Category: Faith

Fingerprints

Fingerprints

My dentist is exceptional. More than a medical practitioner, my dentist has a warm persona that communicates a confidence that makes it easy to relax. If I feel any pain as a result of the work I trust that it was not done out of negligence or malicious intent.  This does not suggest that my dentist is incapable of making mistakes. Nor does it mean I am gullible, believing that everything my dentist does is sincerely for my benefit alone. In fact, I am reminded of my dentist’s shortcomings every time I rub my tongue against my porcelain crown.  Somehow when my crown was molded my dentist’s fingerprint hardened and became a permanent part of the crown. As a result the crown surface is not smooth.  If I had known that there was a fingerprint left on my crown I would not have allowed my dentist to complete the procedure. However, I was too numb from the Novocain to feel the rough surface and missed the opportunity to correct it.  By the time my feeling came back I hardly wanted to return to the Dentist Office.   I remember what the pain was like before I received my crown.  The fingerprint left by the dentist served as a reminder of how important it was for someone to acquire the skill necessary to stop the pain of another person.   It also reminds me that well trained practitioners sometimes leave evidence of mistakes in their work.   Nonetheless, I am a grateful that my dentist is a pleasant person with a warm spirit. Otherwise the permanent evidence of my dentist’s finger tattooed in my mouth would be extremely awkward.

In the same way my dentist is exceptional, are those who provide the biblical witness.  Authors of biblical text were exceptional practitioners of the written word during their time in history.  Apart from its social implications the Bible stands on its own as an exceptional collection of literature.  It will forever be considered a masterful work.  By no means does this conclude that the Bible, an anthology, is inerrant. There are places within the text that are evident of human error. Providing specifics would demand exhaustive explanations, which would redirect the intent of this writing.  Admittedly, one can identify mistakes, misunderstandings, ignorance and misinterpretations in the Bible.  Regardless of such, the Bible is still infallible.  Errant, but infallible; How could this be?   Even with the error of placing a fingerprint on my crown, my dentist accomplished what needed to be done.  Yes, the fingerprint is a mistake, but overall the crown works perfectly. The pain is gone and I understand the intent.  Infallibility, as it relates to the Bible, cannot be defined as something or someone incapable of making mistakes.  Instead, infallibility means the bible ultimately accomplishes what it intends.

The biblical witnesses intended to reveal that God intervenes in human history.  They want us to know that they encountered God. Biblical witnesses struggled with their divine experiences, failed miserably in some instances and triumphed in others.  The Bible is a mere fingerprint of human frailty observed among divine truths. Likewise, the Bible is a mere fingerprint of divine truths observed among human frailty. The fingerprints of human kind are interwoven with the fingerprints of the Divine. In essence, the Bible is an illustration of God and humans holding hands throughout history.

Now that some years have passed I have learned that my fingerprinted crown has served me well. The ridges left by my dentists’ error were not intentional but, they make it easier to shred food which makes for easier digestion. Though my crown is slightly flawed, according to human standards, it proves to work better than the dentist planned.  When we consider the fingerprints of the biblical witness we should remember that they are not without divine intervention. Even with our mistakes God can accomplish more than what we intended.

Read: Romans 8:28

Shoved Off the Throne

Shoved Off the Throne

In his book, Made for Goodness, Desmond Tutu talks about a time when he lead presumptuously until he made a simple decision that would serve to reveal the frailties in his ministry. In short, he put off visiting a sick parishioner and she died before he reached out to her. For Desmond Tutu this was a colossal failure. When he received the news that the lady had passed away he felt like he had been shoved off the throne of ethereal ascent. Suddenly, a sanctified, mighty and revered Desmond Tutu was made to feel low, inept, and undeserving. He had to sulk in the pain of failing the deceased woman, failing the community from which she came, failing self, and failing at the commitment he made to God. Perhaps, the latter was the most hurtful.

Desmond Tutu’s pitfall in this situation only serves to show that the best among us fail. We know that Desmond Tutu’s contributions to the world far exceed whatever mistakes he made along the way.  However, there is something we can glean from how he viewed his failure. He said he felt as though he had been shoved off the throne.  For our exploration there are four important questions. First, what throne was he speaking of?  Second, who put him on it? Third, who shoved him off?  Finally, why does it matter?

More than a large chair atop a flight of stairs, a throne is also an impalpable reality.  We don’t always see thrones, but we know they exist. A throne represents a euphoric position of power. On some level we all have a position of power. Thus, we all have a throne to marvel.  Our throne is what we use to display our power. Perhaps this is the reason we work so hard, and spend much of our lives constructing our throne; we want to put our power on display. Desmond Tutu’s throne displayed his ability to lead people in religious devotion.  Yes noble, but undoubtedly a dangerously powerful position.

We like to think that our throne is ordained by God.  This way of thinking helps suppress the guilt that stems from vanity. We would rather believe God desires for us to live elevated than accept that our throne is self-aggrandized.  So, we pray for our throne; we ask God to bless our throne.  We even plead God’s hand in building our throne.  The problem is we construct our throne regardless of what God says. We are determined to acquire our position(s) of power with, or without God’s consent. Thus, we don’t always know for whom, or by whom our throne is built. God and Desmond Tutu may have shared hands in building his throne.  Tutu may have formed, and mounted his throne all alone.  Nonetheless, Desmond Tutu found himself forced off.

