Babel and Pentecost

God’s Multi-lingual Answers to Rebellious Ambition

Rev. John de Hoog. Trowel and Sword, June 1995

Preamble: You may remember that in Dec. 1977 Bill Deenick wrote about the church year in his article “Annus Liturgicus” (see TSR, Jan. 1, 2024). Next Sunday, May 19, is Pentecost Sunday; another important event on the Christian calendar, celebrated as the day that the Holy Spirit descended on the disciples 50 days after Easter and 10 days after Jesus ascended into heaven. In this article John de Hoog outlines a connection between Pentecost and the attempted building of the Tower of Babel. John points out that the spirit of Babylon is rebellion – “We will displace God.  We will  rule ourselves. If we work together, we can do it!” Sound familiar? How about, “The climate is out of control. We don’t need God. We will fix it. If we work together we can do it.” Compare that with: “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease” (Gen. 8:22).

Babel and Pentecost

“Now the  whole world had one language and a common speech. As men moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there. They said to each other, ‘Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly. ‘ They  used  brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. Then they said, ‘Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth.‘” Genesis 11:1-4.

The claim of the tower of Babel is the claim to be independent of God.  Babel represents a united mankind, doing things their own way.  After the flood, God had commanded mankind to fill the earth (Genesis 9:1).  Mankind rebelled against that command.  Instead of spreading out and filling the earth, the people decide to stick together and build a city with a tower reaching to the heavens.

The name of that city built on the plain of Shinar was Babylon (Genesis 10:10). The name Babylon means “gate of God” in the Babylonian language. Babylon is the great symbol of human pride and self-confidence. The gate of God – Babylon.  Where we drag God down to us, or where we reach up to God. Our tower is so high, it reaches to the heavens!

Here is the spirit of Babylon, of the tower-builders.  “We will displace God.  We will  rule ourselves. If we work together, we can do it!” What leads the people to build this great city and tower?  Three things: pride, ambition and fear.

Pride was a factor. See how the development of the city comes in stages. First they discover how to make bricks, and how to use tar for mortar. Flushed with this success, the next step is to build a city, with a tower reaching to the heavens. Pride in their own achievements leads to disobedience to God’s Word.

Ambition comes next.  “Let’s make a name for ourselves.” Isn’t this so typical of the spirit of the world right down through all of history?  The project is typically grandiose.  The people describe it excitedly to each other as if it is the ultimate achievement. This is going to be it! Mankind seeks to glorify itself, to go its own way without listening to what God wants.

There is pride and ambition here. But there is also fear. “Let’s build ourselves a city so that we will not be scattered over the face of the whole earth. ”  The people were afraid of being scattered, they sought safety in concentrated strength. They no longer believed the promises God gave in the covenant with Noah. God had promised to preserve the human race on the earth.  In faith, they should have dared to spread out across the whole earth and subdue it.  That was their calling in the covenant.

They were afraid of dispersal because they no longer believed. They were no longer bound to each other and to God by faith, they no longer had true unity in God.  So they sought outward unity to give them human power.

Babylon is still being built, isn’t it? Think of modern culture in the world today. Isn’t it true that everywhere we see pride, ambition and fear as the motivating forces behind  human  society?  Pride expressed in going our own way, with no concern for God’s will. Ambition expressed in grandiose schemes to solve every problem and make the world a better place, all without even thinking of God’s way. And underneath, a basic fear that unless we stick together, unless we strive  for  unity  and  external consensus, we are doomed as a race. It’s the modern world, just as much as it was Babylon.

It’s like the wall of a house that is cracking when the foundations are sinking.  You can stick wall-paper over the cracks, but eventually they reappear. Human beings seek power and security in outward  unity, political  consensus,  a kind of superficial peace that spreads paper­ thin over the violence and hatred boiling underneath.  But it doesn’t work, does it? Deep down, people are not changed. Always the cracks will reappear.  Something else is needed.

God will not allow rebellious actions, fuelled by pride, ambition and fear, to succeed. The Lord acted decisively against the Babylon­ builders of Shinar.  “But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building. The Lord said, ‘If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan will be impossible for them.  Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other. ‘ So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. ” (Genesis 11:5-8)

The Lord comes down to see the city and the tower.  So this is the tower that is supposed to reach up to heaven! It’s almost as if the writer is saying that the tower falls so far short of heaven that God can hardly see it! He comes down to look at it. Mankind’s highest achievement is pathetic in God’s eyes! The tower of Babel stands as a monument to how impotent we are before God. The city ends up half-finished, a laughable achievement.

And yet, God takes it very seriously. Not because the tower is threatening to displace him from heaven, not because he is personally afraid of mankind’s achievement. But because mankind’s actions in Babylon go against God’s ultimate plan to preserve and redeem his people through Christ.  Here is human strength and power growing out of all proportion.  If  this continues, unbelief will soon be total.  The whole human world is united in looking to Babylon for strength and security, but that is the wrong place to look.

Do you see that God’s scattering of the people throughout the earth is an act of grace?  There is no salvation in superficial artificial consensus and unity.  Which is better, a single human race unitedly waving its gigantic fist in God’s face, or division and separation with the hope that some would turn to God? If anyone at all is going to continue to trust in God, the false unity of the culture of Babylon must be shattered.  And that is exactly what God does by confusing their language.

God gives us the meaning of what he did in verse 9.  “That is why it is called Babel – because there  the  Lord  confused  the language of the whole world. ” The people had called their city Babylon – the “gate of God”, the gateway to God. But God changes one letter in the language and calls it Babel, the “place of confusion”. God mocks the builders. You called it Babylon, I call it Babel! God will never allow pride, rebellion and a trust in human expertise to succeed (Isaiah 14:13- 15 & Revelation 18:2-5). Going it alone in defiance of God will ultimately  lead to failure and judgment.

But the hopelessness of Babel is not the last word. A new chapter in the story comes on the Day of Pentecost.  Listen to how Luke introduces the witnesses to the outpouring of the Spirit.  “Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing  Jews from every nation under heaven.” (Acts 2:5) Every nation under heaven? What does Luke mean?  Were there Australian Aboriginals in Jerusalem at the time? No!

Luke  lists  the  nations represented in Acts 2:9-11. If you consider where these places are on a map and trace them back to Genesis, you see that Luke includes in his list descendants of Shem, Ham and Japheth. Luke is giving us his ‘Table of Nations’ parallel to the one in Genesis 10. On that Day of Pentecost the whole world was there in the representatives of the various nations!

