I have a dream

It began at a gas station. I had just filled the gas tank of my car, and I was prepared for a long drive home. I had not been home for a while, and I was looking forward to returning.

The service road was crowded with traffic, so I had to wait a bit for a gap before I could leave. But soon I was on my way, merging onto the Interstate. Almost immediately I passed some construction, and some of the vehicles in front of me pulled over into the site, but I kept on driving.

The next thing I knew, I was on Washington Street in my childhood hometown. Some trees next to the street were in bloom, covered with flowers. I pulled a branch to my face and sniffed, but I smelled no odor.

After that I was home. I knew people were sleeping, so I was moving quietly from room to room. Suddenly, I heard the Beatles singing “Paperback Writer.” I knew that my alarm was going off, and my first thought was worry that the alarm had been playing every morning while I was away.

Then I woke. My alarm was playing “Paperback Writer,” as I had set it to do last night. I had not been away from home, and my alarm had not been disturbing my family during my absence.

Most of the dream makes sense: my returning home after an absence, my departure somewhat delayed by traffic, passing through construction—all that I understand. But I am trying to decipher the odorless flowers close to home.

Any suggestions? J.

Church and state and God’s wrath

“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13:1-5).

Americans sometimes speak as if we invented the separation between church and state. That separation already exists in the Bible. Early Israel—under Moses, Joshua, and the judges, including Samuel—was a theocracy; God was ruler over Israel. But already in his farewell sermon (the book of Deuteronomy), Moses guided by the Holy Spirit anticipated the time when Israel would be ruled by a king. The ultimate king is, of course, Jesus, but the kings of Israel and Judah were pictures of Jesus, preparing the way for his coming as surely as priests and prophets prepared the way of the Lord.

Only Jesus is permitted to hold the two positions of priest and king. Saul and Uzziah were both punished by God when they attempted to do tasks assigned to the priests. Likewise in the New Testament, God’s work is done by church leaders and by human governments, but the work they do is carefully distinguished.

Church leaders proclaim the commands of God largely to diagnose sin, to call for repentance, and to offer forgiveness to sinners. Preachers must speak of the wrath of God, but they do not exercise the wrath of God. Human governments pass laws that regulate behavior to protect citizens from sinners. Governments enforce penalties for murder, robbery, false witness, and other sins, declaring them crimes against the state and punishing people convicted of such crimes.

When the church tries to punish sinners, it steps on the government’s feet. Aside from excluding obviously unrepentant sinners from the blessings of the church, Christian leaders can do little with churchly power to overturn evil in the world. We call upon Christians to do good works, to imitate Christ, but we do not convey God’s wrath when Christians fail. Instead, we continue to call for repentance and continue to promise forgiveness through the life and death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

When the government tries to forgive sinners, it steps on the church’s feet. Governors and Presidents have power to pardon criminals, but a governmental pardon is not forgiveness. Forgiveness comes from the cross of Christ through the work of the Church.

Christians have a dual citizenship. We are loyal to human government and take part in its actions. We also belong to the kingdom of God, and our first loyalty is to Jesus. When the government opposes God’s ways, we follow God’s ways, as Daniel did in Babylon and as Peter and John did in Jerusalem. But—even though Christians are called to reach out to their neighbors with the good news of forgiveness through Christ—it is right and not sinful for Christians to report a crime to the police. It is right and not sinful for Christians to testify truthfully in court about crimes they have witnessed. Christians may serve as police officers, jurors, judges, and even executioners. When these actions bring punishment to sinners, the wrath of God is being exercised. The final wrath of God will be expressed on the Day of the Lord, but his wrath works through human government today to limit sin and evil in the world and to protect all people from sin and evil.

Faith in Christ spares sinners from the wrath of God on the Day of the Lord. Faith in Christ does not spare sinners from the wrath of God exercised by human government. Prison officials do not witness to prisoners, but they permit Christians to enter the prisons and witness to prisoners. If a criminal comes to faith in prison, that criminal is a forgiven sinner spared God’s wrath on the Last Day, but that prisoner must continue to serve his or her sentence in the world under the authority of human government.

Human governments consist of sinful humans. They sometimes make mistakes and do what is wrong. In a democracy, Christians are free to vote for the leaders they expect to make the fewest mistakes. They are free to send messages to their leaders, advising them to do what those Christians, informed by the Bible, believe to be right for the government to do. Christians even have freedom to gather together and protest wrong decisions made by the government. Christians remain subject to human government, which represents the authority of God. We owe our leaders honor and respect, even when we feel that they are mistaken—even sinful—in what they say and do.

