How Do We Know What Is True?

This is an important question, that we often don’t think to ask ourselves. Why? Because we assume that what we believe is already true. If we discovered that it was not true, we would change our belief or opinion, because no one intentionally believes a lie. There is something innate within us that rejects lies and seeks that which is true. What we believe is often built upon what we have heard and learned from trusted sources: parents, relatives, teachers, authors etc. Upon that information, believing it to be true, we make decisions and live our lives.

When it comes to what a person believes about Jesus, there are many different opinions based on the information an individual considers credible. Historic Christianity is built upon the belief that what the four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John include is an accurate testimony of Jesus’ life. This was the belief of most people until the Enlightenment of the 1700’s applied rationalism to what Christians believed about Jesus. Since it was not rational to believe in the miracles that are described in the Gospels, especially the resurrection of Jesus, the miracles were believed to be added to the original story of Jesus. This explains why Thomas Jefferson edited his Bible removing all aspects of the miraculous. In the 1800’s this led to a study of the search for the historical Jesus, popularized by Albert Schweitzer’s landmark book “The Quest For the Historical Jesus”. This position advocated that while Jesus did live, what is found in the Gospels is mixed with myth, and is not actual history. Some scholars used the discipline of textual criticism, specifically the preference for a shorter reading of an ancient text, to conclude that Mark was the original of the four Gospels, because it was the shortest. Matthew and Luke used Mark’s Gospel as a source and expanded upon it. This of course assumed that the four Gospels were not written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, because Matthew and John being an eye-witnesses of Jesus’ life, would not have needed a source such as Mark for their Gospels. Along with what became known as the “Priority of Mark”, was the theory that an original document, now lost, known as “Q”, was the source of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. Along with this view, was the belief that the four Gospels were written much later than the 1st century. However, in the 1900’s archaeological discoveries proved that the Gospels were written in the decades following Jesus’ death, which required a rethinking of the views proclaimed by those advocating that the Gospels contained myth.

Since the Gospels were written within decades of Jesus’ life they would not have been credible to the readers if they contained mythical information about Jesus’ life, because there would still be people alive who had known those events and could easily dispute them. For example the early church father, Irenaeus, writing in the 2nd century, recorded that he learned Christianity from Polycarp, who personally had known the apostle John. Such a reaction against “mythical” information in the Gospels would have prohibited the growth of Christianity in the late first century and early second century. Meaning if the Gospels contained myth, we likely would not even know who Jesus is today. To illustrate, this would be like if today biographers of Martin Luther King Jr. wrote that he rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. Such a mythological portrayal of Martin Luther King Jr’s life would not be credible today and be ridiculed out of existence, because many of us were alive during his lifetime and remember him. The same would have happened in the first century, the fact that Christianity was not ridiculed out of existence, even though the Jewish leaders and the Roman authorities attempted to eradicate it, points to the historical accuracy of all that was written in the Gospels.

So whatever one believes about Jesus, it is no longer reasonable to believe that the Gospels found in the New Testament included myth. Which leaves everyone of us to deal with Jesus’ claims to be Lord and King, along with his invitation to follow Him as such.

How Did Christianity Become So Complicated?

Several weeks ago I posted how Christianity is really simple, not complicated. However the reality for many of us is that Christianity seems and feels complicated. The simple reality of Jesus seems to get drowned out in history, doctrine and theology. How did that come about?

Jesus gave us a very simple message to proclaim, repent and follow him, by living out a new command, love one another as Jesus loved us. That message has transformed the world. However along the way Christianity has become more complicated. When Jesus declared to Pilate, that his kingdom was not of this world, he didn’t mean that his followers were to withdraw from the world. He meant his kingdom was unlike any kingdom that had ever existed upon the earth. He told his followers to be in the world but not of the world. In effect, they were to be resident aliens in the world. That means that Christianity has always interacted with culture.

