Glory Be to God

The world Bible comes from the Greek word biblia, This word Bible is used to describe the holy book that us Christians follow and use to get our information about God. However, I think the word “Bible” and the Bible itself are both horribly misunderstood in a very key way. You may be wondering what I mean. I will attempt to explain in this post.

I think one of the greatest misconceptions about the Bible is that it is a book. A lot of you are probably confused by this. Let me explain by first looking at the Greek word biblia. When you look at its definition, you see something interesting. The word is plural. The Greek word  biblios translates to “book”. The word biblia is its plural, meaning “books”. The point I want to make from this is that the Bible is not a book. It’s a library.

The Bible is a collection of 66 different writings that were written  by an estimated near 40 authors  over a span of about 1500 years, containing all sorts of different genres from poetry and apocalyptic literature to biographies and laws. I would hardly call that a singular book. The Bible is instead the collection of documents written by God-inspired men throughout history. However, many people treat it as a single book simply because all these books are normally placed under one cover. I feel that this causes many people, Christians and non-Christians alike, to look at the Bible in the wrong light. I honestly try to avoid the word “Bible” sometimes because people immediately take that word as referring to a single book. The word “scripture” is preferable many times in my experience.

Many people who think of the Bible as merely a book tend to read all of it the same way, which is simply not fair. Paul’s letters are nothing like the writing style of David’s Psalms, and they are not trying to tell us the same things. The highly symbolic apocalyptic literature of Revelation could never be interpreted in a similar fashion to the laws of Leviticus. The stories of Jesus’s life are nothing at all like the Proverbs. Each book is a separate piece of writing and cannot simply be lumped together all the others. We must realize the diversity of the writings in the Bible and interpret each one based on its own context, genre, and authorship. Next time you finish one book of the Bible, remember that moving on to the next is not like going to the next chapter. You are starting a completely new piece of literature which could possibly have a completely different story.

Another thing that happens when you treat the Bible for the library that it is is that the unity of it is breathtaking. We would expect a mere book to be consistent with itself, but when 66 books from 40 authors, many of whom did not know each other, are as connected as the books of the Bible, you realize how amazing it is. Abraham’s story in Genesis flows through scripture straight into the life of Jesus. Isaiah’s prophecies are quoted hundreds of years later in Peter’s epistles. The imagery of Daniel’s visions is used in Revelation. Once you look at the Bible as many different books, the unity of it becomes more evident, not less, and it truly exposes the how incredible this unity is.

The majority of people are familiar with the idea of heaven. If you grew up in a Christian home, you undoubtedly know it’s where believers go upon death. What does scripture say about this? What is the ultimate destination for a believer? What will happen to the world? Let’s examine.

One thing is very clear. Believers will live eternally. Many, many passages make this clear, John 3:16 for instance. So, the first thing I will examine is what this eternal life will be like. Contrary to popular belief, believers will not spend eternity in heaven as a disembodied spirit. There are two events scripture talks about multiple times that will happen in the future, the resurrection of the dead and the new heavens and Earth. Let’s look at these two events.

The resurrection of the dead is referred to in the Old Testament on at least three occasions, Isaiah 26:19, Ezekiel 37:1-14, and Daniel 12:2. These passages seem to describe a bodily resurrection, not just a spiritual one. In Jesus’s day, there were two groups of Jews, the Sadducees and Pharisees, who had opposing views on this topic. The Pharisees believed there was a resurrection, while the Sadducees denied this doctrine. Jesus sided with the Pharisees on this topic, as shown in Matthew 22:23-33, which says, ’On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him, asking, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.’ “Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh. “Last of all, the woman died. “In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.” But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: ‘I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.’ Here, Jesus affirms the resurrection as an actual event that will happen in the future. He describes it further in John 5:28-29, ‘“Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.‘ Paul greatly expands on this in 1 Corinthians 15. In verses 50-57, he says, ‘ Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory. “O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?” The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.’ So, it’s very clear that under the Christian worldview, we don’t just believe in our spirits living for eternity, but that our bodies will be raised and glorified, and we will live for eternity as body and spirit.

