eChurch Blog

This is MASSIVE news right now.

I’m so sorry that I don’t have the time to research and comment more fully on the news that scientists in the US have succeeded in developing the first synthetic living cell.

I’ve made a quick enquiry as to the significance of this news on a Christian forum, and a learned friend has responded thusly:

Perhaps I’m just grumpy, but I can’t say that I’m that impressed. It’s just a copy of existing genes (which is old science) put into an existing cell (which is old science, and even older creation). So what? It’s just nobody has done the whole lot before (because it takes a lot of time and a lot of money).

It’s like I photocopied a Shakespeare play and said “look I’ve created a new Shakespeare play”. Anyway I know a lot more fun way of making new life (-;

[.....]

Well, DNA synthesisers have been reasonably common place in the lab for almost 20 years. You have pots of your four nucleotides, your type in the sequence you want them attached to each other, press “go” and come back later to find your strand of DNA.

Nobody has used them to try to construct a whole genome before, because you need a lot of time and money to do that (and they used to be too slow and inaccurate to do very long sequences). The group made an initial nucleotide sequence in this way but then used yeast cells to maintain the sequences, join them together into larger sequences and amplify them up. These larger chunks of DNA, now being manufactured in much larger quantities by the yeast cells (as that’s much cheaper, faster and more productive than the sequencer originally used) were put back into yeast for final assembly. The assembled DNA was then taken out of the yeast and put into a bacterial ghost cell that has had its own DNA removed.

It’s an impressive piece of work, but it’s essentially taking existing code for life and existing machinery for using that code. It’s an extension of what has been done before. For example, most diabetics now use human insulin that is made by bacteria which have had the human gene for insulin inserted into their DNA. Or, there’s the good old glowing mouse – mice that have had genes for either firefly luciferase (the one that makes their bums glow) or green fluorescent protein (which makes jellyfish glow) inserted into their own DNA. This mix and match of genes has been going on for years. Venter has done it on a new impressive scale but I don’t think it raises any issues or questions that haven’t been around for many years now.

OK, I’ve got to dash off now (still out and about, and will be until Sunday), but I’ll leave you with a collection of Internet links gleaned this morning, and it’s interesting to note the ethical implications are beginning to be explored also:

Andrew Brown Guardian – Has Venter made us gods? Does Craig Venter’s creation of life in the laboratory finally squeeze God right out of the scientific universe?

BeliefNet – Dr. Craig Venter and crew have designed the entire DNA of a cell, and caused it to live. It’s the first-ever wholly synthetic living cell. Excerpt:

Wired – In a feat that is the culmination of two and a half years of tests and adjustments, researchers at the J. Craig Venter Institute inserted artificial genetic material — chemically printed, synthesized and assembled — into cells that were then able to grow naturally.

Catholic and Enjoying It – We have just created the synthetic genome and inserted into cell, where it works. In short, artificial life.

P Z Myers – Get in the mood for this bit of news, the synthesis of an artificial organism by Craig Venter’s research team.

Richard Dawkins – The advance, published in Science, has been hailed as a scientific landmark, but critics say there are dangers posed by synthetic organisms.

(This one’s just for a laugh) NewsArse – Scientists in the US who succeeded in developing the first synthetic living cell have reported that it already appears to have attained eight GCSE’s at grade C or above.

MailOnline – Artificial life: Have scientists created a monster?

LA Times – Molecular biologists say they have created the first bacterium controlled by synthesized DNA. The research, a major step toward artificial life, is called a ‘tour de force.’

Sky News – A US biologist claims to have created the first man-made cell in one of the biggest scientific breakthroughs of the past two decades.

BBC Vid – Synthetic cell creator defends project – Are you playing God?

I’ll add to this list as and when I can.

It’s been some time since I last posted on the thawing relationship between the Orthodox and Catholic church, but it’s worth keeping an eye on, as this Pope (and perhaps the Patriarch) appear driven by ecumenicalism.

The first tentative micro steps toward full communion between the Orthodox and Catholic Church, which bubbles away quietly in the background, is somewhat noteworthy:

Catholic News Agency:

Wrapping up a two-day initiative for the promotion of Russian culture and spirituality at the Holy See, a concert featuring Russian and Italian music will be offered for the Pope. The event marks the culmination of events which have exhibited an increased warmth of relations between the Russian Orthodox and Catholic Churches and could lead to an encounter between their leaders.

[.....]