Though it may not be clear who built his throne, Desmond Tutu uses language that would help us understand that he did not voluntarily step down. According to him he was shoved off the throne.  In other words, he was forced down.  Apart from himself there are only two other possibilities for who was responsible for his demotion. Either it was the people who acknowledged his throne, or it was God.  People can surely knock us off our pedestal.  They can dismantle our thrones with accusations, gossip, condemnation, or any other use of their power.  In this case witnesses would denote Desmond Tutu’s neglect to visit his parishioner as an understandable blunder.  After all, people witness worse indiscretions committed by leaders frequently.  The standard in which people have become accustomed to holding leaders accountable had been diminished greatly by the time of Tutu’s mistake.  So, the people whom recognized his throne had no impulse to dethrone him. However, God was fully aware of Desmond Tutu’s misstep; and God’s standards do not fluctuate.

Desmond Tutu was ever mindful of his humility under the sight of God.  He was aware that his throne was a privilege, and that he should honor God by being careful with it.   The standard set for governing his throne was far greater than what people would expect of him.  It was a Godly standard.  It was one that was established by him and God alone. No matter what anyone else thought, Tutu was well aware of how far he missed the mark. In the end it would be God, who pricked Desmond Tutu’s conscience, and God who shoved him off the throne.

Why does any of this matter? Heirs of God should be made aware that God reserves the right to bring us down from the noblest pedestals. So how much more should we expect to be dethroned from constructs of selfish ambition? It’s plausible that God only allows us to build thrones so that God can shove us off of them. This is the secret life of God’s chosen; a life of being lifted up and shoved down.  Does this personify God as a mean bully who takes pleasure in setting people up to fail?  No more than it does a teacher who looks forward to her/his students making mistakes.  If we are to grow, learn and be of effective use for God we have to endure the pain of occasionally being brought down.  Only after we are brought down we give proper attention to the flaws in our life’s design. We pick apart the places in our ascent where we worked to build ourselves up without God’s input. In the end, Desmond Tutu appreciated God’s rebuke. He learned that he did not have it all together. There were some areas in his ministry that needed some attention. He also learned that his throne was not completely a divine construct.  Some of it was made of self-glory. This acknowledgement served Desmond Tutu in becoming a better servant.  We should note that from time to time we will be shoved off our throne. It creates in us the humility necessary for the proper use of our power.

Read (Philippians 2:5-8)

Solid Witness

Solid Witness

As we progress in postmodernity more Americans, than ever, are asking why Christianity is still so prevalent in our time. Believers in Jesus Christ are being mocked by a growing cynicism that asserts far too many Americans are still unintelligently infatuated with Jesus in the new millennium. There are a multitude of explanations for why our critics think we are silly for still believing in what they consider fairy tales about the deity of Jesus. The biggest reason critics of Christianity cannot comprehend our commitment to our faith is because they grossly underestimate the power of solid witness.

It is because of solid witness Christianity is prevalent today. Without the witness of Jesus’ resurrection Christianity may have died on the cross a forgotten fable. But, after his execution Jesus visited his followers. Like usual, he was met with disbelief. According to the witness in the Gospel of Luke Jesus put on a demonstration of his “realness” by urging people to touch him to ensure them that they were not seeing a ghost. The same Gospel records Jesus eating a piece of broiled fish; post execution. This is not to say that there were not times in which the witness made claims about Jesus appearing in a mysteriously inexplicable way after he died. Rather, it is to say that Jesus did appear resurrected as a solid being. After his death Jesus briefly appeared as one that could be seen plainly, and touched physically. He ate food, and he had apparent wounds. Christianity is alive today because of the testimony of former-unbelieving people who witnessed a solid Jesus Christ, pre and post his crucifixion.

Our critics should be aware that Christianity was birthed out of a milieu of skepticism, unbelief and scrutiny. Different from today, the consequences of making false claims about God in the First Century were deadly. Those who held claim to the extraordinary occurrences of Jesus had far more to lose than an exhaustive argument about who God is, or if God is. More difficult than accepting the professions of Jesus, is believing that multiple witnesses would be willing to die for telling imaginative stories. The testimony of those who witnessed Jesus Christ in the flesh is (1) solid in that they had far more to lose than to gain by fabricating events. Their witness is (2) solid in that they had no earthly incentive to tell such outrageous, socially unacceptable stories. Their witness is (3) solid in that they had to overcome their own doubt when encountering Jesus resurrected. In other words, it took some convincing on Jesus’ part to show that he was not a ghost, but solid. They witnessed a resurrected, solid Jesus.

Those of us who accept the testimony of Jesus’ disciples as solid witness know something that non-Christian intellectuals don’t. That is, critical thinking is not void of emotional intelligence. Just as sound decision-making requires that you use your head, it equally demands you use your gut (instinct). There are some things we simply cannot comprehend without first taking the risk of exercising faith. Sometimes we must put forth what we feel, apart from what we think. A skydiver never really knows whether her parachute is going to open until she takes a leap of faith. Thus, before jumping she is left to trust the testimonies of all those who leaped before her. Only after we decide to believe God in Jesus Christ will we be able to add to our faith knowledge. Christians know that when our intellect runs out our faith can carry us the rest of the way. This is not enough to convince a determined skeptic that Jesus was God incarnate. Nor is that the aim. The purpose is to illustrate that no intellectual pursuit will prove Jesus’ deity above the convicting testimony of a solid witness. We either believe the witness, or we don’t.

Jesus said to Thomas, after he demanded proof that Jesus had been resurrected, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed (John 20:29).” Believers are blessed because we know that only after taking a leap of faith we can give solid witness of Jesus Christ. Christianity will remain to be prevalent as long as we continue to give solid witness. We need to be careful not to leave this generation, or the next to wrestle with the nature of God with nothing more than intellect. We must pass on to them what was given to us, the testimonies of solid witness.

Read: Luke 24:36-43 & John 20: 24-27