Jesus is not Meta

The Metaverse. The Tower of Babel. What do these two things have in common? I suggest the former is a present attempt at the latter.

The Genesis 11 story of the tower of Babel is a story of people who try to build a tower to the heavens to make a name for themselves instead of a) believing that God would not flood the earth again (they make it waterproof, 11:3); and b) spreading out across the earth, as God commanded in chapter 9. This story is likely true and an archetypal story, illustrating what humans attempt to do at every opportunity. We want to live in and create the world our way. 

I think the Metaverse is a digital attempt to do this very thing. Listening to the podcast episode with Lex Friedman and Mark Zuckerberg discussing the Metaverse, it seems to be an attempt to create an alternate, fantasy world, ruled by the 'meta-gods,' in which you will be able to experience a substitute reality. You can be anything you want to be, as long as it is approved by the gods. Buying, selling, owning 'property,' all available. I was slightly horrified to hear them developing clothing for a virtual world. Modern day bricks and tar (Gen 11:3).

I spent the early couple of months of this year researching and writing a graduate paper on the resurrection of Jesus, specifically countering the arguments of some scholars that it was simply a hallucination. Each time I am deeply embedded in studying a Biblical topic, I am reminded of just how important physicality is to humanity. We are embodied people, living in a very physical world, surrounded by matter, all of which God made. We are meant to be in the physical presence of one another--it's why absence can be difficult, and unsurprising the lockdowns of the last couple of years have had such a devastating impact on people. There is no substitute. If there is any question on this point, the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus should end the debate. For if Jesus could have come via Zoom, or as a mirage, or in 3D, or on a Metaverse-like platform, don't you think that would have been a lot easier for him? Quite the contrary, it was absolutely necessary for Jesus to come in the flesh. Not only to redeem what we are now, but to embody what we will be like!

Of course this physical world is a tough place, full of pain, suffering, and an existence that would perhaps be easier to fantasize away in a virtual world. But that isn't how we are made. We are made for this world, though fully restored one day. Jesus will not return to "take us away" from the world, but to restore all things--heavens and earth. The final chapter of the Bible (Rev 22) shows God coming down to dwell with His people, just as He did in the early chapters of Genesis, when it all started. One of the incredible gifts that God has given us is our physicality. The union of spirit and body will continue forever--Jesus, after all, exists now and in eternity as our embodied Savior.

We are not designed to escape, but rather to be in the world. Jesus is not Meta. And neither should we.

Submission to Government

 A comment was made today by the speaker at church that while Romans 13:1 says we must submit to the government, that only applies to righteous government. He then referenced two stories in Daniel (chapters 3 and 6) as an argument for his statement. Taken simply on its surface, this statement opens the door to a significant misunderstanding. It is critical that we distinguish between submission and obedience.

All authority is established by God, which is Paul's point in Romans 13. Thus, submission to authority is part of God's design and command. So regardless of the "rightness" of the authority, one must submit in the sense that one is to be under it and as much as is possible, obey its decrees. This is true regardless of the righteousness of the government -- remember that Paul is writing Romans 13 not only under the Roman system, but under Nero! Hardly a righteous ruler!

However, there are times when the government's decrees come in conflict with God's law -- the story of the large image of gold which all were commanded to bow down and worship and Daniel's three friends who refused to do so (Daniel 3) and Daniel's refusal to obey a command not to pray (Daniel 6) are examples. But I must point out that in both of these instances, their disobedience included a humble submission to the consequences. Daniel and his friends all submitted to the punishments that came as a result of their disobedience, and they did so with truth and yet humility (and miraculously, were saved in both occasions). I will add that both Paul and Peter were murdered under Nero's rule, submitting to the consequences of disobeying a ruler that was evil (they were not 'saved').

Thus, the statement must be carefully nuanced if it is to avoid misunderstanding. We must always submit the government, because it is an institution of God. But at time, our submission is a submission to the consequences of disobedience, because the government has commanded what conflicts with what God has commanded, and God is the higher authority. Yet, the respect for authority means we must humbly accept such consequences. God may deliver us. He may not. He did not spare His own son! 

Perhaps a bit of American rebellious culture has crept into the church and its view of our relation to the government. We would do well to reevaluate such attitudes in light of Scripture and the examples of the early church. Most were martyred for the faith because of their refusal to worship Caesar, and yet they went to their deaths, not with vindictiveness or even exulting in their rebellion, but in submission to authority -- it is the submission to the highest authority that gives one the humble confidence to accept such consequences, even death. 

Hebrews 10 Warning

Hebrews is the most tightly argued book in the New Testament and its warning passages (2:1-4; 4:1-2; 6:4-6; 10:26-31; 12:25-29) are terrifying to read, even when the context is understood. How much more terrifying are they when the context is removed and they are applied to other contexts! One of the harshest warnings is found in 10:26-31 and it cannot be understood without carefully understanding the context.

