Orthodox Christianity

A narrative criticial study of the gospel of Mark

05/11/2009 · Leave a Comment

The Gospel of Mark is believed to be the oldest of the gospels and is in many ways in tune with the modern era. The gospel is brief and to the point, ‘earthy’ and has an ‘authentic’ feel to it. It has more than one ending each of which has significance to the modern reader. The ending generally preferred at Mk 16:8 gives us an ambiguous ending, which to the modern mind may be viewed as exciting. The ending forces us to think about what ultimately happened. The alternative ending (Mk 16:9-20) is ‘strange’ to the modern rational mind with its emphasis on the centrality of ‘signs and wonders’ in mission not ‘preaching’ and rationality.

The text has a number of actors who are given a voice by the author who also vocalises their thoughts, concerns and feelings. The main actors in the text are the narrator;  John the Baptist; God; Jesus, his family;  his followers and the Disciples, with key individuals and sub-groups given prominence in the story; Demons ; sundry people with whom Jesus interacts with; religious powers (e.g. Pharisees, priests, scribes and Sadducees) and  earthly powers (e.g. Herod and Pilate).

Jesus challenges a response from these actors, and us the reader, with the phrase

“But who do you say that I am?” (Mk 8:29)

Like the actors, how we respond to this question will determine whether we are in the Kingdom of God or in the Kingdom of Satan/The World, whether we are followers of Jesus who will be persecuted with him or whether we will be on the side of the enemies of Jesus.

It is difficult to imagine that anyone would come to know Jesus first through reading a gospel or hearing a gospel. Both the modern day reader and the ancient reader/hearer probably knew the broad outline of the story of Jesus before being formally introduced to Mark’s story. As such we have a ‘God-like’ viewpoint and role in observing the story, we know the essential elements before the characters do and we know the ending. We know people are making wrong choices as the story progresses in a linear fashion. However, I believe the disciples stand in for us in the story. They clearly struggle with the significance of what Jesus is doing, who he is and where he is going. They are weak, they lack faith, are hard-hearted and ultimately are cowards when the crunch comes. Although it is not directly stated we could read into the text that if these people failed then our weakness is even more understandable and we like them can ultimately be forgiven. Though not stated Grace rather than Works wins the day in Mark’s gospel.

There are two key themes in the gospel. The centrality of the Cross and Jesus’ true nature being revealed by his ‘Signs and Wonders’ ministry. The ‘Signs and Wonders’ of Jesus defines Jesus’ supernatural nature, they thus challenge the reader. Rejecting the ‘signs and wonders’ is tantamount to a reject of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, i.e. Mk 3:29-30. Accepting Jesus as just a ‘Good Teacher’ is not enough if we follow the logic of the text. It is interesting to note that the longer ending of Mark also emphasises the validity of ‘Signs and Wonders’ in the Church’s mission and from a modern perspective could be taken to validate the experience of the Pentacostal/Charismatic movement.

Having discussed the gospel at a macro-level it is worth looking at the story at the micro-level. In order to do this I will focus on the Jesus actor in the story as the whole story ‘hangs’ around this thread.

The writer of Mark is not interested in the background of Jesus. He has a family (a Mother and brothers are mentioned Mk 3:31) who think he is mad (Mk 3:21) but his true nature is revealed to him by God (Mk 1:11). Only God, Jesus, Satan and the demons know who he truly is. However, his’ Signs and Wonders’ and his transfiguration ultimately reveal who he is, though only to a select group of initiates who still fail to grasp what Jesus is doing. Although the gospel could be interpreted as suggesting that Jesus was ‘adopted’ by God or ‘possessed’ by the Holy Spirit, the author of the text refers to Jesus as an individual rather than him being the conduit of ‘Godness’. Jesus is presented as both divine and at the same time ‘earthy’ – the author says he was ‘angry’ (Mk 3:5), ‘distressed’ and ‘troubled’ ( Mk 14:33). The author clearly paints Jesus as both human and divine.

Jesus is introduced at Mk 1:1 as ‘Son of God’, though what this means comes from our knowledge of the term outside of the gospel. Immediately a quote from Isaiah is used and the term ‘Lord’ is also added to Jesus (Mk 1:3). Jesus is the central character throughout the gospel and is always in charge of his destiny, apart from two events – being driven by the Spirit (Mk 1:12) into the wilderness and at Nazareth where he calls himself ‘Prophet’ and he is unable to do ‘no mighty work there’ (Mk 6:5). Mark is clearly wanting to show that Jesus is not a ‘failure’, the crucifixion was not a mistake or a miscalculation, even the failure at Nazareth is moderated by saying that he healed a few sick people there (Mk 6:5). Jesus repeatedly mentions his rejection by the elders of Israel, his death and resurrection. Mark clearly wants the reader to know that the shocking end of Jesus was no mere mistake – it ‘must’ happen and was part of God’s plan all along. One could imagine that the gospel writer is heading off our negative preconceptions of Jesus’ end. Again accepting Jesus as a ‘wise person’ whose teaching is worth following despite his inglorious end is not an option that the writer wants to portray.

Jesus is often contrasted against other actors in the gospel. The first person he is compared to is John the Baptist. John the Baptist does not conduct exorcisms, healings or other miraculous acts in the story. Both Jesus and John called for repentance. John disappears from the story during Chapter 1 with his arrest being noted and is introduced again during Chapter 6 when the manner of his death is announced. One could be forgiven for reading into the text that a similar fate should be expected for Jesus, earthly powers are fundamentally against the Kingdom of God.

The majority of the gospel seems to be a collection of vignettes about Jesus and his activity. There is only a vague sense of how these events are connected. Events are connected by linking words like ‘and immediately …’, ‘And he …’, ‘And as he…’ ‘Again…’ etc. This gives an impression of time though it could be argues that the events could be connected up in different ways. The lack of a scale for the amount of time passing can be illustrated at the transition at Mk 1:15 which is the first speech of Jesus in the gospel and the calling of the disciples at Mk 1:16. Why would people immediately follow him unless his ministry had been active for some time? The majority of the gospel is a collection of incidents where Jesus either shows great wisdom or great power.

The gospel writer uses Jesus to illustrate the correct attitude the Christian community should exhibit when persecuted. The reaction of the disciples to persecution, and Peter in particular, falls short of Jesus’ example. At Mk 14:50 the disciples run away at the first sign of danger, they fail the test of Mk 13:13 ‘And you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.’ The author is clearly concerned about persecution (e.g. Mk 10:39) Jesus’ response to the authority of the world is to remain silent (Mk 14:61, Mk 15:5) and only when directly challenged as to his status does he give a reply (Mk 14:62, Mk 15:4). The final words of Jesus in Mark is the first line of Psalm 22, the astute reader on reading the Psalm will see that for Mark scripture was being fulfilled on the cross.

The disciples in Mark’s gospel are far from being saints in training. They are witnesses to important events, signs and teachings yet they constantly seem to misunderstand Jesus. Interestingly when rebuked by Jesus (Mk 16:14) one manuscript has the following quote from the disciples:

And they excused themselves, saying, “This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not permit God’s truth and power to conquer the evil [unclean] spirits. Therefore, reveal your justice now.” (Mark 16:14 study note from NLT study bible)

Thus it is possible that we should understand the disciples misunderstanding to be ultimately a consequence of them being under the power of Satan, Peter is particularly singled out for being under the control of Satan at Mk 8:23. Mark’s gospel is saturated with the theme of demonic activity in the world and demonic possession of people. Jesus’ passing of Satan’s temptation at Mk 1:13 allowed Jesus to bind the ‘strong man’ at Mk 3:27 allowing Jesus to plunder Satan’s House (This World) of people to inhabit the Kingdom of God. It could be argued that the word ‘plunder’ means that there is not a free choice in entering the kingdom.

The disciples in Mark start out well, they leave everything behind to go and follow Jesus. They have an intimate relationship with Jesus and are given privileged information and instruction (Mk 4:11). However, they always seem to have doubts and are afraid (Mk 4:40), in a sense they know Jesus but fail his test of faith in him based on his ‘signs and wonders’. Despite this Jesus trusts them to go out on mission (Mk 6:713) and they cast out many demons, which indicates they are successful on one level. However, a little later on at Mk 6:52 it is said that

‘they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened.’