Now, what about the new heaven and Earth? Isaiah 65:17-19 says, ‘“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth;            And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. “But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create;            For behold, I create Jerusalem for rejoicing            And her people for gladness. “I will also rejoice in Jerusalem and be glad in My people;            And there will no longer be heard in her            The voice of weeping and the sound of crying.’ This is the first reference we see of a new heaven and Earth. This idea is expanded on in the New Testament. 1 Peter 3:10 reads, ‘But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.’ This verse clearly communicates that the current Earth will be done away with. Revelation talks in great detail about the new one. For instance, chapter 21 verses 1-4 says, ‘Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them, and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away.”’ These passages show that the current world will be done away with, but that God will create a new one where we will dwell with Him eternally in our natural, physical yet glorified state, body and spirit. That is our ultimate hope, not disembodied spirits floating around in heaven for eternity, but living in a glorified, sinless state on Earth in physical bodies in the presence of God.

Now, what about before all this? What happens when a believer dies? One thing is clear. When a believer leaves this life, he is away from his body but with God. 2 Corinthians 5:8, ‘we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.‘ In Philippians, Paul says he would rather be with Jesus than stay in this life. Chapter 1 verse 23 reads, ‘But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better;‘. So, it is clear Christians will be with God in a disembodied, intermediate state between this earthly life and the next. Where is this? I think scripture is clear this is the place we call heaven. The place God calls His home and His presence is truly felt. 2 Kings 2 describes Elijah being taken to heaven. In Revelation chapter  4 and 7, John describes seeing people in heaven. In 2 Corinthians 12:2-6, Paul describes being taken up the third heaven. (he calls it the third heaven because in that time, the word heaven had three meanings, the sky, outer space, and the dwelling place of God. He was saying he went to the third of these.) He says, ‘I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven. And I know how such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows— was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak. On behalf of such a man I will boast; but on my own behalf I will not boast, except in regard to my weaknesses. For if I do wish to boast I will not be foolish, for I will be speaking the truth; but I refrain from this, so that no one will credit me with more than he sees in me or hears from me.’ He was shown what awaited him after death.

Tim Keller, “Literalism”, 11/5/2006 (via theringofwords)

YES

Having Scripture teachers who understood this was the best thing that ever happened to me. I stopped uncritically reading as a 21st century American woman and started trying to understand what the words actually meant to the people who wrote and read them when they were new.

Narrative. Justice.

Example: Abraham commits adultery with Hagar? Problems galore follow. Including for Sarah, who didn’t do it but whose idea it was. God ignores Abraham for like almost twenty years, gives him the great stony cold shoulder, and then the first thing He says to him is guess what you moron, the sign of the covenant is going to be circumcision! Ouch. A symbolic remedy right in the, er, heart of the problem, just in case he hadn’t gotten it yet.

So Abraham kicks Hagar and infant Ishmael out into the desert to “get lost” with barely any provisions. They’re both going to die. Does God pat him on the back for a job well done? No! He comes to Hagar, consoles her, and saves their lives, and promises that Ishmael too will father a great people.

There are ALWAYS consequences for sin. Even when the sinner is God’s chosen one. God doesn’t have to strike them with lightning bolts to prove that sin is the wrong choice, and neither does the narrator have to didactically expound on it. The evil consequences inherent in the evil choice make themselves abundantly clear. THAT is the lesson, the one God has been trying to pound into our heads ever since the Fall: it’s not about rules and regulations and obeying or disobeying an arbitrary cosmic master. It’s about some things being inherently good, and some inherently bad, and if you choose the bad you and everyone around you is going to suffer for it.

The majority of people are familiar with the idea of heaven. If you grew up in a Christian home, you undoubtedly know it’s where believers go upon death. What does scripture say about this? What is the ultimate destination for a believer? What will happen to the world? Let’s examine.

One thing is very clear. Believers will live eternally. Many, many passages make this clear, John 3:16 for instance. So, the first thing I will examine is what this eternal life will be like. Contrary to popular belief, believers will not spend eternity in heaven as a disembodied spirit. There are two events scripture talks about multiple times that will happen in the future, the resurrection of the dead and the new heavens and Earth. Let’s look at these two events.