What did these people all hear on that Day of Pentecost?  They heard the gospel being proclaimed in their own tongues. One gospel in many tongues. At Babel, human languages were confused and the nations were scattered. On the Day of Pentecost, the language barrier was supernaturally overcome as a sign that the nations are now being drawn back together. How are they drawn back together? By the gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, who has saved people from “every nation and tribe and people and language” (Revelation 7:9). At Babel, earth tried proudly to ascend to heaven, the result was confusion and scattering. On the Day of Pentecost, the blessings of heaven descended to earth, the result now is that the message of salvation is open and available to all nations.

There is a final stage to look forward to.  Zephaniah 3:9 points us to the grand conclusion. He is speaking about the Day of the Lord. “Then I will change the speech of the peoples to a pure speech (or “to one speech”), that all of them may call on the name of the Lord and  serve  him  shoulder  to shoulder. ” On that day unity will finally be restored, and all of God’s people will praise him in one tongue. The international church born at Pentecost will then be complete. The point is this – only in Jesus Christ is everlasting peace and unity possible amongst human beings.

John de Hoog Revd. de Hoog is Pastor of the Reformed Church of Hawkesbury (N.S.W.)

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from ages past.

And if you haven’t already done so, we invite you to subscribe to Trowel & Sword Revisited, (tsrevisited.com) to receive future links in your mailbox.

Prayer And Lack Of Concentration

Prof. K. Runia. Trowel and Sword, December 1962

Preamble: We had decided some weeks ago that this week should be an article on Jesus ascension as this week, Thursday 9, is recognised as ascension day, a day that often slips by without due recognition; often being overshadowed by Pentecost on the 19th. We were somewhat surprised that we were unable to find a single article relating to Jesus ascension into heaven. Thursday evening and no article for the following Monday. As it happened, my attention was drawn to an article written by Prof. Runia of the RTC 62 years ago. Reading the article I recognised some of my own shortcomings when it comes to prayer. But as always Prof. Runia not only points to problems but also offers practical solutions to those problems. This is an article from which we can all benefit in improving our prayer life, and therefore also our relationship with our creator and redeemer.

Prayer And Lack of Concentration

Prayer is the HEART BEAT of the Christian life. If there is something wrong with our prayer life our whole Christian life suffers. If the heart of your body does not work properly, your whole body is suffering.

Of course, you and I know this.

But – what are we doing about it?

How is your prayer life? Is it vigorous or is it languishing? And if the latter is true, did you ever try to find out, what might be the cause of the trouble? I am sure, if you have heart trouble, you would not wait a minute, but see a doctor about it in order to find the cause and, if possible, to get some effective treatment?

Why is it that so often we do not care to take any trouble to find out what is the cause of our weak prayer life?

Of course, there can be many different causes. Just as in the case of heart trouble. The disease appears in many different forms due to different causes. But in ALL cases the result is the same: you have heart trouble.

In this short article we will mention one particular difficulty, which troubles many Christians in their prayer life. It is the LACK OF PROPER CONCENTRATION in our prayers. I think we all know it by experience. We begin our prayer in the right way, we feel that we have real contact with our heavenly Father and then, all of a sudden, we discover that our thoughts have completely wandered off. We are not praying any more, but thinking of entirely different things. Perhaps of our work of tomorrow, or the need of a new dress, or the talk we had with Mr. X this afternoon.

Can we do something about this?

I believe there are several rather simple means that can help us in this difficulty.

The first and easiest and most effective is: TO PRAY ALOUD! When you pray, put your thoughts into words and say them aloud. Speak to the Lord, as you would speak to your friend with you in the room. If you do this, you will soon notice that your thoughts have no opportunity to wander off. No more than this happens, when you speak to your visiting friend.

In the second place: ‘ORGANISE’ your prayer. I know this sounds awful, but it is really not as awful as it sounds. I simply mean that you should think about the contents of your prayer before you start. Why not take a slip of paper and write the topics down. Put down all the things you want to thank the Lord for, Put down all the things you want to ask Him and bring before Him. And put down the names of’ those you want to remember in your intercession. Perhaps a small notebook is even better than a slip of paper.

And then follow this list and stick to it. It will certainly help you to concentrate on your prayer and avoid wandering thoughts.

In addition, it will help you to realise how many things and persons you have to pray for. I believe that too often our private, personal prayers are extremely ‘poor! We often simply repeat some traditional phrases, and that is it. On this point we all have our own ‘traditions’, and just as all traditions they easily become lifeless and purely formal.

Thirdly, before you start your prayer, SET YOUR MIND ON GOD. Make yourself aware of the fact that you are going to speak to HIM, who is the Living God, the God of Heaven and Earth, your Father in Jesus Christ. Bring yourself in His presence by consciously opening your heart for Him. And you will discover how REAL He is and how REAL your fellowship with Him is.

K. RUNIA

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from ages past.

Sure? Are You Sure You Are a Christian?

Steve Voorwinde, Trowel and Sword. August 1994.

Preamble: “I believe; help my unbelief!” These were the words of a father who had brought his son to Jesus to be healed of an evil spirit (Mark 9:14-27). Many, perhaps most Christians can identify with this father when faced with the question, “Are you sure you are a Christian.” This is also the question Steve Voorwinde addresses in some detail in this article. Steve declares that: “…every believer should be able to give a clear and positive answer.” And yet, most of us struggle with our faith from time to time, just as Peter did in Matthew 14:31. The conundrum may well be that we know in our heads that we are Christians but do we believe it with all our heart?

Are You Sure You Are A Christian?

Do you know you are one of God’s elect? Are you confident that you will go to heaven when you die?

These are rather searching, personal questions. They are also questions to which every believer should be able to give a clear and positive answer. Yet the fact of the matter is that these questions are often answered vaguely and evasively:

‘I think so” “I hope so.’ ‘I don’t know. But then, who does?’

It is not just the average Christian who has trouble with these questions. Theologians have often come up with conflicting answers. Church leaders have differed from one another, with the result that believers have been encouraged to look for answers in rather different directions. Some put their confidence in the strength of their conversion experience. Others emphasise good works, the fruit of the Spirit, or the active use of spiritual gifts. Still others are told to distrust their experience altogether and rely only on the direct promises of Scripture.

So where does the truth of the matter lie?

As is so often the case with issues of this kind, we would be wise to learn the lessons of history. How did earlier generations of Christians handle these questions? Can we benefit from their insights, and learn from their mistakes?

