My Visit with Angie O'Gram

So one minute I’m hearing that 50 is the new 40, and the next minute I’m popping pills like a junkie. This is too weird. I hadn’t had a physical in a few years (let’s say) and this new doctor decides to give me a stress test. I think it was because I mentioned chest pains (maybe). I took the test and failed miserably. So then they’re running a tube up my vein (I’ll leave out the entry point for those with weak stomachs) and they’re taking X-rays of my ticker. It was not a pretty sight. I had an ultrasound hooked up to my toe, for some strange reason – it sounded like sonar detecting an enemy sub. Fortunately, I didn’t have to stay the night in the hospital. Unfortunately, I have to meet with the doctor again on Monday to talk about a possible bypass. Don’t that “beat” all?

ChristianCourses.Com

Today I started a class called "Foundations of the Old Testament." I'm taking this one, not teaching it. It is offered free of charge by RBC Ministries, and you can access it at ChristianCourses.com. The "RBC" many years ago stood for "Radio Bible Class," and I suppose the courses on the web are simply the 21st century equivalent.

This one is taught with videos featuring Dr. Douglas Stuart, professor of Old Testament at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. All I had to do was click on the link and for the next half-hour I was able to watch and learn from a well-produced online video.

I actually learned something, too. Stuart discussed the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and asked the question, why would God not want Adam and Eve to know those things? I honestly had not given that a lot of thought before. But he went on to explain that "good and evil" is a Hebrew merism, and "a merism is a category of speech in which totality is expressed by polarity." In other words, "what God is forbidding is that human beings should know everything. And of course, that is exactly what Satan tries to get them to know," according to Stuart.

Interesting stuff. It's free, and it's available anytime. Pretty cool.

Old Fords

Tiger Woods and Atonement

After listening to Tiger Woods’ public apology for his many infidelities, one phrase stood out more than any other during the entire 13 ½ minutes: “I have a lot to atone for.” The statement points to the crucial importance of atonement. It reminded me of what news commentator Brit Hume said more than a month ago. Noting Woods’ Buddhist heritage from his mother, Hume said, “I don’t think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So my message to Tiger would be, ‘Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.’”

You can imagine the contempt and utter scorn that was heaped upon Hume for such audacious words. The Huffington Post for example, called it “sanctimonious,” “distasteful,” and “inflammatory.” I’ve read and re-read Hume’s statement and none of those descriptions seem to apply. But that’s beside the point. What Hume was getting at is that forgiveness and redemption are not the central religious concepts within Buddhism that they are in Christianity. That’s simply a matter of fact, not a reflection of bigotry or intolerance.

What was most interesting to me about the whole story was that journalists sought out Buddhist scholars to comment on the controversy, and the professors (indirectly) confirmed what Hume had said. For example, Carl M. Cannon of Politics Daily cites Stephen Prothero on the religion faculty at Boston University: “You have the law of karma, so no matter what Woods says or does, he is going to have to pay for whatever wrongs he’s done. There’s no accountant in the sky wiping sins off your balance sheet, like there is in Christianity.”

Tiger Woods was right in a sense. There was a lot to atone for, namely, the sins of all humanity. The significance of the cross is that Jesus accomplished that very thing, once and for all. Woods could never atone for his own sins. You and I could never atone for our sins, either. Christians believe that because Jesus took on our sins at the cross, he (and he alone) offers true redemption, the kind Hume was referring to.

Like Woods, at one time I would have identified myself as Buddhist. In all honesty, I still find aspects of Buddhism to be very admirable. Non-attachment, for one. There is much to be gained from letting go of worldly things. Western Christians, in general, could probably learn a great deal from this teaching (and it starts with me).

But for Tiger Woods, who appears to be seeking redemption and forgiveness, he might do well to realize that that’s the native language spoken by Christianity, not Buddhism.

No Secrets

The picture is of the opening to my attic, and yes, that is an authentic Cold War-era sign attached to it. I suppose if I had any secrets, the attic is the place they’d go, but I really don’t have anything I’m at all concerned to hide. I am that boring. That’s why all that are up there right now are lots of file boxes full of stuff I haven’t looked at in years and maybe never will.

I got to thinking about this the other day during my religion course at the Biblical Studies Center. We read the following passage aloud from a very imaginative and insightful book by Peter Kreeft called Between Heaven and Hell.

In it, he describes a conversation between John F. Kennedy, Aldous Huxley, and C. S. Lewis, all of whom died around the same time. The following dialogue has to do with religious beliefs that are secret versus those that are out there in the open for everyone to see.

Lewis: …When I stopped being an atheist and started investigating the claims of the world’s great religions, I came to the conclusion that Hinduism and Christianity were ultimately the only two options.

Huxley: Perceptive of you. But they’re not two. They’re one. There’s your mistake: another example of either/or, black-and-white thinking. You can’t see that all religions are one at their mystical core, just as all reality is one at its mystical core. Which is inevitable, since religion is about reality.

Lewis: I agree that religion is about reality. Whether reality is one is a great question of philosophy, and not easily settled. But whether all religions are one is a question of observation, and it is easily settled: just look at their teachings. They’re not the same. They teach contradictory things.

