Painting: Emil Nolde, Pfingsten, 1909, Berlin, Neue Nationalgalerie
Pentecost, in our day, is the celebration of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit upon the church by the risen and reigning Jesus Christ. Acts 2 records this event. The disciples of Jesus, gathered in Jerusalem, heard the sound of a mighty wind fill the room they were gathered in, they saw what appeared to be flames of fire above their heads, and began to speak in languages they had never learned. Jews who had come to Jerusalem for the Jewish feast of Pentecost, 50 days after Passover, were drawn to the sound of wind, and heard these disciples of Jesus speaking the languages of their home countries, ranging from Persia in the east to Rome in the west.
According to liberal theologians, this episode has been invented by the author (Luke), as a non-historical fantasy, based on various stories about the presence of the Holy Spirit after Jesus’ departure. However, Luke himself qualifies his own writing as based on interviews with eyewitnesses and his own extensive research (Luke 1:1-4). Luke’s express purpose, written in literary Greek, is to convince “Theofilus,” probably a Roman in high government circles, of the historical trustworthiness of the story of Jesus, as already written about by eyewitnesses. Either Luke is lying,which is unlikely, this meaning he is considerably naive about the credulity of an educated Roman, who was certainly able to look into the historical facts himself, or he is telling the truth.
If the Pentecost story is true, then God did a great miracle, which had a tremendous impact on many Jewish people who heard uneducated Galileans speaking their own native languages and dialects fluently. They heard them proclaiming “God’s mighty acts,” that is, what God had done through the coming of Jesus the Messiah. God was demonstrating his intention to “pour out His spirit on all flesh,” as the prophet Joel had prophesied in the Old Testament. It was the beginning of a great “baptism in the Spirit,” as John the Baptist and Jesus had foretold, the beginning of the fulfilling of prophecies in Jeremiah and Ezechiel about the New Covenant in the age of the Holy Spirit.
If the Pentecost story is true, then we know for sure that Jesus is reigning and pouring out the Holy Spirit on people in all nations, bringing salvation and the power of the Holy Spirit to all who trust in him.
What do you think about Pentecost?
Continue Reading mei 30th, 2010
Painting: Rembrandt, Ascension of Jesus, 1636, Alte Pinakothek, München
This past Thursday we celebrated Ascension Day here in The Hague. Most people in The Netherlands have no idea what Ascension Day (Hemelvaartsdag) means. it is a holiday here, but few associate Jesus’ heavenly kingship with this day. This is very sad. Nevertheless there are many Christians who come together on Ascension Day to celebrate Jesus’ ascending to heaven to be crowned King.
To many people, including many liberal theologians, this story sounds mythological and improbable. Yet Luke, at the beginning of his two-volume work, the Gospel according to Luke and the book of Acts, introduces his narrative with a consciously chosen statement, saying that he had himself done careful research into the historical truth of what was known about Jesus. At the end of the Gospel according to Luke, Jesus’ ascension is described summarily. In Acts 1, the events leading up to his ascension, and the ascension itself are described in more detail.
If God made all things, if Jesus was and is truly God in the flesh, if he really rose from the dead, if he realy was and is the promised Anointed One of Israel (Messiah), and thereby the inheritor of all the promises given David’s expected great successor on David’s throne, then the Ascension is not mythological, but historical. The disciples, it is true, expected Jesus to go to Jerusalem to rule, replacing the Herodian surrogate kingship over Israel, but he went up to heaven, heaven being in the Bible that place in or dimension of the creation where God reveals himself in splendor and peace, surrounded by angels and the spirits of just men and women made perfect.
If the Ascension is history, everything on earth is different.
Continue Reading mei 15th, 2010
Painting: Titian, Polyptych of Jesus’ Resurrection, 1520-22
In Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 8, he brings the resurrection of Jesus into confrontation with the “sighing” of all creation, longing to be liberated from decay. This sigh of existence is something which is admitted by all human beings, and something we all experience personally. There is something about life which cries out for cosmic redemption. A cry for eternal life in the midst of ever-present death. And then we begin to rationalize. We say, after reflection, in the cold light of day: “It can’t be helped. Death is part of life.” And yet, when a loved one dies, we feel the loss deep in our bones, and we cannot say with such cool rationality: “O well, that’s that, death is part of life.”
Paul says: Jesus’ resurrection is the beginning of God’s “great reversal.” The “curse” which He laid upon the creation due to man’s rebellion, this curse He is going to lift. He has lifted it. By the first coming of Jesus to this earth, by Jesus’ death and resurrection from the dead, there are forces at work in creation which will one day mean that death no longer is part of life. Things will not go stale. Human beings will no longer ache with unbearable loss. Incredibly, the entire creation, and here I think we must think of the animal and plant kingdom, next to human life, will be set free. Life will rise up and never go down again.
