Playing the Master’s Song on a Broken Violin

A little while ago I got involved in a pretty interesting discussion. It was about the validity and nature of the Bible; in itself a straight-forward and, frankly, boring topic. But somewhere between the bored yawns and the frustrated palm on my head I realized something extraordinarily beautiful. 

All languages of the world are fundamentally flawed. Yes, language is the perfect symbol of human iniquity and brokenness. No one language can express every facet of every thing, whether in regard to grammar or vocabulary. Language in itself cannot hold ideas; it can merely point to them. For instance the English newspaper and the German Zeitung each point to and describe the same thing, but they do not ‘mean’ it. No human language can contain the fullness of our surroundings, not to mention the abstract thought ot the human mind. Besides; while Scandinavian languages might have several hundred words for snow, most Saharans will only know a couple types of frost. Go to Fiji or Samoa, and they probably use less than a handful due to the altitudes of snow in the Pacific. Language is at the mercy of its users, and unused or unusable words will automatically fall away. This means a language is normally well adapted to its usual environment but useless in another. 

This brings us to a major problem with language; translation. If you were to translate a Swedish text about snow conditions into Arabic or Fijian you would face great difficulty. (Thankfully, Arabs and Fijians seldom find themselves in need of literature on snow, but let us ignore this incongruity for the sake of an example.) Arabic and Fijian, though they are both well-functional languagues, do not have enough snow related terms to convey the message - at least not without using many extra words to explain it. To further complicate things; if the book mentions the traditional Swedish «spark» (a kicksled that looks something like a double kick scooter with a chair and blades) the translator will have to find a way to explain what it is. However if the original writer has referenced a well-known story about two lovers out with a «spark», but not retold it, the translator has to be even more creative: Does he retell the story, departing from the original? Does he leave it out, or simply hope readers will know it or not care? Or maybe he makes plenty of lengthy footnotes, or maybe he releases a study guide along with the book. The Bible has the same problem. Some books in the Bible talk about love, but are written in a language with different names for every variety of ‘love’ and ‘friendship’. Some parts of the Bible are so full of stories most modern readers cannot understand (without a Master’s degree in Jewish culture, history and literature, as well as a Bachelor’s degree in Greek and Roman philosophy) that no translator could ever be expected to translate it ‘adequately’ and ‘properly’. While the text might still say the same thing as much as linguistics allow, the original meaning would be lost. This is why no translation will ever be perfect, or even ‘good enough’; and even less so the Bible.

Then again, translation is not the only factor displaying the iniquity of language. Who can say they would not use different words if they had access to a larger, more precise vocabulary? Who is to say an author or translator would not have use different words were he able to? Furthermore, who can be sure that St Paul himself, or even Christ, would not have said things that depart from our translations had he spoken English? I dare say that no original manuscript can hold the thoughts and ideas the writer wanted to express. It may contain a certain makeshift representation of them, but never the ideas themselves, and never completely or adequately.

Some times I wonder if language is not a symbol of something greater; of something that was once a brilliant and glorious structure but is now shattered. The Bible certainly seems to say so. In Genesis 11, the story is told. The people of the earth decided to join forces to build a huge city and tower. They wanted to make it so tall it went right into heaven, so it could bring them fame and put their brilliance on display. But the Lord saw that what he had given man; a single unfiying language, was being used in order to rebel against himself. We decided to glorify the recipient instead of thanking the giver, and our selfish goals became more important than our Creator.

The Bible makes it clear that God loves language. In fact, it says God spoke the universe into life. John 1:1 sheds further light to this fact. It says that «In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.» John compares God’s word, teachings, expression - the logos - to the incarnate Christ. The word, Christ, was present at creation; the word, Christ, was what and who created the world and how it was created. The word - like Christ - holds the light to illuminate the darkness and the power to destroy evil, but it is never accepted or understood by evil.

