I don’t usually agree with The Young Turks, but I think he’s right on the money here:
It’s been said over and over again and yet, ironically, it appears to be an increasingly forgotten notion: remember the reason for the sea
son. Christmas is, primarily and supremely, a celebration of the incarnation of God. This is not merely a celebration of Jesus’ birth but a celebration of God’s own assumption of the human flesh (contra docetism). What often happens, when we’re not focused on our new toys, is we focus too deeply on Jesus’ own coming to dwell with us and not on his purpose for coming. Do not get me wrong. The Christmas season is one for celebrating and praising the arrival of God on this earth. But unfortunately, we have a habit of segmenting the birth of Jesus off from the rest of the story.
The question I want to put before you is this: Why was Jesus born? I do not mean what was his purpose in coming. I mean why was it necessary that he come in order to bring about forgiveness? Centuries ago Gregory of Nyssa posed the same question: “why did God take a tedious, circuitous route, submit to a bodily nature, enter life through birth, pass through the various stages of development, and finally taste death…Could he not have remained in his transcendent and divine glory, and saved man by a command, renouncing such circuitous routes?” (Address on Religious Instruction, 15). This is a legitimate question and it’s one which I have heard posed a number of times: if God is all powerful, why couldn’t God just forgive us? Why was it necessary to become man and die as a sacrifice for sins? Indeed, this was the view which the Greeks had. Aristotle, for example, saw the chasm between God and man so great that any sort of reconciliation, friendship, or redemption was absurd.
We can find one answer to Gregory of Nyssa’s question in the notion of goodness. As T. Oden has highlighted, goodness by nature communicates itself. Thus, redemption is inherently tied to a process in which God communicates with man on a relational and empathetic level. He became like them in every way in order to bring about the salvation plan. First, notice that the incarnation demands that Christ knows our human predicament. He not only knows it in his divine omniscience but God has experienced what it means to be beaten, rejected, tortured, and killed. Gregory Of Nazianzen stated it well in saying that the Christ the judge “measures all by comparison with his own suffering, so that he may know our condition by his own, and how much is demanded of us, and how much we yield” (Theol. Orat. XXX.6). Similarly, Paul writes in 1 Cor 8.9, “Though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich.” Secondly, notice that the author of Hebrews has a strong emphasis on what is actually necessary. Scripturally, in order to save man he needed to take on that nature.
For this reason he had to be made like them,fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted. (Heb 2.17-18)
This brings us right into agreement with Athanasius who argued that his coming as a man was necessary for redemption. Indeed, the idea of a god becoming a man was repulsive to the Greeks (and the later docetists). But as Athanasius argued, full humanity needed to be assumed by God for it to be cured: “it was naturally consequent that the physician and Saviour should appear in what had come to be, in order also to cure the things that were. For this cause, then, he has become a man…” Further, if death was both bodily and spiritual the only way to rid the consequence of death was to take up both those natures (On the Incarnation, 44).
Finally, we can state qualitatively that God’s nature is compassionate. The incarnation was a stepping down of God into the human situation for the sake of sharing in our temptations, trials, struggles, pain, and death. One of the early hymns of the early Church worshiped Jesus for just that:
Who being in very natureGod
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very natureof a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross! (Phil 2.6-8)
This hymn makes the incarnation/birth stories even more remarkable. Both Matthew and Luke are presenting us a new king and ruler. And, yet, this new ruler assumes the role of nothing! He takes the nature of a slave (the Greek word doulos means slave, not servant). It presents a king who is exalted because he died!
According to Calvin, “the sole purpose of Christ’s incarnation was our redemption.” The purpose of Christmas is not to celebrate Christ’s birth as if it is to be segmented off from the death and subsequent resurrection of Jesus. They are, indeed, inherently tied together. As much as we are celebrating his birth, let us celebrate what that birth was for. Why did the incarnation occur? In Augustine’s words, “That men might be born of God, God was first born of them” (Homily on John II.15).
Subscribe to this project by clicking on the YouTube page and hitting subscribe. You do not need a YouTube account to subscribe!