Later at the high point of confessing Jesus as the Messiah it again goes ‘wrong’ for the disciples when Peter is rebuked for rebuking Jesus, they fail to understand Jesus time and time again about his death and resurrection (Mk 9:32). The disciples have a number of bad points with regard to ‘power’. The disciples argue with scribes when they failed to heal a demon possessed boy (Mk 9:14-18), they argue about who is the greatest amongst themselves (Mk 9:33-37), they try and prevent other people using Jesus’ name to cast out demons (Mk 9:38-40), two of the disciples try and get privileged positions in the kingdom (Mk 10:35-45) and the disciples are indigent when Jesus is anointed (Mk 14:4). It could be argued that from the moment they heard that Jesus was the Messiah things went downhill leading  to betrayal either directly as Judas and Peter do of Jesus (Mk 14:10 and  Mk 14:71) or abandonment (Mk 14:50).

It is interesting to note that the disciples ‘fail’ Jesus at the end and the women ‘fail’ Jesus in that they do not tell anyone of the message of the young man at the tomb. In the longer ending of Mark, Mary tells the disciples and they fail to believe her (Mk 16:10-11). Eventually Jesus rebukes the disciples for their ‘hardness of heart’ and unbelief before he gives them the Great commission. We can only assume that Jesus forgave his disciples weakness which is an example of grace. Thus we can draw from Mark’s gospel that the Christian community is expected to be brave in adversity, though those that are weak may still be redeemable like the disciples.

In summary, Mark’s gospel is a sophisticated story that has had considerable thought put into its construction. Mark’s gospel paints a picture of The Kingdom of God entering the demonic realm and redeeming a portion of Mankind that follow him. Like Jesus, the redeemed should expect persecution and death whilst on Earth.

Bibliography

The Standard Bible Society (2001), The English Standard Version, Wheaton, IL.

Tyndale House (2008), The New Living Translation Study Bible, Carol Stream, IL.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: New Testament scholarship
Tagged: , , ,

Understanding Mark’s Gospel part 1

17/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

Mark according to Stanton (2002, p. 57)

’sets out in dramatic form the story of Jesus so that it will be meaningful for faltering and hard-pressed Christians in his own day.’

Most scholars accept that Mark is the oldest gospel and as such it has pride of place in the quest for the Historical Jesus. Based on clues in Mark and tradition, Mark’s gospel is dated to about 70 AD. It must be remember that the gospels are theological works with a purpose not simple biographies. Eusebius quotes Papias (ca 123 AD) on the origin of Mark,

‘Mark, who became Peter’s interpreter, wrote accurately, but not in order, as many of the things said and done by the Lord as he had noted. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterwards, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to the needs (of his hearers) but not a complete work of the Lord’s sayings. So Mark made no mistake in writing some things just as he had noted them. For he was careful of one thing, to leave nothing he had heard out and to say nothing nothing falsely.’ (Eusebius cited by Stanton, p. 55, emphasis mine)

Mark’s gospel was comparatively neglected in antiquity, it was rarely copied, preached from, used in church and seldom commented upon. The reason it was not favoured was Matthew contained most of the material of Mark and had a stronger story of the resurrection and a birth narrative. Mark might have been lost if its authorship had not been attributed to a disciple of St. Peter.

It is very difficult, unlike the gospels of Matthew and Luke, to distinguish between tradition and redaction in Mark. We can detect the author’s hand when he directly addresses the reader (Mk 13:14Mk 7:3-4). Mark is believed by most form critics to have strung many independent paragraphs (pericopae) into a story. Mark makes use of links words translated as ’soon’, ‘then’ and ‘immediately’ to link these independent traditions into a narrative.

Mark uses ‘to teach’ and ‘teaching’ more frequently than in the other gospels but does not major on the teachings. It is possible Mark’s author was more interested in saying that in Jesus’ teaching God was breaking into the world and was less interested in the actual message. In Mark’s gospel the title ‘Son of God’ is a more important title for Jesus than ‘Messiah/Christ’; it is to be noted that ‘Son of God’ was recognises as one of the characteristics of the Messiah.

Scholars have made use of ‘composition criticism’ to look at the structure of the gospel, the order of the traditions in the gospel, the way the gospel starts and finishes. Narrative criticism insists that the gospel should be treated as a whole writing. From this viewpoint Mark is considered a drama in five acts.

The disciples are shown as ‘weak’ in understanding and faith in Mark.This is probably deliberate as by setting out the disciples weakness Mark’s readership could identified with the characters and understand that broken relationships could be restored by Jesus and forgiven.

Reference

Stanton G., 2002, The gospels and Jesus, 2nd Ed, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Stanton
Tagged: ,

Marcan Priority and the Q Hypothesis

16/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

Mark’s gospel has been described as the Cinderella of the gospels (Stanton, p. 19). Since 1835 and the work of Karl Lachmann it has been considered to be the first gospel to be written. Historically, the gospel of Matthew has been the most popular gospel (with some arguing that Mark being just a paraphrase). The gospel of Mark today has overtaken the gospels of Matthew and Luke in scholarly esteem.

According to Stanton (2002, p.23) the hypothesis of Marcan priority is more plausible as it is easier to explain Luke and Matthew in the light of Marcan priority than any other theory of gospel priority. Marcan priority is assumed for the following reasons:

  • It is the shortest gospel which Luke and Matthew have added considerably to.  Why would Mark want to delete so much of the material of Luke and Matthew and add material of little importance? As such its simplicity argues for its age, if Luke and Matthew were the material used to produce Mark, what was the point of producing an ‘inferior’ gospel?
  • Luke follows the order of materiel in Mark fairly closely and Matthew less so. It is easy to explain why Luke and Matthew deviate from Mark but not the other way around.
  • Matthew and Luke improve upon the style of Mark and modify or remove material from Mark.
  • A number of Marcan passages that paint Jesus in a bad light have been modified by Matthew and Luke, e.g. Mark 3:21, Mark 6:35 and Mark 4:38.

Luke and Matthew share 230 verses not found in Mark. This material is known as Q. Stanton gives the following reasons to support the idea that there is a Q source for Mathew and Luke:

  • There is close verbal agreement between Luke and Matthew in many verses in the non-Marcan sections.
  • There is similar order in the non-Markan material in Luke and Matthew.
  • The Q material has a consistent theological viewpoint.
  • The rival theory that Luke used Matthew and Mark would require Luke to have dismantled Matthew and used Matthew’s material in a very free manner, to the extent of often preferring Mark to Matthew. Why did Luke find Matthew so unattractive when the rest of early Christianity found Matthew compelling such that it became the favourite gospel of early Christianity?

Scholars believe that Luke has retained the order of Q material more faithfully than Matthew has, and Q reconstructions are therefore based on Luke more than on Matthew.

Reference

Stanton G., 2002, The gospels and Jesus, 2nd Ed, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Stanton
Tagged: , , , ,

The Importance of Writen Material for Early Christians

14/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

Religion in the ancient world was generally belief without a sacred text. Perkins (2007, p. 32) states that the literacy rate in the ancient world may have been as low as 10%. In general, people required others to read written records. It is to be noted that written records. at the time, did not have spaces between words and little or no punctuation, reading was difficult even for those who could read. As a result the help of someone with prior understanding of the text or subject matter was required for comprehension (a biblical example of this is in Acts when St. Philip meets the Eunuch).

‘Study of ancient educational practice has shown that texts have no life independent of their oral performance and interpretation. Most audiences could not decipher them even if written texts had been more commonly available.’ (Perkins, 2007, p. 46)

Based on the various canonical texts of Judaism circulating in the first century AD, Perkins (2007, p. 33) states that we do not know how significant such differences were to first century readers. Outside of the bible, Perkins (2007, p. 33) gives an example of Josephus who did not attempt to reconcile divergent accounts found in his sources when writing War and Antiquities. However, by the mid-second century Justin Martyr had to defend the Greek text used by Christians against the Jewish texts that were seen as being revised to exclude a Christian interpretation.

It is worth bearing in mind that many believers read from a more extensive collection of sacred writing than the orthodox canon in the early centuries. Not all of these variants were ‘gnostic’. The persecution of the Christians, especially by Diocletian (ca 303 AD) resulted in the destruction of many texts. It is not difficult to realise that local variants of the gospels or other local non-canonical texts were at greater risk of not surviving these events than the more mainstream and widely circulated books.

