Not only did Jesus suffer all of the horrible abuse noted above, but he did so as an innocent.  He never sinned.  He was perfect in thought, word, and deed.  He never did anything that would warrant any kind of punishment or discipline, let alone disfigurement and torture.  

Good Friday?  Really?

Well, maybe we’re misunderstanding the word “good.”  Maybe it’s supposed to mean something else in this context.  Wikipedia says that the use of the word “good” in regards to this holiday is meant to imply the sense of “pious” or “holy.”  It also reports that some Christian traditions use the terms “Holy Friday,” “Great Friday”, or “Black Friday” for their remembrance of this holiday.  But considering that “Black Friday” in our culture is a day devoted to materialism and excess, that’s probably not a good choice for us.  Similarly, “Great Friday” seems to have as many paradoxical problems as “Good Friday.”  But I’m going to stick with “Good Friday,” and I’m going to use a definition of “good” that implies “advantageous” or “beneficial” or even “morally right,” and I’ll tell you why.

If we look to the pages of scripture, the paradox is stripped away and we can begin to understand how something so bad could, in fact, be “good.”  In fact, the reality of Jesus’ suffering and death is an occasion for joy for Christians.  Not that we take pleasure in his suffering, or that we sadistically enjoy the thought of violence and torture of the innocent – by no means.  Instead, we exult in the result of what Jesus accomplished on behalf of those who would believe through his suffering and death.  2 Corinthians 5.21 says: “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”  Jesus took the sins of those who would believe upon himself.  That is, all of the times a believer has broken God’s law were transferred from himself to Jesus.  

The one who was sinless became sinful; the one who was perfect became corrupt; the one who was pure became vile.  Jesus went from never having told a lie, to having told all of the lies of all people who would ever trust in him; Jesus went from never having stolen a thing in his life, to having stolen all things that anyone who would trust in him, had stolen; Jesus went from never having had a lustful thought, to having all of the lustful thoughts of his people placed upon him; Jesus went from never having an angry thought toward anyone else to having the murderous intentions of his people placed upon him.  This is how he “became sin” – he took the sins of all those who would believe upon himself.  

And the logical result of “being sin” is obvious: punishment.  A good judge punishes criminals who have committed crimes, and a good God punishes sinners who have committed sins.  To not punish sin would be just as evil as a human judge not punishing a murderer.  But in the case of Jesus, he took all the sins of all the people who would ever trust in him, on himself.  Therefore it says in Isaiah 53.10 that it “pleased” the Lord to crush him.  How could God be pleased about punishing his perfect Son who had the sins of others thrust upon him?  Because, in God’s great mercy, this was his divine plan, and the Jesus submitted to it willingly out of love.  And since sin must be punished, and since Jesus bore the weight of sin, it was good and right that the punishment fell upon him.

But it doesn’t end there.  Jesus didn’t just take sin and die.  He also transferred his righteousness – his perfect sinlessness – to all those who would believe in him.  So that when a believer stands before God, he sees the righteousness of Christ.  And when God looked at Jesus on the cross, he sees the sins of his people.  And beyond that, he rose from the dead, demonstrating his power over death and sin.  This, my friends, is good news.  It is, in fact, the best news.

So should we call Good Friday “good?”  Yes, by all means.  But with a serious, somber, and sober recognition that it was my sin that brought this holiday about.  But we should also celebrate this holiday and rejoice that there is a God who is loving and merciful so as to sacrifice his only Son in my place, and who would give me his righteousness so that I might have eternal life.  So call it “Good Friday,” or “Wonderful Friday,” or “Fantastic Friday,” or whatever you want to call it, as long as you know why it’s “good.”

Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?