The doctrine of assurance was not an item that was high on the agenda of the ancient church. Although Augustine did touch on it, it remained largely a neglected area of theological discussion. The sad result was that during the Middle Ages it was generally believed that assurance of faith was impossible. A clear representative of the medieval viewpoint was Pope Gregory the Great. In the year 604 he wrote: “The greater our sins the more we must do to make up for them. Whether we have done enough to atone for them we cannot know till after death…  Assurance of salvation and the feeling of safety engendered by it are dangerous for anybody and would not be desirable even if possible.”

Over the years this became the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. By the time of the Reformation the church was therefore completely withholding the blessing of assurance from simple believers, reserving it only for ‘saints’ who had a surplus of merit.

The Reformers reacted strongly against the Roman denial of assurance. Both Luther and Calvin held that every believer has assurance of his salvation. In his ninety-five theses of 1517 Luther wrote: “The Gospel testifies that God is gracious, and that is objectively true; but it is the believer’s privilege to know subjectively that God is gracious to him in Christ Jesus.

Calvin agreed with Luther that assurance is an integral part of saving faith. In his Institutes he argued strongly that Christ is our righteousness by faith. From this he draws conclusions highly critical of the Roman Catholic position: “For if righteousness is supported by works, in God’s sight it must entirely collapse: and it is confined solely to God’s mercy, solely to communion with Christ, and therefore solely to faith.”

From this it follows, argued Calvin, that believers have assurance because their righteousness lies in Christ and not in themselves. Such righteousness is theirs only by faith.

The early Reformers thus emphatically maintained that faith involves certainty. No faith can be a true faith without assurance. Assurance belongs to the essence of faith.

Although both Luther and Calvin were seeking to base their doctrine of assurance firmly on Scripture, they were also reacting strongly against denials of assurance that had been entrenched for centuries. It would perhaps even be fair to say that they were over-reacting. As Reformed theology developed, these early formulations would be both modified and enriched. An early modification of Calvin’s view is found in the Heidelberg Catechism (1563). In Lord’s Day 32 it teaches that ‘we do good so that we may be assured of our faith by its fruits.’

This point is developed more fully in the Canons of Dort (1618-19): “The elect in due time, though in various degrees and in different measures, attain the assurance of this their eternal and unchangeable election, not by inquisitively prying into the secret and deep things of God, but by observing in themselves with a spiritual joy and holy pleasure the infallible fruits of election…’ (1:12).

With their emphasis on the fruits of faith and election, the Catechism and Canons made a significant advance on Calvin’s view. Further developments were yet to take place. In Britain the Puritans thought long and hard about their assurance of salvation and spoke of it in the loftiest terms. For them it was ‘the pearl of great price’ and ‘heaven on earth’. The finest flower of their assurance theology is found in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1648) which devotes an entire chapter to the subject. Chapter 18, entitled ‘Of the Assurance of Grace and Salvation’. is the fullest confessional statement we have of the Reformed doctrine of assurance. While the statement is too lengthy to be quoted in full in an article like this, its four paragraphs do deserve at least a brief summary:

(a) Although hypocrites may deceive themselves with a false assurance of faith, sincere believers may ‘be certainly assured that they are in the state of grace’.

(b) This certainty is based on the divine truth of the promises of salvation, the inward evidence of those graces to which these promises are made, and the Spirit witnessing with our spirits that we are children of God.

(c) This assurance does not belong to the essence of faith. At times ‘a true believer may wait long, and conflict with many difficulties before he be partaker of it’. Yet by the right use of ordinary means, and without extraordinary revelation, he may attain to it. By living a life of love and thankfulness to God, and by being faithful in the duties of obedience, it is every believer’s responsibility to make his calling and election sure.

(d) There may be times when true believers have their assurance shaken in various ways. Neglect, sin and strong temptation are cited as possible causes, and so is ‘God’s withdrawing the light of His countenance, and suffering even such as fear Him to walk in darkness and have no light.” Yet even this is no reason to despair. If they continue in their life of faith and their love for Christ and the brethren their assurance may, by the operation of the Spirit, in due time be revived.

The strength of these confessional statements lies in the intimate relationship that they establish between assurance and sanctification. This is precisely the perspective of Scripture. When in Romans 8:16 Paul speaks of the Spirit testifying with our spirit that we are God’s children, he is not speaking about some special revelation. The context is all about sanctification.

The same is true when Peter exhorts his readers to ‘be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure’ (II Peter 1:10). The context makes it quite clear how this is to be done. To their faith believers are to add goodness, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly kindness and love (vs.5-7). These are the very fruits of faith which the Catechism has in mind in Lord’s Day 32. Peter is not here giving the counsel of perfection. To have assurance it is enough for believers to ‘possess these qualities in increasing measure’ (vs.8).

The Bible’s clearest teaching on assurance comes almost at the very end. in 1 John. In fact, this entire Epistle is devoted to the subject.

In 5:13 the apostle says: ‘I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

In the course of his letter there are three basic tests to which he returns again and again:

The moral test – Do you strive to keep the commandments?

The social test – Do you love your fellow-believers?

The doctrinal test – Do you believe that Jesus is the Christ come in the flesh?

Clearly the Christian is not to be afraid to have a good hard look at his life. His behaviour, his experience, his beliefs are all to come under the close scrutiny of self-examination. As the apostle Paul said, ‘Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves’ (2 Cor.13:5).

As I write this article my students have just come through an intense week of exams. To get good results they toiled, they agonised, they worked long hours. To pass what might be called the Bible’s ‘tests of life’ some believers may need to toil and agonise as well. The results will certainly be worth it.

To our ears last century’s prince of preachers, Charles Spurgeon, may sound little quaint and old-fashioned. Nevertheless he still makes his point very well: “Get then, Christian brethren and friends, get assurance; be not content with hope, get confidence; rest not in faith, labour after the full assurance of faith; and never be content, my hearer, till thou canst say thou knowest thine election, thou art sure of thy redemption, and art sure of thy preservation unto that Day.”

Steve Voorwinde

(Prof Steve Voorwinde is Lecturer in New Testament at the Reformed Theological College, Geelong.)

How Are Things With Your Sunday School?

Rev. K. Warren, Trowel & Sword, September 1968

Preamble: In this article Rev. Warren took some time to outline what other churches were doing with their Sunday Schools, with a particular focus on what was then the Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregational churches before they amalgamated to form the Uniting Church. One can confidently say that he was less than impressed with their theology and teaching. But then he turned his attention to Sunday Schools in the Reformed Churches and found that they were not exactly gold standard either, giving a number of examples where there was room for improvement. Fifty plus years later one could rightly ask, has the situation improved or, in Keith’s words, “Is Sunday School teaching (still) not the neglected step-child in the Reformed family?”

How Are Things With Your Sunday School?