References

Perkins, P. (2007) Introduction to the synoptic gospels, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Perkin

Is Jesus a Fictional Character?

13/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

Often in the comment section on Christian material on the web you will see someone states that Jesus did not exist. Such comments are clever as they are attempts to make people provide evidence which they know is going to be impossible to modern critical standards. (The fact that early Christians faced persecution and probably were unable to ‘maintain’ an historical record acceptable for modern sceptical people seems to be forgotten.) It is noteworthy that creation, the age of the universe, Noah’s ark etc. are also tactics used to demonstrate the absurdity of Christian belief. The point of these lines of attack are to move the topic away from soteriology, the primary message of the bible, to a secondary topic about history and science and the demand for proof. At this point one is wasting one’s time as neither Jesus or the Apostles offered ‘proof’, only their testimony and ’signs and wonders’, so why are we expecting we can do better than them? One is not persuaded into the kingdom, one has to experience God or become convinced by someone else’s testimony in order to believe in God and His acts.
Having stated that we are meant to be preaching the gospel and not engaging in philosophical arguments with non-believers, can we as Christians have any confidence that Jesus was real?

We need to understand that to non-Christians in the early centuries, Jesus would not have been that important, and as a result we cannot expect, Jesus to be on the equivalent of the ‘best sellers’ list of 1st Century AD biography. There is a reference to Jesus by Josephus in his book the “Antiquities of the Jews”. However, it is claimed that Christian copyists might have inserted this reference into the book. There is also indirect references by Roman historians (e.g. Suetonius and Tacitus) to Christians. Now if  we take into account the limited survival of texts outside of the bible from antiquity, and the fact that the ones that did probably were preserved by Christian copyists, one is unlikely to convince a sceptic of  Jesus’ existence, as they will claim any references outside of the bible are fraudulent.

So what are we left with? Well, the existence of the Church today is probably our best line of evidence. If Jesus did not exist and was not resurrected then it is extremely hard to believe that Monotheistic Jews would suddenly start a cult around a mythical deified hero, and be willing to preach such a cult to others and die for it. We are also left with St. Paul’s confession that he persecuted the Christians until his life changing experience of God. We are also left with the fact that Jesus’ death was counter to everything Jews believed would happen to the messiah, and a resurrection prior to the last days was totally unexpected. These ‘facts’ were difficult to accept then as now and were an unlikely starting point for a made-up cult to start from.

In the ancient world, people did not put so much faith in the written word and it was the personal one-to-one/many testament of reliable people that mattered. At the time St. Paul was writing people could verify the Christian message by seeking out those that had seen and experienced Jesus’ ministry and resurrection.

This is the gospel message of the earliest Christians (Acts 10:34-43). Note the reference to the Apostolic witness.

‘Then Peter replied, “I see very clearly that God shows no favoritism.

In every nation he accepts those who fear him and do what is right.

This is the message of Good News for the people of Israel

that there is peace with God through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all.

You know what happened throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee, after John began preaching his message of baptism.

And you know that God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. Then Jesus went around doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.

And we apostles are witnesses of all he did throughout Judea and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a cross,

but God raised him to life on the third day. Then God allowed him to appear, not to the general public, but to us whom God had chosen in advance to be his witnessesWe were those who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead.

And he ordered us to preach everywhere and to testify that Jesus is the one appointed by God to be the judge of all—the living and the dead.

He is the one all the prophets testified about, saying that everyone who believes in him will have their sins forgiven through his name.”

So, then as now, it is ultimately the testimony of witnesses (like the Apostles) to God’s activity, or our own experience (like St. Paul’s) that convinces us, or not, of Jesus’ existence, not cold, hard historical facts.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: New Testament scholarship
Tagged:

What is a Gospel?

12/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

A ‘gospel’, euangelion, was a proclamation of an event of major importance, the equivalent of breaking news today. As such an euangelion could have been the news of a Roman emperor or some other major proclamation. The word evoked excitment – good news.

The gospels we have are post-ressurection accounts of Jesus’ life and minsitry where the author has taken considerable freedom in presenting the story of Jesus. This should not necessarily bother us as ancient writers and readers had different expectations of written accounts than we do. An ancient audience would expect an account of a great teacher, or hero, to present an account of great deeds and an idealised portrayal of the person. An ancient reader would not expect evaluative judgements about the person who was being written about and his teachings. The ancients assumed that people had fixed character; good and bad people had a consistent nature during their life and when they died – being very simplistic good people died nobly and bad people died poorly. Suetonius descriptions of the deaths of Augustus, Nero and Vespasian are examples of how an ancient biographer had an opinion about the character of his subjects, good or bad, and wrote a biography that was consistent to this fixed value judgement.

The fact that the gospels are not disinterested accounts of fact but theological constructs of the writer causes the historian difficulty,

‘Modern investigative history would tag details in the Gospels that seem to be fitted to passages from the prophets or Psalms as fabrications or at least uncertain. Since we lack records or first-hand testimonies … historians must piece together bits of information from similar situations and look for the narrative and theological interests of each Evangelist.’ (Perkins, 2007, p. 6-7)

The evangelists used their knowledge of scripture to suppliment traditions about Jesus’ life and death. This was not abnormal as other ancient biographers ‘filled out’ the life and death of their subjects, Perkins (2007, p. 8). An example to illustrate this is death of Nero given by Suetonius,

‘Suetonius has decked out the dry facts of Nero’s end with a drama of panic, flight and ignoble death.’ (Perkins, 2007, p. 6-7)

So are the gospels biographical? Perkins (2007, p. 11) suggests that the gospels are best seen as being written by a Christian writer for the benefit of a Christian audience. As such they employ Jesus’ teaching and deeds using a narrative of the the writer’s choosing to explain the Christian faith in the context of the readerships problems and experiences.

References

Perkins, P. (2007) Introduction to the synoptic gospels, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: New Testament scholarship · Perkin
Tagged:

Who is Jesus?

11/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

The belief in Jesus’ resurrection affects who we think Jesus is. The Resurrection by God of Jesus vindicated Jesus’ mission, and the Ascension exalted Jesus to the heavenly throne and suggested Jesus had and has a special role in God’s rule over the world. Perkins (1988, p. 100) says that,

‘vindication and judgement were closely linked to resurrection symbols in Judaism.’

The popular expectation of resurrection during Jesus’ time was that people would be resurrected at the end of time,

‘Jesus told her, “Your brother will rise again.” “Yes,” Martha said, “he will rise when everyone else rises, at the last day.”’ (Jn 11:24-25)

Jesus’ resurrection before this time was completely unexpected by his followers and demonstrated that God had vindicated Jesus.

The New Testament does not have a fully formed theology of how Jesus, The Holy Spirit and God the Father were related. Theologians at a later date derived the Doctrine of the Trinity from the biblical material. The New Testament writers gave Jesus the following titles: ‘Messiah’, Son of God’,  ’Son of Man’ and ‘Lord’. Using these expressions the writer viewed Jesus as exalted to the right hand of God.

Messiah

This word is derived from a Hebrew word meaning ‘Anointed One’. Anointing a person or thing indicated that the person or item was chosen by God or dedicated to God for a function. Examples in the Old Testament are the Kings (e.g. Saul and David). A messiah was a special person.

Jesus was wary of the title ‘messiah’ as it had by his time become associated with a saviour who would restore Israel. Jesus saw his mission as that of the ‘Suffering Servant’ so he needed to teach his disciples of that the messiah had to suffer – this was counter to the expectations of 1st Century Judaism:

‘Then Jesus began to tell them that the Son of Man must suffer many terrible things and be rejected by the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law. He would be killed, but three days later he would rise from the dead.’ (Mk 8:31)

Jesus’ preferred term he used to describe himself was the ‘Son of Man’ as it avoided the popular expectations of what a ‘messiah’ would do.

Jesus’ enemies hoped by killing him that they could disprove Jesus’ ‘anointing’ as he would clearly have failed to bring in the last days which were associated with the appearance of the messiah. Without the resurrection this strategy would have succeeded. Jesus’ resurrection vindicated Him, in the eyes of his followers, and they had confidence that Jesus would play a role in salvation as he would be the Judge during the last days.