This interaction with culture began immediately when the apostles, recorded in Acts, began to preach Jesus’ message to the Jews and explain it in a Jewish context. Within a short time they, particularly Paul, began preaching to the Gentiles and explaining that it was not necessary for a Gentile to follow the Jewish religious dietary practices and circumcision. Paul’s teaching to the Gentiles resulted in conflict with certain Jewish Christians who disagreed with him, causing Paul to clarify with letters to various churches. Various of these apostolic interactions have been collected into what we now call the New Testament.

Following the passing of the apostles, the next generation of Christian leaders, such as Irenaeus, Athenagoras and Justin, to name a few, responded to a philosophical interpretation of Christianity called Gnoticism, as well as defending Christianity against accusations of immoral living. They clarified Christianity and distinguished it from what the Gnostic teachers proclaimed and defended the morality of Christians, demonstrating the inconsistency of the accusations and subsequent persecutions against Christians.

After Constantine, Christianity became a tolerated and eventually the official religion of the Roman Empire; there emerged at the urging of the emperors a desire to codify and unify Christian teaching, regarding the Trinity, the nature of Jesus and other theological topics. These efforts to unify Christianity resulted in what are now known as ecumenical councils, such as Nicea (325), Constantinople (381), Ephesus (431), Chalcedon (451), Constantinople 2 (553), Constantinople 3 (680) and Nicea 2 (787). These Councils established creeds that orthodox Christians were required to affirm. These creeds became the foundation for what are now referred to as “Statements of Faith”. The Orthodox Church recognizes only these seven councils, while the Roman Catholic Church recognizes other later councils. What began as an attempt to unify Christianity has resulted in one division of Christianity after another. Just consider all the various versions (denominations) existing now, with each one implying that their version of Christianity is more original or accurate.

These practices of explaining Christian thought and interacting with culture resulted in academic studies called “Systematic Theology”, “New Testament Theology” and “Church History” to name a few. These efforts to clarify Christian thought and practice added to the simple teaching of Jesus and the apostles found in the New Testament resulting in Christianity seeming much more academic and theological, as well as divided into various Christian churches and denominations. While the study and debate regarding differing opinions and views of theological topics is of interest to some of us, we should never forget the simplicity of what Jesus taught or feel like it is necessary to understand all the various opinions regarding Christian theology. Nor should we forget that those who confess Jesus as their Lord and believe that he was raised from the dead are our brothers and sisters, even though they may hold some different theological views. While it may be useful to have the capacity to explain the Trinity and the nature of Jesus etc., we should never forget that Jesus asks a more basic question and message, “Do you love me? If yes, then love your brothers and sisters in the same way as I love you.”

Affections and Freedom

Freedom is more than merely enjoying civil rights. It is more than Jefferson’s life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. True freedom can only be received from the hand of God, otherwise, we are at the mercy of our affections. What we desire and organize our life around. It may be our possessions; it may be a career; it may be a relationship; it could be anything. Whatever holds our affections has influence over us and our decisions. It drives the words “I don’t have a choice”, which really means I don’t want to sacrifice my affections, when in fact it is possible to make that sacrifice. We do have a choice. The phrase, I don’t have a choice, is code for I don’t want to make that sacrifice.

This connection between affections and freedom sheds light on several of Jesus’ statements. Jesus said to seek first the Kingdom of God. That means to set our affections on God’s kingdom first and let everything else take a lesser priority in our life. Later Jesus said to deny ourselves, take up our cross and follow him. From what are we to deny ourselves? We deny our affections that seek to take the primary position in our life, that seek to control our decision making, that seek to deceive us into thinking we don’t have a choice. Jesus means for us again to place those things that call for our affections in proper perspective in relationship to God’s Kingdom and keep following Jesus.

This was the problem with the Rich Young Ruler. Jesus saw the man and loved him. He desired to set this man free. Therefore he told the man to sell his possessions, give the proceeds to the poor and follow him. Why did Jesus tell the man this? Because wealth is evil, of course not. If wealth were evil, Jesus would have told all his followers to sell their wealth, but he didn’t. He only told this man to take that step. Why would Jesus do that? In this case, the man had allowed his wealth to take hold of his heart, which was revealed when he refused to follow Jesus’ advice and walked away downcast. For this man it was his possessions, but for others it might be relationships, friends and family, or a career, which have taken control of their heart.