Secular thought accuses religions of trying to “escape” from reality. For in this view, death is the final end, nothingness wins. There is no hope for man or this earth beyond the grave. This is the pessimistic verdict of Western rationality about the reality of our existence in 2010. Yet at the same time this secular thought longs for “solutions” to the problems of earth: poverty, sickness, injustice, the abuse of creation, even death itself. The tension here is palpable.
Jesus’ resurrection means that there is real hope for our world. Not in an escape from reality. But in God’s promise that what He has begun, by Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, He will continue till there is a new earth under a new heaven. Unimaginable? Yes, if our rationality is limited by our own conceptions of the inevitability of death. No, if the God of Jesus’ resurrection really is there. And if Jesus really rose from the dead.
Continue Reading april 24th, 2010
Painting: Raphael, Paul in Athens, 1515, Victoria and Albert museum, London
In the book of Acts, chapter 17, we see the apostle Paul in Athens. Although the political and cultural capital of the Roman empire at that time was Rome itself, Athens still had the allure of the source of the Greek wisdom, art, and philosophical religion which Rome had copied and tried to make its own.
Paul, a Jew, and a Pharisee, had been raised in Tarsus in what is now Turkey, and educated under one of the leading Rabbi’s of that day. After a period of intense hostility to the “Jesus movement,” he came to faith in Jesus as the Messiah for Israel and the nations. This was on the road to Damascus, recorded in Acts 9. From that moment on he believed that Jesus had risen bodily from the dead, and that that resurrection, next to Jesus’ sacrificial death on the cross, was the pivotal moment in all of human history. He talked about it everywhere he went, and tried to get all the people he met to believe that Jesus, the Messiah, had been raised from the dead.
Paul was a close observer of the cultural landscape he travelled through. When he came to Athens, he was stirred by all the temple worship there. He also found a temple with the inscription, “to an unknown god.” He began to try to engage the Athenians at the Areopagus, “Mars’ hill.” He speaks of the striking polytheism and worship of statues of gods in Athens. This was at variance with some of the Greeks’ own philosophers, who had said that we are God’s children. “If we are God’s children, how come you all are worshipping statues?” Paul said. He went further to speak of God who made all things. Paul said: the “unknown god,” I saw named in that temple, I’m talking about Him. Paul said: this living God has given a special sign of a coming judgment of the world. God had raised a man from the dead, as a convincing sign to all people that the judgment day is coming. God is moving history to its climax. History is not meaningless. It is not an endless repetition of the same things. History is going somewhere: to a renewal of our world, but also to judgment of men who don’t want to worship God forever.
Paul said: this sign of Jesus’ resurrection is proof to all that God will judge the world through this man, Jesus. To many Athenians who heard Paul that day, this sounded utterly ridiculous. Jewish nonsense. But some listened carefully, and came to faith that day. Others came to faith later. Faith in Jesus, the resurrected Messiah.
Continue Reading april 16th, 2010
Etching: Rembrandt, Jesus preaching, 1652, Rijksmuseum Amsterdam
“Question Authority.” Have you seen that bumper-sticker? We live in a time in the West of distrust of all authority. Tim Keller has recently written a good article on the subject of “Authority,” with a cogent analysis of our age (see Continue Reading). His opening words: “The root idea of modernity is the overturning of all authority outside of the self. In the 18th century European ‘Enlightenment’ thinkers insisted that the modern person must question all tradition, revelation, and external authority by subjecting them to the supreme court of his or her own reason and intuition. We are our own moral authority.”
While on the basis of the Bible we must indeed be wary of merely human authority, Jesus himself, at the end of Matthew 28, proclaims himself be the source of absolute authority on earth: “I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18). If we may trust that these words really come from Jesus (liberal theologians doubt this), these are either the words of a madman, an evil manipulator, or someone who was, incredibly, speaking the truth.
In this same passage Jesus calls his followers to make disciples of all nations, to obey all his words, with the promise that he will be with them all the days till his return. These are the four “all’s” of this famous passage: Jesus has all authority, all nations are to be discipled, all of Jesus’ words (including, finally, the entire Bible) are authoritative, and the promise of his presence all the days until his Second Coming.
Keller in his article connects Jesus’ Lordship with the call to see the entire Bible as God’s Word. If we want to trust and obey Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, then a willingness to accept this Word as God’s Word is unavoidable. We cannot be selective, but must be willing to subject our hearts and minds to everything he says, trust everything he promises, and seek to obey everything he demands.