Son of Man

The images of the ‘Son of Man’ in the New Testament allude to heavenly judgement,

‘If anyone is ashamed of me and my message in these adulterous and sinful days, the Son of Man will be ashamed of that person when he returns in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.’ (Mk 8:38)

‘Jesus replied, “I assure you that when the world is made new and the Son of Man sits upon his glorious throne, you who have been my followers will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.’ (Mt 19:28)

‘The Son of Man’ motif can also be found in the book of Daniel and 1 Enoch,

‘And there I saw the One to Whom belongs the time before time, and His head was white like wool. With Him was another being, whose countenance had the appearance of a man, and his face was full of graciousness, like one of the holy angels. I asked the angel who went with me [...] concerning that son of and who he was, and whence he was, and why he went with the One to Whom belongs the time before time.
He answered and said to me: ‘This is the son of man who has righteousness, with whom dwells righteousness, and who reveals all the treasures of that which is hidden, because the Lord of the spirits has chosen him, and whose lot has the pre-eminence before the Lord of the spirits in uprightness for ever. This son of man whom you have seen shall raise up the kings and the mighty from their seats and the strong from their thrones, and shall loosen the reins of the strong and break the teeth of the sinners.’

And at that hour that Son of Man was named in the presence of the Lord of the spirits, and his name before the the One to Whom belongs the time before time. Yes, before the sun and the signs were created, before the stars of the heaven were made, his name was named before the Lord of the spirits. He shall be a staff to the righteous whereon to stay themselves and not fall, and he shall be the light of the gentiles and the hope of those who are troubled of heart. All who dwell on earth shall fall down and worship before him, and will praise and bless and celebrate with song the Lord of the spirits. For this reason has he been chosen and hidden before Him, before the creation of the world and for ever more. The wisdom of the Lord of the spirits has revealed him to the holy and righteous; for he has preserved the lot of the righteous, because they have hated and despised this world of unrighteousness, and have hated all its works and ways in the name of the Lord of the spirits: for in his name they are saved, and according to his good pleasure has it been in regard to their life.
In these days downcast in countenance shall the kings of the earth have become, and the strong who possess the land because of the works of their hands, for on the day of their anguish and affliction they shall not be able to save themselves. And I will give them over into the hands of My elect: as straw in the fire so shall they burn before the face of the holy, as lead in the water shall they sink before the face of the righteous, and no trace of them shall any more be found.
And on the day of their affliction there shall be rest on the earth, and before them they shall fall and not rise again. There shall be no one to take them with his hands and raise them, for they have denied the Lord of the spirits and His Messiah. The name of the Lord of the spirits be blessed.’
(1 Enoch 46.1-41 Enoch 48.2-10)

Son of God

The expression ‘Son of God’ is not an affirmation of Jesus’ divinity. The expression was applied to angels, the king or even a righteous individual.

Lord

In the Old Testament ‘The Lord’ is used to refer to God. In both Jewish and Gentile environments the word ‘Lord’ would indicate divine status.

References

Perkins, P. 1988. Reading the New Testament. London: Geoffrey Chapman.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Christology · Theology
Tagged: , , ,

Man’s Role in His Salvation: Grace and Free-will

09/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

God’s Grace

‘Grace is at the heart of Alexandrian theology. For God “first loved us” Jn 4:19; for He knew us (Rom. 8: 29), chose us, predestined us, called us, justified us and glorified us. He wills, decides and acts for our salvation, even while we were sinners and against Him (Rom. 5:10). Christ’s blood is the only method through which salvation can be realized.’ (Malaty)

Predestination and Man’s free-will

‘Even before he made the world, God loved us and chose us in Christ to be holy and without fault in his eyes’ (Eph. 1:4).

God desires the salvation of all men, he does not as the Calvinist would say, predestine some for damnation or pass over some sinners.

‘As surely as I live, says the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of wicked people. I only want them to turn from their wicked ways so they can live. Turn! Turn from your wickedness, O people of Israel! Why should you die?’ (Ezek. 33:11)

God asks men to choose the way they want to live,

‘Now listen! Today I am giving you a choice between life and death, between prosperity and disaster. …Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live!’ (Deut. 30:15, 19)

God wants to relinquish His statement against sinners if they repent and return from their evil ways by their own will (Ezek. 33:14-16; Jonah 3:10; Mal. 3:7).

‘And suppose I tell some wicked people that they will surely die, but then they turn from their sins and do what is just and right. For instance, they might give back a debtor’s security, return what they have stolen, and obey my life-giving laws, no longer doing what is evil. If they do this, then they will surely live and not die. None of their past sins will be brought up again, for they have done what is just and right, and they will surely live.’ (Ezek. 33:14-16)

Malaty gives the following explanation of what St. Paul meant by his words: “He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world”?

  • We have become believers not due to our own merits.
  • As the divine plan of our salvation was eternal, He was pleased with us  before we were made, through His beloved Son. ‘He accepted us for we were hidden in His Son, our Mediator, clothed [sic] in His righteousness.’ (Malaty)
  • We were chosen, for He knew us before we were created that we would believe in Him.

‘For God knew his people in advance, and he chose them to become like his Son, so that his Son would be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters… And having chosen them, he called them to come to him. And having called them, he gave them right standing with himself. And having given them right standing, he gave them his glory’ (Rom 8:29-30)

Origen comments on this Pauline passage, saying:

‘God observed beforehand the sequence of future events, and noticed the inclination of some men … and their stirring towards piety which followed on this inclination; He sees how they devote themselves to living a virtuous life, and He foreknew them, knowing the present, and foreknowing the future … His foreknowledge is not the cause of what happens as a result of the responsible actions of each individual. Thus, the freedom bestowed by the Creator enables man to choose what to realize, of various possibilities which arise’. (Origen cited by Malaty)

The true Christian accepts divine grace to help and guide his life. Through freedom he receives His Saviour Jesus Christ and by his own volition he denies his own will, in order to enjoy God’s will acting in Him. Through free-will the believer can also refuse God’s grace at any time and resist God’s will. Therefore St. Paul warns us,  Do not stifle the Holy Spirit. (1 Thes. 5:19) and, And do not bring sorrow to God’s Holy Spirit by the way you live. Remember, he has identified you as his own, guaranteeing that you will be saved on the day of redemption.(Eph. 4:30).

We have to act positively for our salvation through God’s grace like St Paul, ‘I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, and I have remained faithful.’ (2 Tim. 4:7)

Origen said,

‘”Unless the Lord builds the house, they labour in vain who build it, Unless the Lord guards the city, the watchman stays awake in vain” Ps. 126 ( 127 ). This is not meant to deter us from building, or to counsel us not to be vigilant in guarding the city which is in our soul … We should do right in calling a building a work of God, rather than of the builder, and the preservation of a city from hostile attack we should rightly call an achievement of God rather than of the guard. But in so speaking we assume man’s share in the achievement, while in thankfulness we ascribe it to God who brings it to success. Similarly man’s will is not sufficient to attain the end (of salvation) (Rom. 9: 16), nor is the running of the metaphorical athletes competent to attain “the prize of the upward summons of God in Christ Jesus” Phil. 3:14. This is only accomplished with God’s assistance. Thus it is quite true, “it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy” Rom. 9:16. Our perfection does not come about by our remaining inactive, yet it is not accomplished by our own activity; God plays the great part in effecting it.’ (Origen cited by Malaty)

Trust and Hope

Without hope the believer loses his salvation. H.H. Pope Shenouda III states that:

‘If anyone asks you: Do you trust?, What would you reply? Yes, I trust in Christ’s blood beyond limits but I don’t trust in myself, in my own free-will which may be inclined into evil … Those who lose salvation  lose it because of the deviation of their free-will to evil, and not because God is unable to save them … We trust in the blood of Christ and in the sufficiency of His atonement and redemption, but concerning ourselves we confess that we are sinners and conceive how possible it is that we may perish because of our sins … Be humble, my brother, and hear the words of the Apostle Paul … “Therefore, let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” 1 Cor. 10:12. You are not more strong than those who fell before, you might not have even attained their level before their fall. Read what the Apostle Paul says and consider carefully the qualities which he mentions, “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good Word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance” (Heb. 6:4-6).’ (H.H. Pope Shenouda III cited by Malaty)