What happens when we live in the manner that Jesus calls us to? We experience freedom. While we enjoy possessions, friends, family and a career, they do not control us and we do not fear losing them. Freedom from fear of losing what attracts our affections, because our affections are focused on what we cannot lose, Jesus’ love for us. Freedom from thinking that we no longer have a choice, because we always have a choice, because we are free to sacrifice and deny ourselves to follow Jesus. This freedom reminds us of the wisdom of the words penned by Jim Eliot prior to his being martyred. “He is no fool, who gives up what he cannot keep, to attain what he cannot lose.” Ultimately this freedom give us true contentment, so that we can experience contentment in whatever circumstances that come our way. This is what the apostle Paul was talking about when he wrote to the Philippians from a Roman prison, telling them that he had learned to be content in all situations, with both plenty and in lack. Now that is a way of living worth choosing.

Simple Christianity

The Christian faith is really very simple. Jesus did not give us complicated doctrines to affirm, rather he had a very simple message. Repent and follow me. It is more personal than intellectual. Those two commands, repent and follow, are connected. We are to repent from living our own way, from being our own master. The word repent, “metanoia” in Greek, means to change the way you think, which implies a change of direction of your life. We think we can fix ourselves, that we can change ourselves and while that might be true in a limited and temporary way, fundamentally we cannot change ourselves, because to change we need an inner transformation. The way we think needs transformation from what comes natural to us to what is supernatural and foreign to us. To put it another way. We need to learn a new language that no one can teach us but the Spirit of Jesus. To embark on that path, we need to repent.

While repenting is a one time action, following takes a lifetime. Jesus called men and women in the past and calls men and women now to follow him, not to learn doctrine and theology. Unless by theology, you mean what theology actually means, the study of God, following Jesus to learn and understand what he reveals about God so that it can transform the way you think and in turn change your life. Some turn theology into an end in itself, by acquiring more and more information, but never seem to realize that the purpose of theology is to know Jesus and let that knowledge transform you.

Today many believe that Christianity is a religion. A religion is a belief system that requires following a set of rules and practicing a certain set of rituals. Religion is a human way to understand God. A human effort for men and women to “improve” themselves so that they can make themselves acceptable to God. Christianity is not a religion, anymore than a friendship or marriage is a religion. The concept of religion is fundamentally flawed, that is why we need a savior, someone who will put us on a different path. Someone who can do for us, what we are helpless to do for ourselves. Jesus claims to be that person, which leads us to a decision. Believe Jesus and change or stay on the same path we’ve always been on. We can continue putting band aids on our bad behaviors, which is why the world is filled with individuals identifying themselves as “recovering ‘you fill in the blank’”, but no one is “recovered”. We can discipline ourselves to appear humble, generous and benevolent, when we know in our heart of hearts that hidden ulterior motives are lurking. We are what Jesus called the Pharisees, outside they appeared all clean and gleaming, but inside they were nothing more than tombs carrying around death. The only way to enter into the “recovered” category is to humbly accept what Jesus offers to us and let him teach us that “new language”, a new way to think. To put it another way, we let him transform our thoughts and life one layer at a time. The choice is ours.

A Peculiar People?

Why does the King James Version of the Bible call Christians a peculiar people? In that version of the Bible, 1 Peter 2:9 refers to Christians as a peculiar people. That phrase sounds odd to our modern ears, because today the word has taken on somewhat of a negative connotation that it did not have several hundred years ago when the King James was translated. So what does the phrase “a peculiar people” mean? This phrase is part of Peter’s description of who Christians are. They are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people. The phrase “peculiar people” refers back to what was said of the nation of Israel in Exodus 19:5, where God refers to Israel as His “treasured possession”. In the New Testament the word is found several times in the New Testament where it refers to “a purchased possession”. This meaning explains why modern translations translate “peculiar people” as “a people for God’s own possession”. The modern translation underscores the truth that Christians are a treasured and valued possession of almighty God through the redemptive work of Jesus.