The resurrection of the dead is referred to in the Old Testament on at least three occasions, Isaiah 26:19, Ezekiel 37:1-14, and Daniel 12:2. These passages seem to describe a bodily resurrection, not just a spiritual one. In Jesus’s day, there were two groups of Jews, the Sadducees and Pharisees, who had opposing views on this topic. The Pharisees believed there was a resurrection, while the Sadducees denied this doctrine. Jesus sided with the Pharisees on this topic, as shown in Matthew 22:23-33, which says, ’On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him, asking, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.’ “Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh. “Last of all, the woman died. “In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.” But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: ‘I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.’ Here, Jesus affirms the resurrection as an actual event that will happen in the future. He describes it further in John 5:28-29, ‘“Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.‘ Paul greatly expands on this in 1 Corinthians 15. In verses 50-57, he says, ‘ Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory. “O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?” The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.’ So, it’s very clear that under the Christian worldview, we don’t just believe in our spirits living for eternity, but that our bodies will be raised and glorified, and we will live for eternity as body and spirit.

Now, what about the new heaven and Earth? Isaiah 65:17-19 says, ‘“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth;            And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. “But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create;            For behold, I create Jerusalem for rejoicing            And her people for gladness. “I will also rejoice in Jerusalem and be glad in My people;            And there will no longer be heard in her            The voice of weeping and the sound of crying.’ This is the first reference we see of a new heaven and Earth. This idea is expanded on in the New Testament. 1 Peter 3:10 reads, ‘But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.’ This verse clearly communicates that the current Earth will be done away with. Revelation talks in great detail about the new one. For instance, chapter 21 verses 1-4 says, ‘Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them, and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away.”’ These passages show that the current world will be done away with, but that God will create a new one where we will dwell with Him eternally in our natural, physical yet glorified state, body and spirit. That is our ultimate hope, not disembodied spirits floating around in heaven for eternity, but living in a glorified, sinless state on Earth in physical bodies in the presence of God.

Now, what about before all this? What happens when a believer dies? One thing is clear. When a believer leaves this life, he is away from his body but with God. 2 Corinthians 5:8, ‘we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.‘ In Philippians, Paul says he would rather be with Jesus than stay in this life. Chapter 1 verse 23 reads, ‘But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better;‘. So, it is clear Christians will be with God in a disembodied, intermediate state between this earthly life and the next. Where is this? I think scripture is clear this is the place we call heaven. The place God calls His home and His presence is truly felt. 2 Kings 2 describes Elijah being taken to heaven. In Revelation chapter  4 and 7, John describes seeing people in heaven. In 2 Corinthians 12:2-6, Paul describes being taken up the third heaven. (he calls it the third heaven because in that time, the word heaven had three meanings, the sky, outer space, and the dwelling place of God. He was saying he went to the third of these.) He says, ‘I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven. And I know how such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows— was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak. On behalf of such a man I will boast; but on my own behalf I will not boast, except in regard to my weaknesses. For if I do wish to boast I will not be foolish, for I will be speaking the truth; but I refrain from this, so that no one will credit me with more than he sees in me or hears from me.’ He was shown what awaited him after death.

This video has been making the rounds on social media, and it’s crossed my path a number of times. It features Bill Nye the Science Guy giving a really patronizing, condescending lecture to the pro-life community, and I’ve seen a number of people post this video with captions praising Bill Nye for defeating the pro-life stance entirely. Problem is, he’s done no such thing, and in fact the entire video is four and a half minutes of cringe-worthy misunderstanding.

So, let’s take a look at this trainwreck:

(Disclaimer: I’m not trying to debate the ethics of abortion with this post. If abortion is morally justifiable, these arguments certainly aren’t why, and all they’re doing is making pro-choicers look like they don’t know what they’re talking about. In fact, I think this is probably the worst collection of pro-choice arguments I’ve ever heard, due to the simple fact that it betrays a total misunderstanding of every facet of the issue, which is ironic, given that Bill accuses pro-lifers of being ignorant.)

Misunderstanding one: “who are you gonna sue? Every woman who’s had a fertilized egg pass through her?”