Reference

Malaty, T. Y., Man and redemption, cited athttp://www.coepa.org/downDetails.php?pageNum_titleDetails=1&nav=downloads&cat_id=1&subcat_id=23&thrdcat_id=45&totalRows_titleDetails=20[Accessed 5 July 2009]

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Malaty · Patristics · Soteriology
Tagged: , , , ,

Redemption

08/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

Mankind is in need redeemer who can reconcile us with God, granting him the new life that conquers death. The Saviour has to be a God-man, who can undertake the following:
Declare the Creator’s goodness
‘‘The Word … has appeared as our teacher, He by whom the Universe was created The Word who in the beginning gave us life when He fashioned us as Creator, has taught us the good life as our teacher, that He may afterwards, as God, provide us with eternal life. Not that He now has for the first time pitied us for our wandering; He pitied us from old, from the beginning. But now, when we were perishing, He has appeared and has saved us’. (St. Clement of Alexandria cited by Malaty)
Joined us to Himself
Redemption in its essence is unity with God, the Source of life. Before His betrayal He said to the Father: “I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one” John 17: 23.
Stand in for us in God’s sentence of death
Malatay says ‘The Messiah, the incarnate Son of God gave His blood for us, and His flesh for our flesh and His soul for our souls. He suffered and died as a Sacrifice on our behalf and thus He accomplished the divine statement of death as a representative of all mankind.’
Die in our place
‘The Lord then wished to release him (man) from his bonds, and clothing Himself with flesh – O divine mystery. – vanquished the serpent, and enslaved the tyrant; and, most marvellous of all, man that had been deceived by pleasure, and bound fast to corruption, had his hands unloosed, and was set free… He has changed sunset into sunrise, and through the cross turned death into life; and having wrenched man from destruction, He has raised him to heaven, transplanting mortality into immortality and translating earth to heaven.’ (St. Clement of Alexandria cited by Malaty)
Conquer Satan
• Raise us upto heaven
• Renew our nature
• Offer a sacrifice for all mankind in all places and times
• Grant us true knowledge
Malatay states that St. Clement of Alexandria was the first Christian writer to call the spiritual believer “Gnostic”, for he believed that “gnosis” (knowledge) is a grace that comes from the Father through the Son. One of the principal actions of the Lord is to reveal the divine mysteries to His believers.

Reference

Malaty, T. Y., Man and redemption, cited athttp://www.coepa.org/downDetails.php?pageNum_titleDetails=1&nav=downloads&cat_id=1&subcat_id=23&thrdcat_id=45&totalRows_titleDetails=20[Accessed 5 July 2009]

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Malaty · Theologians
Tagged: ,

Life after Death

07/07/2009 · Leave a Comment

This is a transcript of a talk given by Fr. Thomas Hopko in Brisbane Australia during October, 1999. original article here

Introduction

There is no clear dogmatic teaching of our Orthodox Church on death and what happens when we die. There is a lot of interest about death as reflected by the amount of books written about after death experiences, salvation and damnation. Furthermore, there are questions about the soul after death and the intermediate state (i.e. the period between when we die and the world’s end). Christ is coming in glory and because the millennium is coming up, which by the way is the year 2001 with 2000 being the last year of the second millennium, has stirred interest in the ‘end time’, the ‘coming of Christ’, and ‘the judgement of God on the world’ are the interpretations of the time.

There is a lot is discussion going on right now on death, how we understand dying and what we are to say about those who are biologically dead already. There are related questions like praying for people who have departed this life. We Orthodox people just love to have memorial services. We have the Divine Liturgy and nobody is there, but when we have a Memorial Service the church is packed.

I will now make some very simple points, which I think are clearly the teaching of our Orthodox Church, although this may be debateable. I am not giving just my opinion; I am giving my opinion about what I believe the Church is teaching us.

Let us take the interpretation of the Holy Scripture, Church Fathers, Saints and Services of the Church together and ask certain questions, such as:

  • What is death?
  • How do we understand death?
  • What do we think happens?
  • How are we to relate to it?
  • What kind of answers would we get from the Holy Scripture?

The Holy Scripture is our basic authority of faith and is the witness of what the Christian faith is, and our tradition is an interpretation and understanding of Scripture. Our tradition is a way of understanding the Scripture and has a sense of which even the Scripture itself is a testimony to the tradition of faith or the kanonaspisteos (the rule of faith) that even antedated the writing of Scripture. Because, certainly there was the Christian faith before the writing of the New Testament Scriptures, which are basically interpretations of the Old Testament Scriptures. By the way, when the New Testament says “the Scriptures” it means what we call the ” Old Testament”, which includes the Law, Psalms, and the Prophets.

What do Orthodox Christians teach about death and what happens when we die?

It is beyond any doubt that we Christians are convinced that we are created for life; it is not God’s will that we die. God doesn’t want death; He wants life. In the Scripture, death is the enemy. The Apostle Paul even calls death, “the last enemy”. Death is not natural, not a natural part of our life and not willed by God. The Wisdom of Solomon, which for us is part of the Bible, says very clearly, “God did not create death”. Death comes into the world as a rebellion against God. Death comes into the world because people do not choose life, but choose death, darkness, and themselves over God.

St. Athanasios said, “if you choose yourself you are choosing nothing, because that what you are without God”, since we are created out of nothing. For God gives our whole life to us, Who is the living God and the only One Who lives.

It is our teaching that death results from human rebellion against God from the beginning and with the help of the demons (who are lovers of death, darkness and evil). The Bible teaches actually teaches kind of a ‘package plan’, you have God, truth, life and glory, or you have the demons, darkness, death, satan, sin, corruption, ugliness and rot. This is the basic reality, and there is no middle path.

In the eight chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, the Apostle Paul says, “working in our members is always a heterosnomos (another law)”. Human beings think that they are economists, in other words, they are ‘a law unto themselves’, but according to the Scriptures we are not. Either there is the law (nomos) of Christ, which the Apostle Paul calls the law of the Holy Spirit and Life in his Epistle to the Romans, or there is the law of sin and death. There is either one law or the other that works, if it isn’t the one it is the other. Here we interpret the Genesis story as the choice of death. Furthermore, it is even not strictly Orthodox to think of sin as a corrupted choice or making the wrong choice. I believe that our teaching is that the problem is not whether it is right or wrong but choice itself (as taught by St. Maximos the Confessor), because if you are a creature you have no choice.

If there is God and God is God and God is the living God and God is Who He is, our only choice is to give up our choice and listen to and obey Him. This is very important to understand, because the modern people think that the more choices they have and the more they deliberate the more the freer they are, however this is not Biblical. What we say is that if there is God, at any given moment the only choice we have is to give up choice and obey Him, listen to Him, trust Him, to love Him and to believe Him. The primordial sin is exactly saying “no, I will not obey, trust or love God. I will do it my way”. You know what takes place when you do it your way; you perish and die. That is where death comes from. Where there is obedience, love and trust in God, there can not be death. If one was to obey God totally, live in communion with God, trust and love God in everything, that person will not be able to die.

It is interesting in the Genesis story, God did not say to Adam and Eve, “eat of the tree and I will kill you”. He said, “you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil”, meaning choice rather than obedience, “for when you eat of it you will surely die”, for it is sin that kills you. God doesn’t kill anybody, in that sense; we kill ourselves. So the minute we take our life in our own hands to do what we want to do, and do not obey God, basically we commit suicide. Furthermore, we put that death over to our children who are born in the same condition of death when born into the world. That is what the ‘ancestral sin’ is all about. A second point is that we would say that the human task is to overcome and destroy death, and to make death to die so that life can then live.

The whole Old Testament, which includes the Law, Psalms and Prophets, is really about teaching people the will of God to reconstruct a rebellious humanity in order that ultimately death can be destroyed. For example, in the Law of Moses you have two very interesting things, one is God says, through Moses, ‘I present to you only two ways: the blessing and the curse’ (i.e. life or death). Then it says, ‘choose life and don’t choose death’. The Law, Psalms and Prophets say Obey God, give up your choice, obey God and you will live. For example, Psalm 118 (119) that is read in our funeral service and on the night of Holy Saturday before Pascha says, “Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord! Blessed are those who keep His testimonies, who seek Him with the whole heart!” Then the Psalm continues “If I keep I Your law, I find life in it and I can not die”. That is way it is read over the body of the dead Jesus, because He is the only One who kept the Law of God completely, and therefore could not die.