We who are Christians in 2010 have been influenced by our questioning age. It is important for us to listen to our Lord, as our source of absolute authority, and seek to listen to his voice in the pages of Scripture. This is not to murder our intellect, or to diminish our humanity, but to find our true identity as human beings made in God’s image. “Jesus is Lord” is an expression of faith, and also a call to worship and obedience, all our days, till his return in glory.
Continue Reading april 11th, 2010
Painting: Caravaggio, The incredulity of Saint Thomas, 1601-1602, Neues Palais, Potsdam
The apostle Paul wrote within 25 years of Jesus’ death that there were good grounds for believing that He had come back from the dead. In the 15th chapter of his first letter to the Corinthians he says that there were more than 500 people who had seen Jesus alive after His death, and most of them were still living at the time he wrote 1 Corinthians. This appeal to witnesses concerning an historical event which is a central belief of a religious conviction is extraordinary.
The German philosopher Lessing said that religion could not be based on historical events, but Paul does just that in 1 Cor. 15. Paul makes his case for the historical reality of Jesus being vibrantly alive after His crucifixion, and says that if that is not the case, faith in Jesus as the Savior of the world is pure nonsense. Everything depends upon it. Liberal theologians since the 18th century have tried to tone down Paul’s enthusiasm for the bodily nature of Jesus’ resurrection body, but their attempts at reconstructions of Paul’s belief have failed miserably. Paul is not saying: Jesus’ life has the effect on me as if He is really alive; or: Jesus’ spirit lives on, whether or not He physically came back from the dead or not; or: it doesn’t really matter if Jesus’ grave was empty or not. None of this. Paul says: I saw the physical body of Jesus with my own two eyes, and I was not the only one.
This assertion challenges all readers to do something with it. Basically there are only three choices. You can say Paul (and the other 500 witnesses) are lying. A monster conspiracy to manipulate the facts. This seems to me to be quite improbable, psychologically impossible, really. The second possibility is that they are sincerely wrong: they did see a vision of Jesus, but they didn’t really see Jesus’ body. This is calling into question their competence to judge whether it is really a human being I am talking with or not. The fact that there were at least 500 people who claimed to have seen Jesus’ body after His resurrection is in any case for Paul a strong argument for the truth of what he and they were saying.
The third possibility is that Jesus really did come back from the dead and appeared to all these people. You could say: so what? Many unusual things are possible in this world. But if Jesus really did come back to life, and not as an emaciated zombie, but as a living Lord, and if this is a confirmation of His teaching about Himself and about God’s plan, then this means everyone who hears about Jesus’ resurrection is summoned to trust in Him as the Savior and Lord He proclaimed Himself to be.
How about you?
Continue Reading april 9th, 2010
Today is Easter day, and Jesus’ resurrection is being celebrated around the world. For the first time in recent history, the majority of the Dutch don’t know that Easter is such a celebration. They think in terms of Easter eggs and nice meals.
The first disciples did not expect Jesus back from the dead. They thought there was no more hope, now that Jesus had been crucified and buried. He appears, and they are shocked. They think they see a ghost. They begin to be joyful when they see him closer up. But they still can’t believe it’s him. He shows them his hands and feet, with the prints of the nails of Good Friday clearly visible. This is amazing, but they are still not totally convinced. Jesus eats a bit of leftover fish from their evening meal before their eyes. Then begin to realize: he is really back from the dead, physically, bodily. And after he explains from the whole Old Testament what his coming means, that he came to suffer and die according to Isaiah 53, and to come back to life, as Psalm 16 prophecies, they begin to trust that God’s salvation has come to pass in this risen Jesus.
We worship the risen Jesus Christ! In the words of Bach’s Easter Oratorio, in a recitative: Wir sind erfreut, Dass unser Jesus wieder lebt (we are joyful because our Jesus lives again), and in the words of the closing chorale: Christus, der hat in dieser Schlacht gesieget un uns frei gemacht (Christ, who has won the victory in this battle, and made us free).
Continue Reading april 4th, 2010
Living in The Netherlands is a curious experience. Churches are dying, yet nowhere on earth do more people (proportionately) go to see performances of J.S. Bach’s Matthew Passion around Good Friday and Easter than here. Why? I think people are impressed by the story of Jesus’ suffering and crucifixion, supported by sublime music in historic churches and concert halls which give you a sense you are connected to your cultural past.
