PAGAN CHRISTIANTY: by George Barna and Frank Viola

PAGAN CHRISTIANTY: by George Barna and Frank Viola

PART ONE OF THE REVIEW

First a word of disclaimer. I know Frank Viola, indeed for some years he has asked me loads of good and telling questions via email. I did not really know what his take was on various matters, but I gladly answered his questions. It is interesting to me that this book appears to take no notice of various of these answers which I have given, nor are any of my works found in the bibliography at the end of the book. Perhaps I have missed something in the minutiae of the truly minute footnotes at the bottom of each page, but now I am wondering why exactly I have answered all those questions over the years. It’s a pity.

Frank Viola is a sharp person, but neither he nor George Barna really interact in this book with the scholarly literature that would call into question their strident claims and theses. They are arguing a particular case, and so they largely cite sources that support their case, for example Robert Banks’ work on Pauline house churches comes in for heavy usage. Their claim to present us with bare historical fact and to stand always on the Biblical high ground needs to be seen for what it is from the outset--- good and powerful rhetoric meant to warm the cockles of the hearts of all who affirm Sola Scriptura, but when one actually examines some of the major claims closely, they will not stand close and critical scrutiny.

I am quite sure that the immediate reaction of some to this book will be “Just what we need—another lambasting of the institutional church, by grandchildren of the radical Protestant reformation, sometimes called the Restoration Movement!” But we should all abide our soul in patience and hear the gentlemen out before deciding.

I personally knew we were in for trouble even from the beginning of the 2008 edition of this book when early on we are told that Isaiah died by being sawed in two. This may be in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs (an early example of Protestant hagiography complete with myths, legends, half-truths, and yes some truth), but it is not in the Bible and we don’t have any historical evidence to verify it. So much for presenting us with “just the facts Mam, just the facts.”

From the first of this study we are also led to expect that the authors will play the role of Socrates, asking probing and critical questions and taking radical steps to help us live out the implications of the answers. They warn one and all, giving the caveat emptor, that if you follow them and their wisdom, be prepared to be ‘slandered, libeled, called names you never heard in the Bible…’ as that prescient prophet Paul Simon once sang. A martyr complex is never far behind when one is an anti-institutionalist.

And of course the big bad guy in Pagan Christianity is not going to be sin, suffering, the Devil, or any of those things. The big bad guy is going to be what is loosely called the Institutional Church and that other famous whipping boy—‘church tradition’ and oh yes--- Greek philosophy. The particular animus is against the Roman Catholic Church for paganizing Christianity. Dan Brown would have liked this book.

But frankly there are no such thing as ‘institutional churches’. Churches have institutions of various sorts, they aren’t institutions. Furthermore, the Bible is full of traditions and many of those developed after NT times are perfectly Biblical. It’s not really possible to draw a line in the sand between ‘Biblical principles’ and traditions. The question is which traditions comport with Biblical tradition and which do not. And there is a further problem. It is ever so dangerous to take what was normal in early Christianity as a practice, and conclude that therefore it must be normative. It may have been normal in the NT era for non-theological reasons, for example for practical reasons.

To tell us that the church is really people, people united in Christ and serving the Lord, is to say nothing for or against the ‘institutional church’, or for that matter its institutions. Everyone agrees that the church is people, more specifically people gathered for worship, fellowship, and service. Everyone agrees that the church is a living thing and organism, not an organization. So what’s the beef here, and where is the real thrust of the critique?

Let us begin with a historical point made on p. 6 on the basis of old and weak evidence. The idea is that Christianity had become overwhelming Gentile and already was adopting numerous pagan practices in the last third of the first century A.D. Frankly, this is historically false. Not only did Jewish Christianity continue well into the fifth century in many forms and places and in considerable numbers, including in the Diaspora and not just in Israel and Syria, in fact all of our NT was written by Jewish Christians with the possible exception of Luke's works, but he seems however to have been a god-fearer. And in fact many of the NT documents were written for Jewish Christians including Matthew, Hebrews, James, Jude,1 Peter, and probably John, the Johannine Epistles, Revelation.

If you are wrong about the history of the early church, and wrong about the character of the canon as well, then it is no wonder you will make mistakes in your argumentation. It is interesting that documents like the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Ascension of Isaiah, the Protoevangelium of James, and other documents which came out of largely Jewish Christian circles are just ignored as well. These folks need to read a book like Oscar Skarsaune’s edited volume on Jewish Believers in Jesus. They will discover it is not possible to say either that Jewish Christianity waned after 70 A.D. nor is it possible to say that the dominate practice of the church was pagan, and became increasingly pagan in the first, second, third centuries--- wrong, and wrong.

They could have saved themselves a lot of trouble by reading sources more recent than Will Durant and Shirley Case, neither of which represent the state of the discussion on such matters in the last 50 years. They also need to read Paul Trebilco’s major study on Ephesus and the church in that region.

One thing about these folks--- Barna and Viola are very sure of themselves. They warn the reader early on (p. 7) that you will be confronted by unshakeable historical fact which will rock your world. If however it’s like the ‘facts’ on pp. 6-7 about the rise of pagan Christianity, we are not dealing with ‘facts’, unfortunately. We are dealing with a misreading of early Christian history.

One of the odder features of the book Pagan Christianity which surfaces immediately in the first real chapter is the attempt to see early Christianity as rather like Melchizedek (‘without antecedents, without succesors’), and so basically something entirely unique and different from either early Judaism or other sorts of ancient religions. Ttis conclusion involves not just an assertion about a difference in theology but a difference in praxis as well.

We are given the usual litany about Christians meeting in homes, and how they did not have church buildings. This is of course partially true, so far as we can tell, but frankly they didn’t just meet in homes, nor were there any mandates for them to do so saying “in order to be truly Christian thou shalt meet in cramped quarters.” They also met in Solomon’s Portico, which is to say in the Temple precincts as the early chapters of Acts informs us, and furthermore they went to synagogue services in purpose built buildings, and furthermore they occasionally rented halls, like the Hall of Tyrannus in Ephesus, and later in the first century, as the archaeological evidence makes clear, they met in caves, namely the catacombs in Rome, as well. I don’t see much of a movement in the church today to go back to cave dwelling J

The authors of this book are right to critique the modern western church for having an edifice complex, and spending too much money on buildings and too little on missions, evangelism, other forms of ministry. But there is absolutely nothing in the NT which either suggests or requires that Christians should only meet in homes. And furthermore, the major problem with these sorts of arguments are that they ignore the differences in social setting, then and now.

Christians met in homes so often and for so long because they were part of an ‘illegal religion’ a ‘superstitio’ as the Roman’s called it. They did not meet in public because they wanted to meet in peace, and in freedom. It isn’t because they thought ‘small group house church ministry is cool or Biblical’.

Nor is it true, that Christianity was the first non-Temple based religion in antiquity. There were plenty of tribal religions in the ANE that could not afford and did not have Temples, or priests. They did sometimes have ‘high places’ where they would offer sacrifices, as the OT mentions.

It is not enough to say that NT theology indicates that it was Christ who was the perfect sacrifice, who is our high priest, and who fulfilled the function of temples did away with all such things. What one would have to argue is that Jesus came saying “I came that you might not have buildings any more”. Church buildings are not, and frankly probably shouldn’t be called temples because literal sacrifices are not offered in them. Sacrifices of praise and self-sacrificial offerings yes, real sacrifices no. This however does not in any way suggest that bodies of believers should not have purpose built buildings. That’s an example of over-egging the pudding, as the British would say, or as I would put it, over reading the evidence by a lot.

And this brings me to another of their claims— that there is no evidence of church buildings before A.D. 190 when they are mentioned by Clement of Alexandria. Wrong and wrong. Here again archaeology helps. If one goes to Capernaum one can see, through the glass floor of the modern church there, the ‘house of Peter’, which was expanded into a Christian meeting place. It was no longer just a home, it was enhanced so it could be a better place of worship—house becomes church building, so to speak. How do we know this? Because of the Christian graffiti in the walls left by Christians, some of which goes back at least to the early second century, and probably back to sometime after 70 A.D. when both Jews and Christians relocated, and one of the places they went was Capernaum.

Then too, one should compare the recent news reports that in Jordan by the river they have found perhaps the very earliest church structure—associated with the 70 and possibly even dating from the late first century. My point is this--- early Christians did not have an allergic reaction to buildings, not even to purpose built buildings. It was the social situation which dictated what it was wise and prudent to do about housing Christian meetings in that era, not some theological principle. It is not helpful to say, “until 300 there were no buildings first built as churches”, unless you add “until the 4^th century Christianity was illegal!”

What about the argument that early Christianity did not have a priestly class? This appears to be largely correct, but they did indeed have elders, deacons, apostles, overseers/episokopoi. There are several NT documents that talk about the priesthood of all believers—1 Peter and Revelation, for example. You will notice that in 1 Peter as well Peter does not say ‘I am just one of the priesthood of all believers’. No, he begins his letter by introducing himself in the same manner as Paul did—as an apostle of Jesus Christ. In other words, when he talked about his ministerial roles, he refers to himself as an apostle.

If you look closely at the priesthood of all believers material in the NT it becomes clear that this terminology was used in relationship to the new spiritualized way of looking at sacrifices as we see in Rom. 12 or Heb. 13.15. It has nothing to do with the leadership structure of those churches, so far as I can tell. Nowhere does the NT say “since we have a priesthood of all believers we no longer affirm the role of set apart ministers or as they later came to be called ‘clergy’”.

In other words the priesthood of all believers is in no way an argument against their being ordained leaders of various sorts in the church, leaders who are both anointed and appointed not from below but from above, appointed by leaders.

There is frankly no Baptist or low church Protestant ecclesiology to be found in the NT in regard to this particular matter. Paul for example instructs his co-workers Timothy and Titus to appoint elders. The elders do not appoint themselves, nor do congregations get together and ordain or appoint them much less vote on them. The ecclesial structure of the NT church was hierarchial, not congregational—it started with the apostles and the 12 at the top, worked its way down to the co-workers of the apostles who were also itinerant and over multiple congregations, then there were the local church leaders—prophets, teachers, elders, deacons etc. In the early second century the apostolate seems to have been succeeded by bishops, most especially monarchial bishops like Ignatius of Antioch (read his letters sometime from the first 2 decades of the second century. They are quite revealing.). In short, the priesthood of all believers neither rules out nor negates the fact that there was an ecclesial leadership structure in the early church which involved in various cases a process of ordination from higher officials. To say otherwise is to misread the NT evidence. Of course it is true that what determined who had which gifts and graces was the work of the Spirit, but the Church needed to recognize that work and affirm it, and this took place through leaders who saw the gift in people like Timothy, and did from time to time use a process of ordination to make clear whom the Spirit had gifted and graced.

On p. 14 we are told that when Christianity was born, it was the only religion that had no sacred objects, spaces, or persons. This actually ignores the fact that Christians continued to meet with Jews in synagogues, until and unless they were expelled. Even the apostle to the Gentile went and worshipped with Jews in synagogues until he was expelled. It does not appear that even Paul thought there was something inherently inappropriate when it came to Christians attending a synagogue service in a building.

I must admit I was also surprised by the bold claim that there were no sacred persons. Actually I would say there were no other kinds of Christians in the church. This is precisely why they are called hagioi or ‘holy ones’ repeatedly, even in Paul’s letters. One of the major mistakes made in this book repeatedly, is assuming that Pauline and Gentile Christianity and its various forms and functions was the only form of Christianity in existence in the middle and latter half of the NT era itself, along with which comes the corollary assumption that Pauline house churches must be the models for all churches today. This does not follow.

This brings up another oddity about the argument being made in the first main chapter of the book. Just because a building was not called a temple, would not mean to early Christians that it was not a sacred building. Jews of course called various of their sacred buildings synagogues, and what is interesting about this is that James, the very brother of Jesus, in James 2.2, as he writes to Jewish Christians all over the Diaspora refers to their meeting place as a synagogos. This is not a reference to a non-Christian meeting place, as James 2.1 makes perfectly clear. Could it be a reference to just the meeting itself, rather than the place of meeting? While this is not totally impossible, it is certainly unlikely since the term already referred to buildings in the first century A.D. in various places in the Holy Land where James lived. There were already synagogue buildings in Jerusalem itself whilst James was the head of the Jerusalem church.

At the bottom of p. 15 we are told that Christians began reverencing the dead in the late second or third century. Actually this practice is already in evidence in the fifties A.D. and is referred to by Paul in 1 Cor. 15 when he talks about proxy baptism for the dead (for more on this see my Conflict and Community in Corinth, ad loc). I would suggest that Paul knows he is dealing with partially socialized Christians coming from a pagan background, who simply brought such practices into the church already in the mid-first century. The so-called paganizing of the Church was not instigated by Roman Catholics. It came much earlier, and in fact it was largely rejected by the church.