This understanding of who we are as Christians, as followers of Jesus, explains why Peter went on to exhort his readers to live in a certain manner in verse 11. There he writes “I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul”. Here Peter instructed his readers, Christians, to live in this present world, no matter what nation they call home, as foreigners and exiles. Why would Peter tell Christians to live as foreigners and exiles in their own homeland? Paul shed light on this when he wrote to the Philippians, that our citizenship is in heaven from where we await our Savior, Jesus Christ (Philippians 3:20). If Christians have their citizenship in heaven, then wherever they may dwell on earth, they are foreigners. How do foreigners live? Well, they are different. Their affections are placed elsewhere. They are not as emotionally attached to what is taking place where they live. They have different values and may appear out of place at times and feel a certain measure of discomfort and displacement. They constantly feel as if they are not completely at home. This understanding explains why the early Christians after being arrested and questioned if they were Jewish, Greek or Roman, would simply reply that they were Christians. They no longer identified with Jewish, Roman or Greek culture. When we lived in Italy for a number of years, we had feelings such as these. Each year we had to go to the authorities to renew our “sojourners’ permit” at the police station, a constant reminder that we were not Italian. At times we were asked why we lived there. At times we felt discomfort and very much as foreigners. This is how Peter tells us we are to live, even in our country of birth. Why does he do that? So we would not adopt the values of this present evil age. Peter, and Paul, call us to live apart with values that come from our new homeland, heaven. That means sometimes we will appear different; we will feel discomfort in certain situations, and that is ok, because our citizenship is in heaven, not here.

Why Are People Offended By Jesus?

Jesus is one of, if not the most divisive, individuals in human history. That is an interesting concept to ponder. Why is that so? In the Western World many people follow his teaching and values, such as equality, the value of women and children, concern for the poor and the disabled, compassion and the importance of forgiveness. These are just a few values that trace their origins to Jesus. So why would anyone who appreciates the values that Jesus taught and instituted, values that have transformed the Western world be offended by Jesus? Well, Jesus also taught other things.

Jesus taught that he was the only way to God and claimed the authority to forgive sins, something that the religious Jews of Jesus’ day clearly recognized as an action only God could do. This statement alone was sufficient to offend the first century Jews, leading some of them to plot and orchestrate Jesus’ death on a cross. By claiming to be the only way to God, Jesus claimed exclusivity, a concept that some in the 21st century find offensive and contrary to the concept of inclusiveness.

Jesus also claimed authority, actually all authority, making him the King of kings and Lord of lords. The New Testament teaches that a Christian is not someone who agrees with the majority of what Jesus taught, but someone, who believes Jesus was raised from the dead, and confesses him as Lord. That means a Christian is someone who voluntarily submits to Jesus’ authority. For those of us living in the United States celebrating 250 years since our Declaration of Independence, we struggle with authority. Actually all men struggle with authority to a certain extent, but independence and shall we say a discomfort with authority, to put it mildly, is something that is woven throughout the fabric of American history and culture. Our nation was founded on a rejection of monarchy, specifically the rule of King George III of Great Britain, whose taxes the founding fathers found offensive. During the Civil War the policies of President Lincoln were offensive to many Americans. Eighty years later some were offended by the policies of President Franklin Roosevelt and his conduct preceding the United States’ entry into World War II. Historical facts that have been forgotten by many. This tendency grew in the 1960’s during which the young baby boomer generation rejected the establishment with the cry of ”don’t trust anyone over 30”. A cry that was no longer uttered after 1980 as many baby boomers reached the age of 30 and beyond and became part of the establishment they had rejected a few years earlier. Recently we have seen “No Kings” protests in cities throughout our nation protesting the policies of our current President. The history of the United States is littered with evidences of rejection of authority.

What does this have to do with Jesus? If we struggle with submitting to human authority, then is should not surprise us that many struggle with Jesus’ ultimate authority and are offended by him, even though they may agree with some of what he taught. The reality is that until Jesus returns, we as followers of Jesus find ourselves in the middle of a war, which the New Testament refers to as a spiritual war. Jesus warned us that we will find ourselves facing tribulation if we choose to follow him. We should not become disillusioned or discouraged when we see difficult circumstances, wars and rumors of wars, taking place around us. We should not be surprised that some vocally reject authority; it is nothing new. Our job is to continue to proclaim what is right and true: honor those in authority, whether the current occupant’s of the White House is named Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden or Trump. Giving honor to a leader doesn’t mean we agree with a particular leader. Clearly Paul did not agree with the Emperor Nero when he instructed Christians to give honor to those in authority. However, it does reflect Jesus, who recognized and submitted to Pilate’s authority to crucify him.