Bach was an orthodox Lutheran, though he was willing to have a musical function in Köthen, where the Prince was Reformed (Calvinistic), and where he wrote the wonderful Brandenburg Concertos. Bach wrote the Matthew Passion for a church service: sections for choir alternate with aria’s as musical “faith reflections” on the story of Jesus’ suffering leading to his death on Good Friday, which is narrated by the “evangelist” in recitatives, balanced by the voices of Jesus himself and others in the story. The choir sections and aria’s display Bach’s own faith as a Christian. The poetry, to our modern taste, is quite “romantic,” in the sense of excessively emotional. Yet Bach was not doing it just to get a “tear-jerking” response from the congregation. He really believed that Jesus’ death was the greatest moment of salvation and new life the world has ever known. In doing this, he was reflecting the faith of the Bible itself. The apostle Paul says: I preach Christ and Him crucified.
We who are Christians pray that God will use performances of the Matthew Passion (and the John Passion, and other Christian musical works of art) to reach a generation of Dutch people who don’t know much about Jesus. The words of the New Testament, in the hands of Bach’s supreme artistry, could be the means of reigniting a living faith in Jesus as the Savior and Lord we who have come to know him, know he is.
‘
Continue Reading april 2nd, 2010
Look at a nebula through a telescope. Wow! Wonder at the miracle that the universe is. According to evolutionary naturalism, this is nothing more than a preprogrammed response of the human brain to certain stimuli. My genes make me respond this way because this response will help my species survive. The problem is, if I believe this, my sense of wonder disappears. Everyone (almost everyone) has a sense that there is more to this experience than this.
Wonder is a feeling of awe, mixed with mystery. There is a sense of distance: I am not the nebula. But also of connection: I am able to observe and be overwhelmed by the sight of the nebula. Naturalism makes everything flat and destroys the reality of this experience. Belief in God supports this sense of wonder by making the universe a wondrous creation of a great artist. Saying “Wow!” at the sight of a nebula meshes beautifully with a faith in God, Creator.
Continue Reading maart 24th, 2010
Of: wat is gevaarlijker, geloof of ongeloof?
Secularisten in Nederland zijn bezig een campagne te voeren tegen godsdienst. “Geloof” zou gevaarlijk zijn: kijk hoe de radicale moslims anders denkenden vermoorden door terroristische acties. Kijk ook naar de geschiedenis: bloeddorstige jihads van de moslims, kruistochten van de christenen, katholieken vermoorden protestanten en protestanten vermoorden katholieken. In de 20e eeuw doodden hindoes moslims, moslims hindoes, en hindoes en moslims christenen, in India en Pakistan. En in Sri Lanka gingen boeddhistische Singalese en hindoe Tamils elkaar te lijf. Kortom, waar er godsdienst is, nemen intolerantie en geweld toe. Godsdienst is levensgevaarlijk!
Ik denk dat we alleen met afschuw en verdriet kunnen kijken naar wat “gelovigen” tegen elkaar gedaan hebben en nog doen. Het is een trieste geschiedenis.
Alleen, doen “ongelovigen” het beter? De meest succesvolle plegers van genocide en het uitroeien van ongewenste groepen waren niet de “godsdienstige” mensen in de 20e eeuw, maar de heidense Nazi’s en de atheistische communisten: Hitler, Stalin, Mao, en Pol Pot, hebben vele mijloenen meer mensen gedood dan alle godsdientige bewegingen bij elkaar. Een klassieke prototype van politieke massamoord in de geschiedenis is de Franse revolutie van 1789, toen de fanatieke, anti-christelijke, “Verlichte” humanistische leiders van de Revolutie alle mogelijke vijanden uiteindelijk naar de guillotine wilden sturen.
Onze conclusie: de geschiedenis laat zien hoe hardnekkig haat en geweld kunnen zijn in de harten en in het gedrag van mensen. We zien geen progressie naar utopie in de geschiedenis, maar helaas een regelmatige herhaling van moordpartijen en onrechtvaardige oorlogen. Wij mensen in het algemeen zijn allemaal in staat om moordenaars te worden. Alle overtuigingen, ook idealistische overtuigingen, kunnen gebruikt worden om andere mensen zwart te schilderen en uiteindelijk te willen uitroeien. “All you need is love,” hebben de Beatles gezongen. En als je niet meezingt zullen we je ophangen.
Continue Reading maart 8th, 2010
De PKN (Protestantse Kerk in Nederland) dominee Klaas Hendrikse gelooft niet dat God bestaat, maar dat Hij “gebeurt.”
Continue Reading februari 28th, 2010
Paulus preekte Jezus als lichamelijk opgestaan, het bewijs voor alle mensen dat God de wereld zal oordelen door hem.
Continue Reading februari 25th, 2010
Review of Hunter Baker, The End of Secularism, by K.T. Karnick, in the magazine Christianity Today, Feb. 11, 2010
What the current spate of anti-Christian screeds really reflects, it now seems clear, is bitter disappointment at Americans’ continuing refusal to come to their senses and stop believing in God.
Continue Reading februari 22nd, 2010
Franca Treur, romanschrijver, ex-belijdend lid Gereformeerde Gemeente
Van Kim Batteau
Het is diep en diep triest dat er zo veel Franca’s in Nederland rondlopen. Haar eigen conclusie, na jaren studie in Leiden: God is een menselijke projectie en niet meer dan dat. Ze zegt dat ze veel moest huilen toen ze nog tobde over haar afscheid van het geloof. Maar op basis van rationele overwegingen kwam ze tot deze voor haar onvermijdelijke en eerst zo emotionele conclusie.
Nederland heeft meer, niet minder apologetiek nodig op onze universiteiten en hogescholen. Wie is het met me eens?
En: laten we blijven bidden voor Franca Treur.
Continue Reading februari 21st, 2010
God and disasters (4). Post from Talking Philosophy by Mike LaBossiere and a response from Kim Batteau.
When watching the news clips of people speaking about prayer and faith in the face of an earthquake, I was reminded of the 1755 Lisbon earthquake [9]. in philosophy [10], this event is best remembered in the context of Voltaire’s criticism of Leibniz [11]‘ claim that this is the best of all possible worlds [12]. After all, it is rather difficult to reconcile the idea of a benevolent and all powerful God [13] with such natural disasters. David Hume [14] also wrote on this problem and explicitly criticized Leibniz.
Response from Kim Batteau: Let us look at the phenomenon “earthquake” more closely, thinking of the famous Lisbon earthquake 0f 1755 and the Haiti earthquake of 2010 as our examples. In these and similar earthquakes tens of thousands of people, men, women, and children lost their lives in violent deaths, or died after somtimes long drawn-out suffering under collapsed buildings. Voltaire and Hume reacted with their criticism of Leibniz, as Mike LaBossiere points out. Leibniz was a theist of sorts, and defended the compatibility of the existence of a good and all-powerful God with natural disasters. Voltaire was not an atheist, but a deist, believing that God had created everything, winding nature up like a clock, which then moved totally mechanically on its own and without further interference from Him. Hume was a sceptic, and most likely an atheist, although he clothed his ideas about religion in deist-sounding words, and criticized some of the blatant atheism of his time. Voltaire and Hume were adamant in finding God’s (theoretical) direct involvement with natural disasters as an incompatible with His (possible) goodness. Therefore they doubted such involvement. Effectively they were criticizing the God of the Bible, who creates, but also causes (or allows) natural disasters. This criticism struck a chord with Enlightenment man, and today the atheist’s creed (see my first entry under this heading) is widespread in the West, among intellectuals and among ordinary people on the street.
To a certain degree, we may perceive this critical reaction to natural disasters in the Bible book Job, where Job complains to God that he is being unfairly punished, with family being killed (by a natural disaster) as well as with his own sickness. However, we notice that Job never doubts God’s existence or involvement with life on earth. Making Job a modern man, as in the play J.B., is a modern misuse of him.
The key issue has to be: on what consistent basis can we say that natural disasters “ought not to happen”? On the basis of naturalism, natural disasters are simply natural phenomena. The consistent naturalist must deny that nature “ought” to behave in one way or another. Nature is not a matter of “ought,” but of “is.” Therefore we get the paradoxical result of naturalists (Voltaire, Hume) objecting to the theoretical possibility of God’s causing or allowing natural disasters, on the basis of the idea that “such disasters ought not to happen,” while their naturalist presuppositions deny that such an objection to natural phenomena is possible. This is more than a paradox: it makes their case against God groundless. It is also leads inevitably to the philosophical position that the terrible suffering of people in earthquakes is simply a natural phenomenon.
We may not let naturalists get away with murder, philosophically speaking. You cannot be at peace with a nature in which natural disasters are merely natural phenomena, and at the same time be deeply disturbed by such disasters. Even the word “disaster” is a misnomer here. However, your disturbance may lead you to question the “normality” of nature as we now experience it on earth. With the result that one’ s gut feeling that natural disasters like the Lisbon and Haiti earthquakes “ought not to happen,” is warranted, and leads you on to the truths which the Bible reveals about God as creator, judge, redeemer and recreator, and you begin to look at nature, earthquakes, and the story of our life on earth in a new way.
Continue Reading februari 6th, 2010
Previous Posts