Like Dan Brown’s novel, the Da Vinci Code, Constantine is painted as ‘Bad Bart’ the person who messed things up in Pagan Christianity. He is called on p.18 the father of the church building, which is giving him far too much credit. He did of course take Christianity off the illicit religion list, and he and his mother became the patrons of the building of various churches including in the Holy Land, but it is simply false to say that there were no church buildings long before Constantine. It will not do to make him the bad guy who ruined pristine and pure early Christianity.

On p. 19 we also have the suggestion that Constantine was the one who originated the idea of Christians having a holy day, or a day of rest, that day being Sunday. While Constantine certainly made it a legal holy day, Christian’s had been meeting on the Lord’s Day for worship for a long time prior to that time. We see this alluded to in 1 Cor. 16 when Paul refers to setting money aside ‘on the first day of the week’ which is when they would have gathered to do this, among other Christian activities. Even more importantly we hear about the Lord’s day on which John had a vision in Rev. 1.10. There is also the very telling reference to Christians meeting on the first day of the week, Sunday, in Pliny’s famous letter to the Emperor Trajan. But I need to emphasize again, many Christians well into the middle ages were Jews, and so far as we can tell, they continued to think that there were such things as holy days. Paul’s discussion of the matter in Rom.14.5-6 should be quoted: “some regard one day more sacred than another; others consider everyday alike. Everyone should be convinced in their own mind. Those who regard one day as special do so unto the Lord.’ In other words, while Christian practice varied on this matter in the 50s, Paul has no problems with the person who regards one day as sacred or special unto the Lord. Indeed he sees it as an appropriate form of worship.

Some of the critique of Constantine is of course warranted, especially when one begins to study in depth the theology of holy relics. But a theology of holy time and holy persons, and even holy space already existed, not only in the OT, which is of course part of the Christian’s Bible, but in NT Christianity as well. I have detailed a length what the NT says about the Lord’s Supper, and how it indeed was seen as a sacrament that had to be partaken of in a worthy manner, or one could actually fall ill as 1 Cor. 11 says. This can be seen in my Making a Meal of It, and so I will not belabor that point here.

One of the worst things that can happen to persons who are anti-institutionalists, and anti-sacramentalists, is that so angry are they about the excesses and bad theology that has sometimes come out of the ‘institutional church’ that they throw the baby right out with the sacramental baptismal waters. I understand this, but it is a colossal over-reaction. Desacralizing worship, the Lord’s Supper, and even persons is not something devout Christians should be about. The last thing the church needs is a more casual, less reverential approach to all these things which removes altogether the recognition that one is entering into the presence of the Holy One when one comes to worship, the One in whose presence we too become sanctified, something that happens through encountering God through prayers, praise, songs, sacraments, and of course the preaching as well. It is the living presence of God that we encounter in any and all true worship, whether through mediated means or directly.

Worship and a theology of worship which trivializes the sacred, the holy, is not the theology of worship offered in books like Hebrews and Revelation and 1 Corinthians in the NT. Mystery is not the same as magic, any more than miracle is the same as magic. Magic is when humans try to manipulate the divine for their benefit. Mystery and miracle is when God comes down, and we touch the hem of his garment and are healed, helped, sanctified, whether that touch comes through hearing the Word, or receiving the Lord’s Supper, or singing a meaningful hymn or song or offering a prayer. It can come in a myriad of means, and thank goodness it does often come in mediated ways, because like Moses at the burning bush, if we reach out to touch God directly, as an unholy person, we may well experience ‘burn out’ even ‘ministerial burnout’.

There is nothing wrong with, nor unBiblical about worshipping God in a way that strongly suggests the special nature of the occasion, the great mystery and majesty of God, and some of the things that help with that are candles, and stained glass windows, and organs, and processions, and all manner of things that proclaim—“I am coming into the presence of the holy one, and I should give God my best.” In fact, worship is the time when all of creation bows down before God, and all of creation should be offered up to God—including our best music, our best words, our best attitudes, our best art, and so on should be offered up to God.

It is a mistake to think that Jesus instituted some sort of pristine primitive religion, that was iconoclastic in nature. Jesus also worshipped in the synagogues. Jesus also worshipped in the temple (see Lk. 2.41-52). What Jesus despised was the corruption of the holy, not its representation in material form. It is no accident that it was the money changers and animal salesmen that he attacked in the outer courts of the Temple. These had been recent additions to the Temple precincts in his lifetime.

And notice what he says. He quotes the OT and calls the Temple “the house of God” which humans have corrupted and turned into a “den of bandits” (Mk. 11). Jesus does not say the Temple is not the house of God! He says that this particular Herodian temple is the ‘temple of doom’ because of its corruption, and in Jn. 2 he alludes to the fact that he himself will be the focal point of future worship, calling himself and his body the Temple (he is not referring to the body of believers in John 2). Nothing in any of this theology of Jesus suggests we should never have sacred buildings or spaces thereafter. What we are told is that Christians should focus on Christ who is both temple and sacrificial lamb and high priest. That, is a matter of Christology and worship focus, not a matter of architectural plan or policy.

I quite agree with the statement that space is never empty it always embodies a meaning, and also the remark that where a body of believers meets affects the character of the church. So let us think about that for a moment. Suppose the church met in the bathroom in homes. Well, it would probably be a very small meeting, and gender specific as well, unless the home had two bathrooms. At least one of the sacraments might happen during worship in that space J But it certainly wouldn’t make it anything special, indeed someone would protest that it was inappropriate. Why? Because of course a bathroom is not a holy place by and large. How about in the living room? Certainly better, and less unholy for sure. But what this whole line of thinking suggests is that there are indeed more and less holy spaces. And frankly, I find it much easier to worship where the space and place reminds me to take my shoes off, put away all unholy thought, because I have entered into the presence of a holy God. An ordinary space connotes an ordinary activity, nothing special. A casual space connotes a casual activity, nothing special. A special space connotes something else entirely.

Some time ago, I was in Rome ending a wonderful tour of Greece and Italy. We had been pilgrims going and seeing various wonderful Biblical and later Christian sites. We finished by worshipping 150 feet underground in a catacomb. In the barreled vault of an alcove there were niches all the way up where Christians had been buried. We sang “for all the saints who from their labors rest”, a great modern hymn of the church and it rang with an amazing echo. We took communion together in that sacred space, and it was one of the greatest worship experiences any of us had every had, before or since, I imagine. We sensed we were celebrating with the saints above in heaven who had been buried there, just as the saints in heaven are described as participating in worship in Rev. 4. God was glorified and we certainly were edified and sanctified.

Far be it from me to suggest this is the only way or place God can be glorified and the saints edified. But it is certainly one legitimate godly and non-pagan way. God of course can be worshipped in simplicity as well. I remember well the wonderful accapella singing at Abilene Christian worship time at Abilene Christian University. It was simple yet profound, and profoundly beautiful —indeed wherever and however God is worshipped in Spirit and in truth, it is true worship. In my view worship is where beauty and truth and goodness and holiness should all meet, and kiss.

My point in the above critique is simply this--- calling more high church worship ‘pagan’ is not only a tragedy which impoverishes the soul. It’s a travesty. And saying over and over again that there is not a shred of Biblical evidence for sacred buildings, particularly church buildings reflects both historical myopia and bad theological analysis of a theology of holiness and worship. Such a view is narrow where the Bible is not narrow, and it fails to grasp the great breadth of ways in which God can be truly, and Biblically worshipped and served, and is indeed worshipped and served around the world every single week. We do not need to be liberated from holy worship—we need to be liberated in and by it, in whatever form it may legitimately take. And that’s the Biblical truth.

PIXAR PERFECT--WALL-E'S WORLD IS WONDERFUL!

First I have a confession. I am a sucker for anything Pixar does. It's almost gotten to the point where I feel like they can do little wrong. I'd go watch their version of a chewing tobacco or mortuary commercial. You catch my drift.

But there is good, and then there is better, and this little trip into outer space called WALL-E is better than good-- its Pixar Perfect. The animation is great, the sound effects are great, the story is fun, but has a message that is not too preachy but makes its point.

It's entertaining for children and adults, and it involves a love-story, AND it has a great new song by Peter Gabriel and the Soweto Gospel Choir! What more could you want for $5.00?

In a season of paltry and pathetic films, this one stands out like Venus the morning star. I even found myself shedding a tear now and then. If you don't like the character of Wall-E (stands for waste allocation load lifter-- earth class) by the end of the move you are a hard-hearted old son of a gun with spiritual hardening of the arteries. But I digress, a film synopsis is required, provided by our friends at Rottentomatoes.com.
---------------

Synopsis: What if mankind had to leave Earth, and somebody forgot to turn the last robot off? Academy Award®-winning writer-director Andrew Stanton (“Finding Nemo”) and the inventive storytellers and technical geniuses at Pixar Animation Studios (“The Incredibles,” “Cars,”... What if mankind had to leave Earth, and somebody forgot to turn the last robot off?

Academy Award®-winning writer-director Andrew Stanton (“Finding Nemo”) and the inventive storytellers and technical geniuses at Pixar Animation Studios (“The Incredibles,” “Cars,” “Ratatouille”) transport moviegoers to a galaxy not so very far away for a new computer-animated cosmic comedy about a determined robot named WALL•E.

After hundreds of lonely years of doing what he was built for, WALL•E (short for Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-Class) discovers a new purpose in life (besides collecting knick-knacks) when he meets a sleek search robot named EVE. EVE comes to realize that WALL•E has inadvertently stumbled upon the key to the planet’s future, and races back to space to report her findings to the humans (who have been eagerly awaiting word that it is safe to return home). Meanwhile, WALL•E chases EVE across the galaxy and sets into motion one of the most exciting and imaginative comedy adventures ever brought to the big screen.

Joining WALL•E on his fantastic journey across a universe of never-before-imagined visions of the future, is a hilarious cast of characters including a pet cockroach, and a heroic team of malfunctioning misfit robots.

Filled with surprises, action, humor and heart, WALL•E was written and directed by Andrew Stanton, produced by Jim Morris, co-produced by Lindsey Collins and features original and innovative sound design by Academy Award®-winner Ben Burtt (“Star Wars,” “Indiana Jones,” “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial”). The film is due for release on June 27, 2008.

----------------

So then Wall-E falls for a girl who is, quite literally out of this world, and furthermore, her name is, not accidentally, Eve. The race of humankind is starting over-- by means of, and by the intervention of two robots! Wall-E as it turns out is a pack-rat and an old romantic. He reminds me of my mom, in the best sort of way. He saves all sorts of things. He's like Jeff Foxworthy's definition of a redneck-- someone who is attracted to shiny objects and brings them home and puts them up in the house! And its not an easy life for Wall-E, as besides compacting skyscrapers worth of trash, he has as his best friend some sort of cockroach. I ask you, if Pixar can make you sympathetic to the plight of a cockroach, obviously the sky is the limit with their powers--NO?

And indeed even the sky is not the limit in this movie, for suddenly after the first 20 minutes we blast off to the artificial realm of a space-station created by those wonderful folks at BUY N LARGE who want you to be buyin' and want you to live and be large, if you catch my drift. The whole race of humans, having trashed the earth, has turned into Pillsbury Dough Persons living in outer space.

Yet it is not too late. All is not lost. Love, and a good exercise program may yet conquer all. Some of the space-station scenes are so meticulously crafted it reminds you of the Star Wars CG effects at their best.

But what of Wall-E and Eve? Will true romance lead to robot joy or only 'Domo Origato, Mr. Roboto'? Will the earth ever be cleaned up and made fit for human habitation again? Will we ever get to see re-runs of 'Hello Dolly' and 'Guys and Dolls' again (which Wall-E has a special fondness for)? Or will we just be like those folks in the TV hit LOST-- alive, barely, and goin' nowhere? Inquiring minds want to know. So here's a tip--- DROP EVERYTHING AND GO TO THIS MOVIE AND BE SURPRISED BY JOY AND PATHOS. I promise, a good time will be had by all.

N.B. from BW3. Thus far the movie rates a 97% direct hit by the tough critics, who would not even give their own mother's cherry pie a 97% rating and gets the same G (as in goooooood) rating as cherry pie. Its running time is well under two hours, and so as usual we have the delightful short subject up front, this one being called PRESTO about a really hungry rabbit and his magician master who wants to pull him out of the hat--- BUT......

'PACK UP THE BABIES AND GRAB THE OLD LADIES--THIS ONE'S A MUST.