In 1 Corinthians 15.20 Paul asserts the physical, bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ as an historical certainty.  There were many in his time who disagreed with him, however, just as there are many in our time who do not hold that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.  It is interesting that when Paul asserts the resurrection as historical fact, he doesn’t ask his readers to believe him in blind faith – rather, he gives them evidence for the historical reality of the resurrection.  As time has gone on, the evidence in favor of a historical, physical, bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ has piled up and we, like Paul, can confidently assert that Jesus Christ is risen.  In our Easter Sunday message at Riverview, I briefly shared two pieces of evidence for the resurrection.  John Piper and Matt Chandler have done a good job in outlining several other pieces of evidence that are worthy of consideration.  What follows is a merely a sampling of the streams of evidence that they and others have put forth in favor of the historical reality of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

1. The Bible predicted and testifies to the resurrection.  See Isaiah 53 for an Old Testament prediction of the crucifixion and resurrection of the Messiah.  Jesus also predicted his own death and resurrection long before it actually happened (see, for example, Mark 8.31, 9.30-32, and 10.32-34).  Moreover, the entire New Testament is based on the presupposition that Jesus rose from the dead – an idea firmly planted in the worldview of New Testament writers by the solid evidence of actual eyewitnesses (some of whom were contributors to the New Testament themselves – for instance, Matthew, John, Paul, James, and Peter) to the resurrection.  There are very few plausible arguments for doubting the historicity of the Bible when it speaks of the resurrection. 

2. The tomb was empty.  The Bible contains four historical accounts that declare the tomb in which Jesus was buried was empty.  How did the occupant of the tomb vacate its premises?  There are several theories as to how this could have occurred naturally or by the power of man, but they are very problematic (a few of these counterarguments were addressed in our Easter Sunday message).  The best explanation is that the tomb was empty because God raised Jesus from the dead – just like the Bible says. 

3. Hundreds of people saw the resurrected Christ. The gospels report that an unknown number of people saw Jesus after his resurrection.  It gives us some numbers here and there (see Luke 24, John 20-21 and Matthew 28), but never a definite count.  The Apostle Paul gives a general number of more than 500 who saw him at one time (1 Corinthians 15.6), and that many of them were alive at the time of his writing.  In citing these 500 witnesses, Paul is encouraging his readers to go and ask those witnesses about what they saw.  He’s saying, “Don’t take my word for it – ask them yourself.”  Arguments attempting to explain away the testimony of hundreds of people (such as simultaneous hallucination) are very weak.  Put simply, hundreds of people claim to have seen Jesus back from the dead because…hundreds of people saw Jesus back from the dead. 

4. The disciples were transformed from cowards to gospel-warriors.  The picture of the disciples that the Bible paints is not a very flattering one: they are consistently depicted as men who are not very intellectual, scared of their own shadow, hypocritical, and self-centered.  But within the span of two months, the disciples went from cowards who denied Jesus at the time of his death (Mark 15), to emboldened preachers who preached the resurrection under penalty of death (Acts 4).  If the disciples didn’t actually see a resurrected Christ, then what could have inspired such a transformational change?  If they had stolen Jesus’ corpse (as some believe) they surely would not have had the gospel-boldness they demonstrated in the book of Acts. 

5. Jesus’ family believed he was God.  The Bible records Jesus’ mother and brother as believing in his deity (it doesn’t tell us whether or not other members of his family believed)  This piece of evidence may seem inconsequential on its face, but think about it: how successful would you be in proving to your family that you are God?  They would probably laugh you out of the room because they know enough about you to know that you are, without a doubt, not God.  The same would have been true of Jesus’ family, but they were convinced.  What did they see that convinced them?  How about coming back from the dead?

6. Women were the first witnesses of the resurrection, and the first to deliver the news.  This piece of evidence doesn’t seem very weighty to us, but it would have been at the time.  The word of women in the first century was seen as unreliable.  In fact, women weren’t allowed to testify in first century court proceedings because their testimony wasn’t reliable.  So then, if the resurrection were a myth, choosing women to perpetuate it would have been very unwise.  Why were women the first to deliver the news of the resurrection?  Because that’s the way it happened.

7. The primary day of worship moved from Saturday to Sunday.  For thousands of years, God’s people worshiped him on the Sabbath day – the last day of the week – in accordance with the 10 Commandments.  In the New Testament, however, there is evidence that God’s people began to gather for worship on Sundays because it was the day associated with Jesus’ resurrection (see Acts 20, 1 Cor. 16.1-2, Rev. 1.10-11, etc.).  This change is not insignificant.  Believers had kept the Sabbath (worship on Saturdays) for thousands of years, and then – rather suddenly – their tradition changed.  The historical reality of the resurrection explains that change.