Vatican and Orthodox Church participants in a May 19 press conference spoke of the Russia Days as a further step forward in the relations between the Churches, which have been separated since the “Great Schism” nearly a thousand years ago. Cardinal Walter Kasper of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity called the current climate “a new stage” in relations.

Speaking about the significance of the concert, Metropolitan Hilarion told reporters that “there are things which cannot be transmitted either through theology or through diplomacy but that can be transmitted through ‘language of art.’”

He explained that “a very strong language is the language of music.”

Art is valuable in bringing about dialogue between cultures: they can “liberate us from prejudices, from negative feelings toward each other that we might have inherited from the past.”

“I see many positive signs in the development of this particular type of dialogue,” the metropolitan said.

He also mentioned that a landmark meeting between Patriarch Kirill I and Pope Benedict XVI is “possible” in the future. He said that there is still much planning to be done, but “times have changed” and with it, people also change. His idea is that, considering the appreciation of the Orthodox Church for the current Pope, “a meeting should be held between Kirill and Benedict XVI in particular, rather than some patriarch and some pope.”

The following piece written for Catholic Online by Deacon Keith Fournier, reveals sentiment I feel is shared by Pope Benedict:

The move toward full communion between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches is prompted by the Holy Spirit. It is the most important development of the Third Christian Millennium. It has extraordinary implications for the West, indeed for the whole world, at a critical time in history. Let us pray that it happens – for the sake of world still waiting to be set free and reborn into the New World of the Church.

First, I must lay all my cards on the table. I long for the full communion of the Orthodox and Catholic Church.  I pray daily for the full communion of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches. I do so because I believe it is the will of God that “All May be One” (John 17: 21).  I also believe that the healing of the division between the two churches would unleash a profound renewal of the entire Church at the dawn of what I believe is a new missionary age. I believe that the gifts found in the whole Church will enrich both East and West and assist us in the mission which we must face together in our One Lord.

I long for this full communion because I believe that as the West implodes under the fierce ravages of what Pope Benedict XVI properly called a “Dictatorship of Relativism” it is only the real humanism found in the fullness of truth revealed in Jesus Christ which can save the West from rushing over a cliff to its own demise. The West needs the Church to once again become its soul in this age which has lost its moral compass.

I long for this full communion because, as a “revert”, one who returned to my Catholic faith as a young man, I walked the way home by way of the early Church Fathers. Had I not had been baptized a Catholic of the Latin Rite; I might have become an Eastern Christian. As the decades of my life have unfolded, including my theological studies and ordination to the Order of Deacon, my vision and theological viewpoint are profoundly Eastern. So too is my worship. I have long prayed with icons and love the Divine Liturgy. However, I cherish the unity that comes with the Chair of Peter.

Let me be clear, I am deeply and happily ensconced in the Roman Catholic Church. I am glad that I have authorization to serve the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Church. For a number of years I had the privilege of regularly serving the Divine Liturgy and I miss it. I love the Liturgy, East and West, however I find the depth of the Mystery is beautiful captured in the Liturgy of the East. There is a Latin maxim that addresses the centrality of worship in the life, identity and mission of the whole Church; “Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi“. It means that the law of prayer or worship is the law of belief and the law of life. Or, even more popularly rendered, as we worship, so will we believe and live!

Worship is not an “add on” for a Catholic or an Orthodox Christian. It is the foundation of Catholic and Orthodox identity; expressing our highest purpose. Worship reveals how we view ourselves in relationship to God, one another and the world into which we are sent to carry forward the redemptive mission of Jesus Christ. How the Church worships is a prophetic witness to the truth of what she professes. Good worship becomes a dynamic means of drawing the entire human community into the fullness of life in Jesus Christ, lived out in the communion of the Church. It attracts – through beauty to Beauty. Worship informs and transforms both the person and the community which participates in it. There is reciprocity between worship and life.

Finally, I long for this coming full communion of East and West because my oldest son is an Orthodox Christian. He, his wife and their children are all practicing Orthodox Christians. I must admit that the more I visit them these days the more I appreciate the beauty of the interweaving of faith and life which comes with Eastern Christianity and its practices. Yet, the more painful our separation at the Altar, the Eucharistic Table, also becomes.I believe it gives me a glimpse into the very heart of the Lord who longs for our unity.