Church leaders describe the wrath of God to warn sinners of the coming Day of the Lord, the punishment that will be dealt to sinners. But we do so to call for repentance. Rather than constantly preaching fire and brimstone and the wrath of God, Christians should be known for pointing to the cross, showing how Christ consumed the wrath of God to spare us the punishment we deserve. Christian leaders should be known for proclaiming the love and mercy and grace of God, not only his wrath.

Church leaders often call believers to discipleship or to holiness. We remind people why we were made—to love God and to love our neighbors—and we encourage one another to do good works. But the commandments of God do not cause sinners to do good works. The commandments do not create discipleship or holiness. The commandments describe what Christians should do, but the forgiveness of God gives Christians power to do good things. The commandments describe the perfection of Jesus, but the forgiveness of God transforms us into the image of Christ, changing sinners into saints. Knowledge of the wrath of God does not, by itself, redeem sinners; knowledge of the wrath of God moves sinners to repentance, opening their minds and hearts to hear and believe the good news of redemption through Christ.

In this way the Bible distinguishes between the functions of God’s wrath under human governments and in the Christian Church. J.

Happy St. Valentine’s Day

I stopped by Walmart on my way home from teaching last night. I had to chuckle as I walked past the Valentine cards; three white-haired men were inspecting the cards, all standing in front of the “Wife” selections. There’s nothing like last-minute shopping for romantic gestures.

Every Leap Year I read the works of Soren Kierkegaard as part of my daily devotions. I just happen to be halfway through Stages on Life’s Way, which is very appropriate for St. Valentine’s Day. For those unfamiliar with Kierkegaard, he was a theologian in the Danish church (therefore Lutheran), although he never served a congregation. Instead, he published (at his own expense) essays on philosophy, theology, and life in general. Many of his books were written under pseudonyms, which gave Kierkegaard the freedom to pursue lines of thought that were not his own. That’s why it’s risky to quote Kierkegaard—you can never be sure that he meant what he wrote, that he wasn’t setting up a straw man through his pseudonym.

Stages on Life’s Way presents itself as a series of works found in a bookbinder’s shop and published by the bookbinder because he had no idea what had happened to the author. The first work is based on Plato’s Symposium: five men gather for a banquet, and each delivers a speech about love. The second work is a scholarly discussion of love and marriage, attributed to a certain Judge William. The third, “Guilty? Not Guilty?” is a diary supposedly fished out of a Danish lake. The diarist writes in the morning, recalling a love affair/engagement of a year before; then he writes at midnight about his sense of guilt for having broken the engagement. Since Kierkegaard had done exactly that—been engaged and broke the engagement—one might suspect that the diary is somewhat autobiographical. In actuality, the work is an exploration of romance, anxiety, depression, worry, and the like. Great reading for Valentine’s Day!

Kierkegaard is sometimes blamed for the Existentialist movement in modern philosophy. He actually was a defender of traditional Biblical Christianity. Kierkegaard insisted that faith must be subjective, but he didn’t mean that in a post-modern sense of “believe whatever you choose to believe.” Instead, he meant that theological statements must be deeply personal to have any value. A list of proofs for the existence of God is helpful to hardly anyone: the believer already believes without the proofs, and the unbeliever already rejects all the proofs that are presented.

Which brings me back to the white-haired men searching for a preprinted card that will express their love for their wife—and doing so long after the most suitable cards have already been purchased. Wouldn’t a handwritten message be more suitable than a Walmart greeting card? Or have these men run out of ways to say, “I love you”? Flowers and chocolate are nice, but nothing is more endearing than a piece of paper that has been handled and rejected by countless husbands over the past three weeks before it finally leaves the store in the hands of a desperate man a few short hours before midnight on February 13. Or so it struck me last night. J.

The cup of wrath

God’s eternal and unchanging nature is love. In love he responds to sin and evil with anger; but in love he also finds a way to rescue sinners from his anger. On the cross, Christ faced the wrath of God, consuming it fully so no wrath is left for sinners who trust in Christ.