Some brothers in the Presbyterian church continue to battle against liberalism. It is good to see that at least some show the spirit of Luther: we can do no other than fight! They need our prayers.

But one wonders about the effect of these far-and-few-in-between local offensives against the firmly established liberal bastion. Is it not like fighting one of those ancient dragons: chop off one head, and seven others take its place! May more and more people become convinced that chopping off heads gets you nowhere with this type of dragon: it needs to be stabbed in the heart!

But at least some of the faithful are trying to have another chop. The ‘head’ they’re aiming for this time: SUNDAY SCHOOL MATERIAL.

The Westminster Society within the Presbyterian Church in N.S.W. prepared and published a booklet some months ago with the title : “Thy children … taught of the Lord?” The booklet gives an analysis of the Sunday School material produced by the Joint Board of Christian Education of Australia and New Zealand. This material is widely used in Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregational Sunday Schools. (Editor’s Note: The Methodist, Congregational and many Presbyterian churches amalgamated to form what is now the Uniting church.)

No doubt a number of Reformed people – notably the ministers – will have received this publication for information, and it certainly is good to see plenty of clear language, pointing out the glaring deviations from the orthodox standpoint regarding Bible and Confession.

Here are some samples :

“There is general agreement that the temptation stories (Matthew 4) are record­ed in symbolic language.”

“The book of Jonah is not meant to be read as actual history; it is a prophetic sermon in the form of a parable.”

“It is possible that, as the miracles were told and retold by the early Christians, some details may have been changed and added.”

“The Bible is one(!) of the central ways along which the living Word of God still addresses us today.”

And concerning questions such as:

Why did Jesus allow Himself to be killed? 

Who is Jesus Christ?

Why is Jesus called Saviour? 

How can I know Jesus Christ?

The Joint Board of Christian Education tells us that “these are big questions to which we have no final or complete answer.”

The Joint Board of Christian Education reacted to this booklet!

In a public statement to the churches they answer some of the criticisms and accusations. We learn that the published Sunday School materials are used by half a million people each week in more than 5000 local churches, and that fact alone would make it strange if the material satisfied everybody.

Says the Joint Board: “Christian education is a ministry of the church designed to share the Christian faith with persons of all ages.  The theological position of Christian education materials must be the theological position of the church. The Joint Board has, therefore, always sought to base its lesson materials on the mainstream of the church’s theology.

Our churches permit theological teachers, ministers, and members some freedom in theological viewpoint, says the Board. In dealing with such differences the Board works on the principle that where one point of view must be adopted it will be in the mainstream of the church’s scholarly thinking…. 

Now that’s clear enough isn’t it?

THE MAINSTREAM OF THE CHURCH’S SCHOLARLY THINKING.

That is the rule, the standard, the confession:

Really, this settles the issue!

If the mainstream of scholarly thinking is the basis for past, present and future Sunday School material, concerned orthodox Presbyterians MUST face the inescapable fact that the now in progress initiating Curriculum 1970 will NOT be more true to Scripture and to the Lord Jesus Christ.

For when the ‘foundations’ are becoming more shaky all the time, what will the ‘building’ be?

Added to this is the fact that compulsion is exercised by some State assemblies to force the use of this Sunday School material by all local churches. That is also the case here in Perth. Evangelical Presbyterians are forced to put up with this liberal material and have it taught to their children.

Fortunately there has been some reaction in Perth to the statement of the Joint board. Says the writer: “Surely it is a very dangerous procedure to base lesson materials ‘on the mainstream of the church’s theology’! What if Luther, Calvin or Knox had been content with the mainstream of the church’s theology? There would have been no Reformation.

To sail along on the “mainstream of the church’s scholarly thinking” might seem a safe and pleasant cruise, but there are some pretty big navigational hazards.

The writer continues: “The position in the churches today is that the Church COMPELS deviation from the Confession. One may be as liberal as one pleases, even to the point of denying the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ; yet large numbers of people who hold to the Confession’s exposition of the Faith, and who adhere to the Confession’s view of Scripture, are DENIED the liberty by some State Assemblies (the West Australian being one of them), to teach the children of the church from materials much more faithful to Scripture, and to the church’s own Subordinate Standard, than those of the Joint Board which are imposed by the church. We maintain in our own denomination’s Christian Education programme a state of affairs in which the liberal has liberty to be liberal, but the conservative has no liberty to be conservative.”

And in closing, the writer of this comment on the statement by the Joint Board of Christian Education, says:

“It is a laughable but grim comment on our church life that the processes of church discipline grind against the home missionary or Sunday School teacher who dares to use teaching literature that is truer to our Confession of Faith, until he is forced either to leave his church or make some kind of miserable compromise; whilst the theological teacher who questions everything and destroys the faith of many is left untouched.”

May the Lord bless these courageous efforts, as this comment goes to Presbytery. Would they result in REFORMATION? Or COMPROMISE? Or SEPARATION?

But what about OUR OWN Sunday Schools? How are things there?

We cannot boast of a Joint Board of Education, and of a curriculum worked out by experts. And the topic ‘Sunday Schools’ has quite probably never been discussed on the floor of Synod. I don’t think that ecclesiastical oversight goes much further than an elder or deacon paying a yearly visit to a class of noisy covenant-youngster and/or non Reformed children.

The teachers are as a rule, keen and hard-working, but without much training. And a variety of material is used (more or less suitable to Reformed teaching), some churches producing their own.

My question is : Is Sunday School teaching not the neglected step-child in the Reformed family? No, don’t get me wrong. Not that there are not enough Sunday school classes and teachers. We thank the Lord for all the dedication and devotion with which many people have been doing this work for years!

But does this work have the attention of our churches? I don’t think so. Not sufficient anyway.

Take only the matter of TRAINING for instance. Do our Sunday School teachers receive adequate training? Many other church workers do. The ministers are thoroughly prepared for their work. The elders and deacons have their literature, conferences, and even a special magazine. The choir members study every week, and the F.C.Y.A. has a training course for senior youth club leaders. Geelong has made a Teachers’ Training Course available, and there’s plenty of opportunity for those who are willing to become better acquainted with e.g. Reformed doctrine and ethics. But what about the Sunday School teachers? Where do they get the training?

Possibly one or two local congregations have a training effort, but that’s not sufficient. The work is important enough to warrant more attention on a local, a state, or even a nation-wide level. Do our teachers have a grasp of the basic teaching concepts? What about the psychological make-up of the various age-groups? And class-discipline? And teacher-child relationship? And are all our teachers born-again Christians, making Jesus REAL in their teaching? And does the session take a REAL interest in this Kingdom work?

