Theology in the Raw - S2: Church and Israel, Same-sex weddings, Halloween, Authority of Scripture, Justified lies, and other questions

Starting point is 00:00:00 Hey friends, welcome back to another episode of Theology in a Raw. This is a bonus Q&A episode. Every month I field a plethora of questions from my Patreon supporters, and I do my best to work through as many as I can. And you're going to get a sneak peek into some of those questions. And then if you want the full length Q&A podcast, which is about an hour and a half or so, I think, I'm not totally sure because I haven't recorded it yet. You can go to patreon.com forward slash Theology in a Raw, become a Patreon supporter, get access to premium content like this full totally sure because I haven't recorded it yet. You can go to patreon.com forward slash theology in Iraq, become a patron supporter, get access to premium content like this full length episode, and you get an opportunity to ask questions. So let's go ahead and jump in with the first question.

Starting point is 00:00:51 John asked, what is the relationship between the church and Israel? Has the church replaced Israel? Should Christians be more concerned about Israel than any other country? Great question, John. And obviously this is very relevant in light of some recent political events happening in Israel, which I plan on addressing in due time. Well, I mean, John, there's several different responses to your questions, lots of different viewpoints on your question. In fact, there's a book, if you're interested, I think it's called Four Views on Israel and the Church. It's a counterpoints book where you have four different views, imagine that, presented on this very question. One of the popular views, at least in the United States more recently, is what some people might refer to as like the dispensational view that the promises made to the nation of Israel in the Old Testament are literal, and they will be literally fulfilled in all their detail in the future. The future from, I guess, both a New Testament perspective,

Starting point is 00:01:53 like from the future of, you know, from Jesus' perspective, but also even from our perspective. And, you know, certain dispensationalists might even look to certain current events in the 20th century, like the foundation of the state of Israel, maybe various wars that often happen in the Middle East as kind of evidence that things are starting to take shape, that these things sort of precede the future work that God's going to do among the nation state of Israel. There is, I mean, you mentioned, you know, has a church replaced Israel? Yeah, that is a view. I mean, some people have what's called a replacement view that you have, you know, the nation of Israel in the Old Testament, then you have the church in the New Testament, and these are different entities. And, you know, Israel forfeited,

Starting point is 00:02:39 you know, they forfeited the promises by living in ongoing disobedience for so many years. And now the church comes along and sort of replaces Israel in the program of God. I don't even know what I would call the view that I would hold to. I typically, I don't, I mean, over the last like two decades, I've just kind of moved away from adopting, you know, kind of modern paradigms as holistic ways to read scripture. Like I'm very much kind of a ground up sort of guy. Like I like to dig deep into certain biblical passages and arguments and themes. And I like to look at, you know, Romans 1 to 4 and see what Paul's doing there. What's Paul doing in Romans 9 through 11 or Galatians 2 to 3. And, you know, Romans 1 to 4 and see what Paul's doing there. What's Paul doing in Romans 9 through 11 or Galatians 2 to 3?

Starting point is 00:03:27 And, you know, there's quite a few significant New Testament passages that address this question pretty head on. What is the relationship between Israel and the church? And so, yeah, I really work hard not to come to scripture with a preconceived view, like a dispensational view or an amillennial view or replacement view, but try to see from ground up what are the New Testament authors doing in these passages. So, the way I describe my view without giving a label to it is, I think that under the new covenant, Gentiles have been included into God's covenant with Israel and that ethnic boundaries have been done away with so that ethnic distinctions no longer factor into one's covenant status as they did in the Old Testament. Okay. So you can, you know, replay that a few times if you

Starting point is 00:04:20 want. Like I tried to word that pretty specifically. So, so in the new Testament, I do think the concept of Israel is, you know, no longer Jew nor Gentile. We are all one in Christ. So that function, like under the new covenant that, you know, the, the Israel of God, Galatians six is also called the church. Okay. So, um, it's not, it's not replacement. It's more, I guess you could almost call it like the church is the surprising maybe extension or fulfillment of God's promises to the nation of Israel in the Old Testament. Several important passages, I think, to really study in this regard are, well, I've already mentioned a few, you know, Romans 1 to 4, especially 2 through, yeah, Romans 2 through, well, 1 to 4 is a unit of thought. Romans 9-11 is almost directly addressing this question. Unfortunately, Romans 9-11 is not the easiest passage to interpret. I think N.T. Wright has a fantastic understanding of Romans 9-11.

Starting point is 00:05:23 He really makes it sing. He's got an older book called The Climax of the Covenant. It's a collection of scholarly essays, and he's got his essay on Romans 9 to 11 in that book. I think it's, gosh, a book that might be 30 years old by now, is absolutely stunning. It's an exquisite piece of engaging scholarship. Galatians 2 to 3 is an important passage, Philippians 3, Ephesians 2 to 3. So, you know, in Romans 2, Paul says that circumcision of the flesh is kind of covenant marker in the Old Testament. This doesn't make you a true Jew, Paul says, but circumcision of the heart. So there is even playing on some of these old covenant Israel specific categories. So there is even playing on some of these old covenant Israel specific categories.

Starting point is 00:06:08 If you have faith, Paul says, then you're a child of Abraham. Whereas, you know, more of an Old Testament concept of, you know, being a child of Abraham is being born ethnically Jewish. So again, I don't think replacement is what I'm getting at as if Israel in the Old Testament was some, you know, completely separate entity than the thing called the church in the Old Testament was some, you know, completely separate entity than the thing called the church in the New Testament. I mean, even in Romans 11.1 is really important. I mean, the whole chapter of Romans 11 is important, but, you know, Paul even asks, you know, did God reject his people? And then he says, by no means. Look at me, I'm an Israelite. I'm a descendant of Abraham from the tribe of Benjamin. God didn't reject his people whom he foreknew. And then he goes on to talk about, you know,

Starting point is 00:06:48 all these examples. And by giving himself as an example of an Israelite, a true Jew, a member of the nation of Israel, you know, Paul is a, he's not a part of quote Israel simply because he's ethnically Jewish. He's part of the true Israel because he's also a believer in Jesus Christ. And we can go in more detail there. I think that's enough for you to chew on. I would, again, point you to those passages that I referenced more than I would point you to my understanding of those passages. Like, just go wrestle with those passages and you'll see, number one, the question is kind of complicated, but I don't see replacement as the best category, nor do I see a complete separation between Old Testament Israel, New Testament church. I think

Starting point is 00:07:35 either of those don't capture the full complexity and beauty of how the New Testament treats this question. So to answer your question, no, I don't think Christians should be more, I'll say theologically concerned with the modern state of Israel more than other countries. That's a very disputed statement. There's lots of people who would disagree with me, maybe even be outraged that I would suggest such a thing. But I'm saying that based on my reading of several New Testament passages. What about the land promise? This often comes up, you know, God promised the Jewish people the physical land of Israel that we know today. Now, the boundaries today are slightly different than what they were under the old covenant.

Starting point is 00:08:22 Even under the old covenant, you have different passages that speak of different boundaries, but we don't need to get into all that. But even here's how I see it. And this is not just me. Lots of people see it this way. The land promise and the land of Israel is intertwined with God's overarching promise to creation. So you have Genesis 1 and 2, which focuses on creation as a whole. I do believe that from Genesis 12 onward, when you begin to see this focus on the land of Israel, that that promised land of Israel takes part in God's larger creational program. program. I don't know the best language to use here. Maybe it's kind of a down payment, a first step, a kind of like already, not yet, you know, land of Israel now and creation as a whole in the future. So anyway, you move from focus on creation, Genesis 1 and 2, to the specific land of Israel

Starting point is 00:09:18 in Genesis 12 honored. And what's interesting is in the land promises, especially in Genesis, you see a lot of the same language, seed, blessing, curse, and so on that you see with regard to creation in Genesis 1 to 2 or Genesis 1 to 3. So that the land of Israel participates in God's kind of overarching promise to creation. And then in the new covenant, I do believe that God's scope widens once again and takes more of a Genesis 1 to 2 perspective so that the land promises given to Israel are now going to be fulfilled under the new covenant in all of creation. So that, you know, Jesus doesn't say the meek will inherit the land of Israel, as in the original Psalm that he's quoting there, but the meek will inherit the earth.

Starting point is 00:10:02 We now look forward, not just to the fulfillment of the strip of land in the Middle East, but we look forward to a new heavens and new earth. You begin to see this creation-wide focus in terms of God's physical promises, land promises in scripture. The one possible exception, because so it sounds like I'm kind of writing off all focus on literal Israel, literal Jewish people, literal land. The one possible exception, and I'm not sure exactly where I land on this, is there could be some future work that God will still do among Jewish people. I'm not thinking of Israel as a nation state necessarily, or the physical land. I'm thinking specifically of ethnic Jewish people. And the only reason why I say this is really, it's based on largely one passage, Romans 11, 25 to 32.

Starting point is 00:10:56 Romans 11, 25 to 32. If you just slowly read that passage, it seems like, and again, I'm not like read that passage, it seems like, and again, I'm not like completely landed on this view, but it seems like a solid interpretation could be that God will do some kind of future unique work among ethnic Jewish people in a similar way that he did a unique work among Gentiles in the first century. So anyway, I hope that helps, John. It's a very complicated question. I know I took almost 10 minutes, well, it took over 10 minutes on that question. That's actually a very short response to a complex question. So let's move on to the second question. An anonymous person asks, where are your personal boundaries attending or participating in a same sex wedding? A close gay friend of mine just got engaged, so I'm having to think through this. I would quickly point you to a fairly in-depth paper that I wrote on this called

Starting point is 00:11:50 Should Christians Attend a Same-Sex Wedding Ceremony? It's available for free, well, for an email, but pretty much for free, at centerforfaith.com. I think if you go forward slash resources, it'll take you close to where this paper is. You have to click on a few different links here, but it's under resources on our website, centerforfaith.com. I think there's a lot of gray in this question in my response. I don't think there's a black and white yes or no answer to this. Where I would draw the line personally, given my theological convictions is as a licensed minister, I would not perform a same sex wedding ceremony. But let me, let me, let me put a wider scope on that.

Starting point is 00:12:33 I wouldn't personally perform a wedding ceremony with anybody that I don't believe is whose wedding I don't think is being blessed by God because they're going against God's design on whatever area. So that would be, that's my, so I try to be consistent with that in terms of performing or officiating a wedding ceremony. Because I think the, I do think there's something profoundly theological happening in that ceremony. And it's one thing to observe what's going on. We'll get to this in a second. I don't think we need to be in full agreement if you're just simply watching it. But if you're officiating it, it's almost like you're standing in the gap between God and humankind there,

Starting point is 00:13:15 the couple getting married. So I do think that that is theologically much more significant. And I would want to tighten in the reins a bit on which ones I would stand in the gap for. With regard to attending, and this would apply to also with participating. Participating does start to get even trickier, obviously. But in terms of attending, I think, again, I think it's a gray area. I don't think there's a black and white. It's sin or not sin. You should or shouldn't. I'm not going to give some categorical statement for every Christ follower and what they should or shouldn't do. I remember saying this in a conference several years ago. I said, yeah, I think that this is a gray area. And somebody yelled out, no, it's not. It caught me off guard. And what's funny is,

Starting point is 00:13:59 you know, I don't, we do, we do plenty of Q and a time, but, um, this particular moment was not one of those times. And, um, I'm deaf in my left ear. So when I hear a noise in a big room, like, I don't know where it's coming from. So it really threw me off. Like, I didn't know where the voice was coming from and they didn't like raise their hand or anything. They just kind of yelled out. So I paused and it was so good. It's just those of you who speak for a living, no, like when something throws you off, you just get so confused. Like, where am I? And I sat there looking around and people were like... Then they started pointing at him like, he's over here. I felt bad for the guy. He's like... Anyway, I think it's a gray area, despite one person's objection. Here's a few thoughts. Number one,

Starting point is 00:14:39 I would say whatever your attendance policy is, just be consistent. If you have a personal policy, I only attend weddings that match God's design, that are being blessed by God, then be consistent. Don't go to any weddings between a believer and an unbeliever, because there are lots of passages to say no go on that one. Maybe somebody who's been been like divorced unbiblically, um, and remarried unbiblically. Like there, you know, I think there's some allowances there, but if they are going against clear teaching of scripture there, then, then, you know, if you don't attend a wedding ceremony that falls short of, it's not being blessed by God, then, then, then be consistent. Don't attend, you know, your uncle's wedding has been divorced and remarried five times or whatever. Um, uh, and then don't go to that wedding, but then say, well, I'm not

Starting point is 00:15:29 going to go to a same sex wedding ceremony. I think that would be inconsistent. Uh, number two, what would you, what will your attendance convey? I I'm very big on clarity, especially more recently. I just, I, I, I'm a big fan that let's just be, I do want to be kind and clear, clear. And I think clarity is kindness. Okay. Isn't that Brene Brown? Didn't she? I think she coined that. Uh, what will your attendance convey? If it will give the impression to the people getting married, that you fully agree with the wedding, the marriage, and you actually don't agree, then, then that, then you might want to clarify that a bit or maybe don't attend. But if your attendance, if the people getting married know you don't fully agree with their marriage, and yet you're still attending, that could convey

Starting point is 00:16:14 a pretty counter-cultural or a pretty powerful gesture of love toward a relationship that you don't agree with, a significant part of that relationship, but you're still willing to attend as an act of hospitality and love. So, what is your attendance conveying to the people getting married? And also, number three, do they claim to be Christians? If you have two people who claim to be Christians and you believe they're fundamentally going against a serious part of God's teaching, then that needs to factor into your decision. But if they don't even claim to be Christians, then in a sense, they shouldn't be held to a Christian standard anyway. I'm not saying, therefore, everybody

Starting point is 00:16:55 should go if they don't claim to be Christians. I'm just saying that these are questions that should factor in to your decision-making process. But again, I would consult that paper that I referenced. It'll give you a lot more detail. All right. Next question. Austin wants to know, what are my thoughts on a justified lie, something like Rahab or similar situations protecting life through lying? I, yeah, I've always taken the view that while lying is condemned in scripture, it is one of several ethical norms that do have evidence of some exceptions. The example you gave is a classic one, Rahab lying to the Canaanite authorities. Sometimes the Hebrew midwives of Exodus 1 are also brought into this as an example of lying. That passage, I just re-read it again just to make sure. It seems like it's not so much

Starting point is 00:17:52 lying in the Hebrew midwives passages. It seems like they're just disobeying the command of the king. So I don't know if that's the best example. Of course, you have modern day examples, Corrie ten Boom and others, you know, hiding Jews during the Holocaust. So, that's kind of where I'm at. I invite people to correct my thinking on this. Obviously, the Bible does have many categorical, seemingly categorical statements that say, don't lie, it's evil, don't ever do it. There's, you know, just, you can Google that. There's tons of them. Um, but I do think ethics can be, um, can be complex. I mean, we also have commands that say, keep the Sabbath and then people don't keep the Sabbath. Like probably everybody listening. Um, and it's all, you know,

Starting point is 00:18:37 in its strictness, you know, or what about, here's another example, you know, what about drunkenness? Okay. Drunkenness, sin, Paul says it. Proverbs say it several times. Do not be drunk with wine, but be filled with Holy Spirit. But okay. What if you're in the wilderness and a tree falls on your leg and you're trapped and all you have is a dull, rusty pocket knife and a bottle and a fifth of Jack? That's a lot of Jack Daniels. Do you chug a bunch of Jack Daniels to numb the pain because you don't carry morphine on you so that you can saw through your leg and escape at least, you know, without your leg, whatever. Has this ever happened? or has this ever happened? Could there be a situation on earth when in lieu of morphine or some kind of painkiller, you actually enter into a state of drunkenness? Would God look down

Starting point is 00:19:35 upon you and say, you evil son? Or would he say like, okay, this is kind of an exception that might prove the rule or something like that. So I don't know. That's kind of a dumb example. But just I think if we take some ethical norms, we might be able to find some exceptions where in light of other teachings of scripture, there might be some exceptions given certain set of circumstances. That doesn't mean every ethical norm has exceptions. I don't think adultery has an exception and there's other, especially when it comes to sexual morality. I think that, um, there is, yeah, I mean, I could probably think of maybe some, but I, I,

Starting point is 00:20:15 yeah, I, I think, um, just because some ethical norms might have some exceptions doesn't mean they all do. So that, that's where I'm at on this. It's awesome. It's an issue that I think philosophers and theologians have probably done a lot more work than I have. I've kind of given kind of a standard basic position, I think, and the reasoning behind it, but that's where I'm at. So I'd love to hear your thoughts. All right, next question. Tisha wants to know about Halloween, Harry Potter, et cetera. What should we do? Tolkien and Lewis are full of magic and even occultist things, but people love them. Tisha, well, you probably pointed out something that is quite common in Christianity, and that is

Starting point is 00:20:56 the ever pervasive problem of inconsistency. But yeah, I think with all of these things, these are all very different to my mind. I, I think Lord of the Rings and, uh, you know, Lewis's, some of Lewis's stuff, you know, the screw tape letters and Harry Potter and then Halloween, like these are kind, like each one is, is quite different, especially the literary works you've referenced and then Halloween. So I, I, you know, I think we would need to take each one of these separately and kind of put it through the grind of a good solid Christian worldview. I think with all of these, you know, part of it's a matter of conscience, you know, if somebody is just can't handle screw tape letters, they read screw tape letters and