This makes it even more impressive that through this mess of words and meaning, God himself reaches down. God reveals himself and his plan for us in plain English - he shows us a glimpse of eternity, with imperfect means and broken tools. He asks for a personal relationship with each of us, and actively steps into our world to gain it. God uses imperfection to get our attention. It is like the master violinist who found himself with a broken violin, but still stunned his audience. He is willing to sacrifice, he is willing to lay down his life. The word of God itself is communicated in and to a world in pieces. It is not a matter of man climbing to a higher level; it is a matter of God pulling man up. It is not a matter of seeking out the high priest; it is a matter of seeking out the commoner: the merchant, the farmer, the student, the nurse. The healthy do not need a doctor, the sick do. The Bible is not written only in a heavenly and perfect language no man can understand, it is written in very earthly and very human languages. It is not only in Latin and Shakespearean English; it is in the pidgins and the creoles, in slang and txtese. God takes our broken language, just like he takes our torn-apart nature and our partial humanity, and uses it to craft his word.

Allow me to give a practical example of this. In most of Europe, Christ was seen as a distant figure throughout the Middle Ages. In many places, He was prayed to less than the saints, who were seen as congenial, personal and approachable. Hoevever, in 1534 the first German Bible was printed. The results were inevitable. Up until that point, all Bibles had been in Latin. As people of all social levels could understand the Bible, people not only found the Bible was more relevant than they previously thought but they were saved. Europeans everywhere was taught to read the Bible, so they could live by it. And soon, all of Europe was transformed: The Bible had been written in the tongue of the commoner, and the church had become truly catholic.

It is evident that a unification between God and man is needed. All of nature, everything we know, has undergone a terrible split and yearns for reconciliation. In order to do this, God steps down into our reality. The reconciliation effort that has gone on since the very fall itself culminated in the cross. This reconciliation is not yet perfect or complete, but will be fulfilled in the Kingdom of God. All of nature will be made right. Everything we know will escape the trenches of brokenness and sin. The tears will be wiped from our eyes and the wolf and the lamb will graze together. There will be no death and there will be no predators. There will be no disunity and no imperfection. Nothing will be fragmented or incomplete; everything will be good and without flaw.

All human languages are fundamentally shattered. A result of sin and pride, they are also strong displays of man’s iniquity. Still, God chooses to use them to convey his word; like a symphony played with broken instruments. All of history shows us the power that in God’s word, and the blazing fire that is lit when people can read it in their own language. Still, the world yearns for restoration and reconciliation. Christ died on the cross, so that God and man could be brought together and nature find a way to its state of completeness. And as if that was not enough, God - the same God who created the very universe just by speaking - uses our own feeble languages to tell us about it. Despite all of man’s sin, brokenness and pain, God gives us a chance to know him. And he uses the very symbol of human failure to do it.

Bickering Branches and Crumbling Cathedrals

"Believers all belong to the same Lord, and are thus one with each other. Therefore anything that denies our oneness with each other denies our oneness with Him."

-John MacArthur

The Bible says we are limbs of a single body, branches of a single tree and brothers and sisters in a single family. There can be no bickering about whether the eye is more important than the ear, no hateful remarks whispered through the leaves and surely no putting our own well-being before that of a brother. And if we do so we are certainly not subordinate to Christ. For how can can two branches on a tree work against each other, if they are both attached to the vine? Or how can two legs walk in opposite directions, if they do not rebel against the head?

I do not disagree that there are certain directions within the church that have beliefs about God that are false and incompatible with the Gospel. I do not disagree that some who call themselves Christian preach things that are everything but, nor do I disagree that false doctrines and heresies are destructive and should be exposed. However, the Bible teaches us about how to deal with this: we are to rebuke brothers privately, and forgive those who repent. But frankly, does it matter more than letting others come to Christ? Constant confrontations between bitter Christians and even more bitter Christians serves only to alienate those with whom we should be sharing the gospel. For some, enfuriated bloggers who tear others down and cause division is their first introduction to Christianity. Those who think hateful debates make Christianity come off as a religion of joy and compassion are sorely mistaken. While we cannot and should not ignore heresy inside the church, the topic must not be made into a public debate before the eyes of those who have no means of discerning what is what and which is which.

Allow me to illustrate this. If there is one area of society Christians tend to dislike, it is the media. Ironically, it seems the Church could learn a great deal from it. Sociology teaches us that the media only really impacts large numbers of people when they are united, and especially so if the public is largely undecided on the topic. This should show us something. If not even the media, the single most significant source of influence in our time; can impact people’s opinions if they are divided, what makes us think the Church can? Quite frankly, if the Church wants to be influential it should start by sending out a unified message.