Hebrews has just finished his magnificent exposition on the greater priesthood of Jesus Christ, begun back in 5:1 and concluded in 10:18, with the expected actions one must take as a result of these truths in 10:19-25. He "breaks" into his exposition in 5:11-6:20 in order to grab his listener's attention in preparation for the long and difficult word (5:11). This word, found in 7:1-10:18, is bracketed by the warnings of 6:4-6 and 10:26-32. It is the latter warning that I want to focus, and in particular, the "willful sin" that is referenced in 10:26:

"For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin, but a terrifying expectation of judgment..." (10:26-27a NASB 1995)

On the surface, this has been taken to mean continuing, willful sin as a Christian means loss of salvation. Isn't that what it says? This is where context is so critical. What is the willful sin that Hebrews is referring to? Is it any continuing sin that a believer commits? We must understand the "no sacrifice" statement first.

The phrase "there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin" in 10:26 is the same phrase that occurs in 10:18, which is the final statement of his long exposition. In short, Hebrews concludes that because the sacrifice of Christ has once and for all taken away sin, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin. This is because Christ's sacrifice is the only sacrifice and it is completed! There isn't and can never be another one. This is key to understanding this passage. The only acceptable sacrifice for my sin is Christ and it has already been accomplished.

In light of this, what does Hebrews exhort his listeners to do in 10:19-25? Draw near, hold fast, and encourage one another (10:22-24). Now for the sin. What is the concern in his book? Is it sin in general or is the entire tone of the book a concern that his listeners are considering abandoning their Christian faith due to persecution (see 10:32-36)? I think it is a fair statement to make that almost all scholars agree that Hebrews is focused on apostasy as the sin he is concerned with in his listeners. Again, context is critical. The sin in Hebrews is that of abandoning Christ, rejecting his sacrifice, and (for the listeners), returning to Judaism for salvation.

Here is the problem. If the sacrifice of Christ is the only one and therefore there is no longer any sacrifice for sin, then to leave Christ is to leave the only sacrifice! To abandon Christ means to abandon salvation. To refuse to draw near, to refuse to hold fast, to refuse to participate in community (encourage one another) is to refuse the only available means of salvation that God offers. Christ's death has forever changed how we come to God, because the veil, His flesh, has been torn so that we might have direct access to God through Him! There is no access to God except through Him. If you abandon Christ, you can't get to God!

One final observation from earlier in Hebrews: the wilderness generation of Exodus-Numbers is used as the negative example of what not to emulate in 3:7-4:13 and possibly implied in the 6:4-6 warning. The wilderness generation witnessed the ten plagues in Egypt (Ex. 7-12), crossed the Red Sea on dry land, saw God kill the entire Egyptian army (Ex. 14), ate manna from heaven every day in the wilderness and received water from multiple rocks (Ex. 16-17)), along with numerous other miracles. Yet, with their mouths full of food from heaven, they rejected the command of God to take the promised land, and as a result, were judged and died in the wilderness (Num. 13-14). For the Christian, the 'promised land' is the salvation found in Christ, and we are urged to hold fast and draw near--not to abandon or become weak in faith. Is it any surprise the very next passage in Hebrews following his long exposition and harsh warning in chapter 10 is his famous hall of faith in chapter 11? This is what he wants to inspire in his listeners! Be like these great examples of faith and draw near to Jesus! Don't abandon Christ, because He is the only all-sufficient once-for-all sacrifice for sin.

Grace for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob

In reading a bit of commentary on Romans 9 last night, the choice of Isaac and Jacob in verses 6-13 was highlighted as a powerful message of the grace of God. Paul brings back up the discussion of Abraham and the promise (4:16-21)--this promise being a son from both Abraham and Sarah. Ishmael, although firstborn of Abraham, was not this son, because the promise was by faith, and Ishmael was an attempt by Abraham to fulfill that promise on his own. However, Sarah was long past the age of bearing children, being 90 years old when she had Isaac. Thus, it had to be by faith that Isaac came, as entirely a gracious gift from God. There was no way Abraham and Sarah were going to be able to create this child of promise on their own. If anything, Ishmael demonstrates a weakness of faith in Abraham and Sarah that they thought they might 'help God out' in producing a son. But God's purpose was not to be altered--the son had to come through both Abraham and Sarah, well beyond their ability, that it might be shown to all that it was by grace through faith.

And then we come to Isaac and Rebekah, who have twins, but God does something unusual--He picks the younger through whom the blessing would continue (Rom. 9:13). Paul makes a point to observe that neither twin had done anything; they were both still in their mother's womb when God chose Jacob over Esau. The point again is that it is God's choice and God's purpose (9:11b)--that this is God's grace that is acting, choosing, and creating. It isn't on the basis of works. Certainly Jacob isn't the hallmark of integrity--he's a deceiver and a trickster throughout the story. But that is the point, and what Paul is calling attention to here. God did this to show "God's purpose according to His choice... not because of works but because of Him who calls" (Rom. 9:11b).