Starting point is 00:21:43 they're having nightmares or whatever about demons or, you know, Harry Potter. And, you know, then, yeah, I don't want to say like, you must read these or these are good. You better consume these works. You know, um, some people might just, maybe they have an occultist background, so they might be unhelpfully triggered by, by coming across stuff like this. Other people that might not have the same experience. Um, I have not read Harry Potter. Well, I have the same experience. I have not read Harry Potter. Well, I read the first book. I have not watched the movies. I only know about the storyline from a distance and even that's pretty sketchy. People I know and respect that have read all the books and really enjoy them have told me that there are some of the most powerful Christian themes in Harry Potter,

Starting point is 00:22:26 themes of redemption, themes of good and evil, you know, and so on and so forth. So, I want to ask the question, not does something simply contain occultist, demonic, satanic views, but do they promote an occultist? Is that the right word? Occultist? That's what you're, you use. I'm just using the word you use. Do they promote occultist values? I mean, the Bible contains all kinds of demonic and satanic activity, but it doesn't promote it in the sense of, Hey, this is good and worthy to be celebrated. So that, that's a big distinction for me when it comes to movies and other things. The question shouldn't be, does it contain sin? Because real life contains sin. The Bible contains tons of sin

Starting point is 00:23:15 all over the place. The question is, does it promote it? So I think that's a firm distinction I want to keep in my mind. Halloween, that was a little tricky. So I'm going to say with Tolkien, Lewis, Harry Potter, I'm going to say these are literary works that contain sin, contain magic, contain occultist things, contain demonic, whatever, but that doesn't mean it's promoting it. So I, I, I think those, I'm going to say those works are not just fine, but actually are good and beautiful. Halloween's, you know, that one's a little tricky for me. I, you know, I, according to some theories, it was originally a Christian holiday, right? I mean, there's debates on that, according to Wiki, at least, um, about the origins of Halloween. I think just because Halloween contains certain,

Starting point is 00:24:01 you know, themes doesn't necessarily mean all forms of participation in all kinds of Halloween events are promoting demons and Satan and the devil. And, you know, I, I, I think it's a little more complicated than that. Um, I would probably say if you do any kind of Halloween celebration, yeah, stay away from participating in or promoting occultist behavior and rituals. Like, yeah, yeah. I think that's, I would think that should be pretty clear. You know, some people who are very pro-Halloween are like, you know, they often bring up the missional impact, you know, like, well, if we're going to be good, if we're going to engage society, then we need to engage in these things. Otherwise people think we're, you know, super weird and, you know, separatists, whatever. I think that, I don't know. I think that can be overplayed a little bit

Starting point is 00:24:50 as if people, you know, aren't going to come to Jesus unless we go trick-or-treating with our neighbors or whatever. I don't know. This is where I'm maybe more of a Calvinist than some people wish I was. But I just, I think sometimes the, a healthy, I don't want to say, I don't like the term separatistic, but I think distinctiveness, distinctiveness, I think healthy, holy distinctiveness among God's people is missional. Like I don't think missional is simply like participating in as much as many cultural rituals that we can do. I think maintaining a distinct, sometimes separate or distant way of life, I think that that isn't at odds with missional impact. So yeah, it's a conscious issue. I think Tisha, I think, I think don't be pressured into thinking certain things are good or evil.

Starting point is 00:25:45 I think you need to think on your own two feet here and really, um, weigh each thing individually. All right. Next question. All right. Eric wants to know why are over 80% of the LGBTQ community raised in a church? Uh, you're interested in my perspective. So, so that, that percentage comes from a, uh, it's not that well known, I guess.

Starting point is 00:26:06 It's well known among people who are engaged in the conversation. A study by Andrew Marin years ago, which is contained in a book called Us Versus Us. I'm staring at it right now, actually, where he surveyed 1,912 LGBT people. So he didn't have the queue for what it's worth. It's a minor detail. So he didn't have the Q for what it's worth. It's a minor detail, but he surveyed 1912 LGBT people,

Starting point is 00:26:31 at least 25 from every state, very thorough study and found out that 86% were raised in some kind of religious environment. I think it was 2.9% of them were a a non-Christian religious environment, which is why I often say... and monthly Zoom chats and more, then please head over to patreon.com forward slash theologyintheraw to join Theology in the Raw's Patreon community. That's patreon.com forward slash theologyintheraw. This show is part of the Converge Podcast Network.

Theology in the Raw - S2: Church and Israel, Same-sex weddings, Halloween, Authority of Scripture, Justified lies, and other questions

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.