Then there’s the MATERIAL used. Is it good? Could it be better? What do others use? Is it not time that Synod requests an extensive report on these matters, and consequently give advice and guidance to the local churches?

These are just some of the questions I’m asking myself. Care to give YOUR answer?

K. WARREN.

Australia, A Vast Mission Field

G. van Groningen, Trowel and Sword. November 1962

Preamble: The following article, written over 60 years ago, paints a picture of Australia as a country urgently in need of missionary endeavours to bring the gospel to its increasingly secular populace. How have we fared since that time? Sadly it would appear, not too well. Have we dropped the ball? It would appear that our missionary efforts are mainly directed at overseas countries while at a synodical level at least, home missions has taken a back seat, with evangelism efforts, where they exist at all, being left to local congregations with limited resources and personnel. One would not need to go far to find fertile ground for evangelism in our own backyard.

Australia, A Vast Mission Field

How does an Australian born and raised minister evaluate his home country? Various ministers would do that in differing ways undoubtedly. The Rev. Alan Walker, a recognised leader in and spokesman for the Methodist Church in Australia wrote an article in an American Theological magazine. (The Christian Century, Sept. 5, 1962). The title is: AUSTRALIA: INSULAR AND HEDONISTIC. Here follow some quotations from the Rev. Alan Walker, and a few comments by the undersigned.

‘Australia’s is a unique society. History knows no other case of one people, speaking one language, under one government, inhabiting a single continental land mass. Australia has experienced no serious internal conflict, nor has war ever ground its way over the countryside. In faith and philosophy it has always been nominally at least Christian.

Having made that statement the author reviews the early political and church history of Australia, Then he refers to a recent poll:

“Gallup polls show that there are many ‘census’ Christians in Australia, that is, people who just remember the church they stay away from. Only 35 per cent of the people questioned in a recent survey stated that they had attended church in the previous week. The facts are that about half our people rarely or never attend church and that on any given Sunday about one person in three attends. Moreover, there are 23,684 people who definitely state that they have “no religion”, and another 855,819 who refuse to state whether or not they have any religious affiliation. These two groups can be regarded as the ‘hard core’ of irreligion in Australia.

Mr. Walker continues then and speaks of the forces of change since World War II. The first force mentioned: migration, which is largely in favour of the Roman Catholics. He adds “if the present trends continue, the Roman Catholic church, now constituting a quarter of the population, will be our largest religious denomination by 1984.”

And now carefully read the next quotation: “But of equal significance is the fact that the immigrants are adding to the non-churchgoing rather than the churchgoing section of the people. “Dead religion” is unfortunately common in Great Britain and Europe, whence many of our migrants come. In other words, the continued influx of new settlers is strengthening irreligion and making the churches’ work harder.”

Is Mr. Walker also referring to many of us – and rightly?

The second force of change is the accelerating industrialisation of the land. Industry is making big and fast moves forward. The third force of change is that Australia is being forced to recognise it belongs to Asia and not to Europe!

The next part of the article speaks of the battle lines that have formed in the recent years. In other words, what and where is it that the Christian has to fight? The first is an intellectual battle line. Agnosticism and Atheism taught by many scientists must be met head on. A second battle line is between spiritual values and materialism – read this quote carefully: “In the greed for money and the harshness of the capitalistic struggle; in the preoccupation of the trade unions with economic issues alone; in the vast public interest in betting-pools and lotteries; in the failure of people and governments to realise the need for the growth of social and spiritual institutions along with the physical expansion of the nation.”

Mr. Walker adds that materialism and hedonism combine to turn huge gambling and liquor interests into principalities and powers against which we must constantly struggle, “Hedonism, the doctrine that pleasure is the chief good, has a tremendous hold on our people. An abundance of sunshine, natural facilities for pleasure and the great sporting tradition of the nation combine to put the emphasis on seeking satisfaction through the senses. Australians work hard in order that they may play hard. They seek money not so much for the security it gives or the comfort and prestige it can buy as for the leisure-time enjoyments it makes possible. Indeed sport bids fair to become a national idolatry among us. The great achievements of our champions in tennis, cricket, swimming indeed in almost every field of athletics are the result of the people’s intense preoccupation with physical prowess.”

The last force mentioned against which we must struggle is insularity – “Australia for whites only.”

Mr. Walker ends his article saying that the picture is not entirely dark. Australia as a whole is not anti Christian or against ministers. They are just indifferent. Mr. Walker adds that the greatest need in Australia is a truly indigenous church – a church which supports itself, and develops its own character and does not continue the character of the church “back home”. Then he also adds that we should re-examine our worship services.

Here now follow the last words of Mr. Walker: “Sometimes I think that nothing matters now in Australia except evangelism. With half the nation living beyond the direct witness of the church, Australia is virtually a vast mission field. Only a church which cares for the ‘lost’, which is ever moving out to those beyond its borders, will be adequate to the remaining years of this century. Through a recovery of faith in the reality of conversion, through a rediscovery of the way the Holy Spirit works, the church could win the battle for a Christian Australia.’

Did you notice those words “Australia is virtually a VAST MISSION FIELD.” Mr. Walker is entirely correct! Synod realised that also. That is why it asked the churches to give approximately £8,000 for Home Mission work. With these £8,000 quite a bit of evangelism work can be done. £5,000 is spent for broadcasting. £1,000 is spent on literature which is for distribution. Another part is for the support of (a) Home Missionar-(y)-ies who should be placed in our key cities right now already.

Some churches find it hard to give their share. Some have a hard time raising money for two ministers, others want their own church building or youth hall first. Indeed, we have many necessities facing us. Yet, the great commandment really stares us in the face ‘ye are my witnesses in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, Hobart, Perth, Darwin and in N.S.W., Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, Tasmania, West Australia and the Northern Territory and beyond.”

May God richly bless us living, working and witnessing in our “vast mission field”, IN AUSTRALIA.

G. VAN GRONINGEN

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from ages past.

Leave a comment

The Work Of The F.C.Y.A.

John Piening, Trowel and Sword. Jan./Feb. 1963

Preamble: I am constantly in awe of the early pioneers of the Reformed Church in Australia. They achieved so much in such a short space of time that the only conclusion that one can draw is that God was with them and guiding them in each step of the way. Among the many achievements was the establishment of what was then called the F.C.Y.A – The Federation of Calvinist Youthclubs in Australia. If you are like me you will have many fond memories of your time being part of your local church youth group; as well as attending Christmas camps and Easter camps and many other activities. Today’s post gives us a glimpse at those early days and is a reminder never to neglect the children and youth of today because they will become the church of tomorrow.

The Work of the F.C.Y.A.

Also this year, on the second Sunday of February, we will have our special Youth Sunday. On this day the Youth of the Church and the Youth work are to be remembered in preaching, prayer and offering.

While we may be thankful for this special opportunity to remind one another of the urgency of Youth work in its entirety, we know that in preaching and prayer the Young People are remembered every Lord’s Day. For during the sermon the whole congregation hears the Word. And the prayer in Church is by and for the whole congregation as well. That makes every Sunday a Youth Sunday!

Yet on the second Sunday of February the needs of the Young People receive an added emphasis. An offering is taken for Youth work. The money is evenly divided between the work in the local Church and the F.C.Y.A. In this way the Federation’s treasurer received a total of £136 during 1962. For this generous support the Young People are very thankful.

In this article I would like to tell you something of a few aspects of the work of the F.C.Y.A. as it is carried out by its executive. This may give you an idea how the money you gave is being used. You have a right to know! More important still: where I mention one or two specific problems with which we are confronted, I trust we may count on your prayerful support concerning these concrete points.

The beginning of last year saw the transfer of the executive from Victoria to Tasmania, Such a change-over always involves a temporary set-back in the work. Inexperienced folk have to take over. Nevertheless we have been richly blessed. It has been a year of consolidation. The Federation counts about 30 affiliated clubs, with a total membership of approximately 500. One New Zealand club has joined our ranks, and no doubt other clubs across the Tasman will follow suit.

During the year there was also a noticeable increase in Branch activities in the various States, due to a large extent of the interest shown by the Churches and Classes. The Young People asked for and received the Rev’s. W. VanderKolk and J.H. Derkley as Branch Presidents for N.S.W, and Tasmania respectively.

Encouraging reports have been received from the many camps conducted, The young folk’s behaviour at the camps has show a marked improvement over the years. With the inevitable exceptions, our young people are becoming more and more “Evangelical” in the good sense of the word. The next Convention will be in Victoria, probably during the week around New Year’s Day. A concerted effort will be made to keep the costs down. The fees for the previous Convention were definitely too high. Convention days are for ALL the members, not for rich bachelors only! I would ask the parents to encourage their children to start saving for the Convention now. Or to do it for them!

Every month 900 copies of the “Calvinist Youth Herald” are printed and distributed. During March we plan to launch a vigorous promotion drive, with a view of increasing the number of subscriptions. Financially the Federation is in a reasonably sound position, but (with due modesty!) we feel that in the “Herald” we offer worthwhile reading material for adults also.

We all, Churches and Parents, may be very thankful that at all club-meetings the study of the Word of God is still the main subject. The Church’s young members are grounded and educated in the precious Truths of the Bible at home, in Church and during the Catechism instruction. But it needs no explaining that the Youth Club has its rightful place in the education of the children. The club is something that belongs to the members themselves,. Here they are at home. They gather around the Bible, prepare introductions, and discuss the meaning of the Spirit together, This takes study. We realise the immense importance of this study in the local club. The executive has now published a booklet containing Bible Study Outlines to help the members. We plan to have these issued to all the members once every three months. The publication of this modest little book marks a milestone in the short life of our Federation, How we have longed for years to be able to do this! Now our hopes have materialised. Your donation on Youth Sunday helped to make this possible.

Another matter of great concern has been the position of Junior Clubs, for children between 10 and 15. What are the possibilities in this field? Perhaps something about that urgent question at a later date. Or (let me make the most of this opportunity!) read about it in the Youth Herald! These then are some of the activities of the Federation.

I solicit your prayerful interest and support on behalf of the Young People. It is a joy to be allowed to work for the young members of our young Churches. For all Christian Parents and Leaders have this glorious promise: “Train up a child in the way he should go, and…. he will not depart from it.” (Prov.22:6).

J. PIENING

Addendum: This is most definitely a long shot but could it be that someone has saved a copy of the “Bible Study Outlines” mentioned above. If so we would dearly love to receive a copy and would be ecstatic to receive a photocopied or electronic version. If you can help, send a message through the comments section. Bert.

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from ages past.

Leave a comment

A Life For God

Rev. Pieter Stok. Trowel and Sword, October 1994.

Preamble: In the movie, “Dead Poet’s Society,” Robin Williams, who plays the part of teacher John Keating, tells his class of boys, “We don’t read and write poetry because it’s cute. We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion.” He then goes on to equate poetry with life with the words, “….the powerful play (of life) goes on, and you may contribute a verse. That the powerful play goes on, and you may contribute a verse. What will your verse be?”

In the article below where Pieter reflects about the passing of his dad, he came to understand that there are many ways that one can write a verse in the poetry of life. We are all in the process of writing our own verses, often without realising it; not as mighty preachers or evangelists, but more often as humble Christians going about our daily lives reflecting God’s love to those around us without even realising it.

A Life For God

What link is there between the state of our denomination, a funeral and my dad? A strange question you think. Please allow me to string some of my jumbled thoughts together.

Recently my dad passed away. It is an occurrence that happens to most of us at some stage of our life. But it is also a time for reflection. It is a time when a host of thoughts cram our heads – some related, others not. It is an emotional time. It is a time of sorrow, regrets, memories, hopes and certainties. In my life this painful event came at a time when my mind was filled with other matters.

For a while, like many of us, I have been concerned about the condition of our churches. The obsession is manifested in the number of ‘disturbed’ churches, and the seeming paralysis in the area of mission, evangelism and kingdom service are matters which disturb me greatly. They have been on my mind for quite a while now.

Then my dad died. While living a very active and happy ‘retirement’ God stopped him very early one Wednesday morning and after dad had been hooked on to life support equipment for 30 hours, He took dad to be with Himself.

As we were preparing for the funeral, I thought to myself: ‘It will be a small funeral.’ After all, I have only one brother, there are only seven grandchildren and there are not many other relatives. As well as this, his church is small. I estimated to myself – we will probably have 100 people there if that many. Wasn’t I surprised when well over twice that number attended? Many of these people never normally attend church services. A phrase that I heard repeated by many people over the days and weeks after dad’s death was: ‘He was like a brother to me.’ That phrase struck me. Many people were there because my dad had shown love and commitment to them over many years. He had been their greengrocer and friend; he had played music for them and with them. In his latter years he faithfully did his ‘meals on wheels’ deliveries, and he was involved in a variety of groups.

My dad was relatively uneducated. He had been labourer, factory worker, greengrocer and farmer. By every financial measurement he had been a failure. But he was committed to people –  committed to loving them and caring for them. And this was despite the fact that he could be stubborn, intolerant and hot tempered. My dad was no saint – ask any of his past ministers or elders. But he did know Jesus. And more importantly, Jesus knew him. If you looked carefully, Jesus could be glimpsed in his life and people saw it and were touched by it.

In his death and through his funeral my dad, who had influenced my life greatly, was still teaching me. He reminded me of what was really important. Serving God with the gifts and talents you have and with the personality He has given you is what He calls us to do. We each have a task. Education and wealth has nothing to do with it.

I believe my dad’s life has a message for the church – the Reformed Church. If we are going to be the people God wants us to be, serving Him as He calls us to serve Him, then we need our sleeves rolled up and we need to work in the world. We need to love people ‘out there’ because if the church (you and me) does not show that love, who will show them the love of Christ?

How many close friends do you have who are outside the church of Christ? How many non-churched people will be at our funerals because we have touched their lives in a real way? If we were all as serious about showing Christ to others, as this imperfect man was, what an enormous impact our church could have!

My dad’s life also proves that we do not have to be educated or extremely articulate to be the servant God wants us to be – all that is needed is that humble desire to be His servant. His life proves that we do not have to have done EE3 or Christianity Explained or have a well developed theory of mission. He had none of that.

My dad’s garden was nothing to write home about. It was not his priority. But the day we buried him many of his ‘garden’ farewelled him. This ‘garden’ was the people he tended, cared for and loved.

These were people who needed a friend, who had been hurt, or needed help. But even then, he would be the first to admit that he was only just starting to reflect the one who loved him perfectly – Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ loved (and still loves) Maarten Stok. That love enabled him to touch the lives of others. I ask myself: ‘How many lives have I touched?’ ‘How many lives are we, the church, touching because Christ first loved us?’

Pieter Stok

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from ages past.

Leave a comment

Film Review – The Passion of the Christ

David Groenenboom. Trowel and Sword, March 2004.

Preamble: Many movies have been made based on the Bible, a large number of them about the life (and death), of Jesus. Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” is one that has stirred up much debate, and often criticism in many quarters so we considered it appropriate that we revisit David Groenenboom’s review in Trowel and Sword in the week before Easter. The movie itself pulls no punches and neither does David in his review. Read on….

The Passion of the Christ. Icon Film Distribution (2003). Starring: James Caviezel, Maia Morgebstern and Monica Bellucci. Director: Mel Gibson.

The publicity surrounding Mel Gibson’s film has almost made it one of the most anticipated movies of all time. There are Web sites in the states which for the last few months have recorded the level of interest county by county. The film has also had its challenges: critics thought the sub titles would be a turn off, and that the film may give rise to anti-Semitic feelings.

The Passion avoids the Hollywood sentimentalism some may have expected. I was surprised – pleasantly – that the film doesn’t play on the emotions or sensationalise the message. None of the actors will be known to many, but all fill their roles with realism and maturity. Jim Caviezel’s portrayal of Jesus struck me as sensitive, moving, and above all, God honouring.

The Passion brings us face to face with the sheer ugliness of human sin, and the overwhelming hatred of humanity toward the gracious and loving God who sent His dear Son to rescue them. The violence is raw, undiluted, and generally accurate to history. Gibson has presented us with a passion account which he himself describes as “very real, and as close as possible to what I perceive the truth to be”. I tend to agree with his assessment. Crucifixion is an abhorrent and heinous form of punishment. And this is exactly what Jesus became to absorb the fullness of God’s wrath for His people.

The film also offers some unique perspectives from ‘redemptive historical’ angle. The “Satan figure” is more visible in The Passion than what we read in the Gospels. This helps the viewer realise that temptation for Jesus was an ever present reality. The Passion’s treatment of Gethsemane and the journey to Golgotha certainly have OT dimensions rarely imagined by those in our society. Further, hearing the Aramaic and Hebrew dialogue also brings (a) few educational moments – Jesus’ discussion with Judas in Gethsemane is just one example.

The film presents excellent opportunities for sharing the Gospel with others. The opening slide is straight from Is 53: “He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities… This sets the whole film in context: This is what the Son of God undertook because of human rebellion and rejection of God.

The Passion of the Christ is a deeply moving exposition of the immediate lead up to Jesus’ crucifixion. Every viewer observes the wonderfully non-sensational resurrection. The avenues for witness and impact on our community are boundless. Do commend the film? Absolutely. But more than commend, I thank God for it. believe it will be powerful tool for proclaiming the Gospel.

It would be wise to access some of the excellent small group material that will be released in the next few months. Anyone who sees the film will need to talk about it with others. This will especially be the case for spiritual seekers and others who have no faith relationship with Jesus Christ. It is perhaps the greatest evangelistic opportunity we have seen for centuries. Churches can make group bookings by registering at http://www.iconmovies.com.au / passion/bookings/bookingsform.pdf. I have heard of churches who have already booked entire cinemas for group bookings. In some cases this allows review and question time after the screening.

In closing, let me answer a few questions: 

1. The film is not anti Semitic. The film quite accurately portrays the human rejection of Christ, implicating Jews, Romans, and the whole crowd. One could just as easily call The Passion “anti roman empire”. Interestingly, Jesus is called “Jew” with the same contempt shown to Jews in Schindler’s List and The Pianist.

2. Parents should carefully consider whether they allow young children to view the movie. No one should be protected from the realities of the Gospel, but the violence is graphic. It is expected the film will be given an MA rating.

3. The sub titles are no barrier.

4. Every mature person should see this film. You won’t be the same afterwards.

Rider

T&S Movie Review Policy: 1. Discernment is exercised in what is previewed – reviewers do not view just anything. 2. We do not set out to provide a censorship service. 3, Realising that most movies will have been seen by many before the review is printed, we aim to get readers to at least reflect on what they have seen from Reformed viewpoint. We seek to advise those intending to view a movie (even on video) as to what they can expect to see, raising the various issues encountered in the movie.

A Contemporary Defence of the Resurrection

Dirk J. van Garderen, Trowel & Sword. April 1995.

Preamble: Back in April 1995 (Easter issue) T&S carried an article from the pen of Rev. Dirk van Garderen (N.Z.) showing that, while the idea of a resurrection might be regarded as unscientific, it is not more difficult to believe the Easter story today than it was in the past.

A Contemporary Defence of the Resurrection

CAN A MODERN, scientifically trained and educated person believe in something as crude and primitive as a dead body coming back to life?  I am not thinking of the many ‘near death experiences’ recounted in weekly magazines and pseudo-scientific journals of parapsychologists.  ‘Near death experiences’ are exactly that – near death.  Think of someone who is completely dead; zero brain-wave activity, no heartbeat or blood circulation – stone cold dead.  Can a dead body be revived?

Even the most sophisticated equipment devised to date comes nowhere near to being able to do this.  I doubt if it will ever be possible.  But now the crunch!  If on good rational and scientific grounds the dead cannot be revived in this day and age, why on earth believe that it happened to Jesus of Nazareth almost 2,000 years ago?  If we know it cannot happen now, there is no reason to believe that it happened then.

When preaching the Gospel to this generation, raised and educated within the context of modern technology and beliefs, you expect them to be prepared to believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus.  Is that reasonable?

I recently read Alister McGrath’s book ‘Bridge-Building – Communicating Christianity Effectively’ (IVP 1992).  McGrath is a young English theologian who is especially interested in helping and equipping Christians in defending what and why they believe.  He is tremendously helpful and his book is highly recommended.  In one section of his book he points out that modern criticism or attacks on the resurrection tend to be in three directions.

The Idea of Resurrection in Jewish Belief

The first attack argues that it was easy and no real big I deal for the first Christians to believe in the resurrection of Jesus.  Belief in resurrections was commonplace at the time.  These folks easily confused a symbolic event with an historical event because they were extremely open and ready to believe in a resurrection.  This argument shows little understanding of Jewish beliefs in the first century.  Jews, and do not forget that the first believers were all Jews and initially preached to and among fellow Jews, had two general beliefs about resurrection.

The Sadducees, as Scripture points out, denied the idea of a resurrection altogether.  Recall for example how, as recorded in Acts 23:6-8, Paul set the Pharisees up against the Sadducees precisely on this issue.  “The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.” (23:8).

Orthodox Jews – the vast majority only believed in a general resurrection at the end of time.  For example, in John 11, which records Jesus raising Lazarus, Jesus says to Martha: “Your brother will rise again.”  Martha replies: “I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” (John 11:23f).

What no one expected or anticipated was one individual being raised from the dead before the end of time.  There was nothing in their belief that prepared them for this.  What happened to Jesus contradicted popular belief.  It was an unheard of, novel position that was unorthodox and radical.  The Jews could not and would not believe it.  That is why they so readily believed the lie which the priests told the soldiers to spread: The body was stolen by his disciples. (Matt 28: 11-15).

But could wishful thinking become a parent of what is believed?  Is it possible that the disciples loved Jesus and his teaching so much that out of love and a desire to keep his memory alive they began to believe their own dreams?  Indeed, but dreaming up a resurrection to convince fellow Jews was hardly the way to proceed.  The idea was extremely unorthodox and radical.  Furthermore, there were countless other Jewish faith heroes and martyrs whose teaching lived on without anyone believing that they were raised.  Think of the Old Testament prophets!

Parallels With Pagan and Gnostic Myths

Another line of criticism has arisen through the study of pagan and more especially, Gnostic religious beliefs in the ancient world.  According to many critical scholars there were lots of pagan myths of dying and rising gods in those days.  It is claimed that the New Testament writers were simply reproducing a variation of this myth to suit their own purposes.

It is very difficult to rebut these criticisms by simply pointing to a Bible text.  You have to have a very close look at the myths themselves.  However, what is striking as you begin to read about them is how critics went to great lengths to find what they thought were parallels and similarities between pagan myths and Jesus’ resurrection.  Differences were almost completely ignored.  Further and more reflective studies show that these so-called parallels are much more remote than first claimed.

In the pagan myths, dying and rising is never attributed to an historical or a real person.  It happened to ‘gods’ – vague, surreal personages who lived in the misty, mythical past.  Contrast that with the manner in which the Bible speaks of Jesus’ resurrection!  It happened in Jerusalem, during the rule of Pontius Pilate, about 30 A.D.  The disciples were personal eyewitnesses who saw, touched and talked with the risen Jesus.  When Paul was pressed, he told the Corinthians: “…he [Jesus] appeared to Peter and then to the Twelve.  After that he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living.” (I Cor.15:4-6)

C.S. Lewis was one of the greatest experts on pagan myths and mythology.  McGrath points to Lewis’ findings:

“Perhaps most important, however, was his realisation that the Gnostic redeemer myths – which the New Testament writers allegedly took over and applied to Jesus – were to be dated from later than the New Testament itself.  If anyone borrowed ideas from anyone, it seems it was the Gnostics who took up Christian ideas.”

An Argument from Analogy

A third criticism of Jesus’ resurrection sounds extremely powerful and convincing, especially to modern ears.  It is devastatingly simple.  It states: since dead men do not rise, Jesus could not have risen either.  The argument, expanded a little, assumes that for an event to have happened in the past we need to be persuaded that a parallel, similar kind of event still happens or is possible in the present.  Since we do not witness true resurrections nowadays and are unlikely to, it couldn’t have occurred in those days either.

The trouble with that viewpoint is that it is not logical.  It makes some basic errors in reasoning.

The reason for all the fuss about Jesus’ resurrection is precisely its uniqueness.  It has only ever happened once.  The event is noteworthy precisely because it is unique.  If resurrections were a common occurrence then there would be no reason to get excited and worked up about what Jesus experienced.

The argument ‘dead people no not rise from the dead’ is reminiscent of the person who says, “Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is already made up.”  He has already, dogmatically and without investigation of the facts, decided that resurrections do not happen.

If you present evidence of a resurrection he will say, ‘I reject the evidence because I don’t believe in resurrections in the first place.’  That is like 16th century England when everybody believed that all swans were white.  It was argued, ‘I have never seen or heard a reliable account of the existence of black swans.  Therefore black swans do not exist.’  When someone turned up with an Australian black swan the response was, ‘That cannot be a swan!’

The problem is not the evidence, but the unfounded, dogmatic beliefs which bias that person.  Rather than start with a whole set of presuppositions with your mind already made up before you look at the evidence, return to the Jesus described in the Gospels – return to the Gospels as historical evidence.

Paul, in I Corinthians 15:20, sums up: “But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep.”

Is that conclusion a reasonable one today?  Modern day arguments, which are raised to question Christ’s resurrection, can be shown to be full of holes.  The evidence, even after 2,000 years of scrutiny, ridicule and rejection still confronts us today as a real challenge.  It will never be easy to believe the evidence.

It will, in fact, always demand faith.  But, it is just not true that believing in the resurrection of Jesus is more difficult today than it has been in the past.

Dirk J van Garderen.

(The Rev. D,J. Van Garderen is the pastor of the Reformed Church of Avondale, New Zealand)