My natural tendency is to keep trying to do something to somehow please God and made Him more inclined to be favorable to me. That is "the Law" mentality and one that the Christian has been set free from. But there are still habits of legalism in me that come up and this truth of grace and God's choice must continue to be pressed into me. Reading this section last night and this morning shows this powerful story of God's gracious choice of His own purposes and choice, not due to any actions on the part of these people. God's salvation has always been by grace through faith, and Paul through the Holy Spirit is showing us that truth! He chose Abraham and Sarah by His grace, He made Isaac by grace, and He chose Jacob by grace. The faith is that God can do what He has promised, although praise God their faith was imperfect, as an example to me, whose faith is also imperfect. God isn't looking for perfection. He will fulfill His purpose. By His grace. I believe He will. Do you?

God is not (just) love

If, as the title provocatively suggests, one describes God as primarily love, then such a description of Him is not only incomplete but fails to accurately communicate Him as He has revealed Himself to us. And it creates enormous barriers for us to understand why He acts as He does.

Christianity in this century appears to have swung the pendulum into an extreme position where we almost entirely focus on and talk about God's attribute of love. Love is everywhere. God is love. Love, love, love. The most important thing you must believe about God is that He is love. And then we scratch our heads and can't understand large parts of the Bible and what they reveal to us about God because it sure doesn't seem like love!

May I suggest it is because we've made God into our own chosen image, an image that we want to see, an image that we want to worship, and an image we want to share, instead of Who He actually is? We want a God of love because that is tame and safe and friendly. We're kind of embarrassed at some of the things God did in the Bible. God needs a better sales strategy. Let's focus on love. All you need is love, right?

Except not.

Most (all?) of the time someone comes into the presence of God, their reaction is not warm fuzzies. It is terrifying, woe-is-me fear! This includes the "apostle of love", John, who when He sees Jesus (JESUS!), falls down as if he is a dead man in terror (Rev. 1:17-18)! And he's the "disciple whom Jesus loved," the guy who wrote that "God is love."

If we want to know God, we must accept Him as He has revealed Himself, not as we would have Him. God is all of His revealed attributes, all of the time, in all their fullness, in everything that He does, in their maximum perfection. He is holy, righteous, just, merciful, good, infinite, all-knowing, everywhere present, all-powerful, and love (to name a few). I will note that the seraphim around the throne of God do not sing "love, love, love, is the LORD God Almighty" day and night -- they sing "holy holy holy" (Isa. 6; Rev 4)! When we focus on one attribute of God to the detriment of the others, we fail to know Him and honor Him as God!

If a passage of Scripture doesn't seem to make sense, ask yourself if perhaps it is showing you a bigger God than you currently imagine, who is way more than just love.

More of God, More of Me, Though I am not He

I am in the midst of taking Trinitarianism at Dallas Theological Seminary with Dr. Horrell and as I have been told by many sources, it has been magnificent thus far! It is a lot of material to take in and digest (and ultimately it is hardly being digested but mostly stored away for future thought or at least a vague recollection which can then encourage me to dig further into my notes) in a single week. One thing has stuck out to me in this second day that I wanted to share because it seems so antithetical to how we typically expect relationships to function.

In relationships, we sort of expect that to some extent we will “lose” ourselves in the other person, somehow change, become different, or at least, we feel the pressure to do so. This is actually an indicator of a poor or unhealthy relationship, not a good one. What I am seeing in reflecting on the Trinity and the Godhead – the beautiful mystery of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit – is that true submission and love results in becoming more of who one truly is! The more I enter into the love of God, the more I submit myself to God, the more I actually become and embody – physically, emotionally, mentally – who I am made to be. In contrast to a pantheistic point of view where God sort of “takes me over”, in fact, in Christianity, God sets me free to become more real. And in an interesting way, we kind of “know” this is the case, because when you are in the “relationship” that is right, it is right because you are with a person who accepts you the way you are. The love of the other gives you greater freedom to be and enjoy you as you! That is love – loving the beloved as they are, not as we would try to manipulate them to be.

You may ask: “but doesn’t God expect us to change or to become more ‘Christlike’ or better?” Yes, but in the way one who actually loves the beloved would desire. You see, God sets us free from sin, which is the condition that is binding and preventative true freedom, and He provides us both the freedom and power (by His Spirit) to live more deeply and fully into our design, into how He’s made us. Satan (the Father of lies) would prefer that we live in bondage and in part, limping along with tiny bits of joy, scraps that only cause us to pursue things that can never satisfy. God wants us to live freely and true freedom in its fullest sense will mean loving Him in return – because He is the Creator, Sustainer, Redeemer, and Lover of our soul. We won’t lose ourselves in the process – we will become more of ourselves, which in turn, gives Him more glory, praise, and honor!