The death of the wicked

Ezekiel 18:23 Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? Declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?

In light of festive American reaction to the deadly success of yesterday’s military operation, several friends have posted the above verse as a counterpoint on blogs and social media networks.  They want to say that, instead of celebrating the death of an enemy, we should be lamenting the demise of a “wicked” person who is the object of God’s love and who had the potential for repentance and life.

Certainly God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to a knowledge of the truth.  But our understanding of Scripture’s big picture is limited if we immediately identify “the wicked” with our enemies, or even with those who do not conform to our ethical standards.  Ezekiel’s words were directed to “the house of Israel,” God’s chosen people who had chosen to ignore God’s law.  Israel was involved in idolatry, adultery, discrimination against the poor, lack of compassion for the poor, usury, robbery and unfair economic practices (Ezekiel 18:5-17).  Not only that, the people of Israel accused God of being unjust when Babylon invaded their land and carried away their leadership and wealth (18:25).  In other words, they felt that, as God’s people, they should have a free pass to health, wealth and prosperity.

“The wicked” whose death God laments in Ezekiel are not the “evil” Babylonians. They are the “house of Israel,” those called by God to bless and transform the world.  Jesus was asked, “Why do you [hang out and party] with…sinners?” He answered, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick.”  The gospel message blurs human categories of who is “in” and who is “out.”  Instead, Jesus shows us that the line between the wicked and the righteous cuts right through the heart of every human being.  And, in every case, true repentance always leads to life.

Book review -- Saving Darwin: How to be a Christian and believe in evolution

Our readings and discussions in Theology and Science class have challenged the often turbulent relationship between the two disciplines, especially in the recent American context. Karl Giberson's book helps explain the origins of the warfare mentality for some groups.  Here is my review.  Bottom line: I recommend it for those who have interest in the dialogue between theology and science.

Karl Giberson, Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution, Harper One, 2008.

Giberson’s thesis

In Saving Darwin, Giberson argues that a forced choice between belief in creation or in evolution is a false alternative (215).  He wants to convince creationists that the theory of evolution is a robust explanation for the origin and development of all life on earth (194), and that it is not incompatible with the idea of God as creator and sustainer of life (10). Using a historical and sociological approach, he demonstrates that the considerable opposition to evolution on the part of many American Christians is driven by cultural forces rather than by reasonable interaction with empirical data and theological arguments.

Response and critique

Giberson shines when he takes the reader on a tour of the history of evolution as an idea. He busts the myth that Darwin’s theorizing was motivated by personal anti-Christian sentiments (19). Much to the contrary, Darwin’s worldview was “solidly creationist” (27), and thus the weight of evidence he saw in favor of evolution generated considerable internal conflict as he wrestled for decades with its implications for biblical interpretation and theology (21).

No less revealing is Giberson’s recounting of the incriminating association between Darwinism and its “dark companions”—eugenics, Nazi anti-Semitism and social Darwinism (77).  His masterful treatment of the 1925 Scopes “Monkey Trial” exposes the “popular mythology” that has grown up around the event, seeded by H. L. Mencken’s sarcastic journalism and inflated by Hollywood’s rendition, Inherit the Wind (86).  Giberson also makes a surprising connection between the ideas of Ellen White, the Seventh-day Adventist visionary, and early twentieth century American anti-evolutionary sentiment expressed in The Genesis Flood (58). This sweeping historical and cultural analysis forms the heart of Giberson’s argument that anti-evolutionary sentiment in the United States can be largely explained by its inconvenient bedfellows.

Giberson is relatively silent on the question of humankind’s special place in God’s created order, and excuses himself on this count with the comment that this discussion is “best left to theologians” (14). As all evolutionists must, he minimizes the differences between humans and animals, while highlighting the similarities, which include evidence for a moral compass in higher primates. He makes no attempt to interact with the “image of God” language in Genesis 1, but simply states that he sees no necessary contradiction between the idea of humankind’s “kinship with the primates” and Christian theology (14). To bring home his point, Giberson points to the theological and practical significance of embracing our interconnectedness with the animal world (14). One thing is certain: even traditional creationists with a high view of humanity need to come to grips with the sobering thought that we are made from the “dust of the ground” (Gen 2:7). Is this any less humbling than embracing the fact that we are genetic cousins of chimpanzees and the great great grandchildren of sponges? 

While Giberson rejects a literalistic reading of Genesis, he offers no specific alternative hermeneutic. No doubt he was reluctant to wade into this quagmire, over which much ink has already been spilled.  Even so, he misses a good chance for a culturally driven interpretation of Genesis when he discusses (134) the “canopy” of water envisioned by young earth creationists in 1:6-7. A brief mention of the affinity between Genesis and other Ancient Near East cosmologies could have offered some direction to inquiring readers here.

Throughout his book, Giberson rightly accuses both creationists and evolutionists of entrenched posturing and of using offensive language toward each other (141).  But he is in danger of committing the same sins when he uses labels such as “crackpot” (147) or “mountebanks and charlatans” (148) to describe some traditional creationists; or when he uses caricature-like language to describe extremists within the National Association of Biology Teachers (167). While Giberson is an equal opportunity critic, he tends to ridicule traditional creationists more than evolutionists. If Saving Darwin targets an evangelical readership, as the subtitle would suggest, Giberson has run the risk of alienating a large segment of that group with his occasionally acidic prose.

Intersections with evangelical theology

One of Giberson’s intriguing ideas is the connection he makes between the theological concept of human freedom and the freedom “embodied in the natural order” (38).  Are traditional creationists being inconsistent when they affirm the human ability to choose good or evil, yet deny that God infused the universe with similar possibilities for growth and decay?  This is a question which revolves around the character of God, and would seem to open fruitful avenues for discussion. Just as freedom explains human sinfulness, it can also explain why nature is sometimes “red in tooth and claw.” Giberson borrows this phrase from Alfred Lord Tennyson (66), while using it to refer to the impressive amount of death and suffering inflicted by seemingly impersonal evolutionary processes. Belief in the inherent freedom of evolutionary development allows theologians to explain nature’s fallen state without resorting to a view of the Fall that calls for catastrophic changes in an idyllic world at the time of Adam and Eve’s disobedience. If we see sin primarily as selfishness, says Giberson, we can also understand the driving force of the evolutionary process, in which selfish creatures seem to thrive and unselfish ones die (12).  At the same time, he points out that there is plenty of beauty in nature, including altruistic behavior in otherwise selfish human beings. Theology can help us to explain these contradictory coexisting currents in the universe and within ourselves.

Another promising field of inquiry is the relationship of the evolutionary development of humankind to Christian eschatology. For example, Romans 8:18-25 suggests that God’s plan for human salvation is intimately connected with the redemption of his entire creation. Theology has much to offer to the discussion of an integrated ecological perspective of life on planet earth.

Saving Darwin speaks repeatedly of the culture wars which drive the great American divide between science and religion. It is possible that, by revealing the childish ad hominem epithets wielded by both sides, Giberson wants to shame us into a more civil discourse.  In his irenic conclusion, he suggests that questions of meaning, aesthetics, creativity and the limits of human understanding have the potential to create fruitful dialogue (209). Admittedly, the deliberate search for common ground is always more difficult than taking potshots at people with whom we disagree.  However, Giberson’s final words give us hope that the perspective of a humble pilgrim can help us move beyond entrenchment and provincialism. This approach to life is just as applicable to diverse groups within the Christian community as it is for relationships in the society at large.

A tribute to Bill Stoll

Bill Stoll had a major role in my successful adaptation to missionary life and ministry in Brazil, and I thank God for his life.  In the words of Irma, his wife, he was "instantly cured" of all his earthly ailments on Friday, January 21.  He was 82 years old.

Bill taught Old Testament at the Baptist seminary in São Paulo (Faculdade Teológica Batista de São Paulo).  One of his students in the late 1970s was Lalia Pacheco, who graduated with a bachelor's degree in Christian Education and later became my wife.  She remembers Bill as a wise and gentle professor.

Bill also helped run the day-to-day operations at Edições Vida Nova, WorldVenture's publishing ministry.  This was no small task in the days of hyper-inflation and general political and economic instability.  When I started my career at Vida Nova in 1985, Bill took me under his wing.  He was always ready to answer questions and assure me that one day I would be able to speak and write well in Portuguese.

At the breakfast table this morning, Lalia remembered that Bill was instrumental in spearheading the Portuguese translation of the New International Version of the Bible in the mid-1980s.  She was invited to consult for the translation committee on matters of Portuguese style and grammar.  Alan was a baby at the time, and so he would also attend the meetings in his stroller.  At times, Bill would hold Alan's bottle while Lalia would take notes.

Bill, thanks for being an example of what real missionary work is all about--the incarnation of the good news of Jesus the Messiah.

Deluge in Brazil

God said that he would never again destroy the world with water.  But sometimes, in the middle of a gully washer, we wish for the protection of an ark.

After hearing about the torrential rains here, some have written to ask if we are well.  The answer is yes.  The hardest hit area is in the state of Rio de Janeiro, about 300 miles east and north of where we live (São Paulo).  At this writing more than 700 people have lost their lives in the mountainous regions north of the city of Rio, due to flooding and mudslides.  Hundreds are missing.  Children have been orphaned.  Many survivors have lost their homes and physical possessions.

We are in the middle of the rainy season here, so showers are a normal occurrence in December and January.  But certain weather patterns have caused unusually high amounts of rain in some areas.  Add to this the mountainous terrain, and the fact that human activity has stripped the hills of vegetation which could help prevent erosion.  Also, many people build their homes in high risk areas, hoping that nothing will happen.  Sometimes they are right.