Before going to the cross, Christ prayed, “Let this cup pass from me” (Matthew 26:39). He prayed about the cup of God’s wrath, which is described by the Old Testament prophets: “Wake yourself, wake yourself, stand up, O Jerusalem, you who have drunk from the hand of the Lord the cup of his wrath, who have drunk to the dregs the bowl, the cup of staggering” (Isaiah 51:17); “Thus the Lord, the God of Israel, said to me, ‘Take from my hand this cup of wine of wrath, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it” (Jeremiah 25:15); to Judah, God says, “You have gone the way of your sister; therefore I will give her cup into your hand. Thus says the Lord God: You shall drink your sister’s cup that is deep and large; you shall be laughed at and held in derision, for it contains much; you will be filled with drunkenness and sorrow. A cup of horror and desolation, the cup of your sister Samaria, you shall drink it and drain it out, and gnaw its shards and tear your breasts; for I have spoken, declares the Lord God” (Ezekiel 23:32-34). Imagine in heaven a cup with your name written on it. Every time you sin, a drop of poison falls into that cup, the poison of the wrath of God. For every lie, another drop of poison. For every careless deed that causes harm, another drop of poison. For every neglected opportunity to help a neighbor, another drop of poison. Imagine that cup of God’s wrath waiting for you when the Day of the Lord comes, the Day when all sinners will be judged.

But now that cup is empty. Jesus took your cup and drank all that it contained. In exchange, he gives you his cup, the cup of salvation (Psalm 116:13; I Corinthians 11:25-26). As in a comic movie, one cup is poisoned and the other is pure; but Jesus purposely takes the poisoned cup and gives to you and me the cup that is pure.

For this reason, Christians do not fear the wrath of God. Nor are we terrified of the Day of the Lord. Because Jesus drank the cup of wrath and gave us the cup of salvation, we are confident that we belong to the Lord and will dwell in his kingdom forever. The wrath of God is real; but Christians will never face that wrath. It was consumed and finished on the cross, granting us forgiveness, salvation, and eternal life.

No one can teach the whole message of Scripture without speaking of the wrath of God. God’s commandments (his Law) show us why we deserve his wrath; God’s promises (his Gospel) show us how we are spared his wrath through the saving work of Christ. God is love, which is why Christ provided an atoning sacrifice to save us from God’s wrath. No Christian should seek to be a wrath-monger; we should always delight to share the grace of God with sinners. The purpose of teaching the Law is to show our sins and our need for a Savior. This leads to repentance and the joy of sharing the Gospel, which shows us our Savior. The full message must be taught for sinners to come to repentance and faith and thus receive the Lord’s salvation. J.

The wrath of God

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth” (Romans 1:18).

About a month ago, my friend and fellow blogger InsanityBytes and I had a conversation at her place (See, there’s this thing called biology) about the wrath of God. IB was speaking against “Christian wrath-mongers,” those who emphasize the wrath of God to such an extent that they scarcely leave room for his love and mercy and forgiveness. In particular she has been disturbed by another blogger who persistently describes the cross of Christ in terms that smack of violence, hatred, and abuse. While I agree with her that the third blogger has badly misstated his description of our redemption at the cross, I also found it necessary to reply to her suggestion that the wrath of God is not real, that it does not exist.

Now, had IB said, “The wrath of God no longer exists for Christians because it was consumed at Christ’s sacrifice on the cross,” I would have joyfully agreed with her. To negate the wrath of God in its entirety is to drain the cross of its power. Granted, other descriptions of the cross still have power: that Christ paid the debt of sinners, that he offered a ransom to reclaim sinners from the enemy, that he fought the enemy (the devil, evil, sin, and death) and won. Any single description of redemption is incomplete. To remove God’s wrath from the equation, though, is not a valid option, since the Bible clearly teaches about God’s wrath.

I promised to study the Bible and report upon the wrath of God. I found that—depending upon which English translation of the Bible one uses—the word “wrath” appears roughly 200 times in the Bible. “Anger” and “angry” show up another 275 times, and “fury” is mentioned 70 times. The Hebrew and Greek words translated as wrath, anger, and fury are correctly translated; the various words all have the meaning of “anger, fury, indignation, ire, wrath.” While they are sometimes used to describe the anger and wrath of humans—and, in some cases, even warn against those qualities—by far the larger number of instances attribute wrath to God. Often that wrath is reserved for the Day of the Lord (Judgment Day), but frequently God’s wrath is a response to sin happening in the present world. Sin makes God angry.

When I sin, I hurt myself. When I sin, I harm my neighbor. When I sin, I damage God’s creation. When I sin, I defy God and declare independence, as if I could rule my own life. For all these reasons, God is right to be angry at sin.