So, yes, I watch for every sign that the two lungs of the One Church are beginning to fill with the one breath of Divine Life, the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit alone can animate the One New Man, Jesus Christ, to heal the division which has gone on for too long in His Body. Yes, I watch with the eyes of living faith. Some say I see these developments with what they would call “Rose Colored glasses”. If I do see through the color of rose, it is because the color symbolizes the hope which comes from faith in the Resurrection of Christ Jesus. It is also because of my bedrock conviction concerning His one plan for His One Church.

This past week, on May 19 and 20, 2010 the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity and the Moscow Patriarchate cosponsored a Day honoring Russian Culture and Faith in the Vatican. It was one of a growing number of meetings between the leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Holy See. Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev of Volokolamsk, the head of external affairs for the Moscow Patriarchate and one of the brightest and most dynamic leaders of the Orthodox Church delivered a message of greeting from Patriarch Kirill at a concert

of Russian music in the Vatican attended by the Pope. Archbishop Hilarion is an accomplished musician and an extraordinary theologian and scholar.

The concert presented music by Russian composers. It included a work by Metropolitan Hilarion called the “Song of the Ascension.” It highlighted the spirit of the meetings which were filled with hope. Last September, Metropolitan Hilarion and Pope Benedict XVI agreed to foster such meetings. They are  part of a growing collaboration between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches. Together we face the wasteland of Western Culture resulting from the collapse of Christian influence and we have rediscovered one another as brothers. Together we greeting the “post-modern/neo-pagan” challenge of our age, not with despair but with a solid mutual commitment to re- evangelize the West and do what the Church is called to do in every age.

There is more than speculation surrounding an upcoming meeting between Patriarch Kirill I and Pope Benedict XVI. The Orthodox Archbishop of Cyprus Chrysostomos II is only one of the several leaders trying to arrange it. He has offered Cyprus as a place where such an historic summit could occur. Archbishop Chrysostomos II counseled the Orthodox Christians in that land to stay calm in the face of pushback from the dissident Pancyprian Orthodox Christian Movement. They are strongly opposed to the growing relationship between the Catholic and Orthodox leadership. However, they will not be able to stem the momentum of the Holy Spirit.

Pope Benedict XVI will visit Cyprus on June 4 – 6, 2010 and engage in discussions with Orthodox leaders.  The Pope’s visit to Cyprus will end with a Mass at the Eleftheria Stadium in Nicosia. During his Cyprus trip the Pope will set forth in more detail the topics which will be discussed in an upcoming meeting of the Synod of Bishops on the Middle East which is scheduled for October.

Metropolitan Hilarion favors a formal meeting between the Pope and Patriarch Kirill I in the near future. He told a recent Press conference that this meeting  “should be a historic event, not just because it is the first meeting between the head of the Roman Catholic Church and the Russian Orthodox Church, but especially because such a meeting must be sign of the intention to move our relations forward”.

During the two days of cultural meetings in Rome, Metropolitan Hilarion presided over the Divine Liturgy at the burial site of St. Peter in the crypt of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. Concelebrating were Archbishops Kirill of Yaroslavl and Rostov and Feognost of Sergiev Posad. We have chosen that extraordinary photo as the main image to accompany this article. It is a profound visual reminder that the One Church existed, with legitimate diversity in the bond of unity, for the entire First Millennium of Christianity. It is a reminder as well that it can exist that way once again in the Third Millennium of Christianity.  In the words of the Angel given to the Mother of God “Nothing is impossible with God”. (Luke 1:37)

On Wednesday May 19, 2010 Metropolitan Hilarion met with Cardinal Walter Kasper the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity at the Council’s library in the Vatican. They discussed the work of the Joint Commission for Orthodox-Catholic dialogue. That work has involved fruitful mutual discussions on the role of the Bishop of Rome in the first millennium. Attending the talk along with Bishop Hilarion and cardinal Kasper were the vice-president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity Bishop Brian Farrell, secretary of the Council the Revd. Milan Zust, DECR deputy chairman hegumen Philipp (Ryabykh), and acting DECR secretary for Inter-Christian relations priest Dimitry Sizonenko.

At the meeting, Cardinal Kasper presented Metropolitan Hilarion with his books ‘The God of Christians” and “Jesus Christ.” Metropolitan Hilarion presented Cardinal Kasper with his book “The Mystery of Faith”. The warmth and brotherly affection which characterized that exchange of gifts is a symbol of the work underway, inspired by the Holy Spirit.