What we believe is that Jesus Christ our Saviour came into the world in order to die. He is the only One who came in order to die so that He can transform death itself into a victory through His death. He is the only One, the only Person, and the only Human who has ever been born in order to die. He is also the only Human who is the Son of God, Who is divine as the same divinity as the Father, Who is born of a virgin, Who is begotten of the Father, Who comes exactly into the world for one purpose; to destroy the work of the devil and death, and to give us life.

Before the coming of Christ, according to the Bible, everyone is caught by death, no matter how good or bad they were. We can even say to this day that is the truth. Biologically, we are all dead; we are a room of dead people. It is a good idea once in a while to remember that. In fact, many of our monastics would even put a coffin and cross in their room to remember that. There is an American church story about some southern Protestants who heard about a Roman Catholic monk who used to write “remember death” and that he had a coffin prepared for his death. One of them says to the other, “You know that they used to do that, and sometimes they’d even sleep in that coffin?” Then the other character said, “Yep, they weren’t as advance as we is”. However, the question is who is really advanced?

The problem, however, is that in our time death has been so naturalised nobody will even think of it as an enemy. In much literature it is considered the last stage of life, normal, or you go into some sort of light somewhere, and if you are tired of this life or this world you call some doctor to end your life. However for Biblical Christians, that is absolutely not the teaching.

Let us compare the death of Socrates to the death of Jesus. Socrates the philosophic man, corrupting the youth of Athens because of his teaching of philosophia, says that the real philosopher is the one who can face death. When they finally catch him to put him to death and his friends want to rescue him, he says no. When they bring him the hemlock he drinks it and dies. By the way, the euthanasia society in the state of Massachusetts in the United States is called the Hemlock Society.

Then look at how Jesus dies. He is in the garden and begs His Father to let ‘this cup pass’ and sweating blood. For Him it is an outrage to die or that any person would die; it is the total victory of the devil. We were created to sing halleluiah to God, not to be corrupted and rot in the tomb. In the Old Testament, there was a big debate about death. Some thought that death is natural and you just died and went to your fathers. They also believed that God continues to live in the people and the dry bones of Israel (or the people of Israel) are resurrected, but the individual person is lost. These people, at the time of Jesus, were called the Sadducees. The Sadducees, if you read the Bible, did not believer in the spirit, soul or the resurrection of the dead. However, the Pharisees believed in them all. They interpreted from the Scripture that there will be a resurrection from the dead and the dead will rise. They also believed that when the God Messianic age will come, when God’s glory will fill creation, when God’s kingdom will finally be established through the Messiah the main thing that will happen is that the graves will be open (beside the blind seeing, the lame walking, the deaf hearing and the dumb talking…). Then all the dead will rise and God will judge every single person that has lived. That was the teaching of the pharisaic party and the Apostle Paul. If you read the Book of Acts, every time St. Paul got into trouble for preaching the Resurrection of Jesus, he would create a fight between the Jews. He would say that he was on trial because of the Resurrection, and the Sadducees would start fighting with he Pharisees and he would just stand aside and look on. Jesus, from this perspective, was a Pharisee because He believed in the Resurrection. In fact He said He was the Resurrection and the Life.

In the Old Testament, however, whatever the position was about resurrection everyone was dead. In the Bible, the place of the dead or the condition of being dead was called Sheol in the Hebrew or Hades in the Greek. One problem is that sometimes Sheol or Hades is translated into English as hell, and people speak of God descending into hell, but it should never be called hell, because there is no hell until the end of time.

In the Bible, specifically in the Wisdom of Solomon, it says that if you were a righteous, just person and died, you were still somehow in the hands of God who cares for you. People think that it is a tragedy, but it is not because God is still there. This was kind of a blissful state of death and was called the bosom of Abraham. So the righteous dead were in the bosom of Abraham, and those who believed in the Resurrection believed that they were blissfully dead until the Messianic King would come to raise the dead and then they would enter into glory. David, Solomon, the Prophets and even John the Baptist was in this state of bliss in the bosom of Abraham. In our Orthodox tradition, John the Baptist is the forerunner of Jesus even into Sheol. As expressed in his troparian, he dies before Jesus to announce that the Son of God is coming into the realm of the dead to smash it open, to raise up everyone from the dead, to usher in the kingdom of God, and to grant us the great mercy of everlasting life with God.

There is also the teaching that this realm of the dead, or Sheol, had what is called the ‘pit’ where the evil people were. When the Messianic King comes, those in the pit were also raised for just condemnation and judgement. It should be pointed out that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in the Gospel is exactly about this. It has nothing to do with heaven and hell. In the parable is about the rich man in the pit talking to Abraham and not to God. The whole point of the parable is if you do not listen to Moses and the law of the Prophets and really love, choose and obey God you will not be saved even if a poor man rises from the dead. In other words, if you do not love God and do not find life before you die then you will not find it after death, even if Jesus the Son of God comes in order to be crucified and die to descent into Sheol and raise the dead. For us, that is the very center of the Gospel.

The Gospel is that we now have the new, final and last Adam named Jesus. St. Paul says that the first Adam was a ‘tipos’ of the one Who was to come. Jesus is the real Adam, because He is the One who really obeys God His own Father. He obeys God from all eternity as the Son of God begotten of the Father and became human born of the Virgin Mary to be the Man who literally could not die and to be the Man who was literally, totally and completely dedicated to God, His Father. His word was the word of the Father, His will was the will of the Father, His work was the work of the Father, everything that He did was the Father, and when you saw Him you saw the Father.

Everything that is attributed to God in the Old Testament is now attributed to Jesus, this Man who is a real man but not mere man. He is the Man that the Son of God, Who is the source and author of life, comes down on earth and takes on Himself the sin, the curse, and everything of our human falling’s including the last enemy (death itself), in order to destroy death by death. It is our teaching that that is the only way death can be destroyed, because God desires all people to live, all sin to be forgiven, and that His is loved with all our soul, mind and love. Furthermore, if we were to keep His word and love Him, we would live forever, but nobody does this. We are all non-righteous and we can not save ourselves. The Psalm asks, ‘who can bring themselves up from Sheol… who can raise themselves up from the dead?’ Even the Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus, could not keep herself from dying, because everyone is under the curse of death and in the hands of the power of the evil one.

We need to be liberated and saved, but who can save us? God can not just say ‘be saved’, because if He could He would, but He can’t. He has got to destroy death itself, and the only way that death could be destroyed is by life. The only way that darkness can be destroyed is by light. The only way that evil can be destroyed is by good, and the only way that hatred can be destroyed is by love. So you have to have the One who is Love, Truth, Light, Goodness, Beauty, and Perfection who literally has to actualise this in this life. However, if you actualise this in life the way it is you get crucified. If you live completely and totally according to God in this world you can be sure of one thing you will get crucified. Jesus came in order to be crucified.

Jesus is the only One to can in order to die, because He came in order to love, obey and trust God His Father no matter what. And how do you show that you love God? By loving your neighbour and your worst enemy, and by taking their sin and evil upon yourself and even by dying their death for them so that you can liberate them from death, because they have no power over it. That is exactly what Jesus does and that is what our faith is. So Jesus comes into the world in order to die, and He destroys death by death. In our Orthodox faith, this is the only way this can happen. That is why the center of our Church is “Xristos anesti ek nekron,” (Christ has risen from among the dead,) “phanato phanaton patisas…”(by death trampling upon Death…). There isn’t any other way; even for God there is no other way. He became human and had become a curse, sin and die and for us, because that is the act of ultimate obedience, trust and love. This is a perfect act of love, which destroys death from the inside and raises up all the dead whether they want it or not. In fact everyone with be raised from the dead, irrespective of his or her wishes, during the Universal Resurrection of the dead, as taught by the Orthodox Church. This is way our Paschal icon shows Jesus even pulling Adam and Eve, with all the righteous and unrighteous from the dead.