Bishop Wright visits Stephen Colbert

My friend and colleague Bishop Wright has boldly gone where angels fear to tred--- onto the Comedy Central Show-- The Stephen Colbert Report--- You'll enjoy this one, and notice the reaction of the crowd.

http://www.spike.com/episode/27772/st/2995361

or try this---

+

June 19 - Bishop N.T. Wright

IFILM

6/20/2008

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30p / 10:30cStephen tells Bishop N.T. Wright his idea of heaven is getting a harp, drinking a mint julep and asking Ronald Reagan questions.

+

Thu, Jun 19, 2008

Hulu

6/24/2008

Bishop N.T. Wright, author of "Surprised by Hope," challenges Stephen to think differently about life after death.

+

The Colbert Report 6/19/08

Fancast

6/21/2008

Bishop N.T. Wright challenges Stephen to think differently about life after death.

+

The Colbert Report - Thu, Jun 19, 2008

Hulu on AOL

6/20/2008

Bishop N.T. Wright, author of "Surprised by Hope," challenges Stephen to think differently about life after death.

LANDS OF THE BIBLE TOUR EXTRAVAGANZA-- MAY 2009

Here below you will find advance notice about our upcoming tour in May of 2009. Let me tell you now this tour is top drawer. You get two good meals a day, good hotels, airfare is included as are entrance fees, and you will get to see these sites in a way that is not like the cosmetic usual 'tourist' trips. This tour will go in depth into these Biblical sites, and the Bible will indeed become more real and alive for you in the process. But there is more. This trip is also a spiritual pilgrimage for those who want to take it. You will have a chance to get in touch with your Christian roots, and not merely walk in the footsteps of Paul and John of Patmos, but even go to places frequented by the Magi, and by persons who had been touched by Jesus himself. As usual, I will only be taking one bus load, no more. So the maximum on this trip is 40 persons, and people are already signing up. Here is the itinerary:

BEN WITHERINGTON – May 19-June 2, 2009

TURKEY & JORDAN

May 19 Depart USA

May 20 Arrive Istanbul - Fly Amman

Arrive Istanbul at 10:30 am. Visit Archaeological Museum and St Sophia Church. Fly from Istanbul to Amman at 23:40 by Turkish Airlines TK 1212. Arrive Amman at 01.50. of the morning of 21st of May. Transfer from Airport to 4 star Hotel for overnight. Jerusalem International Hotel or similar.

May 21 Amman

Leave the hotel after Breakfast / Proceed to Jerash / Visit Jerash /

Return to Amman for dinner and overnight.

May 22 Madaba - Petra

Leave the hotel after Breakfast / Drive to Madaba to visit church of St

George / Mount Nebo / Kerak via Kings Highway / continue to Petra for dinner and overnight.

May 23 Petra

Breakfast at the hotel. Full day visit to Petra including horse and fees.

Return to the Hotel for dinner and overnight.

May 24 Petra - Amman Airport

Transfer from Petra to Amman Airport for departure. Long Bus drive (no hotel).

May 25 Fly Izmir via Istanbul – EPHESUS MEETING - Overnight Kusadasi

Fly to Istanbul by TK 1213 03:30/05:50am flight. Take connection flight to Izmir TK 312 08:00/09:05

Drive to Selcuk to visit Ephesus. EPHESUS MEETING on the evening.

May 26 Visit Pergamon – Overnight Izmir

Drive Nort to Pergamon to visit the Acropolis and Asklepion. Dinner and overnight in Izmir.

May 27 Sardis – Philadelphia – Hierapolis – Pamukkale

Drive East to Sardis, capital of Lydian Empire to visit the Gymnasium, the 3^rd century Synagogue, and the Temple of Artemis. Continue to Alasehir to see the ruins of Philadelphia. Drive to Pamukkale to visit Hierapolis. Overnight Pamukkale.

May 28 Laodicea-Colossae-Psidian Antioch-Konya

Visit Laodicea in the morning. Drive to Colossae to see the unexcavated site. Continue to Yalvac to visit Psidian Antioch. Overnight in Konya.

May 29 Konya-Cappadocia

Drive from Konya to Cappadocia, afternoon sightseeing in Cappadocia.

May 30 Cappadocia

Full day Cappadocia tour; Visit the underground City, Goreme Open Air Museum, and Avanos.

May 31 Cappadocia – Iznik

Drive to Iznik, to visit the ancient Nicaea. Overnight Iznik.

June 1 Iznik – Yalova – Ferry to Istanbul

Take the morning car ferry to Istanbul. Afternoon sightseeing in Istanbul.

June 2 Departure

Group fly back to New York. Arrive back to New York same day afternoon. End.

We will be leaving from JFK in NY on the 19th. Unlike many other tours which spend most of their time on cruise boats, we will spend most of our time at the actual Biblical and ancient sites, learning and celebrating our heritage. A good time will be had by one and all. We have engaged the very top local guide in Turkey and in Jordan, and of course I will be lecturing at each of the sites as well. Come join us. For more information and all the financial particulars please contact my friend and agent in Turkey, Levent Oral at info@tutkutours.com. Start saving your shekels now.

Pew Forum's Revelations-- Do even a Majority of Evangelicals Believe Jesus is the Only Way of Salvation?

You can read the 200 plus page full report of an extensive religious survey taken last year by the Pew Charitable Trust at the Pew Forum website, which can be found here---

http://religions.pewforum.org/reports

Below is their own summary of findings in their most recent very detailed survey:

Summary of Key Findings

An extensive new survey by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life details statistics on religion in America and explores the shifts taking place in the U.S. religious landscape. Based on interviews with more than 35,000 Americans age 18 and older, the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey finds that religious affiliation in the U.S. is both very diverse and extremely fluid.

Key Findings and Statistics on Religion in America

More than one-quarter of American adults (28%) have left the faith in which they were raised in favor of another religion - or no religion at all. If change in affiliation from one type of Protestantism to another is included, 44% of adults have either switched religious affiliation, moved from being unaffiliated with any religion to being affiliated with a particular faith, or dropped any connection to a specific religious tradition altogether.

The survey finds that the number of people who say they are unaffiliated with any particular faith today (16.1%) is more than double the number who say they were not affiliated with any particular religion as children. Among Americans ages 18-29, one-in-four say they are not currently affiliated with any particular religion.

The Landscape Survey confirms that the United States is on the verge of becoming a minority Protestant country; the number of Americans who report that they are members of Protestant denominations now stands at barely 51%. Moreover, the Protestant population is characterized by significant internal diversity and fragmentation, encompassing hundreds of different denominations loosely grouped around three fairly distinct religious traditions - evangelical Protestant churches (26.3% of the overall adult population), mainline Protestant churches (18.1%) and historically black Protestant churches (6.9%).

While those Americans who are unaffiliated with any particular religion have seen the greatest growth in numbers as a result of changes in affiliation, Catholicism has experienced the greatest net losses as a result of affiliation changes. While nearly one-in-three Americans (31%) were raised in the Catholic faith, today fewer than one-in-four (24%) describe themselves as Catholic. These losses would have been even more pronounced were it not for the offsetting impact of immigration. The Landscape Survey finds that among the foreign-born adult population, Catholics outnumber Protestants by nearly a two-to-one margin (46% Catholic vs. 24% Protestant); among native-born Americans, on the other hand, the statistics show that Protestants outnumber Catholics by an even larger margin (55% Protestant vs. 21% Catholic). Immigrants are also disproportionately represented among several world religions in the U.S., including Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism.

Although there are about half as many Catholics in the U.S. as Protestants, the number of Catholics nearly rivals the number of members of evangelical Protestant churches and far exceeds the number of members of both mainline Protestant churches and historically black Protestant churches. The U.S. also includes a significant number of members of the third major branch of global Christianity - Orthodoxy - whose adherents now account for 0.6% of the U.S. adult population. American Christianity also includes sizeable numbers of Mormons (1.7% of the adult population), Jehovah's Witnesses (0.7%) and other Christian groups (0.3%).

Like the other major groups, people who are unaffiliated with any particular religion (16.1%) also exhibit remarkable internal diversity. Although one-quarter of this group consists of those who describe themselves as either atheist or agnostic (1.6% and 2.4% of the adult population overall, respectively), the majority of the unaffiliated population (12.1% of the adult population overall) is made up of people who simply describe their religion as "nothing in particular." This group, in turn, is fairly evenly divided between the "secular unaffiliated," that is, those who say that religion is not important in their lives (6.3% of the adult population), and the "religious unaffiliated," that is, those who say that religion is either somewhat important or very important in their lives (5.8% of the overall adult population).

Even smaller religions in the U.S. reflect considerable internal diversity. For instance, most Jews (1.7% of the overall adult population) identify with one of three major groups: Reform, Conservative or Orthodox Judaism. Similarly, more than half of Buddhists (0.7% of the overall adult population) belong to one of three major groups within Buddhism: Zen, Theravada or Tibetan Buddhism. Muslims (0.6% of the overall adult population) divide primarily into two major groups: Sunni and Shia.

A Very Competitive Religious Marketplace

The survey finds that constant movement characterizes the American religious marketplace, as every major religious group is simultaneously gaining and losing adherents. Those that are growing as a result of religious change are simply gaining new members at a faster rate than they are losing members. Conversely, those that are declining in number because of religious change simply are not attracting enough new members to offset the number of adherents who are leaving those particular faiths.

To illustrate this point, one need only look at the biggest gainer in this religious competition - the unaffiliated group. People moving into the unaffiliated category outnumber those moving out of the unaffiliated group by more than a three-to-one margin. At the same time, however, a substantial number of people (nearly 4% of the overall adult population) say that as children they were unaffiliated with any particular religion but have since come to identify with a religious group. This means that more than half of people who were unaffiliated with any particular religion as a child now say that they are associated with a religious group. In short, the Landscape Survey shows that the unaffiliated population has grown despite having one of the lowest retention rates of all "religious" groups.

Another example of the dynamism of the American religious scene is the experience of the Catholic Church. Other surveys - such as the General Social Surveys, conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago since 1972 - find that the Catholic share of the U.S. adult population has held fairly steady in recent decades at around 25%. What this apparent stability obscures, however, is the large number of people who have left the Catholic Church. Approximately one-third of the survey respondents who say they were raised Catholic no longer describe themselves as Catholic. This means that roughly 10% of all Americans are former Catholics. These losses, however, have been partly offset by the number of people who have changed their affiliation to Catholicism (2.6% of the adult population) but more importantly by the disproportionately high number of Catholics among immigrants to the U.S. The result is that the overall percentage of the population that identifies as Catholic has remained fairly stable.

In addition to detailing the current religious makeup of the U.S. and describing the dynamic changes in religious affiliation, the findings from the Landscape Survey also provide important clues about the future direction of religious affiliation in the U.S. By detailing the age distribution of different religious groups, for instance, the study's statistics on religion show that more than six-in-ten Americans age 70 and older (62%) are Protestant but that this number is only about four-in-ten (43%) among Americans ages 18-29. Conversely, young adults ages 18-29 are much more likely than those age 70 and older to say that they are not affiliated with any particular religion (25% vs. 8%). If these generational patterns persist, recent declines in the number of Protestants and growth in the size of the unaffiliated population may continue.

Major changes in the makeup of American Catholicism also loom on the horizon. Latinos, who already account for roughly one-in-three adult Catholics overall, may account for an even larger share of U.S. Catholics in the future. For while Latinos represent roughly one-in-eight U.S. Catholics age 70 and older (12%), they account for nearly half of all Catholics ages 18-29 (45%).

Finally, the Landscape Survey documents how immigration is adding even more diversity to the American religious quilt. For example, Muslims, roughly two-thirds of whom are immigrants, now account for roughly 0.6% of the U.S. adult population; and Hindus, more than eight-in-ten of whom are foreign born, now account for approximately 0.4% of the population.