As followers of Jesus we must continually resist the urge to fit in with the current age and choose to live by heaven’s values even when it results in sacrifice, difficulty and hardship.

Jesus, The Logos

Words are interesting and powerful things. We constantly use them to communicate with one another and to formulate our thoughts. Their power lies in their meaning. What is curious about words and languages is that words can change in meaning over time and mean one thing in one language and something else in another language. For example, take the word “piano”. In English, when we use the word “piano”, we usually refer to a musical instrument with black and white keys, but how did that particular instrument get that name. The word “piano” comes from the Italian language. But, what is odd, is if you use the word “piano” in Italian you are not referring to a musical instrument, because in Italian that musical instrument is a “pianoforte”. In English the word is truncated and loses the meaning it had in Italian. In Italian, if your kids are playing loudly you say to them “piano”, meaning “quiet down”, which hints at the Italian meaning for “pianoforte”. Piano meaning quiet, forte meaning loud. A piano is a quiet-loud. If your kids are running around a pool, you might say to them “piano”, meaning slow down. Or if you say, that road is piano, piano means smooth or level. Or if you go into a store and ask to see a piano, you will be shown shelving, because shelving is smooth and level. In English “piano” has a pretty specific and limited meaning, but in Italian it has a different meaning and is much broader.

Now, if I say to you “the Word” or “the Word of God”, we likely think of the Bible, but in Scripture when we read “logos”, or “the word”, most often it is not referring to Scripture. In the early church of the first 300 years, when we read the church fathers, such as Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr or Irenaeus and they use “logos”, they most often were referring not to Scripture, but to Jesus.

In the 27 books of the New Testament, the Greek word “logos” is utilized over 330 times. Logos is found in every book of the New Testament except for Paul’s short letter to Philemon and the short letter known as Jude. In all the other 25 books of the New Testament we find occurrences of “logos”, with a range of meanings.

Let’s start with the usage in the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. The vast majority the uses of “logos” are related to Jesus’ words or teaching. See Matthew 7:28, where Jesus’ words/logos were used in the context of Jesus’ teaching. This usage was repeated in each of the Gospels. In the Sermon on the Mount the word is used to describe the cause or reason for a man to divorce his wife, where the English word “reason” is used to translate “logos” (Matthew 5:32).

Logos is also used to communicate an authoritative word, such as when the Centurion asked Jesus to say the word/logos and his servant would be healed. (Matthew 8:8). Again a few verses later in Matthew 8:16, Jesus cast out a demon from the man in the Gaderenes with a word/logos.

Later in Matthew logos is also used in conjunction with rhema, another Greek word translated as “word”, when Jesus says that we will be judged for every careless word/rhema we will give an accounting/logos. (Matthew 12:36). Logos here refers not so much to the word that was spoken but to the accounting for why it was spoken.

Occasionally logos is used in reference to the Old Testament as when Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for rendering ineffective the Word of God with their traditions (Mark 7:13). Luke also equated logos with a prophetic word when he used it in reference to the prophecy out of Isaiah that John the Baptist was a voice calling in the desert (Luke 3:4). Jesus declared the eternity of his words, when he declared that heaven and earth will pass away but his words will never pass away (Matthew 24:35).

In Acts the shift is made where logos is used in reference to the Apostles’ teaching, specifically the gospel. After Saul persecuted the church and the believers went out and preached the word/logos (Acts 8:4). The idea was that the apostles proclaimed the logos that Jesus had taught to them for the purpose of salvation and grace. Luke used it also to refer to his previous work, the gospel of Luke (Acts 1:1).