Huxley: They seem to. But that’s only on the surface level, not at their core. Perhaps you’ve read Fritjof Schuon’s The Transcendent Unity of Religions? Alan Watts made the same point in a more popular and lively style: that there are two levels or dimensions in religion – the exoteric and the esoteric, the outer and the inner, the public and the private, the revealed and the hidden. The outer shell of a religion is its creed, code and cult; its words, works, and worship. But the kernel, the inner essence, is the experience of oneness.

Lewis: It seems to me you are saying that Christianity and Buddhism are very much alike, especially Buddhism.

Huxley: You plagiarized that from Chesterton!

Lewis: Yes, I did. I’m glad you have read him.

Huxley: What does it mean?

Lewis: That you’re using Oriental categories to interpret Christianity; you’re Orientalizing Christianity, synthesizing by annexation – spiritual imperialism.

Huxley: Why do you say that?

Lewis: Because the esoteric/exoteric distinction is itself an esoteric, not an exoteric doctrine. It applies to esoteric Eastern religions but not to exoteric Western religions. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are public, open, democratic religions, religions of a Book, open for all to read, not religions of hidden experiences known only to the initiated mystics. They are religions of history and of the deeds and words of God in history. Christianity is ultimately the Word of God in history. All public facts, not private mysticism.

Huxley: You’re probably one of those suspicious fellows who think that mysticism begins in mist, centers in “I” and ends in schism.

Lewis: Actually, I had a different quip up my sleeve: Ronald Knox’s remark about “comparative religion.”

Huxley: What’s that?

Lewis: That it makes you comparatively religious.

Huxley: So you’re not sympathetic to ecumenism?

Lewis: Not when it involves fuzzy thinking and ignoring contradictions.

Huxley: Contradictions appear only on the outer level, the exoteric. If you would penetrate to the inner core, you would find all contradictions resolved in The One. But you ignore that deepest level.

Lewis: In Christianity, the deepest level came out in public: “In him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell.” I’m not ignoring esoteric Christianity; how could I ignore something that doesn’t exist? It’s your invention.

The Gospel means “good news” and it was news that the early Christians proclaimed everywhere they went. It was no secret what they believed. From the beginning, they faced ridicule for insisting that God had come to this world in the flesh. They still do. But even Christianity’s harshest critics knew exactly what it was that they were refuting. It wasn’t hidden or esoteric or available only to the initiated.

Last month, on ABC’s Nightline, Martin Bashir interviewed Tommy Davis, a spokesman for Scientology. They had hardly begun when Bashir asked about Scientology’s teaching that has to do with the evil emperor Xenu. Within minutes of mentioning the name, Davis unclips his microphone and storms off the set. Apparently the deeper secrets invented by science-fiction author L. Ron Hubbard, including the existence of Xenu, are only intended for those initiated into the higher levels of the cult.

Consider the difference with Christianity. As Kreeft has Lewis saying, the Gospel has to do with “public facts” not private or secret “truths.” Mock it or dismiss it altogether, at least everyone knows (or can find out) exactly what this “exoteric” message has to say.

The top one is the “before” picture; the bottom one is the “after.” I’m very grateful for Bill Nutt, whose sixty-some years experience in doing this sort of work certainly shows. He is a professional with an eye for detail, and a generous heart, too.

This was a first for me. I’m not real good with concrete – I suppose in my line of work I’m much more of an abstract thinker. I hauled about three-fourths of a yard of it in a wheelbarrow a week ago. I have a new appreciation for people who do this sort of thing all the time. It’s hard work! I went into teach class that afternoon still sweating. But it was worth all the effort. For years, we have had water drain right next to the foundation of the house, and now with the slope, the problem is solved.

It reminded me a little of the Old Testament story about the Israelites making “bricks without straw.” I actually had some junior high kids try that one summer at camp. Again, it’s not an easy job. Here’s what is amazing to me, though. When you read through the entire story of the Exodus, you discover one of the greatest contributions these people made to human civilization: A day off! Up until that time, you just worked all day, every day, until you died.

It wasn’t the Israelites, exactly, that came up with the idea. It was God. And the purpose was not simply to take a break for one day. It was a Sabbath intended to remind them that there were things much more important than making bricks. In fact, there was one thing more important than all things in this world put together, only it was not a thing. Taking a day to remember God is a way to keep everything else in proper perspective.

Thoughts worth pondering while hauling another load of concrete…

Back to School

It’s that time once again. Classes are starting up, and my calendar says I’ll be busier teaching this round than I’ve ever been: four classes and three different schools. I’m not complaining, though. I will admit, there are times I still dread grading papers. Maybe I just hate to be the bearer of bad news so much of the time! But what I always do look forward to are what I would call “windows of opportunity” for learning. And, as any teacher will probably tell you, the learning goes both ways. I’ve been engaged in some incredible online dialogues about some very heavy subjects, something that I was quite skeptical would ever happen before I started doing this. But happen it does, and I’m ready for more.