Other Survey Highlights

Other highlights in the report include

• Men are significantly more likely than women to claim no religious affiliation. Nearly one-in-five men say they have no formal religious affiliation, compared with roughly 13% of women.
• Among people who are married, nearly four-in-ten (37%) are married to a spouse with a different religious affiliation. (This figure includes Protestants who are married to another Protestant from a different denominational family, such as a Baptist who is married to a Methodist.) Hindus and Mormons are the most likely to be married (78% and 71%, respectively) and to be married to someone of the same religion (90% and 83%, respectively).
• Mormons and Muslims are the groups with the largest families; more than one-in-five Mormon adults and 15% of Muslim adults in the U.S. have three or more children living at home.
• The Midwest most closely resembles the religious makeup of the overall population. The South, by a wide margin, has the heaviest concentration of members of evangelical Protestant churches. The Northeast has the greatest concentration of Catholics, and the West has the largest proportion of unaffiliated people, including the largest proportion of atheists and agnostics.
• Of all the major racial and ethnic groups in the United States, black Americans are the most likely to report a formal religious affiliation. Even among those blacks who are unaffiliated, three-in-four belong to the "religious unaffiliated" category (that is, they say that religion is either somewhat or very important in their lives), compared with slightly more than one-third of the unaffiliated population overall.
• Nearly half of Hindus in the U.S., one-third of Jews and a quarter of Buddhists have obtained post-graduate education, compared with only about one-in-ten of the adult population overall. Hindus and Jews are also much more likely than other groups to report high income levels.
• People not affiliated with any particular religion stand out for their relative youth compared with other religious traditions. Among the unaffiliated, 31% are under age 30 and 71% are under age 50. Comparable numbers for the overall adult population are 20% and 59%, respectively.
• By contrast, members of mainline Protestant churches and Jews are older, on average, than members of other groups. Roughly half of Jews and members of mainline churches are age 50 and older, compared with approximately four-in-ten American adults overall.
• In sharp contrast to Islam and Hinduism, Buddhism in the U.S. is primarily made up of native-born adherents, whites and converts. Only one-in-three American Buddhists describe their race as Asian, while nearly three-in-four Buddhists say they are converts to Buddhism.
• Jehovah's Witnesses have the lowest retention rate of any religious tradition. Only 37% of all those who say they were raised as Jehovah's Witnesses still identify themselves as Jehovah's Witnesses.
• Members of Baptist churches account for one-third of all Protestants and close to one-fifth of the total U.S. adult population. Baptists also account for nearly two-thirds of members of historically black Protestant churches.

About the Survey

These are some of the key findings of the Pew Forum's U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, which draws primarily on a new nationwide survey conducted from May 8 to Aug. 13, 2007, among a representative sample of more than 35,000 adults in the U.S., with additional over-samples of Eastern Orthodox Christians, Buddhists and Hindus. The study also takes advantage of the 2007 survey of American Muslims ("Muslim Americans: Middle Class and Mostly Mainstream"), which was conducted by the Forum in partnership with its sister projects, the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, the Pew Hispanic Center and the Pew Global Attitudes Project. In total, these surveys included interviews with more than 36,000 Americans.

Detailed data tables provide extensive demographic information on the 14 largest religious traditions, 12 large Protestant denominational families and 25 individual Protestant denominations in the United States.

Summary of Key Findings

Full Report: Full Report (268 pages)

Introduction:

Background on the Report

Summary of Key Findings:

Survey Highlights in the Report

Chapter 1:

Religious Beliefs and Practices

Chapter 2:

Social and Political Views

Appendix 1:

Religious Composition of the U.S.

Appendix 2:

Detailed Data Tables

Appendix 3:

Classification of Protestant Denominations

Appendix 4:

Survey Methodology

Topline:

Questionnaire and Survey Results

A major survey by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life finds that most Americans have a non-dogmatic approach to faith. A majority of those who are affiliated with a religion, for instance, do not believe their religion is the only way to salvation. And almost the same number believes that there is more than one true way to interpret the teachings of their religion. This openness to a range of religious viewpoints is in line with the great diversity of religious affiliation, belief and practice that exists in the United States, as documented in a survey of more than 35,000 Americans that comprehensively examines the country’s religious landscape.

This is not to suggest that Americans do not take religion seriously. The U.S. Religious Landscape Survey also shows that more than half of Americans say religion is very important in their lives, attend religious services regularly and pray daily. Furthermore, a plurality of adults who are affiliated with a religion want their religion to preserve its traditional beliefs and practices rather than either adjust to new circumstances or adopt modern beliefs and practices. Moreover, significant minorities across nearly all religious traditions see a conflict between being a devout person and living in a modern society.

The Landscape Survey confirms the close link between Americans' religious affiliation, beliefs and practices, on the one hand, and their social and political attitudes, on the other. Indeed, the survey demonstrates that the social and political fault lines in American society run through, as well as alongside, religious traditions. The relationship between religion and politics is particularly strong with respect to political ideology and views on social issues such as abortion and homosexuality, with the more religiously committed adherents across several religious traditions expressing more conservative political views. On other issues included in the survey, such as environmental protection, foreign affairs, and the proper size and role of government, differences based on religion tend to be smaller.

Religion in America: Non-Dogmatic, Diverse and Politically Relevant

Most Americans agree with the statement that many religions – not just their own – can lead to eternal life. Among those who are affiliated with a religious tradition, seven-in-ten say many religions can lead to eternal life. This view is shared by a majority of adherents in nearly all religious traditions, including more than half of members of evangelical Protestant churches (57%). Only among Mormons (57%) and Jehovah’s Witnesses (80%) do majorities say that their own religion is the one true faith leading to eternal life.

Most Americans also have a non-dogmatic approach when it comes to interpreting the tenets of their own religion. For instance, more than two-thirds of adults affiliated with a religious tradition agree that there is more than one true way to interpret the teachings of their faith, a pattern that occurs in nearly all traditions. The exceptions are Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses, 54% and 77% of whom, respectively, say there is only one true way to interpret the teachings of their religion.

The lack of dogmatism in American religion may well reflect the great diversity of religious affiliation, beliefs and practices in the U.S. For example, while more than nine-in-ten Americans (92%) believe in the existence of God or a universal spirit, there is considerable variation in the nature and certainty of this belief. Six-in-ten adults believe that God is a person with whom people can have a relationship; but one-in-four – including about half of Jews and Hindus – see God as an impersonal force. And while roughly seven-in-ten Americans say they are absolutely certain of God’s existence, more than one-in-five (22%) are less certain in their belief.

A similar pattern is evident in views of the Bible. Nearly two-thirds of the public (63%) takes the view that their faith’s sacred texts are the word of God. But those who believe Scripture represents the word of God are roughly evenly divided between those who say it should be interpreted literally, word for word (33%), and those who say it should not be taken literally (27%). And more than a quarter of adults – including two-thirds of Buddhists (67%) and about half of Jews (53%) – say their faith’s sacred texts are written by men and are not the word of God.

The diversity in religious beliefs and practices in the U.S. in part reflects the great variety of religious groups that populate the American religious landscape. The survey finds, for example, that some religious groups – including Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and members of historically black and evangelical Protestant churches – tend to be more likely to report high levels of religious engagement on questions such as the importance of religion in their lives, certainty of belief in God and frequency of attendance at religious services. Other Christian groups – notably members of mainline Protestant churches and Catholics – are less likely to report such attitudes, beliefs and practices. And still other faiths – including Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and Muslims – exhibit their own special mix of religious beliefs and practices.

The Landscape Survey also reveals that people who are not affiliated with a particular religious tradition do not necessarily lack religious beliefs or practices. In fact, a large portion (41%) of the unaffiliated population says religion is at least somewhat important in their lives, seven-in-ten say they believe in God, and more than a quarter (27%) say they attend religious services at least a few times a year.

The findings of the Landscape Survey underscore the importance of affiliation with a particular tradition for understanding not only people’s religious beliefs and practices but also their basic social and political views. For instance, Mormons and members of evangelical churches tend to be more conservative in their political ideology, while Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and atheists tend to be more politically liberal than the population overall. But the survey shows that there are important differences within religious traditions as well, based on a number of factors, including the importance of religion in people’s lives, the nature and certainty of their belief in God, and their frequency of prayer and attendance at worship services.

One of the realities of politics in the U.S. today is that people who regularly attend worship services and hold traditional religious views are much more likely to hold conservative political views while those who are less connected to religious institutions and more secular in their outlook are more likely to hold liberal political views.

The connection between religious intensity and political attitudes appears to be especially strong when it comes to issues such as abortion and homosexuality. About six-in-ten Americans who attend religious services at least once a week say abortion should be illegal in most or all cases, while only about three-in-ten who attend less often share this view. This pattern holds across a variety of religious traditions. For instance, nearly three-in-four (73%) members of evangelical churches who attend church at least once a week say abortion should be illegal in most or all cases, compared with only 45% of members of evangelical churches who attend church less frequently.

These are among the key findings of a major survey on religion and American life conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life between May 8 and Aug. 13, 2007, among a representative sample of more than 35,000 Americans. The first report based on the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey was issued in February 2008 and focused on the religious affiliation of the American people, including the impact of immigration and changes in affiliation. This report provides information on the core religious beliefs and practices as well as the basic social and political views of the various religious traditions in the U.S. as well as people who are not affiliated with a particular religion.

The report includes information on members of many religious groups – such as Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, atheists and agnostics – that are too small to be analyzed in most public opinion surveys. More detailed tables, provided in an appendix to this report, also summarize the basic beliefs, practices, and social and political attitudes of a dozen Protestant denominational families and 25 of the largest Protestant denominations in the U.S. These detailed tables also include information on what the survey classifies as “other Christians,” which includes such smaller groups as Spiritualists and other Metaphysical Christians, as well as on members of a variety of other faiths, including Unitarians and New Age groups.

To read the Summary of Key Findings in full, download the PDF (18 pages)

When is a Text not a Text? When is a Reader not a 'Reader'?

We are a text driven culture. We are preoccupied with things like copyright infringement, and used to looking at computer screens. And so it is natural to assume, when one is part of a largely literate culture that ancient texts are like ours, and ancient readers just like us. We could hardly be more wrong on both counts. Consider for example this text here to the left from near Mt. Nimrud in Turkey. Here is a text with no punctuation, and for the most part no division between paragraphs, sentences, or even between words and all letters are capital letters. What sort of text is this? The answer is simple-- an oral text, one that can only be figured out if you sound out the syllables out loud, one by one. For if you are not already familiar with this text, there is no other way to decipher it. In a culture where the literacy rate is under 20% texts could only be read by a minority of the population anyway, and furthermore, literacy and texts were ways that the elite asserted their power and authority in an oral culture, especially when we are talking about the most important texts in any such ancient culture-- sacred texts.
If ancient texts are oral texts, meant to be heard, and never meant to be silently read, what then of readers? There has been a lot of loose talk about readers and the references to readers in the NT. And many of the usual deductions about such references are wrong, as we shall now point out.

Some scholars, on the basis of the occasional reference to ‘readers’ in the NT have thought that this signaled that Christians were some of the first to self-consciously be trying to produce books, or even literature meant for reading. For example, sometimes Mark’s Gospel has been called the first Christian book, in large part based on the reference in Mk. 13.14 where we find the parenthetical remark, “let the reader understand”, on the assumption that the ‘reader’ in question is the audience. But let us examine this assumption for a moment. Both in Mk. 13.14 and in Rev. 1.3 the operative Greek word is ho anaginōskōn a clear reference to a single and singular reader, who in that latter text is distinguished from the audience who are dubbed the hearers (plural!) of John’s rhetoric.

As Mark Wilson recently suggested in a public lecture at Ephesus, this surely is likely to mean that the singular reader is in fact a lector of sorts, someone who will be reading John’s apocalypse out loud to various hearers.[1] We know for a fact that John is addressing various churches in Asia Minor (see Rev. 2-3), so it is quite impossible to argue that the reference to ‘the reader’ singular in Rev. 1.3 refers to the audience. It must refer to the rhetor or lector who will orally deliver this discourse to the audience of hearers. I would suggest that we must draw the same conclusion about the parenthetical remark in Mk. 13.14, which in turn means that not even Mark’s Gospel should be viewed as a text, meant for private reading, much less the first real modern ‘text’ or ‘book’ Rather Mark is reminding the lector, who will be orally delivering the Gospel in some or several venues near to the time when this ‘abomination’ would be or was already arising that they needed to help the audience understand the nature of what was happening when the temple in Jerusalem was being destroyed. Oral texts often include such reminders for the ones delivering the discourse in question. So in fact it is not likely the case that the reference to 'a reader' in the NT functions like it would in a modern text. The reader in question is not the audience of the discourse or document, but rather its presenter who knows the text in advance and can appropriately and effectively orally deliver its content to the intended audience or audiences.

(The above is a brief excerpt from a chapter in my forthcoming textbook entitled NT Rhetoric-- due out in the fall).

---

[1] In a lecture delivered by him at a conference at Ephesus in May 2008 where we both spoke on the oral character of these NT texts.

Memento Mori-- Part Two

Grave steles, sarcophagi, and grave art teach us a great deal about what ancient peoples believed about the afterlife. In cultures where the spirits of the ancestors (called genius (singular, and genii plural-- from which we get the word genie) were believed to be alive and could inspire and affect the lives of their descendants, the dead were honored, often in lavish fashion. Christians are of course used to thinking in binary categories of people either going to heaven or hell, but in fact in earliest OT times there was the simple belief in Sheol, the land of the dead, and this belief still existed in some forms in the first century A.D. world. Hades was the land of the dead, and unless you were an immortal, or a demi-god like Herakles (Hercules) or perhaps an Alexander, you were simply going to the land of the dead, where your spirit existed in some sort of shadowy condition. Of course if you were a heroic figure you might make it to the beautiful Elysian fields, but not many were believed to make it there. The saying of Jesus about few entering the Kingdom and narrow the way, suits this belief system as well. And furthermore, in the Greco-Roman world, since there was no great hope of a positive afterlife (remembering the famous grave epitaph 'I was, I am not, I care not'), salvation was all about what happened to you in this life, and 'saved' meant materially blessed, or blessed with good health, or rescued from danger or slavery, or the like (see the Appendix to my Acts commentary). We see a form of this belief when Jesus says "your faith has saved you" by which is meant "your faith has healed you". Jesus was not suggesting the woman in question had either been converted or had accepted the four spiritual laws. In this post, you will see what was the initial impetus for the building of the Istanbul museum, namely they had obtained some remarkable, and remarkably huge sarcophagi, including the famous Sidonian sarcophagus of Alexander the Great. As it turns out, it is probably a very early copy of Alexander's which would have been in Alexandria, not Sidon, but still it gives us a clear picture of the lavish sarcophagi of the elite in that period. The first picture here is of the doors into the sarcophagi, meant to resemble the 'gates of Hades' (see Mt. 16). This is followed by two pictures of the Alexander sarcophagus in different lighting, and then detailed pictures of various of the panels. I have included a picture of a temple replica, because these sarcophagi with their elaborate story telling friezes were meant to be like mini-temples or shrines. The friezes on the Parthenon are of the same character, though they largely tell mythological tales. Alexander's friezes recount his mighty victories of various sorts, as the attempt is made to portray him as a god upon the earth. This was surely part of the background to the rise of the Emperor cult, since Alexander was indeed a real person who conquered most of the known world.



















A bit further down you can see that originally these friezes were painted with a riot of colors of various sorts. This would have been true on the Parthenon as well. It would not have just been all white marble. The color sample replica frieze on the left depicts the famous scene of blond Alexander slaying his foes. More normal on sarcophagi on those who were just ordinary Romans or Greeks were scenes of mourning, such as the scenes below of the women. Normally mourning periods for someone who died with honor could last up to a week or more, and the Romans would have a plaster cast mold made of the face of the deceased, which would be put in a cabinet in the home, and when the Roman wanted to consult their ancestors, or venerate and honor them, they would open the cabinet and interact with the genii or spirits represented by the masks. They most certainly believed their ancestors were still alive, and when they were inspired they called it the affect of genius, that is inspiration by one's ancestor. So much was the honoring of the ancestors crucial, that it was a regular practice to celebrate the deceased's birthday by going to the sarcophagus, and pouring wine in a pour spout into the tomb so they could celebrate with you. And this brings us to the 'baptism for the dead' practice of the Corinthians. Paul acknowledges this is going on in Corinth, though he does not endorse it in 1 Cor. 15. Proxy baptism is not a Christian practice, since early Christians when they were thinking right, realized that as the parable in Lk. 18 suggest
once a person is dead and gone from this world, their fate cannot be changed. This life is the place deciding one's eternal destiny, as Paul makes clear. I have also included the grave art of a woman playing the lyre. Music was a regular part of ancient burial practices, and in fact the elite hired women to cry (I call them town criers) and musicians to play mournful music (see the story of Jairus's daughter. The one's who laugh at Jesus cannot be family surely). I have also included the interesting Roman relief of a woman with wings, presumably one of the gods, but a belief in angels and demons was not solely something those in the Judaeo-Christian tradition embraced.

Towards the bottom here I have included the statues of one goddess, and two Emperors who were being viewed as gods. Full marks if you can identify them on this blog. When one examines all of this, it becomes clearer in various ways how Christian practice both differed from, and in some respects seemed similar to ancient near eastern, Greek, and Roman practices. But what really distinguished Judeao-Christian religion was not only a robust belief in a positive afterlife, but a strong belief in life back from the dead-- resurrection.

Memori Mento-- Please Remember Me; Part One

Museums are fascinating places for those who love history, and know what they are looking at! This post begins our tour of statuary, grave art, and stone inscriptions of relevance to NT studies which are found in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum.

The first item which is of direct relevance to understanding the NT is the small altar from Palmyra with the inscription to the "nameless (and thus unknown) god". Scholars used to debate at length whether the reference in Acts 17 to altars for unknown gods was historically accurate, but they seldom do so any more not only because of finding altars like this one, but also because of the now considerable inscriptional evidence as well. Ancient pagans liked to have all their bases covered, since they were polytheists and were not sure on any given day who was blessing them and who was blighting them. Better to have a catchall altar to any gods they had not named just to be sure everyone was properly honored. The next two pictures take us to the actual temple in Jerusalem, and the famous inscription warning Gentiles to keep out of the inner sanctums of that temple. Yes, this inscription stone now resides in Istanbul, thanks to the Ottomans or even earlier Moslems who carted it off at some juncture.

Below that is the famous Siloam inscription also from Jersalem and its famous tunnel dating back to the eight century B.C. You can just see the Hebrew in the middle of the stone, and the translation is hopefully readable in the following picture.
















Graeco-Roman statuary and grave art were of course the main means of keeping the memory of a deceased person from slipping into oblivion. It also teaches us a great deal about the values, styles, and afterlife beliefs of the ancients. Few places in the world have a better collection of Graeco-Roman grave art and statuary than the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, in which a person like myself could get lost for days.

In this part of your tour of that famous museum we will concentrate on certain samples from the inter-testamental and NT period. Let us start with busts and statues.

In some cases all we have left is the head of a huge statue, such as the huge head of this high status woman. No one was likely to forget her. You will notice that almost all the statuary was done in marble, though sometimes it would be done in bronze (see the next post).

We are fortunate to have a full statue of an ephebe, a young boy in his toga and cape, showing appropriate deference (or indifference?) to the sculptor. To his right is a bust of the young Alexander the Great, nearly always depicted with hs head inclined a bit to the right.

The Romans tended to prefer more realistic portraiture, the Greeks more idealistic portraiture, with the result that we have a bit clearer picture of what ancient Romans looked like than ancient Greeks. At the top eschelons of society one finds many busts of women, almost as many as that of men. Here above is a nice example of a bust of a patrician woman, with prominent Roman nose. One of the things you learn a great deal about from such statues is women's hairstyles of the period, which is of direct relevance to the discussion of a text like 1 Tim. 2.8-15 where Paul critiques women who wear their hair piled up on their head with jewels woven into it. One can well imagine the effect of such a hairdo, if not covered by a head-covering, in a small room at night full of lamps. The woman's coiffure would have been a constant distraction, having the effect of an ancient disco-ball glinting in the lights. This is why Paul insists on women, especially high status women keeping their heads covered, as only God's glory, not human glory was supposed to show up in Christian worship, and a woman's hair was viewed then (and often now) as her own, or if married her husband's glory.

Ephesos and the Artemesion

There is a special exhibit at the Istanbul Archaeological Museum on the Temple and cult of Artemis in Ephesos (Ephesus), or the Artemsion. You will see a scale model on the left here of this temple and its precincts, which of course is mentioned at length in the book of Acts. Temples served many purposes in antiquity, besides the obvious religious ones of providing priests and opportunities for sacrifices. They were also centers of scribal activity and education, and furthermore they were banks (remember the phrase Temple treasury). The wealthy and socially elite would sometimes keep their valuables there, and often their most precious documents, such as wills (e.g. in Rome the Vestal Virgins guarded not only the eternal flame of Roma, but also the wills of many well to do Romans).

Artemis or Diana was the goddess of many things, including the hunt, but by NT times she was I suppose primarily the goddess of fertility and one who was believed to help
women when they had problems with infertility. Scholars debate the significance of all the orbs on the chest of the statue of Artemis, specifically whether they are a multitude of breasts or eggs, but either way these are emblems of fertility.

You will notice below the inside model of the silver statue of Artemis which was said to be huge in the central hall of the temple. Of course the temple precincts were considered sacrosanct, and inviolable which is why people kept money and valuable things there.

Since money, at least in the form of gold coins, seems to have originated in the region of Lydia, it is entirely appropriate that there is a display talking about the rise of the use of money, in connection with the temple of Artemis. The picture on the left below shows all that is left of the temple of Artemis today--- a single standing column in a mosquito swamp! In Paul's day however is was a vital center of the city, and it brought trade, tourists, and of course business to the city. Anyone who threatened the ongoing function of the temple was threatening more than just the cities dominant religious opinions. He or she would also be threatening the economy, the money trade, the will business, the educational operations of the town, and so on. There was a lot of trickle down effect, and the true consequences of a vast adoption of monotheism would have been devastating to this town. The silversmiths were not over-reacting to the message of Paul about idols.

I have included in this post two of the stone monuments which are genuine from Ephesos and they attest to several things. First of all, the family stele seems to indicate that this family did business under the auspices of the Emperor and his cult in this town (notice the temple cornice with the eagle in the center). It is especially interesting that the Emperor cult emblem is higher on the stele then the circular emblem of Artemis. This is very interesting indeed and bespeaks the changing landscape of what was the dominant pagan religion in the first century. It needs to be kept in mind that Ephesos had suffered from its harbor silting up a great deal by the mid-first century, and so trade based in the temple and patronage connected to religion became all the more crucial as seaport trade faded, as the silting up could not be stopped.

The second of the stone monuments shows a gladiator. Now this is a very telling monument, because gladiatorial games were Roman games. They were no part of the original Greek games, as they were deemed by the more refined Greeks as too bloodthirsty in character, and not in accord with Greek family values. But by the time Paul got to Ephesos, most great cities in the Empire were actually activiely seeking imperial patronage, and what came with it--- more games, including gladiatorial ones, and more temples, including the Emperor cult. The barter economy was fading and the money economy was growing and the pagan golden rule was becoming increasingly 'the rule'-- that is, whoever has the gold, makes the rules. Into this high powered environment Paul came and sought to change the social and religious landscape, 'turning the world upside down' and for over 2 years he made a considerable impact whilst dwelling in this town, befriending its socially elite persons (including the Asiarchs), renting its lecture hall, exorcising its unclean spirits and mediums, and in general creating spiritual and economic mayhem of various sorts.

Get Smarter--- 'Missed it by That Much'

I must confess a guilty please. I used to enjoy the old Get Smart TV spy spoof. I even like the cartoon remake called 'Inspector Gadget' which I watched with my children. I was hoping for some more low camp humor and general slapstick fun, in a summer season of otherwise rather droll or abysmal fare. And, I suppose, be careful what you wish for, because I got it-- to an extent. And furthermore, I love Alan Arkin, Terrence Stamp, and Steve Carrell is fun, and then there is Anne Hathaway whose name suggests she belongs in Shakespeare, not slapstick. So, why am I not entirely amused? Well first the plot Synopsis from Warner---

"Maxwell Smart (Steve Carell) is on a mission to thwart the latest plot for world domination by the evil crime syndicate known as KAOS. When the headquarters of U.S. spy agency Control is attacked and the identities of its agents compromised, the Chief (Alan Arkin) has no choice but to promote his ever-eager analyst Maxwell Smart, who has always dreamt of working in the field alongside stalwart superstar Agent 23 (Dwayne Johnson). Smart is partnered instead with the lovely-but-lethal veteran Agent 99 (Anne Hathaway). Given little field experience and even less time, Smart-armed with nothing but a few spy-tech gadgets and his unbridled enthusiasm-must thwart the doomsday plans of KAOS head Siegfried (Terence Stamp)." --© Warner Bros.


This movie is PG-13 because of a good deal of sexual humor, sometimes hardly covert (unlike the original show for the most part), and there is the usual quotient of violence. The film only lasts 1 hour 50 minutes, and is filmed in visually enjoyable locales such as L.A., D.C. and Moscow (and perhaps elsewhere in Russia also). I suppose any film that has Mel Brooks as a consultant will be required to have a lot of physical and visual humor, and I suppose as well that since the original Get Smart was in some ways a spoof of a spoof (namely of Peter Seller's Pink Panther films), we should not expect plot consistency, great wit, and characters noted for their bon vivant. And we don't get them either. O.K. we do have a fun cameo with Bill Murray as an agent hiding in a tree next to the reflection pool in Washington.

But let us say what was fun about this light, and light weight summer fare. First of all, I like Steve Carrell, he is capable of being quite funny, and to his credit though he uses some of Don Adams famous lines ('Would you believe....' and 'Missed it by that much') he does not attempt to imitate the voice pattern or intonation of Adams, which would have seemed very contrived and forced. Secondly, I also like Anne Hathaway, she puts the hot back in 99, as in agent 99 and Fahrenheit 99.

The problem is, alas, that the plot is so thin and threadbare that between the set piece humor situations, the movie as a movie is not moving, or even plausible. One of the best scenes is the dance scene in Russia, with certain hilarious and implausible moves, and the scene with the agents dodging the lasers is pretty hilarious as well as is the scene with the miniature cross bow. But in some cases the sight gags and pratfalls sadly just fall flat. A few of the zingers of Carrell do work, but most of them are too predictable. I did enjoy seeing one of the gargantuan Bond characters once more in a film, making even Lurch look little. And there is something a bit odd about this remake, namely Maxwell Smart doesn't just get lucky, he is actually pretty smart in places in this film. This can only be called 'out of character' or Maxwell Smart gets a makeover.

The problem with a movie that tries to redo a beloved earlier fictional character is that of course comparisons will be made, and what was once innovative, on rewind becomes innocuous. And one has to say that there is probably too much sexual humor and innuendo to make this a truly wholesome family film. I am not surprised that the reviews thus far have been split right down the middle between thumbs up and thumbs down. The movie has the right components and participants to be a funny movie, but it needed a decidedly better script. In the end weighing the pros and cons, I must say in the words of Max--- "Sorry chief, missed it by that much." But I also have to say "Would you believe this movie is better than most that have come out in the last 45 days, except Iron Man, and to a lesser extent Prince Caspian (and an even lesser extent Indiana Jones)". Maybe Wall-E will intervene and restore order to the comedic celluloid universe. Lord knows the Incredible Bulk, err Hulk doing his mean green giant thing didn't do it.

Visiting the Land Down Under=Oz

The first stop on my world circling bone-wearying tour was Australia, to do a conference at Morling colleague and to give a lecture on Oral Texts at MacQuarrie University, which certainly has one of the leading Ancient History Departments in the world, when it comes to the study of early Christianity in its original social setting. Whilst there I had some time with my friends Edwin Judge and Alanna Nobbs and Chris Forbes, and made a new friend, Don Barker, who kindly gave me the tour of the papyrology and ancient artifacts museum. Contained in this museum are many things of importance for Biblical and Christian studies, but this post is devoted to some of the papyri Do showed me and let me take pictures of.

Let me explain what you are looking. Firstly, the picture is of myself Edwin Judge, whom we were honoring on the occasion of this conference. Clearly he is one of the major figures in the reorientation in the way we view the social level, life, and status of early Christians (see the recent collection of his crucial essays edited by my old mentor David Scholer). Beside Edwin is Alanna Nobbs a central figure in the History department at Macquarrie and finally there is Larry Welborn who has just been added to the faculty there half time, and will continue at Fordham half time. When you add Steve Llewellyn, Chris Forbes, Don Barker and others you have the best department there is in the world when it comes to early Christian history. One of the specialities is the cataloguing and publishing and translating and analyzing of ancient papyri relevant to the NT period, which of course includes some Christian ones, some NT ones, and some Greco-Roman ones. I have included pictures of all of these sorts in this post.

What you see is the blow up image under the microscope of one of the early Christian papyri, here focusing on the nomina sacra, the abbreviated sacred name, in this case the abbreviation for Christ. Note the line over it as well indicating abbreviation of the sacred name. The next two pictures are of their famous Acts 8 fragment, and I am sorry they are not of better caliber but it is hard to shoot through glass, and especially at an angle. Then we have a lead curse tablet which roles up, by which it was believed you could zap your foes. Next to this is a practice tablet, where someone is learning to write Greek, and perhaps doodling as well. Below this is a letter fragment and you can see how delicate it is, and how it must be carefully handled. The last picture is a Christian papyri with an image of a demon on it, no less!

There is much more of interest in this little museum at MacQuarrie, and I wish to thank all my friends there for a splendid time indeed. Australian hospitality is justly famous-- Good on you mates :)

The Spectacular Kultepe Excavations

Approximately 15 miles north of Kayseri in south central Turkey are the now famous Kultepe-Kanish Excavations, which are of direct relevance to OT studies, as this site provides us with a clear link between the Assyrians and the Hittites. This site is a rather rare one in Turkey, in that excavations have gone on for almost sixty years now with some remarkable results. I have here two pictures give you an aerial view of the tumulus mound that has been being excavated all these years-- a tumulus like a tel, is an artificial hill, man-made in nature forming a city site or a burial site or both.


Some 300 meters of the city walls have been unearthed from this city, and the goal is to unearth all 2,000 meters of them! If you Google Kultepe Excavations you will find the full story in the Turkish Daily News May 26th edition (which thankfully is entirely in English) and another excellent story in the Turkish Airline publication.

One of the most significant finds is of course the cuneiform tablets, some 20,000 of them (!) which appear to be the oldest written documents ever found in Turkey, some dating possibly as early as 2,000 B.C. (see picture above). What links these older cuneiform tablets with the later Hittite finds is that there is a gold god Hittite statue found there, the same god that appears in the much earlier tablets. This, among other things has led the archaeologists digging this site to suggest that Hittite civilization was just the continuation of the Assyrian civilization.

Here you see some of the drinking vessels and lamps that have been uncovered from the site, showing the level of artisanship in the city. Also present is a picture of a Hittite warrior with moustache. The boat at the top of this post may well be the Hittite version of the Noah's ark boat, since their capital was near Ararat, and the story existed in various forms throughout the ANE (cf. Enuma Elish, and the story of Utnapishtum).

Finally I have included some jewelry pictures as well, demonstrating the wealth of this city. These are the kinds of finds which Biblical scholars need to study closely and learn more about, if they hope to assess the relationship between the Israelites, the Hittites, and the Assyrians.

Exploring Erythrai

Set on a hill overlooking the beautiful Aegean is the ancient city of Erythrai. It is not on anybody's tour itinerary, because it has hardly been excavated. Some of it simply sticks out of a farmer's plot of eggplants. The theater still has various steps intact and a tremendous view from the top (see the picture of me and my good friend Levent sitting on the top row of theater seats. Yes that's me wearing a Turkish football jersey, for Levent's favorite soccer team Fenerbache. The colors are the same however for the Carolina Panthers :).

As the Turkish sign tells us, this city was an important Greek city at one juncture, and the famous traveler Pausanias (see his famous work Descriptions of Greece etc.) visited it and commented on its splendor overlooking the sea. To judge by the size of the theater, the population of this town was probably about 15,000 or so at one juncture in antiquity. Like so many other Classical and Biblical sites in Turkey, the sheer cost of excavating all such promising sites and maintaining them has made it impossible for all such sites to be dug. Notice the beautiful keystone arch from the theater just lying on the ground untouched. Notice also the purple thistle and the poppies-- the former being the bane of the archaeologist's existence with its serious prickers.

In my estimation, having now traversed from the eastern to the western end of Turkey, I would reckon there are perhaps 100 times as many important unexcavated sites of Biblical and classical importance in Turkey in comparison to Israel. In part the fault lies with NT scholars who have done nowhere near the amount of spade work as OT scholars in unearthing our past. NT archaeology continues to be the step child of OT archaeology unfortunately, and it is a pity since there are so many more NT sites of interest that we have yet to assess. Here is a city from the Ionian League just sticking out of the ground and begging to be unearthed. But alas, while the harvest is vast and plentiful the workers and funds are few.

Mission to Jakarta

Through the auspices of of Perkantas, the Indonesian version of InterVarsity, and other Christian groups, I was asked to come to Jakarta and deal with the issue of the Gnostic Gospels and also the Jesus Tomb theory. The impetus for this was that books on these subjects had been published in Indonesian, some even by the Moslem Press (presumably as a critique of traditional Christianity), and it was my task to try and set the historical and theological record straight, over the course of a four day visit.

Jakarta is a huge commercial and in many ways modern city, of some 9 million people. The country itself is the fifth largest in the world with 200 million people, and of that total, estimates say that perhaps 25 million are Christians. There consequently was a large turn out, both for the public lectures (some 1500 or so people came), as well as the seminars for theological students and pastors on Saturday and Monday. The events were all held in large public facilities that were air conditioned, and it was a good thing too as it was extremely hot and humid there, so much so that worship services on Sunday were held at 6:30 a.m. and 7:30 a.m. I was a man of leisure and attended the 'later' service, preaching in a large and largely Chinese Christian congregation.

The theological and Christian history of Indonesia is very different than that of Singapore, with considerable influence from Europe, originally caused by the Dutch East Indies Company, about which nothing good can be said by an Indonesian I met. Basically they took the natural resources of the country and did not help it develop. They also left a legacy of rather liberal German theology, which is another reason why Perkantas was concerned because this influence, that leads to an openness to heterodox ideas about early Christianity.




In these pictures you will see both scenes from downtown Jakarta, including shots of its famous flame monument, the ever present little 3 wheeled vehicles which are banned on major roads but there is a glut of them on minor roads (along with a zillion motorcycles). You also can see how very modern the city is in various places and ways, with more and more high rise complexes being built.

I include a couple of pictures from inside the church where I preached, and as you can see it is in every way a traditional church, with robed choir, traditional pulpit and traditional stained glass windows.

All of the work which I did there had to be done through translator since I certainly do not know Indonesian. The country itself was of course at one point called JAVA and is famous of course for its coffee, amongst other things. It has lovely Batik silk shirts and blouses that are made by hand, and its tropical climate (having only two seasons, basically wet and hot, and basically dry and hot) leads to their being various tropical plants, bugs, birds, not to mention major volcanoes. The closest equivalent in the U.S. would of course be Hawaii, which I found it very similar in character to.

My hosts, including Prof. Zaccheus Indurwan were very gracious indeed, and despite my trepidations about going there, since Christians have in various cases been persecuted there, all went quite well, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ was heard, and well received. Sola Deo Gloria.

Pagan Christianity?-- Ask St. Nick

There has been a lot of loose talk of late about pagan Christianity. I want to say from the outset that most of this sort of rhetoric about pagan Christianity, and it is rhetoric, is either false, or based on half truths. One of the more frequent parts of this discussion has to do with the origins of some of our modern Christian celebrations such as Christmas.

It is sometimes said that this celebration, and its mythology is not based in the Bible or anything historical or particularly Christian. Some go even further in arguing that Christmas is just an adaptation of the pagan Saturnalia, the reversal festival of the Romans which climaxed on and just after the winter solstice on Dec. 21. This latter claim is false, since Christmas has always been celebrated after the Saturnalia was already over, and in the case of the Orthodox church, long after the Saturnalia was over. But my concern in this post is with the man himself-- jolly ole St. Nick.



Whether you call him St. Nick (short for Nickolas) or Santa Claus ( a barbarization and abbreviation of Saint Nik Claus) we are indeed talking about a real Christian person, Nicholas of Myra.


Notice in the icon above the dominant color of his garb--- a red suit, more particularly a red robe. Hmm, I wonder where the idea that St. Nick wore red came from? How about from ancient Christian tradition, which is probably right, knowing what we know about the early bishops of the church in the 3rd and 4th centuries in this region and what they wore.

The pictures on this blog post were taken at Priene where there is an 18th century Greek church ruin, and before that a much earlier church built in honor of the real St. Nick. But again, who was he?

Nicholas, while he died in Myra, was in fact born in the Turkish town of Patara, somewhere around 270 A.D. He died on Dec. 6th 343, and that date is his feast day, which is one reason he is connected with the celebration of Advent and Christmas. He was raised by his uncle, also known as Nicholas who was a bishop of the church, and he was raised to be a holy man, but most importantly he was known as a generous person, and more particularly a giver of secret or anonymous gifts to person. He was also known as a miracle worker. You can immediately see the relevance of all this for the celebration of Christmas. One more fast fact of relevance to the American celebration of Christmas. In 1809, the New York Historical Society convened and named Sancte Claus the patron saint of Nieuw Amsterdam, the Dutch name for New York.


The pictures in this blog post, as I said, are of the church in Priene which celebrated and honored Nicholas. What is really remarkable about this is that Nicholas was never formally canonized, never formally declared a saint of the church, but he was so popular with Christian lay persons, that he was not only honored with a feast day, but had churches built in his honor and named after him, such as this one.

One of its more interesting features of this particular Church of St. Nick is the charnel house, or as it is called on the sign the Osteofilak-- the place where the bones of the monks were placed after they died. For a church that has been derelict for 150 or so years, it is remarkable that its painted friezes and dome still show some original color, and the bell tower is still in tact.

Bottom line, yes Virginia there really was a Santa Claus who gave gifts to others in honor of the Christ child, make no bones about it :) The rumors of an amalgam of paganism and Christianity early on in church history are in fact largely false. Consider these pictures and this post my not so anonymous gift to you all, in his honor. Merry Christmas, half way through the year.

The Pilgrimage to the Nerl

Let me take you on a journey into the past. Let us return to a time when people simply walked to church, along birch tree-lined paths, often walking many miles to get to church. The time is the high Middle Ages, and the place is Russia, more specifically one of the cities of the Golden Ring around Moscow called Vladimir (rhymes with Redeemer).

What you will see in the following pictures are some of the oldest churches in all of Russia, found in and around Vladimir, which before Moscow was the capital of Russia, and a major spiritual center as these churches will attest.

Firstly we will take a trek through the woods, and across the flower-laden fields, and over the Nerl river to a church built in about 1165. This small chapel cannot be reached by a road, only by walking through the fields and across the river. Perhaps you have heard of St. Martin in the Fields, which sits smack dab in the middle of London. This church however is as advertised, in the middle of a field. Why? Why would it not be in a town? Because it is a church one is supposed to go on pilgrimage to to get away from the city, to spend time alone with God, to pray, and meditate.



The churches you see a bit further down with blue domes, recently refurbished by the government (as 'cultural landmarks') are also outside Vladimir.

Then a bit further down the blog, you will find the pictures of both the Church of the Assumption, built sometime around 1160, or about 60 or so years after the greatest Norman cathedral in Europe, Durham Cathedral. Clearly the high middle ages was an age of great expansion of churches and building of many new ones all over Europe. It would be nice if it were so today.

Also included on your tour is the little wedding chapel, complete with picture of Sasha and Natasha standing beside the door of the church where there is a sign in Russian saying-- 'Warning: Brides and Grooms should not pose here for Pictures" so naturally since we do not endorse anything as mean-spirited and unChristian as that, we took a picture :) When we tried to go into this particular church we are told "this is not a church, it is a museum, you cannot pray here." Sadly, all too many Orthodox churches in Russia are like that.

You will notice we also stopped for a traditional Russian lunch at a traditional (but new) Russian restaurant. Traditional Russian restaurants have names like Moo Moo or Tracter, harking back to their rural and agricultural past. The various salads and soups you see include the famous Olivea (something like our potato salad only with many more ingredients like peas) or the reddish beet salad (and of course the Borsch, which is delicious beet soup with sour cream in it).

You will also find in these shots a picture of a major pink building in downtown Vladimir, and also a picture of the ancient city gate into Vladimir as well.
Finally, at the bottom you will find what we saw when we returned to Moscow, three hours west of Vladimir. This is Vladimir Putin's folly, as the Brits would call it. It is an indoor multi-million ruble ski slope, so the ex-Pres. could ski whenever he likes. And who built this? None other than the mayor of Moscow who built it as a bribe so he could keep his job. And we think we have political issues ! But I digress.

Protestant Christianity is alive and well in Russia, and growing, despite opposition from the Orthodox Church who sees Protestants as encroaching on their turf, and in many cases they are viewed as heretics (witness the recent Orthodox attempt to prosecute a Protestant Church for teaching Sunday school lessons to children without an education license!). It sometimes seems Christians are the worst enemies of Christians.

Pray for mother Russia as she recovers her Christian heritage and faith. The living church is thriving despite, or perhaps even because, of opposition.

Celtics return to Glory-- the 2008 NBA Champs

Basketball is a North Carolina obsession. It is the other religion in North Carolina. If you don't believe me, consider the license plate pictured on the left here.
Basketball is a game played by the greatest athletes in all of team sports. You won't see any John Daly's or Prince Fielder's or Jumbo Elliot's playing basketball, at least not on any good team, much less a professional team. You have to be in remarkable shape to play this game at all, never mind play it well for 82 regular season games, then 26 playoff games. Basketball players are so fast, that most pictures, here of the fleet Rajon Rondo (our home boy, late of Kentucky Wildcat address), Kobe Bryant, and dear old number 34, turn out blurry. You don't have that issue with most other professional athletes.

This post is simply to give praise to the most remarkable franchise turn around in NBA history, and all in the course of one year. The Celtics since about 1987 have been mostly dreadful. I ought to know, I am a Boston guy who lives and dies with my Boston teams. They were called Gang Green (as in gangrene) for a reason the last few years-- putrification had set in. and this time last year Paul Pierce was ready to insist on a trade and go elsewhere, despite Yeoman's service on many bad teams. Finally, a miracle happened. Danny Ainge decided to do something before he lost Pierce and his mind, and so the big trades for Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, both still great players, but beginning to show there age, being now in their 30s. Sprinkle in some good role players like James Posey, Leon Powe, Sam Cassell, and TADA-- you have a team who dominated the NBA from start to finish this year. They had 66 wins total during the regular season, for the best reversal of win-loss total in NBA history, and they lost exactly 6 games all year at home--- total counting the playoffs, (as in total domination). They were the best defensive team, they were the best road team, having a remarkable record against the supposedly tougher Western Conference-- they were simply the best, and they proved in in six games against a Laker team that had dispatched various good western teams to get to the final, including last year's champs the Spurs in just five games.

How did they do it? Team play, and great defense night in and night out. In other words, they won the old fashioned way. The sports prognosticators overwhelming predicted that the Lakers, with their much vaunted offense and touting the most offensive player in the league (in more than one sense), would beat the Celtics in 5, 6 or 7 games. Wrong, wrong and wrong. Red Auerbach would be pleased, especially with the never say die comeback from the dead win (as in they were behind by 24 and more points) in L.A. in game 4, which really probably won the series for them. Somewhere he is smoking an old cigar today with a big grin. I wish I could be in Beantown for the parade later this week.

There was a lot of lose talk in the run-up to this NBA finals about the Laker-Celtic rivalry. Those who actually know their basketball history know that there was only a Laker Celtic rivalry for a brief period in the 80s when there were the epic Bird and Magic confrontations. Before then the Celtics beat the Lakers everytime they played them in the finals, and since then, there has only been this year, and the Celtics won in six games. I don't call that much of a rivalry, when their head to head finals record in the modern era is 9 championships for the Celtics, and 2 (or perhaps 3 if your counting differently) for the Laker. That my friends is not a rivalry.

And while I am celebrating the news about my NBA basketball team, I will also celebrate that the 3 Tar Heels who had tenatively put themselves in the NBA draft (Lawson, Ellington, and Green) withdrew from the draft Monday, and will return to play their junior or senior seasons, depending on which player we are talking about. Along with Hansbrough returning this means we will have our starting five back---- HOORAY, a true rarity in modern college basketball. Equally rare is the 97% graduation rate of UNC players, not to mention no sanctions ever for recruiting violations. The Tar Heels live up to the state motto which reads --'Esse quam videre'

For those who are Latin challenged, that means "To Be Rather than to Seem". In an era of hype and posturing, both the Celtics of this season, and the Tar Heels most any season know how to do things right, and to 'be' contenders rather than pretenders, champs rather than chumps.
----

One little P.S. It was announced today that Tiger Woods will undergo year ending knee surgery. It was also announced that his doctor told him not to play, and he rejected the advice of his doctor. It was also revealed he now has a stress fracture in the left leg and the ACL will need repair. What should we think of this? Frankly, as much as I love Tiger and his game and his pursuit of excellence, this looks like a pure case of stupidity fueled by ego. He did not have to play this tournament, and he knew he ought not to do so. The biggest pity is that with his ego driven ambition he deprived Rocco Mediate of his one and only major championship, and Rocco frankly deserved a better fate. And dat's all I got to say about dat.

More Scenes from Beautiful Iznik (Nicea)

In this post I am simply trying to give you a feel for the modern city of Iznik (population 20,000). The major industry here today is not tourism, as one might expect, since Iznik is off the beaten path. If you look carefully at the map here, and look at the left side near the top you will see the name Iznik right beside a small body of water, and not too far from the Bosphorus and Istanbul. This city however is well off the regular tourist run which sticks much closer to the west coast of Turkey, only venturing in land to go to Pammukale (Hierapolis), or perhaps Cappadocia. This northwest corner of Turkey has been neglected by tourists, and it is a pity.

The second shot here shows just how intact the Roman walls, enhanced by the Byzantines, and then the Ottomans, are. Recent excavations have unearthed more of Hadrian's gates, and also his aqueduct.

You'll see one of the gates and the Roman pavement in the next picture. Adjacent is the picture of the Turkish bath, from the entrance and then from the side, which is now the Iznik tile museum and craftsman shop, a definite place to visit.

I have included a couple of street scenes to give you the flavor of the center of town, which has gorgeous tree lines but narrow streets. Notice the vendor selling hot steamed corn on the cob on a stick, a Turkish favorite.

The three pictures that follow show the recent excavations at Hadrian's gates.


There is then a picture taken from the graveyard which overlooks the whole city, giving you a panorama of the city and its lake.

This is followed, sadly by a shot of most of what is left of Constantine's Senate house on the lake where the first council of Nicea in 325 was held, and this in turn is followed by a shot of a scene that all the early Romans and Christians must have admired many times-- dawn, over the placid waters of lake Nicea.

Holy Blogging Batman!

This cartoon appeared in a Turkish newpaper....enjoy.

Historic Nicea (Iznik)

Nestled in the hills which surround Iznik lake is the beautiful small town (about 22,000) of Iznik. The unassuming tourist might well mistake it for just another little Turkish town, but in fact it is a city of great historical importance to the Christian faith, and also to the development of high art in the form of decorative tiles, bowels, and plates (known as Iznik tiles). But let us start with the ancient history. The town of Iznik was of great strategic importance to the Romans, so much so that they built huge walls around the town, had large plantations near by, and both Trajan and Hadrian had gates erected for this city. I have included a couple of shots of these gates which are still being excavated as we speak. The city derives its Greek name from the fact that two generals of Alexander, after his death fought in 301 B.C. over control of this city, and Lysimakos won, with the result that he named the town after his beautiful wife, Nicea. Unlike some cities which had to be captured by the Romans, and be subjected to seige, one of the last of the Greek kings of Asia, Nikomedes III ceded the town to the rising power, Rome, in 74 B.C. and it suffered no damage.

Nicea was often in competition with its neighboring cities to be the chief city, or 'capital' of the region, and it is a measure of its importance that Trajan and the governor of Bithynia, the famous Pliny the younger both undertook construction projects here, the later making a start on building a theater, which was unfortunately not finished due to earthquake, apparently. In fact, the whole city had been recovering for almost two centuries from a devastating earthquake in 123 B.C. and it was Hadrian who in fact gave the order that the city must be rebuilt. We see both gates and city walls still today from Hadrian's construction. And clearly enough important Romans lived there during the NT era as well, for we find a remarkable triangular obelisk that serves as a burial memorial to a Roman noble who owned a plantation just outside the city in the middle of the first century A.D. The many burial sarcophagi which are marble and highly ornate, attest to the considerable presence of socially elite Romans in the city during and after the NT era.

The archaeological museum in Iznik is well worth the visit, and it chronicles for us in detail the extensive Roman population in the region during the early Christian era. That Roman presence continued all the way through the whole era of the Roman Empire, and so not surprisingly Constantine, as the first Christian emperor saw this as a crucial city as well, and a good meeting place for the first major Christian council, after Christianity had been removed from the list of illicit religions, or 'superstitio', by Constantine. The first council of Nicea held in 325 A.D. brought together bishops from all over the Empire, including of course Bishop Arius from Alexandria who wished to maintain that Christ, while he had a nature like that of God's, nevertheless it was not the same divine nature or essence as God had.

Students of church history will remember the debate over the two words homousios (of the same substance) and homoiousos (of like substance), which Arius supporting the latter reading. This debate was heated, and is well chronicled in Ramsay MacMillan's recent slender but fascinating entitled Voting on God. The end result of the council of 325 was that it was declared that the Son shared the same substance or nature or 'ousia' as the Father, and at the same time shared the same substance or nature as a human being-- both fully divine and fully human. Among other things, the Nicean creed was the result of this council. It is important to bear in mind that Christological orthodoxy in regard to this matter was established before the closing of the NT canon in the latter part of the fourth century A.D. Orthodoxy in regard to Christology was seen as a more crucial issue than the limits of the NT Scriptures, though the two issues are intertwined.

Unfortunately for this city, earthquakes struck inA.D. 358, 362, and 368, ruining many of the monumental buildings and structures. Nevertheless, the seventh ecumenical council was held here in 787 A.D. a church which I have provided pictures of in this blog entry. The name of the church was Hagia Sophia, just like the much larger one in Istanbul. That council voted against iconclasm-- the destruction of icons and so-called 'images'.