Due to the apostles preaching, Luke wrote that the word of God increased (Acts 6:7 and 12:24). This doesn’t mean that the content of the Gospel changed, but that more and more responded and the influence of the logos increased, implying the development of a community of believers built upon the logos. Like in the Gospels it was also used to refer to the prophetic declarations recorded in the Old Testament (Acts 15:15).

While John also used logos in ways similar to the other New Testament writers, he is the only one to tie logos to the person of Jesus. He does so in all of his writings, the Gospel of John, his 3 letters 1, 2, and 3 John as well as in Revelation. The wording of John 1:1 is fascinating and in my opinion the change of word order in English is unfortunate. English maintains a parallelism, the word was with God, the word was God. However, in Greek it literally reads, the word was with the God and God was the word. This is where the English word order is unfortunate, because the way John wrote it he linked all three references to logos to one and the same God. In Revelation 19:13, John equates “the word of God”, as Jesus’ name. Not only was Jesus himself the word, but the word was also his name.

So if the early church used “logos” to refer to Jesus, why do we use it to refer to the Bible? It is a good question. As time went on several hundred years later, the early church started compiling apostolic teaching and recognizing certain letters as Scripture, which with the translation of the Old Testament Scriptures from Greek into Latin and utilized the 27 books of the current New Testament. This volume in Latin was referred to as “The Vulgate”, which was the official and only recognized version of the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church until the Church Council Vatican II in the early 60’s. When the Vulgate was completed the Church began referring to it as the Holy Scriptures, and the Holy Word of God, which is how we refer to the Bible today, “The Word” or “the Word of God”.

So why is it important? Peter tells us in 1 Peter 3:15 that we should always be ready to give a defense for our faith. That means we should be able to explain why we believe what we believe. Even during Jesus’ own lifetime, the Jews were accepting of the life lessons Jesus taught, but they rejected Jesus himself. That same pattern of behavior has been repeated throughout history. During the Enlightenment, men such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine as well as the French philosopher Voltaire, accepted Jesus’ morality and ethics, but rejected Jesus. Today, progressives who teach that we must care for the oppressed express Jesus’ moral teaching, but they reject Jesus himself. Christianity, however, merges the person of Jesus with his teaching in the word, logos. You can’t have salvation and reconciliation with God without both bending the knee to Jesus and following his teaching.


Finding Purpose In Life

All of us live for purpose, which according to some writers is a struggle when people retire, because what they had for a purpose, a vocation or a career has now stopped and they struggle with how to live. This was pointed out in the movie, “The Intern”, where Robert De Niro’s character struggled with purpose after retiring and led him back to work as an intern in a start up company. King Solomon the wealthy, wise and illustrious king of ancient Israel struggled with the same issue of purpose in life. He sought it in many forms: the acquisition of wisdom, plunging into self-indulgence, the pursuit of knowledge, the vanity of vocation and the accumulation of wealth and honor all left him with emptiness. All Solomon could offer to mankind was to fear and remember God, while rejoicing in the work God gave to do.

As wise as Solomon was, even his solution to the purpose of life, seems rather hollow. Modern man also struggles with the same issues. Many seek the same things Solomon found lacking, others turn to ideologies religious and otherwise. In the last several centuries, some dedicated themselves to ideologies and social issues seeking to make the world a better place, but often those pursuits led to conflicts as one ideology fought with another. The pursuit of “making the world a better place” often leads to fatigue and disillusionment, because the goal never seems to be attained. There is always more that could be done while society’s problems remain, even with technological advances that make life more comfortable.

So what is the answer? One man took a very different approach, while everyone else in modern society teaches to do more, to work more efficiently, to be more productive in order to accomplish more, Jesus offers a different way. After Jesus made a startling claim, one that no other man has made; he alone truly knows God the Father. Then Jesus declared to his followers to come to him all who labor and are heavy-laden and he will give them rest. Coming to Jesus, they are to take up his yoke and learn from him, because he is gentle and humble. In this way, they will find what nothing else, not even Solomon or the pursuit of ideologies can offer, rest for their souls (See Matthew 11:25-30). Through Jesus we learn that the purpose in life is not necessarily to make the world a better place, but to learn to know God, who is the only one who truly knows how to make the world a better place. Through Jesus, not only does the world become a better place, but those coming to know God through him also find true and complete rest.

The Power Of Martyrdom

Ironically there are some from church history who are remembered not only by what they did and taught, but more so by how they died. One such individual was a man and church leader, who had learned of Jesus through the apostle John and eventually became the leader of the church of Smyrna in Asia Minor during the early decades of the second century. He died as a martyr in 155 AD at the age of 85 or 86. Today he is considered a saint by the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Lutheran and Anglican Churches.

From the account of Polycarp’s death we get a glimpse of the life and faith of early church leaders. We know of Polycarp through two primary sources, his letter to the Philippians that touched on some of the same themes as Paul’s letter to the same church. The other source is known as the Martyrdom of Polycarp, written from the church of Smyrna to other churches to communicate what had happened to Polycarp.

During the persecution of some Christians at Smyrna, those martyred exhibited great peace and patience as they suffered, moving some of the observers to tears and conversion to Jesus. The majority, however, were enraged and called for the death of Polycarp, the leader of the church in Smyrna. When Polycarp learned that the officials, commanded by a man named Herod, were looking for him, he desired to remain in the city, but his friends convinced him to depart and stay at a farm a short distance away . There he prayed for the churches. Having fallen into a trance, he saw his pillow engulfed in flames and realized he would be burned alive. Departing to yet another farm, he remained there until the officials found him after having tortured two boys who had served Polycarp.

Finding Polycarp in a bed upstairs, the officials were surprised by his age. Polycarp first commanded that food and drink be provided for the officials, then requested that he be allowed to pray for an hour, which was granted. Polycarp then prayed for two. Witnessing this, some repented for having come against such a venerable old man. Arriving in the city, Polycarp was met by Herod and his father Nicetes, who had him join them in their carriage. There they tried to persuade him to declare Caesar as Lord and offer incense, but Polycarp refused. After threatening him, they made get out of the carriage and walk to the stadium as the crowd roared. As he entered he heard a voice tell him to be strong and be the man. The Christians with Polycarp also heard the voice, but did not know its source. The presiding Proconsul urged Polycarp to confess Caesar and declare away with the atheists. In response Polycarp looked at the crowd and declared “Away with the Atheists”. At the persistence of the Proconsul, Polycarp responded: “Fourscore and six years have I been His servant, and He hath done me no wrong. How then can I blaspheme my King who saved me?” Polycarp offered to make an explanation of his faith, but the Proconsul told him to make his appeal to the crowd, to which Polycarp explained that the Proconsul being a government official was worthy of an explanation, but the crowd not so. Upon Polycarp’s refusal to confess Caesar, he threatened him with wild beasts, but Polycarp told him to bring them on. Then he threatened him with fire, but Polycarp responded that he only had fire that burned for a season but was ignorant of the eternal fire of judgment.

Declaring to the crowd that Polycarp had confessed to being a Christian, the crowd called for the lion, but the Proconsul declared that this would not be lawful since he had already closed the games. Then they called for Polycarp to be burned alive in accordance to the vision Polycarp had before. After building the pile of wood, they desired to nail Polycarp to it, but he told them that God would give him grace to endure the flames and remain in the fire, so they tied him to it. Then Polycarp prayed thanking God for the honor to be counted among the martyrs and asking to be received into His presence. After lighting the fire, the aroma of baked bread filled the arena, not the smell of burning flesh, but the fire could not kill him, reminiscent of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in the Old Testament, so the executioner was sent in to kill Polycarp with a dagger. When he did so a dove flew out and blood came out which extinguished the fire. When the Christians came to claim Polycarp’s body, the Jews opposed them and declared that they would begin worshiping Polycarp as they did Christ. Therefore the Proconsul had Polycarp’s body burned according to the Roman custom. Afterwards the Christians came and gathered his bones and put them in a suitable place.