The move toward full communion between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches is prompted by the Holy Spirit. It is the most important development of the Third Christian Millennium. It has extraordinary implications for the West, indeed for the whole world, at a critical time in history. It will continue and it will result in the healing of the wounds which for too long have separated the Church.

Yes, the Orthodox and Catholic Bond Deepens. Will the Two Lungs of the Church, East and West Breathe Together Again? As we approach the celebration of Pentecost, the Birthday of the Church, let us pray that it does indeed happen – for the sake of a world still waiting to be set free and reborn into the New World of the Church.

You have got to check this out……

……as this gallery of weird and wonderful church structures is quite breathtaking:

BoredPanda – 50 Most Extraordinary Churches of the World

OK, I’m in the middle of my out and about phase and as a I have a short pit-stop I’ve scanned my news feeds, and here are a few bits and bobs worth mentioning:

A biggie today revolves around the revelation that the UK’s largest abortion provider has announced that the country’s first ever abortion advert is to be screened on national television later this month. See here, here, here, and here. I will confess at this point, to having consciously linked to articles which are critical of this move, as I do deplore the millions of potential lives sacrificed to the god of convenience. I do however also acknowledge the complexities and exceptions that run through the abortion debate.

Another top news item in my feeds are reporting that apparently today is “Draw Mohammed Day”. For a couple of responses to this, see here, here, here and here. UPDATE: I’ve just been informed that Pakistan is blocking access to Facebook in response to the online group calling on people to draw the Prophet Mohammed.

Another biggie is the news that mandatory new rules drawn up by the General Medical Council (GMC) warn medics that they must not ignore the wishes of dying patients who do not want their lives prolonged. See here, here, here and here.

OK, they’re the biggies and here’s a couple that piqued my interest.

Firstly, the news that Peter Tatchell has directly rebuked Anglican Mainstream following their reaction to him being invited as a guest speaker to the Christian “Rock” festival Greenbelt.

Secondly, Jonathan Bartley of Ekklesia has written a scathing article entitled; Lib Dems and Tories have sold out disabled children, which is a follow up to Jonathan’s serendipitist encounter with David Cameron on the run up to the elections.

Sorry this was all a little cobbled together, my pit-stop is quite short!

I’ve been trying to write an intro for the following cross-post by Michael over at the Parchment and Pen blog, however, this is such a timely and complete message that I’d only spoil it, so here it is:

Heretics by C Michael Patton – With kind permission:

I cannot tell you how many times I have been called a heretic. It simply comes with the territory of teaching theology. I have been called a heretic by anti-dispensationalists, Catholics, egalitarians, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and, of course, my anti-Calvinistic friends. The word “heretic” seems to be well worn these days. With so many different beliefs out there, people automatically assume that those who fall outside their belief system are heretics.

We need to be careful about how we use this word.

The Theological word of the day (which I write) says this about heresy:

“An opinion, belief, or doctrine that is in variance to an established belief of a particular tradition. In Christianity, a heresy can have a historic value (more serious) or traditional value. In other words, a belief can be considered heretical to Baptists (e.g. paedeobaptism), when it is not heretical in the historic sense. To be a historic heresy, it must be in variance to that which has been believed by the majority of Christians of all time (e.g. the deity of Christ).”

Because many of us use the word heresy in such a cavalier or domineering way, it has begun to lose its value. At least once a day, it seems, I hear someone calling someone else a heretic for something that is not really deserving of the term. Some will say someone is a heretic for being too strong of a Calvinist, for being too nice to Catholics, for believing in theistic evolution, for saying that drinking alcohol is not a sin, for denying inerrancy, or for denying their version of free will.

Calling a person the “h” word should be done with great fear, qualification, and thoughtfulness. I don’t think we should call a moratorium on the word since it carries with it an important rebuke with the implications of grave consequences. Here are some qualifications:

Historic heretic: Those who depart from the faith with regard to a belief that has been held by Christianity from the beginning. There can be two different types of historic heretics:
1) One who departs from an essential belief  (heresy)
2) One who departs from a non-essential belief (heterodoxy)

Traditional heretic: those who depart from the faith of a particular tradition (e.g. Catholic, Protestant, Reformed, Dispensationalist, etc.) or denomination (Baptist, Anglican, Methodist, etc.).