Someone might counter that God’s nature is love, grace, mercy, and forgiveness—and God never changes; he is the same yesterday, today, and forever. All that is true. But God is also holy and good, and a holy and good God must respond to sin because of his love for all that he made. When my sin harms my neighbor, God is angry; when my neighbor’s sin harms me, God is angry. A holy God cannot let sin and evil go without atonement; evil must be countered and not merely ignored.

Because Christians are holy people, we also should be angry about sin. For a Christian to shrug and say, “Oh, well, another mass shooting; another child abducted; another fatal overdose; another person abused. There’s so many problems, it just doesn’t matter any more”—that would be cold hearted, unholy, and not like God. Sin should offend us. Evil should anger us. Like God, we should feel righteous wrath toward those who do wrong in this world.

But the Bible does warn Christians against anger and wrath. Wrath is included in lists of sins that God does not accept. Jesus equates anger—anger that causes us to shout insults—with murder. How do we reconcile these teachings with righteous wrath?

The Bible advises us, “Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger, and give no opportunity to the devil” (Ephesians 4:26-27). Anger can be a powerful temptation to sin. God cannot be tempted and never sins; his wrath is always righteous. Our wrath can push us into sin, which is why we need to handle wrath with care. When anger is selfish, when it comes from inconvenience to us and not from rejection of evil, such anger is sinful. Jesus calls that kind of anger murder. God’s wrath toward sin is never murderous anger; it is always holy, righteous, and just.

When the Israelites at Mount Sinai had Aaron build them a gold calf to worship, God was angry. “And the Lord said to Moses, ‘I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people. Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them, in order that I may make a great nation of you.’” (Exodus 32:9-10). Moses interceded for the people, and God relented from his wrath. The intercession of Moses is a picture of Christ’s intercession; what Moses did was only possible because of what Christ would do. “For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die—but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God” (Romans 5:6-9).

God’s eternal and unchanging nature is love. In love he responds to sin and evil with anger; but in love he also finds a way to rescue sinners from his anger. On the cross, Christ faced the wrath of God, consuming it fully so no wrath is left for sinners who trust in Christ.

(To be continued) J.

You will know the truth

Jesus said, “If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples; you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:31-32).

Why do Christians who read the same Bible and trust the same Bible have different versions of the truth? I’m not asking about people who read the Bible and purposely edit what they read to suit their purposes. I’m asking about people who expect to find the truth in God’s Word, yet disagree with each other about what that Word says and means.

For fans of big words, the answer to this question lies in hermeneutics. In simpler terms, even faithful Christians may approach the Bible in different ways, having different assumptions about what the Bible contains. One Christian may treat the Bible as a rulebook and may search the Scriptures looking for rules and regulations. That reader sees the historic accounts of the Bible as examples of what happens when one person obeys God’s rules and when another person breaks God’s rules. Another Christian may treat the Bible as a set of promises from God. That reader sees the historic accounts of the Bible as people acting out God’s plan of salvation. To the first reader, Genesis 22 (Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice Isaac) shows a believer giving his best to the Lord. To the second reader, the same chapter shows Abraham and Isaac acting out the drama of Good Friday, as a father is prepared to sacrifice his son.

How do we know which approach is correct? The best answer is, “Scripture interprets Scripture.” When a reader is confused about one passage in the Bible, that reader searches for other parts of the Bible that address the same topic. The other passages add clarity to the message of the confusing passage. To understand the apocalyptic language of the book of Revelation, a reader should be guided by the clear teachings of Christ in Matthew 24 & 25 and those of Paul in I Thessalonians 4 & 5.

Of the various mistakes that many Christians make while reading their Bibles, the two most common (at least in western culture) is to trust their reason and to trust their feelings. Both reason and feelings (head and heart) are important when reading the Bible, but reason and feelings should both be shaped by the words of God, not the other way around. Reason is a tool that helps the reader to interpret the Bible correctly; it assists in leading to other passages that provide clarity. Feeling is a tool that helps to apply the message of the Bible to a person’s life. God’s commandments can prompt a sense of sorrow which leads to repentance; God’s promises can prompt a sense of joy which accompanies faith. But so long as we live in this sin-polluted world, both reason and feeling are tainted by sin. Our heads and our hearts, even after we come to faith, are unreliable guides to truth. Both should be placed under Christ’s Lordship; both should be ready to surrender to the Bible’s message even when that message seems wrong to the head or to the heart.