Due to his martyrdom, Polycarp became even more well-known than other martyrs. Polycarp’s and others willingness to be martyred may seem strange to us who do not face the same trials that they did, but it gives us a glimpse into how precious they understood following Jesus. They saw it as an honor and privilege to lay their life down for Jesus. Those ancient believers would probably quite agree with the words of a 20th Century martyr, Jim Eliot, who wrote in his journal: “He is no fool, who gives up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose”. Throughout the history of the church the death of martyrs has not accomplished what their murderers desired, but actually the opposite. Historically, martyrs have inspired others to seek out Jesus and follow him. Their example gives yet another confirmation of Jesus’ words to his disciples, not to fear those who can only kill the body, but fear the one who can destroy both body and soul in hell (Matthew 10:28).


Science and Theology

From my recent reading on Quantum Physics, I am learning about the unique properties of light and its impact upon time and our existence. Not surprisingly, light is also significant within Scripture. In the first words of Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament, we read God saying: “’Let there be light’ and there was light. And God saw that it was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.” (Genesis 1:3-5 ESV) The first thing that God created was light, not sources of light, which he created later on the fourth day; he created light, which also is related to time, because light defined a day.

In the New Testament, we gather more information about light. According to John, light has also become a person. That light is identified as being the Word, who was with God and who was God in the beginning. Through this person all things came into being; he is the source of life and that life was the light of all men, which shines in the darkness. This being whom John calls the Word is life and light became a person known as Jesus. (John 1:1-18) Jesus declared himself to be the light of the world, promising that whoever follows him will not walk in darkness, but has the light of life.

In the early 20th century as physicists were making new and unprecedented discoveries, Albert Einstein wrote about relativity and demonstrated that time is not constant, but is rather related to the speed an objecttt is traveling. It is also related to the observer. Einstein explained that the faster an object travels the slower time passes. On earth we do not travel fast enough to notice, although Einstein did give an illustration. In the case of a person standing still and bouncing a ball up and down, the ball travels a path of straight down and straight back up. However, if a person were to observe another person on a train passing by who is also bouncing a ball up and down, he would see that the ball does not travel straight up and down, but takes a “V” shaped path down and up, because while the person bouncing the ball is standing still the train is moving forward so that the ball also is moving forward on its path down and back up. In other words, the ball on the train is actually traveling further than the ball that is bounced standing still in the same amount of time. Einstein went on to explain that the closer an object travels to the speed of light the slower time passes. Einstein’s discoveries demonstrated a connection between light and time, while light has a constant speed, time is relative to the speed at which an object travels. Theoretically time stops at the speed of light or we might say is timeless. In other words, we might say that light is the lord of time. Jesus being the light of the world, is Lord over all and existing in a dimension outside of time.

Also discovered during that same time period is that light sometimes functions as a particle and at other times functions as a wave so that it is difficult to define what exactly it is. Curiously, Jesus is also hard to define. He is both God and man. Theologians struggled to explain him in the early centuries. The Council of Nicea affirmed that he was God, not a special created being as the Gnostics and later Arius taught. However, that did not end the debate about Jesus or answer the question of how one person could possess two natures, divine and human. Really that question has never been answered. One hundred years after Nicea at The Council of Chalcedon (451 AD) which defined Christ’s nature by what it is not. Jesus Christ’s dual nature was affirmed to be both fully human and fully divine existing in one person without confusion, change, division or separation. Curiously the nature of Jesus and the nature of light are strangely similar both having two components whose interaction are not fully understood or explained.

When we speak of Jesus as the light of the world, we often think of him in terms of illuminating humanity. While this is true it is also possible that the discovery of physicists and the emergence of Quantum Physics are also instructive on who Jesus is as well. Jesus as light of the world not only illuminates humanity, he is also Lord over time and exists outside of time. The discoveries regarding light made by 20th century physicists illustrate the truth of Scripture and also help understand what Paul wrote to the Colossians when he declared that Jesus sustains all of creation. Paul wrote about Jesus: “And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together”. (Colossians 1:17). Over the last several hundred years and particularly the last hundred the view has been taught that science and theology oppose one another, that faith in God and in Jesus cannot be reconciled with science. However the discoveries of the last 100 years indicate that science and theology have a lot in common if we just have the eyes to see and the ears to hear.