If one is a historic heretic who departs from a non-essential, this belief does not mean that it is not serious. For example, I believe that Open Theists have departed from a historic Christian belief about the nature of God and I believe that it is a serious departure. Even when I don’t believe that a departure necessarily undermines the very essence of Christianity, I do believe that many departures necessitate a strong rebuke.

There are also three different reasons for heresy:

1) Minor departures: Some may just deny some minor historic detail of expression. For example, I know many, including myself, who do not agree with the historic articulations of the “eternal generation of the Son” for reasons that are not connected to the essence of the doctrine (Christ’s deity).
2) Heresies held in ignorance: Many times people hold to heresies simply because they have never been taught orthodoxy. For example, some, in ignorance, deny Christ an equal place in power with the Father while believing that Christ is God (a subordinationalist view which amounts to bitheism or tritheism). More common, many hold to a modalist view of the Trinity (i.e. that there is one God who shows himself in three ways instead of one God who eternally exists in three different persons).
3) Defiant heresy. This is the type where people are well familiar with the orthodox understanding of a doctrine, yet deny it anyway. For example, many are familiar with orthodox view of the Trinity yet deny Christ is eternal or that the Holy Spirit is personal. The defiance can be both willful and/or intellectual.

I think that these are all different in view of their centrality.

Those in category one have to do with language and concepts that have defined orthodoxy by means of a particular articulation which is more negotiable, but, nevertheless, has been held by the historic faith. So, by definition, it is a heretical departure from the faith, but I would not call someone who denies the eternal generation of the Son as a formal/historic heretic.

Two is more serious, but normally comes from ignorance. Those who are not discipled in the faith can easy find themselves here. It needs correction, but it is also somewhat innocent. In other words, it is not a sinful departure from the faith in the same way as number three.

Three is the most serious as it represents a willful and informed departure from that which provides the essence of an historic confession.

Putting this into perspective, I think we should also understand how God uses heresy to advance his kingdom. This is not to say that heresy is good, but it may be a necessary evil on the path to truth and revival. When the church is immature, doctrinally lazy, or simply apathetic toward truth, often heresy serves to help people take up arms in defense of the beliefs that provide the foundation for our faith. In this, heresy is good.

Heresy is a rich term that can be very constructive and very destructive. It is important to know what it really means before we use it. Sometimes people call others heretics when they only disagree with a minor traditional bent. Sometimes people call others heretics when, at worst, it is heterodoxy. And sometimes people lack the courage to identify when others have departed from a cardinal doctrine of the Christian faith. All of these are wrong.

Just to let you know that I’m out and about at the mo and so if I appear a little absent, it’s because I am.

Cross-post Epiphenom

Chris Mooney has an interview with Elaine Ecklund, the researcher who’s been documenting the religious beliefs of academics for several years. I’ve blogged about her work last year.

One of the things Mooney picks up on is her conclusion that, although scientists are much less religious than the general population, it doesn’t seem to be that studying science is the cause. That’s because prospective scientists are mostly non-religious in the first place.

I guess that’s not too surprising. There’s a considerable anti-science movement within conservative Christianity, so highly religious people are less likely to go into science in the firs place. And there’s no reason to suppose that learning about science should necessarily conflict with liberal religion. After all, mainstream religions have successfully accommodated science within their worldviews (often reconstructing God as a remote figure who lets evolution and the laws of physics do most of the work (but see this earlier blog post for more on that).

And yet there is something odd going on here. Because college in the US is, in fact, a major non-religious epiphany for many students.

Take, for example, data from the ongoing Spirituality in Higher Education Study. This study is following nearly 15,000 students through their college years.

They’ve found that religious attendance plummets during college years – as shown in the figure on the right (which I nicked from the Salt Lake Tribune). According to the study organizers, this drop in attendance is closely related to an increase in “alcohol consumption and partying”. A shocking indictment of college life, I’m sure you’ll agree!

But it’s not just the hedonism and freedom of college life that entices students away from religion. You can see this in some remarkable data from the Monitoring the Future Study (the paper is here, but behind a paywall).

They estimated how much religiosity changes for kids who do not go to college. Then they compared that with changes in religiosity over 6 years for kids who study a range of disciplines.

The data are shown in the graph at the top of this story. Basically, for the biological and physical sciences it’s a mixed picture, similar to what Ecklund found. Church attendance goes up, while beliefs go down. Perhaps that’s because, as they join the workforce, they feel under increased pressure to conform socially.

For vocational subjects, the effect is all positive. These folks come out of college more religious than you might expect – which may reflect the different natures of the colleges that teach these subjects.