“With regards to the body of Jesus, by Easter Sunday morning, those who cared did not know where it was, and those who knew did not care.” (Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, p. 158)” – J.D. Crossan
In the years that I have been studying the NT and arguing for its general reliability, I have seen this statement thrown out dozens of times in reference to the crucifixion of Christ. How can we speak confidently of the resurrection if Jesus’ body was thrown away, given to the dogs, or carelessly placed in a pit or sorts? We cannot speak of an empty tomb if, in fact, Jesus’ body never made it to the tomb. Crossan’s remarks, which have been followed by many skeptics, are unfortunately not in line with what we can best decipher from historical research. Indeed, it should be pointed out first and foremost that Crossan’s view makes very little sense given the religious stigma Jesus carried. To say that those who cared–those who watched who they believed was the messiah die by crucifixion–had no interest in knowing where it was in fact that Jesus was buried is simply a bad historical assumption. Crossan has a lot to explain here regarding the “knowledge” of Jesus’ followers.
First, he has to explain why Jesus’ disciples would not have been in the know of where Jesus was buried. These were the people with him day in and day out for years. We know, historically, that crucifixion was a public event. There is no possible reason to suppose that as the messiah was taken to the place of crucifixion the disciples would not have watched both the death and the eventual taking down of Jesus. I think it is safe to say that the disciples really had nowhere to go that evening. Whatever was done with Jesus’ body would have been known by his very circle of followers. This means, if he was left up on the cross they would have known it. If he was cremated, they would have known it. If he was thrown into a pit for the dogs, they would have likely known it. And if he was actually buried in a tomb, they would have known it.
Secondly, Crossan has to explain why Jesus’ family would not have known where he was buried. Many of the points just mentioned are still applicable at this juncture, though it may be worth mentioning that Jesus’ family never disappeared into the backdrop of history. As we know from both Acts, the epistle of James, and Josephus, James was a high profile public figure within early Christianity and Judaism. He was, in fact, the head of the church in Jerusalem. Surely, if James knew that his brother had died and remained either on the cross or was decomposing elsewhere, his conversion to Christianity could hardly be explained.
Thirdly, Crossan must explain how this particular tradition arose as opposed to other views which would have been more accomodating to the facts of non-burial. Why place Jesus in a tomb if, historically, he wasn’t? Couldn’t the early Christians have invented something a little bit more inline with the facts. Why include the burial in the tomb if in fact it did not happen? On the same note, the early tradition associated with the burial of Jesus must be accounted for. This is found, of course, in 1 Cor 15 3b-5. J.D.G. Dunn places the formation of this creed within six months of the crucifixion of Jesus and I am not aware of any scholar who has legitimately made a case for it being any later than five or six years. This is a pre-Pauline creed which, in the estimation of many scholars, goes back to the original disciples. But even if this is not the case, one must still ask how would the early tradition of a burial be associated with Jesus if, in fact, such a notion was false and could be known as such by the Romans, Jews, and early Church. The fact is, there is no early tradition–or any tradition at all that I am aware of–that has Jesus’ body undergo anything but burial.
Fourth, the reference to Joseph of Arimethia and his request to Pilate for the body of Jesus must be explained by Crossan. According to our earliest gospel, probably based upon the recollections of Peter, Joseph of Arimethia “worked up the courage” to ask Pilate for the body of Jesus.
Joseph of Arimathea came, a prominent member of the Council, who himself was waiting for the kingdom of God; and he gathered up courage and went in before Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. (Mk 15.43)
Raymond Brown has noted, “Joseph’s being responsible for burying Jesus is ‘very probable,’ since a Christian fictional creation of a Jewish Sanhedrist doing what is right for Jesus is ‘almost inexplicable.” I would add that the mere invention of a political request for a corpse would have been the last thing invented for how one got a corpse. Certainly, especially given the significance of Jesus’ crucifixion for both religious and political reasons, the request for a corpse would have either been accepted or denied. Notice that Joseph needs to “work up the courage.” He knew that his request could be completely denied and, in fact, such a denial might have negative consequences for him in some way. Further, to claim permission is to throw one’s story immediately under the spotlight of government records. In the first century, anybody who doubted either the existence of Joseph of Arimethia (whom the text calls a “prominent member”) or the request and granting of the corpse of Jesus could have checked the facts with both groups. What a blow it would have been for the early Christians if the Sanhedrin had stated that there never was a “Joseph of Arimethia” or if the Roman’s declared that Jesus’ corpse was never granted permission for burial. There is a historical kernal here.
Finally, Crossan is simply insufficient in his statements about the burial customs of the Romans and Jews regarding crucified victims.