I find it interesting that this even needs saying. The Bible does not merely call us to unity; it calls us to the most radical concept of all: love. We are to love our brothers and continually ask how we may best serve them. We are to wash their feet, as Jesus washed the feet of His disciples. We are to spend our lives serving them and if necessary lay down our lives for them. Paul asks us to love one another with mutual affection and outdo one another in showing honor. The gospel is not merely about shaking hands and accepting that the other groups exist, it is about laying down ourselves for the sake of brothers and sisters.

It is important not to lose track of the benefits that unity brings. The Bible is clear on this. Love and unity do not only bring a new level of community among God’s people, it brings change in ourselves. Also, it brings people to Christ. Anyone who is to find Christ must first find the church. We are to be ambassadors of Christ; to be instigators of His kingdom on earth. We are called to be perfect, just as our Father in heaven is perfect. Without love Christianity is worthless; without love it is mere noise. With love, Christianity is the single most revolutionary movement the world has known; with unity, people may be open to it. Unity opens the church to fresh anointing and divine favor; unity allows God to move. When love and unity flourish among its followers, Christianity comes to life.

We must love our family as ourselves, so we do not destroy it. We must forgive those who wrong us, lest we fall at the hands of bitterness and resentment. Then we must honour those to whom honour is due, and give attention where attention is due, lest any go unseen. We must build commitment, so our unity may be strong. We must respect and admire one another, so we may be friends. We must trust eachother, so suspicion cannot tear us apart. Unity must be paramount, or the church will crumble.

We can debate this topic up, down, sideways and backwards, but frankly, we do not need to. No one has the privilege of choosing their family, and Christians are certainly not exempt from the rule. As human beings we can choose to love and nourish our family members or we can choose to make them homeless. However as Christians we resigned this right on the cross. We are not our own; we have been bought with a price. Now the choice is ours; to either follow Christ or disobey Him, to either do what He asks of us or to ignore His direction. He who does not love abides in death. We may not choose not to be humble, patient, loving, honoring and self-sacrificial any more than we may choose to depart from the gospel. It is a demanding assignment, but so is everything else worth doing. It is a daunting task, but it becomes easier with time. It is a great challenge, but we shall reap the rewards.

The Perfect Escape

The very essence of Christianity is the idea that God steps down to earth and takes our sins upon Himself, making us righteous and holy. It is what sets Christianity apart from other religions, and it is the very basis of faith. Interestingly enough, this basic doctrine of grace and salvation has caused great division, yes; the largest schisma in all of Christianity. Even the reformation itself was tinged with soldiers shouting «sola gratia» and smoke from villages being destroyed. For thirty years a war raged and the world would never be the same. From 1517 until this very day, no other idea is as responsible for the gaping cleft carved between Protestants and Catholics. Even among Protestants, grace and the meaning of the cross are much debated ideas, with more or less orthodox doctrines leaping out of the big and colourful box that is theology. We must ask ourselves how such a central doctrine can create so much disunity.

This disagreement is not unpredictable, nor is it a coincidence. Without grace Christianity is worthless, without the cross Christ is not needed and without Christ there can be no Christianity. The cross is the single most important factor in Christianity. Without the cross there could be no hope of atonement, without Christ there could be no chance of humanity restored. Obviously, the devil takes particular interest in destroying and spreading confusion about the cross. No other event in history poses as great a risk to his reign and no other act in all the human race has taken so much ground from him. The cross is the perfect escape car for any and all who want to escape the devil's luring traps. The devil suffered immense defeat on the cross, and to think he would not try to deny it is unusually naive. This is why the topic is so important and needs clarity.

It needs to be made clear that salvation is entirely a result of grace. It is impossible to attain to such a high moral standard, to have such an extreme lifestyle, that we could ever be righteous by our own effort. No amount of helping elderly ladies cross roads or giving food to hungry Asian kids can repair the gash that exists between man and God. But this is where God Himself offers a perfect sacrifice; He offers to bridge the gap we could never cross in our own might. Christ died for our transgressions, and those who accept it are made perfectly clean. No human act, no good nor bad deeds, can change that. When we choose to receive God’s exceptional grace, nothing can make us holier and nothing can make us more righteous in the eyes of God. 

However, something is wrong if those who follow Christ do not experience a change in behaviour. We are saved by grace and called to a life in an intimate relationship with Christ our Saviour. That alone should create a desire to do His will and seek His instructions for our lives. That is not to say God does not lay out a foundation for His bride. He gives instructions for what we should do, what we should think about, what our attitude should be like and what we should say. He calls us to be constant in patience, active in encouragement, consistent in generosity and lingering in love. But it does not stop there: God offers His help, God Himself steps down from the Heavens. God is the God who says, «my, it seems you got yourself in a mess there son, allow me to help you out». He then points in a different direction, and says, «this is the way to go from here. Let me walk it with you, so that next time you fall I can help you up». Christians still commit sinful acts after God has saved them, and those who claim not to sin by lying about it. It is God who works in us to fulfill His purpose. (Phil 2:13) If salvation was to be achieved by works, even in addition to grace or after accepting God’s salvation; none could be saved. Even though a change in behaviour should be a natural side-effect of a living relationship with Christ, it does not affect our salvation.

This is not to say that God chooses everything and individuals have no choice regarding the state of their soul and their final predicament. Those kinds of theology make God a monster and mankind a puppet show. They imply that all worldly experience is mere illusion. This is where most untraditional (and a couple traditional) doctrines fail. God has given man independent will, and grace is an offer to be accepted or denied. Grace forced upon others is a paradox just as grace without repentance is an illusion and predestined fate is an impossibility; there can be no such thing. Those who simply do not want forgiveness, or are unaware they want it, cannot accept forgiveness. Salvation requires one act alone; choosing to embrace it.

A final problem with salvation by works is it gives no glory to God. In fact, it deprives Him of glory: If our own deeds and actions grant us salvation, we are glorified by our sufficience. If God’s grace and mercy grant us salvation, God is glorified by our insufficience. How can we defend a doctrine that so fundamentally deprives God of His glory?

Some times I find myself wondering why God’s grace so difficult for people to comprehend, but then I look at myself. Without Christ I am the most wretched sinner and the most miserable of beings, and I cannot come close to changing that by my own capacity. I cannot save myself any more than a sparrow can lift a boulder, yet Christ rolled the stone away. How amazing the work of God; how marvelous the blood of Christ. When my efforts cease, God may be glorified. What a mighty God we serve.

Beginnings

C.S. Lewis once said, "With the possible exception of the equator, everything begins somewhere". I would like to dedicate this very first blog post to just that; beginnings.

Beginnings are interesting because they are always matter. Beginnings are signs that something different is brought about, points in time that say that from this day on something will be different. It marks the commencement of something unmapped; something involving risk, something unfamiliar. Some beginnings are giant launchpads, like having a child or getting married. Some are more subtle, like taking Spanish classes, starting a blog or even trying a new recipe. The only thing a beginning cannot be is unimportant.

We all know that seemingly random acts take people into things they never would have dreamt about. A simple handshake turns into a life-long friendship or a class on astronomy becomes a journey to the moon and back. All great things come from small beginnings, and from small beginnings come great things. But fact is still fact, people fail to make the most of what comes their way. Wasted opportunities and broken dreams loom over us, and we hustle past, shielding ourselves with umbrellas of "reason" and "rationality". We utterly disregard our possibilities, or we are intimidated and create our own make-believe monsters that prevent dreams from crossing into reality. 

How do we find the middle ground between these two ideas? Does one apply to a certain kind of person and the other to another kind, or are the two somehow entwined? It is important to note that we are never told what could have been. And there is a reason for this: If we all knew the consequences of our inactivity, or activity for that matter, most of us would be paralyzed by regret and fear; unable to go on with our lives. All we can do is ask God to help us make the best of the opportunities that He sends our way, no matter how small and seemingly insignificant, and then use those occasions as well as we know how.

That brings me to the reason for writing this. This blog is a new beginning for me. It is not a big and life-changing decision or something that will drastically alter my path in life, but it is an honest attempt to take myself less seriously and my writing a little more seriously. I feel I am running with pens, and if I do not sit down and take the hood off I might stab myself with one. I do not know what will come of it, but for some reason I think it is the right thing to do. I will not become a great writer over night, but every journey starts with a single step. This is mine.