Bill Nye says that because pro-lifers consider a fertilized egg to be identical with a human person, they should therefore hold spontaneous abortion or miscarriages as equal to murder the way they hold clinical abortion to it. If abortion is murder, then this argument is like saying that the mother of a baby who died from SIDS is just as guilty of murder as a mother who went into her baby’s room and smothered it to death. It’s absolutely ridiculous. In one case, the mother has no control over whether her baby dies, and in the other, the mother is directly responsible for the fact that her baby dies.

Misunderstanding two: “when it comes to women’s rights with respect to their reproduction, I think you should leave it to women.”

This at least has some merits. However, if abortion is murder, then it’s not just the rights of the woman being affected. It’s also the rights of the human person whose future is at stake. Even if it’s not murder, in the case of (specifically) abortion being treated as a women’s issue, the father’s rights to his child would be completely ignored in favor of the woman’s, and that’s not fair.

This is also ignoring the fact that, in all cases (not just abortion), if one party has a personal and emotional investment in an issue (as women do in the case of their reproductive rights), then it’s more than likely that they will be unable to make an objective and logical decision about it. This doesn’t mean they should be excluded from the decision by any means, but it does mean that they shouldn’t be the only ones allowed to have a say.

Misunderstanding three: “sorry guys, I know it’s your interpretation of a book written 5,000 years ago…”

This actually makes me furious. In addition to the chronological snobbery (which is a fallacy, by the way), this is an attempt to discredit and disregard all pro-life arguments as “lol religious people and their silly superstitions, amirite? Good thing us sciencey people are smarter than that.” There are plenty of pro-life organizations, as well as people, who are not religious, and nonetheless consider abortion to be a moral evil. Many of them would be legitimately offended at being lumped in with the religious crowd. I’m curious as to whether Bill Nye has ever talked to a pro-lifer, if he thinks their arguments can all be tied back to the Bible.

Misunderstanding four: “nobody likes abortion, but you don’t get to tell people what to do.”

Actually, yes I do. I have every right to tell someone not to commit murder. The government also has the right to tell someone not to commit murder. If abortion is murder, then both I and the government have every right to tell people that they can’t have abortions.

Misunderstanding five: “she has rights over this, especially if she doesn’t like the guy that got her pregnant.”

Disliking someone is not an acceptable motive for murder. If abortion is murder, disliking the guy who got you pregnant is not an excusable motive to have an abortion, any more than it’s an excusable motive to kill a toddler. Even if the woman in question was raped.

Misunderstanding six “to squander resources on this argument based on bad science, on just lack of understanding, is very frustrating.”

The argument isn’t based on “bad science” because it isn’t based on science at all. Life and personhood are not scientific concepts. You can throw as much science as you want in there, and it’s not going to do a lick of good, because this isn’t a scientific issue–it’s an ethical one. If abortion is murder, then this is just as serious an issue as any other issue we could be “squandering our resources” on, like human trafficking or terrorism or poverty.

Misunderstanding seven: “abstinence… closing abortion clinics… not giving women access to birth control has not been an effective way to lead to healthier societies.”

First of all, abstinence education and limiting access to birth control are not necessarily actions endorsed by the pro-life community as a whole. Bill Nye is still confusing “pro-life” with “Christian,” and even then, he doesn’t understand the nature of the issues. Second of all, if abortion is murder, then allowing it is much more detrimental to the health of society than any of the things he’s listed.

Misunderstanding eight: “I just really encourage you… not to pursue these laws that are really in nobody’s best interest. Just really be objective about this.”

Well, if abortion is murder (say it with me, folks), then these laws are in the best interests of the unborn people they’re saving. Just because they’re not in the best interests of the would-be murderers doesn’t mean that nobody‘s best interests are being considered here. And I don’t think dear old Bill gets to lecture people on objectivity when he just said that women are the only ones who should be allowed a say in the abortion debates.

TL;DR: none of Bill’s arguments work unless we’ve already demonstrated that abortion is morally permissible. Unfortunately, the question of whether abortion is morally permissible is LITERALLY THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT so all he’s managed to illustrate is that if abortion is morally permissible, then abortion is morally permissible. You’ll have to excuse me if I’m not particularly amazed by his logical prowess on this point.

Here’s a thought: How about we try and actually listen to what the other side has to say and come to an amiable, rational conclusion instead of shouting over them about how wrong they are? Pro-lifers, I’m talking to you, too…