- Roman Burial Practice For Crucifixion Victims
- Romans believed that by leaving a corpse unburied there would be less than pleasant repercussions in the after life for the soul. Most people in Roman society were buried no matter their social status. Romans were known, however, to deny burial to executed criminals since with the lack of burial would come eternal torment and discomfort. Certainly, this warning would serve as an influential deterrent against social crimes. Indeed, those who were crucified were left on their crosses for the birds to pick and eat at their corpses. The hanging of a victim for several days would remind the citizens that Romans still had the ability to uphold legal justice. However, Philo reports cases where the crucified victims were removed and given to relatives for burial. Specifically, this happened on the eve of festivals and occasions:
” I have known instances before now of men who had been crucified when this festival and holiday was at hand, being taken down and given up to their relations, in order to receive the honours of sepulture, and to enjoy such observances as are due to the dead; for it used to be considered, that even the dead ought to derive some enjoyment from the natal festival of a good emperor, and also that the sacred character of the festival ought to be regarded. (Philo, Flacc. 10.83)”
This is exactly what we find in the gospels. Mk 15.42 reads, “When evening had already come, because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath…” We find the same statement in Lk 23.54. What Philo observed done on the eve of festivals was likely what was done with Jesus.
- Jewish Funeral Practices for Crucified Victims
- The Jews, in contrast to the Romans, believed that even executed victims deserved burial rites. This was likely based on Deut 21.22-23: “If a man has committed a sin worthy of death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you do not defile your land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance.”
- While the Jews buried their dead, crucified or condemned individuals were given a different sort of burial, namely that they were not allowed to be buried in family tombs, though such a notion has been challenged by the work of L. Rahmani.
- Due to a warm climate, burial was a speedy process. If Joseph of Arimethia was allowed the body of Jesus, they may have washed it once or twice, sprinkled it with spices (to avoid stench), and wrapped it up in a linen before placing it in the tomb. The tomb would then be sealed by a huge rock held in place by a smaller stone and left for a year to decompose. After a years time, the bones would have been taken out, placed in an ossuary, and prepared for second burial. The secondary burial, aside from giving emotional closure to the family, would have ensured a certain level of forgiveness for the victim. R. Adda b. Ahabah states “The decay of flesh too is necessary [for forgiveness]” (v Sanh 47b).
Thus, what we conclude is that Crossan’s statement is too broad and generalized to account for what happened to Jesus’ corpse after crucifixion. It fails to account for a number of details which have convinced the vast majority of scholars of John A.T. Robinson’s conviction that the burial of Jesus is “one of the earliest and best-attested facts about Jesus.”
See, J.B. Green, “Burial of Jesus”, pp 88-92, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Grand Rapids: IVP), 1992
In about 24 hours we will be releasing The Bara Initiative, a brand new social-media ministry designed to explore some of the greatest questions of life over the course of the next 5 years.
As you are considering your yearly giving, please consider The Bara Initiative by clicking HERE
The Hebrew word Bara arb has two definitions:
Create – The opening lines of Genesis are “In the beginning God created…” Human beings are creatures infused with the imago dei, created to be creators, made beautiful to make beauty, the pinnacle of the cosmos designed never to be satisfied with mere nominalism. We live up to our calling as Christians when we exhibit the creation of Jesus within whatever disciplines we pursue.
Cultivate – Cutting down what is unnecessary in order to replace it with something that is fertile. We are likewise called to be cultivators. Tearing down what is negative in order to replace it with something good or better.
It cannot be overstated that the internet is a highly populated and influential place. Youtube—one of the largest social media sites on the internet—garnishs around 2 billion video streams daily, totaling over 730 trillion a year. We are blind if we accuse our music, televisions, and movies of influencing our worldviews and not the sort of content which appears on social media sites. Let it be said that there is a severe lack in any solid Christian presence exhibiting the principals of our creativity and cultivation online! Simply put, there’s a lack of Christian content, a lack of well produced content, a lack of informed content, and a lack of relevant content. The Bara Initiative is a project designed to exhibit the two Bara principals in this world of online social media. This is a serious attempt to engage the culture where its at, becoming all things to all men!