If you have even been to an Orthodox funeral, you hear the fifth chapter of St. John’s gospel. It says, “… the hour is coming in which all who are in the grave will hear His voice and come forth – those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgement is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me”. This part of the gospel is extremely important, which says all and everyone will be raised. Not just the good people, but everyone. This Universal Resurrection is our teaching, because death is destroyed.

“What about the dead now that Jesus is raised from the dead?”

Jesus is raised and glorified… He says, ‘he who can believe in Me can not die”. St. Paul says, ‘I gladly die and be with Chris, but if I have to hang around here at least let it be fruitful work’. However, Christ is risen and glorified and is at the right hand of the Father. That is the most repeated sentence of the Old and New Testament, and is found in Psalm 109 (110). The Psalm says, “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool”". The last enemy to be put under is death. When death is destroyed everything is subject to Christ, He subjects everything to God the Father and God will be all and in all. This then will be the Messianic age, when the dead will be raised and God with glory will fill all creation. There will then be life for all those who repent and want to be righteous with God and there will be torment for those who do not repent and do not want the righteousness of God.

What about those who are dead, where are they and what are they doing?

We do not know what the dead is doing, and I did not think anybody knows exactly and clearly. However, there are some things that can be said, and I think that what we have to say is for us who believe death is already destroyed in Christ. The last enemy has already been destroyed. Christ is risen and life lives, as the last line of St. John Chrysostom’s homily for the Paschal night says. “Christ is risen and the demons shutter, Christ is risen and no one is in the grave. Christ is risen and life reins” (we say in American English). This original word for ‘rein’ doesn’t simply mean ‘rein’ it means abides and lives. I think, a good translation would be “… Christ is risen and life lives”. Life can not be destroyed and that is our faith. We are alive in Christ and our Baptism is a death into Christ.

I said earlier that we are all biologically dead people; like it or not. However, it is also true that those who believe and those who are Baptised and accept their Baptism, and even those who St. Gregory the Theologian says who desire Baptism but may not have heard about it, are already dead in Christ. Therefore, we are not only biologically dead but also hopefully all of us are already spiritually and mystically dead. We have died with Christ and no longer live in this world. We are fellow citizens with the Saints and we eat and drink at the table of the kingdom. We already have passed through the veil. We are already raised and glorified. We are still in this world, bearing the flesh, but the Holy Spirit has been sealed all over us… Those who have been Baptised have died, raised and sealed with the life creating Spirit. They are literally raised from the dead and can not die, and death becomes the transfiguration or the passage of everlasting life in Christ, because Christ is risen. This is important, not because we have an immortal soul; our soul is as dead as our body is, as far as the Bible is concerned. We do not teach immortality of the soul in our Church; we are not Socrates or Plato, but we follow the Bible. Death is the enemy of the body and soul, and Christ raises us up in body and soul. It is because Christ is risen that we have hope over death, not because of any ‘natural’ teaching.

I have a feeling that most Christians generally are pagans when we are alive and Platonists when we die. We function as pagans when life is going well, and we function as pagans when things are going badly (because we want the priest to come and make everything go well). However, when ultimately things do not go well and we die then we turn into Platonists and say, “It is better anyway, because the soul goes to heaven and we are finally with God”. Well let’s make up our mind, if the soul is better off going to God anyway why don’t we all just go off and kill ourselves? Then why do we keep calling the priest over to pray so a person can be healed or be healthy, and when they die we say “well it is God’s will anyway”? Well it is God’s will, but the point I am trying to make is that this whole approach is absolutely wrong according to the Scriptures and the Saints.

In this life we don’t just live just for God to make us healthy, wealthy and happy, and when we die we say, “well it is better anyway”. We do not live this life for clothes, health and wealth. We live this life taking on the Cross of Christ loving God with the love which Jesus Christ and God has loved us (which is the New Commandment) so that we can trample down death ourselves by faith and grace through Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit given to us. So we have to live now as dead people and if we do not live as dead people we are not Christians. If we do not live as those who are already dead to this world, we are not Christians.

There is a wonderful story from the desert fathers. One man asks an old man, “What is this Christian perfection we are seeking for?” The old man replied, “Come, I will show you” and took him to a fresh grave in a cemetery and said to the dead man, “Brother, you are the worst pig that ever lived. No one is as rotten as you”. Then the old man asked the young one, “What did he do?” The young man said, “Nothing, he is dead”. The old man looked again at the same grave and said, “You are the greatest person who ever was. No one is like you. You are the most wonderful, perfect person”. He then looked at the young man and asked, “What did he do”. The young man again replied, “Nothing, he is dead”. The old man then said, “Perfect”. He lives only before the face of God. He is not living for what people say whether they flatter, curse or bless him; he lives before the face of God. Therefore, he is free and he already reins. And if he is with the love which God and Christ loves us, it is impossible to be before the face of God without being a lover of God.

So we are all already dead. It is our teaching that we Christians who die, we die in the hope that we will enter into the glory that Jesus already has at the right hand of the Father and that we will be alive in Him until the end of the ages. However, we also believe that because Christ, the Son of God, has taken on human life and died, everyone who dies is also raised up to be at the right hand of the Father in Christ. The problem is not everyone likes, wants or believes that. Even when people are convinced that it is true, they don’t want it. So we can say in Jesus everyone is raised from the dead, everyone’s sins are forgiven, and everyone is saved whether they want it or not, like it or not, or know it. If you want it, like it and know it is paradise and joy in life itself. If you don’t, it is hell. Hell and paradise begins when we die.

Paradoxically we say that when a person dies, they already enter into the presence of God by being spiritually raised in Christ. If they love Him, they already experience the end of the ages, the joy of heaven and in the presence of God. If they resist and do not want it, that very same experience is torment. They are tormented by the evils that they cling to, tormented by the devils they serve in place of the living God, and they are tormented by all of the evil spirits instead of the Holy Spirit that are in their life. Furthermore, they are even tormented by the presence of Christ who loves, forgives and invites them into Paradise. Yet they do not want to come still thinking that they belong there. That is how they are not there with the just and righteous. That seems to be the picture that we have from the Holy Scripture.

In this sense it is very important that when we die now, we on early already image that and pray as it will be at the end of the ages. So, we believe that those who are revealed to us as being really holy, really God and Christ loving, and really full of grace are already glorified with Christ and that is why we can pray to them. That is why we can say, pray, be and intercede with us, because Christ Himself is alive making intercessions with God the Father on behave of us, before the end of the ages. So the dead in Christ are also in Him interceding on our behave before the end of the ages. We see it all in terms of the end and not some immortal soul that is out there floating around somewhere and we wonder where.

No, we see it all in terms of the final victory of Christ that is already anticipated by us on earth in the Church by our Baptism and Eucharist. Furthermore, when we die we leave the temporal and spatial conditions of the planet earth and enter the very presence of God anticipating already the age to come. That is why in our Eucharist, when we offer to God that which is His, we say “That which is Yours we offer to You”. Then the priest continues remember all that has happened for us, the Cross, the tomb, the Resurrection on the third day, the ascension into heaven, the sitting at the right hand, and the Second and glorious Coming are remembered in the present tense. And we relate to the Theotokos (the Virgin Mary) and all the Saints as at the end of the ages when they are at the glory and ask them to intercede for us as we are offering the Eucharist of Christ’s death for them. Since we say, “and first of all we offer this for the most holy, the most glorious lady Theotokos and Ever-virgin Mary”, because the death of Christ is even for her salvation.

Now having said this, the questions arise: if when we die and enter into this reality, is it too late to repent? Is it all over? Are those who are fixed in their penitent, repentant and unrighteousness totally lost? Do you have to be totally perfect to enter paradise? How does all that work? Here is an issue that has become incredibly debated today. That is he issue of what happens to a person when they die. Sometimes it is put in terms of he soul. But that can be a little misleading, because soul in the Bible means ‘their life’ or ‘person’. It means who they are. It shouldn’t be thought of as a discarnate spirit and we are not a combination of a ghost and a corpse, but we are whole people.