During the Byzantine period, Nicea had briefly been the capital of the Byzantine Empire, and during the the 4th Crusade in 1204, after Emperor Theodoros had been expelled from Constantinople, he made his capital in Nicea.

Much later in its history, Nicea became famous for something else. During the Golden era of the Ottoman period, and especially in the 14th and 15th centuries, the city became prosperous due to the patronage of the Grand Vizier, and we find the origins of the famous Iznik tile and pottery in this period. I have provided one picture of some of this beautiful tile, which seems to have been the art which was to inspire the later European potters, including those who made the famous blue Delft pottery and tile. If you visit the famous Ottoman palace, the Topkapi palace in Istanbul, you will find whole rooms plastered with this beautiful tile. There is so much more I could say about this gorgeous city, and its hospitable people, but this must be enough for now.

The Underwater Archaeology Museum at Bodrum

Nestled on the southwest coast of Turkey is the beautiful resort town of Bodrum, which is actually an ancient Roman (and before that Greek) harbor town. Not surprisingly, there are many shipwrecked boats not far from this harbor, which as you can see, is still a safe haven for boats. And so there could hardly be a more appropriate spot for an underwater archaeology museum (no the museum is not underwater, its in a Crusader castle actually). The pictures below show you a boat, full of amphora that went to the bottom of the drink, loaded with drink (more specifically wine. Now that wine had been chilled for 2,000 years before it was brought up).

The first picture is the schematic of what the original boat looked like, the second shows the boat from the side. On the left side of the fourth slide (underwater slide) you will notice the large slabs of gold plate. Gold was used for many things, but before money was the basis of any economy, precious metals, and especially gold were molded into large plates of a specific weight (the ancient equivalent of gold bricks), and became the basis for trade and purchase.
There is a further picture of the boat from a different angle, and then some of the actual gold salvaged from the boat itself. In stark contrast is the last picture, of a stone anchor. We tend to think of anchors as made of metal, but the ancients saw that as a waste of good metal, causing it to rust, so they tended to use stones like the one pictured below. Recently, there have been spectacular underwater finds in the Bosphorus near Istanbul as well. My friend Meltem has kindly provided me with links to the National Geographic sites where one can learn more about such excavations.

National Geographic has just made a series of documentaries about the new construction under the Bosphorus and the excavations under the water

The links are ;

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/explorer/3106/Overview#tab-Videos/05397_00

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/videos/player.html?channel=1803&category=5566&title=5397

Recently, on one of my many flights I watched a movie entitled Fool's Gold with Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey and Donald Sutherland. It wasn't a very good movie, but it did deal a bit with the hard tasks and dangers involved in underwater archaeology. A good deal of progress has been made in this field, and I am happy to report that before long there should be much to say about what has been found in the Alexandrian harbor as well in Egypt. Stay tuned. As it turns out, some archaeologists are all wet :)

Russian Cake Baking Contest

O.K. so first of all, the Russians love their sweets, both cakes and candies. You should see the sweet shops. So they had a cake baking contest, with
the most creative representation of something real winning. I'll let you vote for your favorite of these 12 cakes. They were allowed to use a
little supporting structure, but basically it had to be all cake and frosting. Bon appetit! Me personally, I like the night club and the Pepsis.

Euromos-- The Growth of Paganism in the Christian Era

We will begin our tour of places I visited this summer in Turkey. The first is in some ways one of the oldest and most well preserved of the Greek cities visited. It is also today one of the most obscure and difficult to find, as it is not on the beaten track that any tour bus would go on, and yet it is clearly visible from the road. This was a critically important city of the Greek league in Asia Minor, and it has clear connections with the famous Hellenistic ruler Mauselos, whose mammoth and grandiose tomb gave us the term 'mausoleum'.

The distinction of this second century temple built to the honor of Zeus (see the honorific inscription in the picture below) is that it is one of the 3-4 best preserved Greek temples from the first or second century A.D. and it shows beyond cavil that paganism was still alive and being supported by massive building projects such as this one. What is interesting about this one is that the city was no longer a major and crucial city north of the port at Bodrum and yet the building projects went on. What this temple also shows is that it was not only the Emperor cult that was being supported by the propaganda of
erecting religious buildings. One needs of course a tour guide to find such important but obscure sites, and you will find him depicted above :). Enjoy.

A Three D Jesus in a High Def World

One of the things you find at the Moscow Flea Market is products made by the new laser technologies. Naturally enough someone was going to try and capture Jesus in glass through this technology and with some considerable success. Here are two images, one front one from the side, which show the the 3 D Jesus. On either side of his halo are the proper nomina sacra, the abbreviations for Insous Christos, and in the halo itself you can see the abbreviation indicating he is the alpha and omega. Over his head is a small flame (flame on Jesus). The most interesting feature here is Jesus is holding a Russian Bible in old Slavonic. Who knew that an Aramaic speaking Jesus read old Slavonic? As they say in Russia Slava Boga (Praise God).

In any case, we need a 3 D Jesus in this High Def world. Most of the Jesus' we offer the world are far too monochrome, one dimensional, and frankly just fall flat (as in flat screen). I am finally safely home, so you may prepare your self for a multitude of posts from materials from the trip, including some archaeology reports from Turkey.

The Freedom of God and the Free Will of Human Beings

One of the more interesting subjects to discuss is the freedom of God. What exactly is God free to do or not to do? Is God's will the primary and controlling divine attribute such that even God's knowledge is dependent on God's will in the first place? Are there things that a sovereign God cannot do? For example, is God free to sin? Or is God's behavior determined by the unalterable divine nature? That is, is God subject to the same sort of determinism some Christians believe applies to human beings? These sorts of questions and their answers all have a bearing on how we ask and answer the question about human freedom and its nature.

A few preliminary points are in order. Firstly, I take it that the primary attribute of God is not God's will but rather God's love, which is a holy love. Not holiness without love, and not love without holiness. I say this because God's will has primarily to do with his doing, but what is prior to that is God's being or character, and in my view God's willing is dependent on his character. There are certain things which, while theoretically God might be able to do, God would never do because it would be 'out of character'. For example God is light, and in God is no darkness at all. This I take to mean that God would never do evil nor commit sin. Of course there have been theologians who have argued that the terms good or evil are simply defined by what God does or does not do and sanction. I think there is a problem with this whole approach. The moral order of the universe and more specifically the image of God in human beings is meant to tend in a particular direction, namely conformity to the character of God. God says "be ye holy as I am holy". There is supposed to be a reflection of the divine character in us, and indeed in all of creation. This in turn means that God, having set up the universe in a particular way, is not free to be capricious and redefine the meaning of holy in the middle of the game. God has chosen to express the divine nature in a particular way and has chosen to limit himself such that God as well as all of his creation is subject to certain standards of truth, holiness, love, and so on. This is a complicated matter, but the bottom line is that once God set up a universe with other free agents other than himself, God is not free to do just anything without violating his revealed character and will. This is not an absolute limitation. I am assume God could set up a definition of sin and could violate it, but if God did, he would cease to be the good God of the Bible. It is the last refuge of a scoundrel to say that God who has already defined darkness and light, can change the definition along the way so that "whatever is, is right, because God has done and said it". This is one of the reasons why it is terribly false to predicate of God sins that he prohibits us from doing, say for example destroying innocent human lives for no good or appropriate reason. But I digress.

I assume that when human beings were created in the image of God this meant, among other things that Adam had libertarian freedom to either obey God or not. It is not appropriate to judge this matter on the basis of the attributes of fallen human beings who indeed in various ways can be said to be in bondage to sin or addicted to sinful behaviors. No the question is, how did God make us in the first place, and how in Christ does God restore us in Christ as we are renewed in the image of Christ? Does grace restore the power of contrary choice in redemption or not? Of course much depends on one's view of grace. Some people think grace works rather like an escalator-- it does all the heavy lifting and we are just along for the ride. I disagree with this. Grace is not irresistible, it is rather a form of enablement from a gracious God which gives us a further chance to freely love and obey God. In other words, we must indeed work out our salvation with fear and trembling, God's grace does not do it all for us and in spite of us.

Another of the major issues which affects this discussion is the nature of love. Now I understand love to be something that is the most personal act of either God or human beings. And furthermore it is the most free and freeing act of all beings. It must be freely given and freely received. It cannot be coerced, co-opted, manipulated, and it most certainly does not work in an impersonal manner, like say the way iron filings are attracted to a magnet. God is not a magnet, and he does not treat his creatures in an impersonal way that makes their behavior inevitable, and if he did, it would cease to be personal and loving behavior on our part for sure.

This leads me to a further point. Ethics in the Bible are largely what are called virtue ethics. They are not intended to be exercises in futility or frustration. Nor is the function of ethical enjoinders to simply give us a clear picture of our impotence compared to God, though it must be said it often has such an effect. Now virtue ethics require that a person has the capacity to be virtuous, by which I mean, the person has the capacity to either freely behave in this way or not. Otherwise there is nothing virtuous about the behavior. The fight or flight pure instinct of a deer, for example, is not an example of making a conscious choice to "do the right thing". I am utterly convinced that the Bible calls us to be virtuous beings, or as Paul suggests in Phil. 4 to be creatures who can not merely reflect on what is noble and excellent, but seek and attempt to do it. The commands to love as we are loved, to forgive as we are forgiven, and so on, presuppose that grace actually enables us to freely attempt to imitate Christ and do what he commands us to do, at least approximately. God is an ethical being and he wants Christians to reflect the highest and best behavior a human being can muster. Indeed, he commands us to do it, but as Augustine says, God gives what he commands, he enables us to believe and behave as we ought to do.

In short, the discussion of the freedom of human beings should never be undertaken in isolation from the discussion of the freedom of God, and the ways God has chosen to limit himself in order to allow us to be beings with a limited measure of freedom, and so a small reflection of the divine character. Here we must return at the end of this discussion to the matter of God's will and knowledge. Notice how in Rom. 9-11 God foreknows things that he did not will, for example the apostasy of Israel and the rejection of its savior by most early Jews. God not only did not will this, it breaks his heart in the same way it breaks Paul's. What this tells me is that Calvin was wrong about the relationship between God's will and God's knowledge. God does not merely know it because he wills it. There is some other relationship between knowing and willing in God and they are not inexorably linked. At the end of the day I believe whole heartedly in what John 3.16-17 says, God loves the whole fallen world, and Jesus died for the sins of all human beings as 1 Tim. 2 also says. This in turn means there are other agents in play in the matter of redemption, human agents who can either positively or negatively respond to the Gospel, and the eternal lostness of some is in no way willed or destined by God. Were the matter otherwise, our God ceases to be a good God, by God's own definition of goodness. One final reminder-- as the prophets told us God requires of us that we reflect the divine character-- to do justice to love kindness and to walk humbly with our God. What God requires of us, he enables us to do, so that in small measure we may reflect the virtuous and free character of our God.

From Russia With Love

Here are a series of pictures from my time in Russia the land of golden domes and beautiful icons of Christ and the saints.

Above you will see the picture of Moscow Evangelical Seminary where I teach from time to time, and a picture of Natasha and Sasha Tsutserov the latter being the head of the seminary, and my former student and a graduate of St. Andrews University doctoral program. I have been teaching a course all week on Christology, hence the image of Sasha's favorite icon of Christ-- Christ the Golden Hair which I like as well. On Sunday we will travel to the historic city of Vladimir to see the beautiful old churches and icons including the very famous Our Lady of Vladimir.

The students here are both engaging and fully engaged with many good questions about Christology. What is especially of note is that they are overwhelmingly Arminian not Calvinist in character as is true all over Russia's Protestant Churches as also is the case with the Orthodox Church. Having lived so long under 'determinism' of a Communist sort, they like their freedom both in society and in their theology as well. For them if Christ has set us free, part of what he set us free from is things being pre-determined by anyone, including God. God's Son did not come to announce that God had pre-determined all things from before the creation of the world, instead he came to set the captives free and "if the Son has set you free, you are truly free indeed". It is an odd paradox indeed that in the land of liberty (America) Calvinism plays better than in a land of limited freedom like Russia. Think on these things.

'Back in the USSR'--err Russia

Well I am in my fifth country on the world tour and will be teaching Christology here all week at Moscow Evangelical Seminary. Its currently light until almost 11 p.m. and its also light by 3:30 in the morning, so there is nothing dark about Moscow at this time of year... it is however in the 50s. This year Moscow Seminary graduated 17 students just in youth ministry never mind those with the other degrees. It is a thriving and interesting place. Christianity is alive and well here. Thanks for all those who keep praying for me on my Odyssey. I have lots of archaeological news from Turkey and hope to begin doing more posts soon. For now I will say that my predicted reaction to the Indiana Jones movie was right on target--- the officials here were upset.