Over the next five years, we plan on creating and producing content for around 300 videos related to major worldview topics. We intend to make them edgy and well produced, indicate the relevancy of the ideas discussed, and provide some clarity of thought for seekers. We need several things to make this happen:
- We need the Church to stand behind us in support, praying for and encouraging this project. This is a hefty and daunting task for which we need your support
- We need subscribers and vocal promotion. The most successful social media campaigns are those which are able to market their product well. If we can manage to market this in our non-production time and, at the same time, utilize the voice of the Church in promoting this project, we believe it will be majorly effective
- We need financial support. This project will only work if we have the time and ability to work on it. Interviewing, Scripting, Filming, Producing, and Marketing this project is a full time job, especially once the personal aspect of follow-up with viewers and any business ends are considered. It needs to be noted that this project is designed not for an organization or a full fledge ministry center but for two film-makers. Thus, costs will be low and we are not seeking to raise much. Our goal for 2012 is to raise $50,000 in funding support. We ask your help. See back for donation procedures.
Due to the nature of our project and in order to avoid the time and costs of starting up an independent 501c3, we are covered under the fiscal sponsorship of an umbrella non-profit organization called Fractured Atlas (www.fracturedatlas.org). This is a recognized and respected non-profit umbrella for other non-profit organizations.
We ask that you join us on this journey.
Randall Hardman and Todd LaBerge
The Bara Initiative
youtube.com/thebarainitiative
Whatever your political committments, we have all seen too many campaign ads which tend to the ‘attack the other opponent’ method. Instead of solidly contributing to the political debate of where our country is headed, most campaign ads–in my opinion–merely come off as annoying, antagonistic, sound-bytes from one particular voice over another. I would rather see my contribution dollars go towards buying the campaigner a new tie than a campaign commercial.
However, I must admit that presidential candidate Ron Paul has recently released one of the best campaign ads I’ve witnessed. The difference? He attacks no one, he does not need to go on the defensive, he tackles a very difficult subject, he’s empathetic, and he puts the political debate in a practical, implicational perspective. This in no way is an endorsement of his campaign (my political opinions are my own and I find myself both agreeing and disagreeing with Paul). This is simply an example of where and how politicians can seriously step away from the antagonistic sound-bytes and actually engage relevant topics in a relevant way. To tackle the question of life in such a way proves that Paul, despite certain short-comings, is a practical man who firmly believes what he believes. Contrast this with Obama’s statement that the question of life is “above my paygrade” and you can see who, at least with this topic, has greater leadership ability.
To the citizens of the United States of America:
“In light of your failure to nominate competent candidates for President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately.”
“Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths, and territories (except Kansas ,which she does not fancy).”
“Your new prime minister, Gordon Brown, will appoint a governor for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed.”
“To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:
1. “You should look up “revocation” in the Oxford English Dictionary, then look up aluminium, and check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it.
2. “The letter ‘U’ will be reinstated in words such as ‘favour’ and ‘neighbour.’ Likewise, you will learn to spell ‘doughnut’ without skipping half the letters, and the suffix -ize will be replaced by the suffix -ise. Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. (look up ‘vocabulary’).
3. “Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as “like” and “you know” is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. There is no such thing as U.S. English. We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter ‘u’ and the elimination of -ize. You will relearn your original national anthem, ‘God Save The Queen’.
4. “July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday.”
5. “You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns,lawyers, or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you’re not adult enough to be independent. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you’re not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you’re not grown up enough to handle a gun.
6. “Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. A permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.
7. “All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and this is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.
8. “All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.
9. “The Former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling gasoline)-roughly $6/US gallon. Get used to it.
10. “You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called crisps. Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with catsup but with vinegar.
11. “The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as beer, and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as Lager. South African beer is also acceptable as they are pound for pound the greatest sporting Nation on earth and it can only be due to the beer. They are also part of British Commonwealth – see what it did for them.
12. “Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Andie McDowell attempt English dialogue in Four Weddings and a Funeral was an experience akin to having one’s ears removed with a cheese grater.
13. “You will cease playing American football. There is only one kind of proper football; you call it soccer. Those of you brave enough will,in time, be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American football, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like a bunch of nancies). Don’t try Rugby – the South Africans and Kiwis will thrash you, like they regularly thrash us.
14. “Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the World Series for a game which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.1% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable. You will learn cricket, and we will let you face the South Africans first to take the sting out of their deliveries.
15. “You must tell us who killed JFK. It’s been driving us mad.
16. “An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty’s Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due (backdated to 1776).
17. “Daily Tea Time begins promptly at 4 pm with proper cups, never mugs, with high quality biscuits (cookies) and cakes; strawberries in season.”
“God save the Queen.”