Reason rejects paradox, but many of God’s truths are paradoxes. God is one, but he is three Persons. Christ is entirely God and entirely human, yet he is one Person, one Christ. The Bible is God’s Word, entirely trustworthy and true, yet God delivered that Word through human individuals who each had his own style of writing. Every attempt to make these teachings reasonable results in false teaching. One Christian makes the Father, Son, and Spirit sound like three gods rather than one God. The next Christian reasons that the three Persons are simply the same God under different names—that Jesus is the Father and the Spirit as well as the Son. Both approaches sound reasonable; both are wrong.

Feeling can carry a Christian many directions away from the truth. One Christian reads the commandments, begins to repent, and is overcome by sorrow and guilt which blocks true repentance and keeps that Christian from hearing the promises of God. Another Christian, having felt the joy that accompanies faith, yearns to continue in that joy. That reader avoids the passages that speak of sin and judgment and so avoids the guidance that God’s Law provides for our lives on earth.

Everything should be judged by the Bible, the messages God delivered to the world and to his people through Moses, the prophets, and the apostles. Any dream, any vision, any message that claims to come from God (whether audible or heard only within) should be compared to the Bible, which we know comes from God and is trustworthy and true. A message that seeks to change the message of the Bible—whether by direct contradiction or by subtle reinterpretation of the Bible—is not a message from the God who gave us the Bible. Even if that message makes sense to our heads or feels good in our hearts, the Christian must still “test the spirits” (I John 4:1-3) to be certain that the message is not false.

Head and heart are important parts of our beings. They were created by God and have been redeemed by Christ. We use them both to find God’s Word in the Bible and apply that Word to our lives. But, until Christ appears and makes everything new, neither can be trusted in the same way the Bible should be trusted. Scripture interprets Scripture—only by this rule can we come to know the truth and to receive freedom through that truth. J.

Ransom (a story based on Matthew 20:28)

Once a good and wise king ruled over a prosperous land. This king loved all his subjects equally, whether they were rich or poor, educated or not, whether the were farmers or storekeepers or shoemakers or blacksmiths or soldiers in the king’s army. The king’s great love for each of the people in his kingdom was deep and unselfish, and in return all the people loved him. Whatever he directed them to do, they did gladly. They did not complain to pay their taxes, the share of their work claimed by the king.

Not all remained peaceful, though, in this kingdom. One of the king’s knights, a leader among the warriors, held anger and jealousy in his heart. Although the king knew that this knight was thinking of rebellion, justice did not permit the king to act until the knight had first rebelled. The knight knew that the king was a just man, and he used this fact to his own advantage.

The evil knight’s rebellion began this way: he started telling lies to the common people of the kingdom, those who loved and served the king in their farms and stores and smith shops. With his lies the knight suggested that the king had been unfair to his people, that his laws did not have in mind what was best for the people, that the king did not truly want the people to have everything that belonged to them.

The people believed the lies of the evil knight and began to disobey the laws of their king. They took for themselves those things that the king had told them not to take; and, in many other ways, they rebelled against their king. The war had begun, and already the knight had captured the citizens of the kingdom.

The castle guards were divided when they heard about the revolution. Some of them joined forces with the evil knight, but many more remained faithful to their king. When fighting broke out inside the castle, the king and his son successfully fought off the evil knight and his followers. They drove the rebels out of the castle and lifted the drawbridge. From that time, the evil knight was no longer allowed in the castle.

Other knights served their king faithfully. They saw that the evil knight and his allies remained alive outside the castle. They also saw that the common people had joined his side, because they loved to hear and believe his lies. The faithful knights were angry; they asked for permission to attack the rebels and complete their victory. Nevertheless, as the king looked out at the common people, he realized how they had been deceived, and he loved them. He called his son to him, and together they planned a way to save the common people from the evil knight. They planned a way to spare them from the punishment demanded by the law for anyone who rebelled against the king.

The prince was the only son of the king, and father and son loved each other more than any other father and son of any time in history. Therefore, when the knights of the castle heard what the father and son had decided to do to save the people of the kingdom from the consequences of their revolution, the knights were aghast. Though they did not doubt the wisdom of their king and of their prince, still they shook their heads and wondered how this unusual plan would end.

Some time later, the prince quietly left his father’s side and slipped out of the castle. The knights watched as he went out into the town, dressed as a common worker of the kingdom. They wondered what he would say to the common people and how they would respond. They wondered if any people would recognize the prince, and, if so, how such people would treat him. They wondered what would happen when the prince found that knight who had begun the rebellion against the king and had led all the people astray.

In the weeks that followed, the prince spoke to many people about the king. He explained the laws of the king and showed how all these laws were for the good of the people. When the people heard his words and were sorry for their rebellion, the prince promised that soon the king would provide a way for their guilt to be removed. He promised that they would be restored to the kingdom at no cost to themselves. Many people rejoiced because of the prince’s words.

The prince did not travel with empty pockets. He used the riches of his father to feed the hungry and to help people with their needs. He did not give to everyone he met, but only to those who called to him for help or whose needs were obvious. He had not come to give away his father’s money, but when he saw how the lies of the evil knight were driving the people his father loved into debt and despair, he was quick to reach out a helping hand.

Some people recognized him. A small group of men traveled with him as he crossed the kingdom. They followed him, not merely because he was giving away money and saying nice things, but because they saw nobility in him and they remembered the love of his father and how much they had once loved the king.

Their goals in following him still were not entirely noble. They dreamed that when the prince would finally take control of the kingdom from the evil knight and the other rebels, they would be lifted up in rank and would enjoy the privilege of being right-hand advisors to the ruling monarch. Some even spoke to the prince, asking him to grant them such favors, since they had been following him so faithfully.

Gently, the prince reminded them how and why he had come. He had not stepped out among the people of the kingdom as royalty to be worshipped and adored, but he had come to them as the servant of the people. His goal was to bring the people back to his father. The prince encouraged his followers to imitate him in this: not to try to be men and women in authority, forcing others to serve them, but to show the kind of nobility the prince showed, serving all the people and meeting their needs. This, the prince said, was the kind of life his father wanted the people of the kingdom to live.

Many people loved the prince, whether they guessed as his identity or not. One group of people, though, hated the prince: the judges of the kingdom. These judges had claimed to be fighting the lies of the evil knight, but actually they had been helping the knight in his rebellion. The judges continued to teach the king’s laws, but they made these laws sound harsher and stricter than the king had ever meant. They offered no hope of forgiveness to those who had broken the laws. The judges boasted that they were keeping the laws of the king. Rather than going to him for guidance, though, they changed his laws to suit their ideas. After the lying knight himself, they were the king’s worst enemies.

The judges had never dreamed that the prince would leave the castle to come among the people. When they saw him, they were furious. They began to look for opportunities to get him out of their way, because they knew that his presence and his teaching would turn the people against them. No doubt some of them recognized the prince and chose to fight him all the same; others convinced themselves that this was not the prince but only an imposter, and they told themselves that they were doing the king a favor by opposing him.

The judges went to the evil knight for help to fight against the prince. The knight, of course, hadn’t the slightest doubt that this really was the prince. All the same, he first tried to tempt the prince to leave his father’s plan and join in the rebellion. When that attempt failed, the evil knight looked for a way to put the prince to death.

The friends of the prince were appalled when they heard how he planned to fight against the evil knight. When the prince warned his friends how the judges would join the fight against him, and when he told his friends what the evil knight was going to do to him, the friends of the prince were very frightened. This was not what they expected of their prince! He spoke of a Ransom, and they were terrified. Because they trusted him, though, they remained with him.

Finally the great day came, the day that the king and the prince had discussed long before. The judges set their trap for the prince, and the prince voluntarily walked into their trap. His friends ran away in their fright, leaving him alone in the hands of his enemies. The evil knight laughed, delighted to have the son of the king in his power.

On that day the evil knight stood before the castle of the king with the prince at his side. “Look, O King,” he shouted, “here I have your son. Are you willing to pay a ransom for his life?” The knight heard no answer from the castle.

“I already have your kingdom in my hands,” the knight boasted. “Now I have your son whom you love so much. I will return him to you, O King, if you promise to let me keep your kingdom and all the people outside your castle.” Again, the knight heard only silence.

“I have offered you the chance to pay a ransom for your son,” the knight called. “You have paid nothing. If I kill your son, the kingdom will remain mine, for no one else in all this kingdom is strong enough to take it from me.” The faithful knights inside the castle boiled in anger, but they obeyed their king and did not reply.

When he still heard no answer, the evil knight commanded that the prince be killed. He left the body at the gates to the castle and rode away, thinking that the kingdom was finally his.

To the amazement of the knight and of all the people of the kingdom, the story did not end here. The king called his son whom he loved back to life; and the evil knight discovered that in killing the prince, he had destroyed himself. No longer were the common people forced to follow him, to believe his lies, to join his rebellion. Rather than paying his kingdom as a ransom to save his son, the father gave his son as a ransom to recover his kingdom.