But both the Humanities and the Social Sciences see dramatic declines in attendance and even more in religious beliefs.

Now, this might simply be because they were more religious to start with – but then, so were those who went into education. So I suspect that broadening world views is the major reason these students lose their faith – a conclusion also suggested by the fact that, in the Spirituality in Higher Education Study, participation in a “study abroad program” also created increased skepticism about religion.

In other words, humanities and social sciences, much more than biological and mathematical sciences, challenge you to imagine the world though the eyes of others. And this exercise in imagination undercuts religious dogma far more effectively than any science lesson can.

As the Michigan researchers conclude: “”Our results suggest that it is Postmodernism, not Science, that is the bête noir of religiosity.”?

Cross-post Polycarp

I’ve been pondering a few things lately, and one of them is the relation of Psalm 2 to Revelation (especially chapters 4-22). While I may not and will not fully express my thoughts here – saving that up for later – I wanted to start publicly formulating them so that I may receive guidance, or help, and to test these thoughts:

When you bring up the book of Revelation, you bring up with it everyone’s exegetical work, thoughts, and ideas (which generally are relatively new in the history of Christianity and biblical interpretation). I am not trying to dismiss the notions of many that this book pertains to the End of Days, as I think that the book itself reveals itself as something which points to the final act of human history; however, we should be able to examine it free from the human quest to ‘figure’ out what it ‘prophetically’ means. I want to examine it in its socio-political and historical contexts. I say socio-political because if my theory proves true, then Revelation presents a very political approach to Jesus Christ, in which first introduced to Him as little more than one among many, who steps forward to open the seals of the book, but ends up on the throne of God which then becomes the Throne of God and the Lamb. It is a process that not only takes place in heaven, but on earth, where the nations slowly come to see Christ as the Occupant of the Throne. Revelation, I hope to show, like the second Psalm, in which both writings are seen in light of enthronement and validation.

Historically, the second Psalm is thought of as an enthronement psalm because it fits into the Near Eastern method of placing a king on the throne. We might, in the West, best understand this theory as the divine right of kings espoused by the British Monarchy centuries ago. Could the kings of the ANE appeal to a long and royal blood-line? Hardly, as David who is the titular progenitor of the Israelite throne was nothing more than a dirty shepherd boy just a few years before be became king, yet he is seen as the herald of the Messiah. David, for all of his faults and failures, is a man ‘after God’s own heart.’ He is a song-writer, a prophet, a muse, and a man who fathered the Messiah’s line. Yet, he still had to be coronated, as did his children. Even today, we feel that a proper ceremony validates almost anything. From the time of the first American President until now, the ceremony has grown, because it is used to validate a man into the office, much more so than the few words of an oath of office. The second Psalm should be seen as an appeal to Heaven for the validation of Israel’s king, especially in an embattled kingdom, surrounded by all sides with those who would dispose of the King. So to Revelation.

Psalm 2 has a long history of usage in early Christian history, starting with the Gospels. Every Gospel has the account of the baptism of Christ, the anointing by the Spirit, and the recognition that the Man in the water is the Son of God. (Mark 1.10; Matthew 3.16; Luke 3.22; John 1.32-34). Each account mimics Psalm 2 in which the King suddenly becomes the Son of God. Luke uses it as well in Acts 4.-25-26 when Peter and John, freed from their punishment for teaching in the name of Jesus, found support among the local congregation who saw the troubles as a fulfillment of Psalm 2. Further, John’s Apocalypse is replete with references to this Psalm, starting with Revelation 2.26-27 which quotes Psalm 2.8-9. In Revelation 19.5 is an allusion to this Psalm as well. Not only that, but throughout Revelation, we have the writer focusing his story around the kings of the earth (Psalm 2.2; Revelation 1.5; 6.15; 17.2, 18; 18.3, 9; 19.19; 21.24) the nations (Psalm 2.1, 8; Rev. 2:26; 10:11; 11:2, 9, 18; 12:5; 14:8; 15:3; R16:19; 17:15; 18:3, 23; 19:15; 20:3, 8; 21:24, 26; 22:2) , and the Son with the Rod of Iron (Psalm 2.9; Revelation 2.7; 12.5; 19.15).