When we die, is there a post-mortem repentance? Is there purification after we die? Can we change our mind after our earthly life is over? How do we relate to all of that? Here I think the simplest answer would be that death is the finally test. That is why the quintessential Christian is the marker; you prove your whole life by how you die. Christian life has only one purpose, to trample down death by death through the grace of God. So the transfiguration of death is where everything is proved, and how we die proves everything. Anything that we do up until that moment is prepared for that moment. That is why if we don’t die daily we will not be able to transfigure death when the moment comes when we have to go through our passion, crucifixion and death by whatever way that is going to happen. As it is clearly the Orthodox teaching that death is the moment of truth, death therefore also is the final judgement on our life and it is the final chance and opportunity.

Here I think the teaching simplicity put is this, we do not believe in post-mortem conversions or eons of life where you can keep on repenting like Buddhists believe. However, I believe that from the Holy Scripture, the lives of the Saints and the funeral service tell us that in the process of dying and entering into the presence of the risen Christ we have to be purified from everything that is contrary to life, God and truth in that particular activity. It is in the very presence of the fire of God, or the consuming fire of God as put by the Scripture, that will burn out of us in that process of dying, everything that can not enter into life or God’s kingdom.

The teaching of the Scripture is that death is a cathartic process even for the most righteous person. Perhaps the only person for whom death was a shear transition was the holy Theotokos, who was so full of God, life, faith and grace that her death is a pure entrance into paradise. All the rest of us are not the Theotokos and we are not pure. There is garbage, sin and rebellion in us even where our desire is for God and our prayer is for God and we want to repent still there is that in us that can not enter into the presence of God or the very heart of the Father (which is everlasting life). This impediment must be burnt away. I believe that our teaching is that this process of dying is this cathartic process where at the end of which you are either with God for ever or away from God forever tormenting yourself with the demons and being tormented by the love of God that is still upon you even though you are an unrepentant sinner. In fact many of the Saints say that the greatest torture of hell are not only the tortures of the evil but the torture of the mercy and love of God that is still upon you (because God loves you not matter what). St. Isaac the Syrian said that there is no greater torment than to be scourged with the scourge of love.

When you die and enter the presence of love and you resist it that becomes a torture to you. St. Mark of Ephesus, a great Church father, refused to sign the council of Florence because of the papacy, the filioque, and because of the Latin teaching on material hellfire. He said that our Church tradition has no teaching on material-hellfire. We have no such teaching; God is not a punisher. Jesus on the Cross was not punished for our sins. Jesus on the Cross loved and trusted God so He can destroy death by death. When I speak with that nuance I say that there is no such thing as punishment. The punishment comes from our own evil and the love of God upon us when we reject it. God is not torturing or punishing us. In our tradition, this teaching about the need to be purified to enter into the kingdom got developed into a kind of allegory called the ‘tollbooths’. You can read in some of he Christian literature that you have to go through around 20 or 22 tests in order to make it into the kingdom of God. Then I think some weird teachings developed which are not Orthodox and not according to the Scripture, but like every crazy teaching have a kernel of truth. The crazy teachings are that when you die you have to be punished for the things that you do and go through each of these tool-booths in order to get punished by the demons for that particular sin. So you go through the tollbooth of lust to get punished for your lust, you go through the tollbooth of greed to be punished for your greed, you go through the tollbooth of anger to be punished for anger, and so on until you are punished enough and make it.

In the western church, even before the Reformation, there was a teaching that if you pray for these people you can get some of the punishment off. It was called temporal punishment due to your sin and those were called were called indulgences and then you could actually go to church to light a candle, say a prayer or give some money to get the time off from the punishment. This was called the “purgatorium” (or the “purgatory”) connected with the doctrine of punishment and inflicted pain that had to be done away with. This is not our Orthodox teaching.

The Orthodox teaching is that we do have to be tested by every possible demon and be victorious over that demon by the grace of God, the intercessions of the Saints, and anything that we can do to open ourselves in faith to God so that we can be delivered. So the truth of the tollbooth myth or allegory is not that the soul will go through some “astral space” getting tempted by demons and getting punished for sin. The right interpretation is that, as taught by many holy fathers such as Sts John Klimacus and Athanasias, death is the moment of truth and every demon is going to try to get you to apostatise, hate God and try to make you cling to corporeal things. They would like to stop you from letting go of everything so that you can only love God and let God save you. So the tests will see if we hang on to our pride, arrogance and so on. These tests you have to pass through are symbolically represented by the tollbooths; you have to be ‘tried’. Then we that the prayer of the Church and the prayer of the Saints do help us to resist the demons and to be faithful and to be faithful and trust God,but this is true at any moment of our life. We pray for one another now, we are prayer for by the Saints now so that we will not succumb to lust, greed, power etc, so that when we die we are ready to float right through and not have to deal with all that at the very end of our life. However, the teaching is this, deal with it we must because we must do the work that Jesus Christ Himself did. Jesus said, “He who believes in Me will do the work that I do”. We must conquer the devils like He did. We must resist the temptations like He did. We must destroy death the way that He did. That is what He gives us the power to do through the gift of the Holy Spirit, the Sacraments and the life of the Church.

So folks, lets gets started now by being freed from all of this, because at the moment of death it is going to come upon us like a power. But not only at the moment of death, if a person tries to die now before they die all the demons will come to bother them. Evagrus Pontokos said, “If you come to the Church, say your prayers, stand there and say to God ‘Lord have mercy, God save me, God be with me, God purify me’ all the Panagia Theotokos with all the angels with all the Saints will come and pray with you”. Then he said, “So does every demon in hell”. To try to get you not to love God and not to trust God, but hang on to your own self, power, greed, money, and what ever it is that your idol. That is going on all the time, but the teaching is that it intensifies at the very moment of death. Therefore, the prayers at the very moment of death are important and we have special prayers for dying people. We have two canons and a funeral service. In our Church it takes 40 days to die.

Some people say, “Well, when you die it is too late and it is certainly too late for us to pray for a person. Why should I pray for my mother and father who have departed this life? They are dead and into the presence of God already. There is nothing that these prayers can do, because it’s over for them”. Here our Church would say this, “As long as I am alive in this world, it isn’t over for me. And I don’t know what is going on out there, but if I love my mother and father and even my worst enemy, and I know that they are dying and they are going into the presence of the Lord, and have to pass this incredible test and have to really come to love and have faith in God, then I will pray for them will all my heart and soul. I will pray to my last brief that God’s mercy and love would be accepted by them and that they would be saved”. But I also have to say this, our Church teaches that God hears our prayers before we even pray them. In fact our Church teaches that God hears our prayers before He even created the world and us. So if I pray today for my father like I did at the Holy Liturgy this morning, when they say remember the departed, I always say John and Anna as my parents and others, like we all do, God heard that even before He created even the whole world. That prayer becomes part of the whole divine providence for my mother and father and others we pray for. Therefore, it isn’t too late for God, because God hears our prayers whenever we make them for all eternity, and they have an effect upon the whole of creation. One little prayer changes the entire divine providence. So if I pray now for my parents, I am obviously going to pray for them as being already asleep in the Lord, because they are biologically dead. Although I believe that they are alive in God and sometimes I must say have mercy on them. One in a while I even pray to them and say “mum and dad, please help me today. Because I have to give a talk in Brisbane”.

I believe that my parents are with God and I have the right to believe that. And I can risk that in faith and I can even ask for their prayers in the same way I can ask for the prayers of the Bishop. I can also ask a Bishop who has already fallen asleep in the Lord; the Bishop who ordained me. For God, this is for all eternity. So it is not too late, but we pray from our position. If a person is sick, we pray for them as sick and if they have fallen asleep we pray from them as dead… We pray for people from our perspective, but God takes the whole thing into consideration from all eternity and arranges the whole plan on the basis of our prayers, including the prayers we make for people who are dead. Therefore we believe that my prayer for my father not only helps him to enter into the presence of the Lord and to be saved in the age to come, but I believe that it helped him when his father died when he was 12 years old, before I was even born. It helped him get a job in a factory and it helped him to support me being a priest. I believe this, because God is embracing the whole thing. That is why we can have memorial services and pray. It is not that we have one more memorial service and bingo dad gets into heaven. That is not our teaching. God knows what everybody needs and He knows what we are all doing and works together the whole thing, according to love as well as He can. So we are coworkers with God and a big part of that co-work is remembering and holding before God those who are already fallen asleep and have already entered into the life of the age to come. And we relate to them that way in the life of the Church.

→ Leave a CommentCategories: Theologians · Theology
Tagged: