Killing Goliath

MAKING GOD'S WORD
Part 3

The story of David and Goliath is a favorite among many Christians, and it's easy to see why. In it we see David, a young shepherd boy, fearlessly take on a warrior renowned for his giant stature, and emerge victorious, bringing glory to his people and his god. As a kid, this story was important to me; it reminded me that if God was with me, I didn't have to be afraid of even the biggest of bullies.

As I began to study the Bible academically, I realized that some of the details I found most inspiring in the story of David and Goliath weren't necessarily well grounded in history. Was David really a mere shepherd boy? Was Goliath really 9.5 feet tall? Was David really the one who killed him? It is this story that I now turn to as my second example of biblical editing, addressing these questions and their corresponding layers of editing along the way.

The Creations of the Cosmos

MAKING GOD'S WORD
Part 2

We don't need to look far for our first instance of biblical editing, which can be found in the very first chapters of the first book of the Bible: Genesis. In Genesis 1 and 2, we see two different accounts of the creation of the world and of humankind. As has been shown previously on this blog (see "Adam and Steve"), these two accounts contradict one another, and are generally thought to have been originally two separate stories that were eventually compiled into a single book (Genesis). This means that Genesis was not written by a single author, but rather is the product of multiple unknown authors, which was put together by an unidentified editor or series of editors.

This article will look at the two contradictory stories of creation found in Genesis 1 and 2. Since Genesis is part of the Torah (the first 5 books of the Bible, sometimes referred to as the Pentateuch), I will start by briefly presenting some of the prominent views in academia on how the Torah came to be composed as we have it today, and will then analyze the two creation myths within Genesis, noting instances of contradictions between the texts as well as significant differences in content.^[1]

MAKING GOD'S WORD

Part 1

Growing up in a Christian home, I believed that the Bible was made up of God's very words, and as such was perfect and sacred in every way. Yet at the same time, I knew the Bible was actually written by humans, not God. Being the inquisitive kid that I was, I often tried to imagine how this transfer of information between God and humanity worked. Did God speak from Heaven with a booming voice, telling the authors what to write down? Or did God speak in the authors' hearts to instruct them on exactly what to say, and the authors, being especially righteous, just had a good ear for hearing God's voice within them (which unfortunately I never had)? Or did the authors merely write these works themselves through their own will, and the Holy Spirit was just working in them to produce inspired scripture without them even knowing it?

In my adult life my religious views changed, but my inquisitive nature never did, and I am still interested in understanding how the Bible came to be written as we have it today. But even setting aside unanswerable questions regarding the inspiration of the Bible, I have realized the simple question "how was the Bible written?" is even more complicated than I could have thought. Not only do we not know who originally wrote most of the Bible, there is also substantial evidence that much of it has been anonymously edited for centuries after its original texts had been written.

What Is Religion?

The term "religion" gets thrown around a lot in books, TV shows, everyday conversations, and blogs (including this one!). But what does the term "religion" actually mean?

This is a surprisingly difficult question to answer. If we ask our friend Merriam-Webster, we find three definitions of religion:

1. the belief in a god or in a group of gods

2. an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods

3. an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

While these three definitions may look similar, they are quite different. Definition 1 defines religion as a mere belief; Definition 2 defines religion as a system of beliefs, practices, AND rules; and Definition 3 defines religion as either an interest, belief, OR activity. So which is it?

The answer, of course, is it can be all three, depending on how a person uses the word. The subjective nature of religion can be seen by the fact that certain traditions are considered a religion by some, and not by others. For this article, we will be looking at one such contested tradition, Theravada Buddhism, to see how it lines up with our three example definitions above.

God With Us

CHRISTMAS SPECIAL
2015

"Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel," which means, “God is with us.” 

(Matthew 1.23)^[1]

Upon hearing this familiar verse, most Christians immediately recognize who Emmanuel really is. If not for hearing it dozens of times around Christmastime, the conceiving virgin bit is a pretty good clue that we are talking about Jesus Christ. While this seems obvious enough to most Christians, if we stop a moment to reflect upon what we just read, we may realize that there is something kind of odd about it. Sure, according to Matthew and Luke, a virgin named Mary becomes pregnant by the Holy Spirit and births a child, but she names her child Jesus, NOT Emmanuel.

Is it really that odd? After all, Jesus is known by many things in the New Testament: Son of God, Son of Man, Lord, etc. Could it be that Emmanuel is just another title Jesus was commonly known as? Probably not. In fact, there is only one mention of Emmanuel in the New Testament, and it is quoted above from Matthew 1.23. No other passage in the New Testament ever calls Jesus "Emmanuel."

To understand why Jesus became equated with Emmanuel, we must explore what the author of Matthew is quoting: Isaiah 7.14. However, when we look at this verse, we see that it reads a little bit differently from Matthew's quote. The part of Isaiah 7.14 that Matthew quotes is italicized below:

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel. 

This raises even more questions. What kind of sign is Isaiah referring to? Why does Isaiah call Emmanuel's mother a "young woman," while Matthew calls her a "virgin"? Why was this verse included in Matthew to begin with?

This article will explore why Emmanuel became commonly associated with Jesus of Nazareth. First we will look at why Matthew 1.23 reads slightly differently than Isaiah 7.14, and then look at the historical context of both verses to get a better understanding of the relationship between Jesus and Emmanuel.

Lovers, Not Lawyers

HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE BIBLE?
Part 7

[[Okay, so let me get this straight. You have concluded the following things:

(Part 2) the creation account in Genesis is really 2 creation stories that contradict one another

(Part 3) the Bible never identifies homosexuality as the sin which caused Sodom and Gomorrah's destruction

(Part 4) Christians are often incredibly inconsistent with the laws in the Torah that they choose to apply to their lives

(Part 5) Jesus said nothing on homosexuality, nor offered a definition of marriage

(Part 6) Paul's views on homosexuality were informed by an outdated understanding of the natural world, and were responding to homosexual practices that were often associated with pedophilia and prostitution

That's all well and good, but where in the Bible does it say that homosexuality is okay?]]

It doesn't. There are no verses in the Bible that explicitly support homosexuality, even in marriage. For those solely interested in the historical contexts of the Bible verses frequently used in the Christian debate over gay marriage, this is where I leave you. I have shown to the best of my ability that the Bible was not written with gay marriage in mind, and as such did not speak for or against it. Do with this information what you will.

However, I find that when I read blogs about controversial topics such as this, I want more than just the cold facts. I want help making sense of them. So for this article, I will do exactly that. This is a controversial topic within Christianity, so I will forgo my usual academic perspective, and instead write from the perspective of my own tradition. I will switch my point of view from the third-person to the first, no longer merely describing what "Christians" do, but will rather comment on what I would like to see "us" do as Christians.

Unnatural Intercourse

HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE BIBLE?
Part 6

There may not be a Jesus card available to play in the debate over gay marriage, but there are a few different Paul cards to choose from. Indeed, there are three common passages attributed to Paul in the New Testament that speak against homosexual intercourse, and all three are frequently quoted as evidence by Christians who believe homosexuality is a sin.

Each of these passages are found in what are known as the Pauline Epistles. An "epistle" is simply a Greek word for "letter," and is generally used nowadays to refer to books in the New Testament that are formatted as letters sent from early Christian leaders to various churches or individuals. "Pauline" is an adjective used to describe epistles that are thought to have been written by Paul. These epistles were written for various reasons, usually addressing problems that a particular church was facing, correcting doctrinal errors, and offering encouragement. There are 13 Pauline Epistles in the New Testament, but only 7 of them are widely accepted by scholars as being authentically written by Paul.^[1]

We find our passages on homosexuality in three different Pauline Epistles: Romans, 1 Corinthians, and 1 Timothy. This article will look at each passage, address why these verses were included in Paul's epistles, and analyze their relevancy in the modern Christian debate over gay marriage.

As a warning to my readers, the following article is more explicit in its descriptions of sexual intercourse than my previous articles. Paul uses specific terms to refer to specific homosexual acts, and such terms need to be addressed if we are to understand Paul's views on homosexuality. For those who are uncomfortable with reading about sex in a frank manner, viewer discretion is advised.