Here in São Paulo it rains daily, sometimes heavily, but not for long periods of time.  Even so, low-lying streets fill up quickly with runoff water.  Most of the ground in the city is covered with asphalt or concrete, so the soil is not able to absorb much rain.  The result here is localized flooding as the storm sewer system becomes quickly overloaded.  Garbage in the streets often plugs the storm drains and aggravates the situation.

In our ninth-floor apartment we stay high and dry, if we remember to close all the windows!

We pray for all those affected by this disaster. Brazilians are generous, and donations of food, clothing and cash have been pouring in from all over the country.  Our mission (WorldVenture) and our local church are investigating the best ways to help at this time.

Film review: The Social Network

The Social Network is a dark film that makes me think twice when I log on to my Facebook account. In the opening scene, the somber lighting and edgy music tell us that something is wrong. Director David Fincher is not crusading for intellectual property rights, or even documenting internet evolution. He and Aaron Sorkin, the screenwriter, seem intent on ambushing viewers with the great ironies of our information age. For Sorkin and Fincher, social networks are just as much forces for alienation as they are for collaboration. Real-life friends are dispensable. Profits rule. In the final scene, Mark Zuckerberg’s character pathetically refreshes his Facebook page over and over, in the hopes that an old girlfriend (whom he publicly berated in a drunken blog post) will accept his friend request. Based on her icy attitude in their last encounter, we presume that she will click the “ignore” button. In the end, the gazillionaire creator of Facebook, a site which supposedly puts people together, is alone.

Behind bars, but still women

Lalia writes about her December visit to a prison for women...

First, just to set the record straight, no, I am not in prison, and I don´t intend to do anything that will put me there.

Yesterday I went with two friends to visit a women´s prison in a little city not too far from São Paulo. This was my second visit to that facility.

Conditions are horrible. Too many women crowded in four little cells. One woman was by herself in another cell; she couldn´t stay with the others because she was incarcerated for killing her son, and was in danger of suffering harm from the other women prisoners.

Some of the women are waiting for a trial before a judge, others are waiting for their release papers. Some are there for theft, sale or possession of drugs, petty crimes... you name it. A couple of them are pregnant. One had recently given birth, and was thankful to God because she was transferred to a facility closer to the foster home where the baby was sent.

With all this diversity, they all have one thing in common: they were made in the image of God and are loved by Him.

Behind bars, but still women. When we arrived, one was having a manicure and pedicure!

It was all I could do to not cry when we gave them the few gifts we took with us. The women were so excited to receive a notebook, a pen, a hair barrette and a little devotional book (they all know how to read).

My friends and I were separated from those women by heavy metal bars, but we united our voices to sing to the Lord. Not all of them came close to us. Some stayed in their cells, others stayed by the door of their little cubicle, but they all heard the message that Jesus was born because God loves them all.

Some of the women have decided to follow Jesus since they were put in prison. The difference between these and the others is hope. They are free in their hearts. They know God will use their circumstances “for good”. They want to tell their families about Jesus.

The three of us spoke a few words to the prisoners. Then we sang some more. While we were there, the police came and took one of the youngest women (she was no more than 19 years old) to the doctor. She may be pregnant.

When we finished, one woman came very close to the iron bars and said: “I speak for me and for my friends. Thank you for coming here to speak to us. Thank you so very much for the gift of your time.”

The gift of time! I left the prison thinking about that phrase. For those women who can´t go anywhere, who aren´t too busy shopping for Christmas; for that young mother who has all the time in the world to hold her baby, but cannot; for all of them our time was the best gift of all.

Please, this Christmas, let´s not get so busy with shopping and cooking for our loved ones that we´ll not have time for them.

Ah, yes, I was so very thankful to get home to my beloved husband, my nice shower, my soft bed.

Next Thursday, we´ll visit another women´s prison. This will be a different type of visit, because we will talk individually with the prisoners, without bars between us. All of the women are close to being released from jail so they will not do anything stupid... we presume! We will see as many prisoners as the number of women we have from our church. So, pray that many will go. Honestly, I´m a little nervous about the visit. I´ve never been with a prisoner without the bars to keep me safe. I know the guards will be around, still... Pray that I will show God´s love for “my prisoner,” whoever she might be. Pray that many will be free from the hands of the Enemy of their souls.

A big hug.

Free because of Him,

Lalia

Hands and feet

PROMIFÉ (Vacation Missionary Project) starts tomorrow in Ribeirão Preto. Young people from Brazil and the U.S. become the hands and feet of Jesus for one week in a neighborhood of the city. Together they live, eat, laugh, cry, witness, pray, study and sing to the glory of God. We're participating vicariously through the many friends who are there on the front lines.