This is was not an uncommon practice for the old Christian community, to take a portion of the Scriptures and apply it to its fulfillment in the life of the New Community. One only has to read Matthew and the Epistle to the Hebrews for the very weighty evidence of that fact. Moving past the New Testament writers and interpreters in the Apostolic and Church Fathers, we find an abundance of quotes from those writers, including writers as early as Clement of Rome (90) and Polycarp (140). They were not the last to use Psalm 2 as a lens in which to see the Christ-event through, as it was used well past the Nicean age.

It is also not uncommon to see the Eschatological Ascension of Christ as something which is ongoing. It was in Peter’s Speech at Pentecost (Acts 2.35) where he quoted various Scriptural passages, but in this instance, quoting Psalm 110, which according to Luke, Christ quoted in Luke 20.13. But, the allusion to this part of Psalm 110 doesn’t end at Pentecost, but can be found in the epistle to the Hebrews as well. In this homiletic work, the author starts with a quote that shows the superiority of Jesus Christ to the angels in much the same way in which Psalm 2 is used to show the superiority of the Israelite throne to those of the nations surrounding it. The same author in Hebrews 10.12-13, while showing that Christ is superior to the Levitical Priests, is shown sitting in the Glory of God, awaiting the eschatological victory. According to Paul, this final victory will take place when the last enemy is destroyed. That enemy, is death:

But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death. For HE HAS PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all. (1Co 15:23-28 NASB)

Paul is quoting, possibly, Psalm 8.5-6 along with the thought in Psalm 110.1 about the Anointed King ruling having final dominion. It is here as well that Paul has a twisted theology of sorts. The Son is now reigning, perhaps because of the enduring Sacrifice as we have seen in Hebrews 10, but when Death is destroyed then God will be ‘all in all.’ Death, according to the Apocalypse, is destroyed in Revelation 20.14. When this happens, there is a magisterial change, evident in Paul’s theology and in the Christology of Revelation. There is biblical support for the process of enthronement when it applies to Christ, with the writers seeing that in the end, the Majesty will be different than what is presently thought.

Revelation serves a political purpose in that it shores up the New Community of Christ against persecution against itself, and against the memory of the Crucified Messiah. Psalm 2 shored up the Israelite Throne against the nations which sought to destroy it constantly, with God promising to protect the one who sat there, as well as perceived weaknesses of the crown who was suddenly now the Son of God. The author of Revelation used Psalm 2, along with other Psalms, treating them Messianicly as well as casting them from the present into the future with the eschatological bent. Christ was still King, but He must extend His rule beyond the orders of the Church into the whole earth, conquering the Kings of the Earth and the Nations, ending in destroying Death. Psalm 2, however, was not the only ancient song to make it into the author’s literary worldview. In Psalms 76, 89, 102, 138 and 148, we find again the Anointed King at odds with the Kings of the Earth and the nations which surrounded Israel. It is easy then to see how the early Church could replace the historical setting with then-current political climate. Jesus become the Anointed King, the Church Israel with the Caesars and Rome in their respective places.

Beginning in Psalm 76.7, after validating Israel and Israel’s God, we encounter an angry God, angry against those who oppose Israel and the Anointed King. God then judges the earth, ‘arising to do so’ (Psalm 76.), and saves the humble and in doing so, turns the wrath of humanity into a cloak of praise of Himself. If we look at this Psalm through John’s pen, we can find a connection between Psalm 76.12 and the ending of Revelation where the spirit which created the ’sons of disobedience’ is cast into, along with death, the Lake of Fire. (Ephesians 2.2; Revelation 20.10). The Psalmist leaves a short statement in which God destroys what infects Israel’s enemies, is feared by the Kings of the Earth, allowing John’s interpretation to expand the meaning eschatology. While this Psalm gives little to John, the 89th Psalm creates a path for further theological speculation and eschatological development.

The 89th Psalm begins with a song to the LORD and is filled with poetic theologies, such as the Divine Council (Psalm 89.7-9) and Creation (Psalm 89.11-12.) In verse 19, the author picks up the story of the Anointed King, starting like John does in Revelation 4.1, with a vision. In the ensuing dialogue, God promises great things, protection, and a royal line to the one would become His firstborn (Psalm 89.27). It would be this firstborn who would reign over the Kings of the Earth. A new covenant (vs28) would be formed which would last forever. (vs29) The Son is seen as David, or perhaps the Son of David. The promises (Psalm 89.19-37) is followed by a lament from those who had rejected God and His Anointed King, waging war in disobedience. The middle section promises to the Son of David a time which will last forever, in which the Throne would tower above all the earth. This is mirrored in the 102nd Psalm, where the writer speaks about a time in which Zion will be built up anew. During this time, the nations will fear the name of the Lord along with the kings of the earth who fear the Glory of the Lord. (Psalm 102.12-17). The picture of the Kings of the Earth praising God is seen again in Psalm 138. 4-6. Finally, in Psalm 148, a song of praise, completes John’s expansion of Psalm 2 when we read that the Kings of the Earth and all nations join in the praise of God. This happens when the Name of the Lord is alone exalted (148.13). In Revelation 22, the kings of the earth and the nations are separate from the Saints, as is the picture in Psalm 148.14.

In a brief note about literary structure, I want to point out in Psalm 2 that God does three things to the people of the Earth

He who sits in the heavens laughs, The Lord scoffs at them.
Then He will speak to them in His anger And terrify them in His fury,  (Psa 2:4-5 NASB)

The Lord of Heaven laughs/scoffs, speaks to them in anger, and then terrifies them. In Revelation, we have the trumpets from heaven, the seals, and then the bowls of wrath.

While this idea is not fully fleshed out, I am still working on collecting sources on use of Psalm 2 in Second Temple Judaism and the New Testament, as well as other concurrent apocalyptic writings. If it is proved that Revelation is an expansion of Psalm 2, it doesn’t have to take away from the prophetic element many people see in it; however, I maintain that Revelation is an example of what  may be an early Jewish-Christian Midrash or Targum of Psalm 2 in light of the socio-political experience of the New Community. It enthrones the Crucified Messiah as King of Israel, protects against persecution, and shows through history that God is in control. Just as Psalm 2 sets up the Anointed King as God’s king, defends the sovereignty of Israel, and warns the others that God is in control.

Psychology Today have an article entitled: Why atheism will replace religion and although I don’t agree with it in principle (especially the premise that Intelligence directly correlates with atheism – see here and here), this piece still throws up some interesting points to ponder:

Atheists are heavily concentrated in economically developed countries, particularly the social democracies of Europe. In underdeveloped countries, there are virtually no atheists. Atheism is thus a peculiarly modern phenomenon. Why do modern conditions produce atheism?

First, as to the distribution of atheism in the world, a clear pattern can be discerned. In sub-Saharan Africa there is almost no atheism (Zuckerman, 2007). Belief in God declines in more developed countries and is concentrated in Europe in countries such as Sweden (64% nonbelievers), Denmark (48%), France (44%) and Germany (42%). In contrast, the incidence of atheism in most sub-Saharan countries is below 1%.

The question of why economically developed countries turn to atheism has been batted around by anthropologists for about eighty years. Anthropologist James Fraser proposed that scientific prediction and control of nature supplants religion as a means of controlling uncertainty in our lives. This hunch is supported by data showing that the more educated countries have higher levels of non belief and there are strong correlations between atheism and intelligence (see my earlier post on this).

Continue Reading

Is Humanism beginning to look like a religion? Next they’ll have schisms, denominations and creeds. I suspect they may already have their high priests.

BBC:

Hertfordshire Police is believed to be the first police force in the UK to add humanists lay advisers to its chaplaincy team.

Pam Burn and Ray Owen joined the team this month and will help support police officers and other staff.

The chaplaincy team has 20 members from a range of faiths, including Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Paganism.

Humanists believe morality is based on human nature, human society and human experience.

Continue Reading

I for one am heartily tired of our community being framed solely in terms of our relationship with the LGBT community.

Ruth Gledhill – Times

Some years ago, at the Greenbelt Christian rock festival that takes place every August Bank Holiday near Cheltenham, someone close to the Archbishop of Canterbury told me that a person’s view on homosexuality was now what defined them on the Christian spectrum. What this person of considerable authority and intellect was saying was that it was no longer possible to be both pro-gay and evangelical.

In other words, the infighting over homosexuality means that for the 77 million Anglicans worldwide, more important than the Resurrection, the Crucifixion, the Virgin Birth and the Trinity is what one person does in bed with another.

The lines of Christian belief, in the Anglican world at least, have been redrawn around a battle over gay rights that, in the secular world, ended years ago.

Sexuality figures nowhere in the creeds. It is not mentioned in the church’s liturgies. When godparents bear witness to a baby’s baptism they do not swear to help to raise the infant as straight.

Continue Reading