The king now sent messengers throughout the kingdom to announce that any person who dared to disobey the king’s laws deserved to die, but that the king’s son had already died in that person’s place. Any friend of the prince would be declared innocent of rebellion, because the prince had already paid the price for guilt, enough to cover the guilt of every person in the kingdom.

Many days were required for the messengers to carry this news to all the villages and farms and homes in the kingdom. When the last messenger had delivered his message and everyone in the kingdom had heard the king’s decree of forgiveness through his son’s death, then the king stood for judgment. The prince stood at the king’s side, and he called for all his friends to join him. When the king looked out at his kingdom and saw all those who still believed the lies of the evil knight, all those who refused to be friends of the prince, he was angry. He sent his faithful knights out to slaughter every one of the rebels who had refused their chance to be forgiven by the king. When he looked at his son and the many people who called themselves friends of the prince, the king was glad. He arranged a grand banquet for the prince and for all his friends, and he declared a holiday to be celebrated throughout the entire kingdom.

Though the time of the rebellion seemed long, it was really only a short time for the king, his son, and all the friends of his son. The faithful knights of the kingdom quickly restored the kingdom to its former peace and prosperity. The many men and women and children who had been named friends of the prince lived in this kingdom for a time so long that it couldn’t be measured.

A week of contests and division

What a busy week it has been so far! Sunday night was the Superbowl, which featured a dramatic come-from-behind victory by the Kansas City Chiefs. I was reading that evening and only checked on the game when about ten minutes were left, and San Francisco was leading 21-10. I got to see the last three touchdowns and the shorter version of the Bill Murray/Groundhog Day/Jeep commercial, so I feel my evening was well-spent.

Monday night the voters of Iowa conducted a caucus. When the results of the Democratic caucus were finally released on Wednesday, they included a few surprises but no real indication of who the nominee will be. Regarding the delay in releasing the results—evidently caused by a flaw in the ap they were using—one spokesperson for the White House quipped, “and these are the people who want to run our health care system.”

Tuesday night was President Trump’s State of the Union report to Congress. The event was marked by rudeness among the Democratic Senators and Representatives, who sat sulking and pouting through much of the speech. Their disdain for the President was capped when the Speaker of the House tore in half her copy of the President’s speech in half as soon as he was finished. Having voted to impeach the President, the Democrats were clearly continuing the theme of “not my President,” ignoring the fact that the President won the November 2016 election according to the rules set by the United States Constitution.

Wednesday the Senate voted to acquit the President rather than removing him from office. The vote was conducted almost purely among party lines. Several Republican Senators reported that they did not approve of the President’s behavior; they added that the charges against him were not significant enough to warrant removal from office. Democrats replied that, in the absence of evidence and witnesses, President Trump did not face a true trial in the Senate. The results have been predictable since the charges leading to impeachment were first filed last year. Once again, the Constitution shaped the events; no one violated the Constitution in acquitting the President.

All these events (except, I guess, the Superbowl) reveal a nation that is deeply divided and virtually at war within itself. The split is not yet as violent as that which led to a four-year Civil War in the 1860s. The division might even be less turbulent than that of the late 1960s and early 1970s—the era of Vietnam, Watergate, and Civil Rights. The United States has survived troubled times in the past, and the current sense of crisis will also pass. Christians can and should pray that citizens of the United States learn again how to respect one another despite political differences, how to talk to one another without resorting to attacks and insults, how to listen to one another and hear one another, and how to find compromises when and where they are possible.

Meanwhile, the Democrats have badly hurt themselves heading into the Presidential and Congressional elections. They have energized President Trump’s base of support while failing to change anyone’s mind about him. They have probably reduced their chances of retaining control of the House of Representatives, let alone of gaining control of the Senate. If the caucuses and primary elections lead to the nomination of one of the more liberal candidates, President Trump will have an easy campaign for reelection; all he needs to ask is, “How will you pay for free college for everyone? How will you pay for universal health care?” So long as people representing the Democratic Party continue to speak of socialism, redistributing wealth, and government control, they will continue to lose support of the voters and will fail to win elections.

During his first term, President Nixon seemed terribly unpopular. The media focused on his shortcomings without noting his accomplishments. Potential Democratic candidates led in the opinion polls throughout 1970 and 1971. But when the Democrats nominated George McGovern as their candidate, voters found him to be too liberal for the country, and Nixon won the election, carrying forty-nine of the fifty states. In his second term, though, Nixon faced a Democratic Congress determined to stymie his initiatives and weaken his power. The mistakes of Watergate, magnified by inaccurate reporting across the media, began a process of impeachment that ended when Nixon resigned. Looking at the politically-motivated impeachments of Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, one wonders whether Nixon might have survived a vote in the Senate after all.

Many things can still happen over the coming weeks and months to shape the election in November. At this time, though, I am no longer wondering whether President Trump will be reelected. I suspect he will. My biggest question is whether Republicans will maintain a majority in the Senate and regain a majority in the House. I think they might. It will be interesting to watch… very interesting…. J.

Keep Flying High

(chorus)  Reach up your hand and touch the sky. Look around you and wonder why.

Take the worst in the world and try not to cry, and keep flying high.

 

Take a journey far away. Don’t be afraid.

Be ready to take off today. The plans are made.

The stars are calling out, so don’t be afraid.

Lift up your voice and shout, I’m on my way.

 

Take a journey far away. We love you so.

Tomorrow’s dreams begin today. You’re our hero.

You carry our desire in all you do

And wherever you fly, we all go too.        Chorus

 

Smile and look around you now. Keep flying high.

The work you’ve done is over now, up in the sky.

You’ve been training for so long, so keep flying high.

We salute you in song. You’ll never die. Chorus

 

When you leave this surly sphere, reach out and touch God’s face.

Confide in him and have no fear. He suffered in your place. (instrumental interlude)

 

Take a journey far away. Don’t be afraid.

Be ready to take off today. The plans are made.

The stars are calling out, so don’t be afraid.

Lift up your voice and shout, I’m on my way.        Chorus, two times

A national tragedy

Yesterday, January 28, was the thirty-fourth anniversary of the space shuttle disaster. Seven astronauts died when their ship exploded seventy-three seconds after lift-off. The memory of this event gives poignant context to the tragic news from this past weekend, the death of Kobe Bryant, his daughter, and several friends in a helicopter crash.

The death of a celebrity is always major news, especially when that celebrity is still young and active. Whether it’s a shooting, a drug overdose, a suicide, or a vehicular crash, the shock of the sudden loss becomes an international event. People come together in their grief, even though they never met the deceased. These heroic figures have become part of our lives. Their mortality reminds us of our own mortality. And, I suspect, we transfer the grief of our personal losses onto the larger event. If we are privately mourning the loss of a family member or a friend, or if we are living surrounded by troubled lives, the chance to join with millions in sorrow over death brings a cathartic relief to our hearts.

I’m a little too young to remember the assassination of President Kennedy. Most people over sixty can tell you exactly what they were doing when they heard the news of his death. Many of today’s college students are too young to remember the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. For them, that event is merely one more episode in history, like Pearl Harbor and the Maine and the Alamo.

In my novel I Remember Amy, the main characters talk about national tragedy the night of the Challenger explosion. Here is an excerpt from that book:

“If only for a day or two, the world seems so different after something like that happens,” I commented.

“But it usually is only a day or two,” you reminded me. “Except for the family and the closest friends, most of us have gotten over it and gone back to life even by the day of the funeral. I promise you that, by the weekend, nothing will seem any different than it was yesterday or the day before.”

“You’re right, of course; and I guess that’s the way it should be. We can’t go on thinking about all the bad things that happen, or we’ll be overwhelmed by sorrow and loss. But it seems as though some of these things should change us more than they do.”

“Some of them are too big to change us. If they don’t happen to us, or to the people we love, they really don’t have any reason to change us, not even for a day or two. I think,” you added, with wisdom beyond your years, “that sometimes we save up the emotion of our big personal losses and hurts, and we let it pour out at a time like this, when everyone is shocked and hurting. Then we can hurt together; and then, after a day or two, we’re all allowed to feel better again. It’s our way of letting go of our personal pain, to be able to share it on a day like today.”

In 1986 I wrote a song—“Keep Flying High”—to commemorate the seven astronauts who died in the Challenger explosion. A few years ago, when my mother had just died, I found comfort in singing that song and dedicating it to her memory. However it happens, death remains the enemy. Even Jesus wept at the tomb of his friend Lazarus. But Jesus went on to conquer death and to share his victory with all who trust in him. Remembering Kobe Bryant, or any other celebrity we have lost to death, we find true comfort in the victory of Easter and in our guarantee of the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting. J.