Religious Liberty

"The struggle for religious liberty across the centuries has been long and arduous, but it is not a novel idea or recent development. The nature of religious liberty is grounded in the character of God Himself, the God who is most fully known in the life and work of Jesus Christ. Determined to follow Jesus faithfully in life and death, the early Christians appealed to the manner in which the Incarnation had taken place: “Did God send Christ, as some suppose, as a tyrant brandishing fear and terror? Not so, but in gentleness and meekness..., for compulsion is no attribute of God” (Epistle to Diognetus 7.3-4). Thus the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the example of Christ Himself and in the very dignity of the human person created in the image of God—a dignity, as our founders proclaimed, inherent in every human, and knowable by all in the exercise of right reason. "Christians confess that God alone is Lord of the conscience. Immunity from religious coercion is the cornerstone of an unconstrained conscience. No one should be compelled to embrace any religion against his will, nor should persons of faith be forbidden to worship God according to the dictates of conscience or to express freely and publicly their deeply held religious convictions. What is true for individuals applies to religious communities as well."

- Manhattan Declaration

After talking with a person reputed to be wise, Socrates reflected as he walked away,

“Well, I am certainly wiser than this man. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know.”

- Plato, Apology

Socrates, Paul, and Baptism for the Dead

“Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?” 1 Cor 15:29

Here is a notoriously difficult verse. There are two reasons for its difficulty: 1) “There is no historical or biblical precedent for such baptism,” and (more importantly) 2) Paul mentions a clearly unbiblical practice “without apparent disapproval.”[1] Gordon Fee states that “at least forty different solutions have been suggested.” However, most of these propose interpretations that do not match the straightforward meaning: some are being baptized vicariously for those who have already died. Whatever they were actually doing (which Fee says cannot be known), “what is certain is how the text functions in the argument . . . those actions are a contradiction to the position that there is no resurrection of the dead (v. 12).”[2]

The very same week I began to study this passage, I also started reading Plato’s The Last Days of Socrates. The introduction includes a discussion of the persuasive strategies of Socrates. One strategy is called elenchus. “It is a tool for the exposure of problems with beliefs and inconsistencies in sets of beliefs rather than for demonstrating what is true and what is false.”[3] Based on observations of Paul’s argumentation and rhetoric, it is reasonable to assume that Paul would use such a strategy. For the sake of this argument, Paul ignores the fact that being baptized for the dead is a bad idea and demonstrates that those who claim there is no resurrection have an inconsistent set of beliefs. This possibility is supported by Paul’s unusual use of third person (usually 2nd person in such a context, cf. v. 12) and its clear contrast to the first person in the next verse. He certainly keeps his distance from this practice. He goes on to demonstrate that his own actions only make sense if the dead are raised, and therefore are consistent with his claim about the resurrection (vv. 30-32).

Paul assumes that one’s worldview should be internally consistent. I’m sure than none of us want to contradict ourselves. Although we may have theological consistency, it is possible we have not thought through the implications of our faith for other parts of a worldview – economics, philosophy, politics, sociology, etc. It is not uncommon to find people with a biblical theology and an unbiblical political position. More to Paul’s point in this passage is the consistency of our faith and practice. Are our daily actions and lifestyle habits consistent with our professed faith? If not, it is appropriate to ask whether we believe it at all (James 2:18-26).


[1] Fee, 1 Corinthians, 764.

[2] Fee, 1 Corinthians, 763.

[3] Introduction to The Last Days of Socrates, xv.

What Happens After Death?

There are three great questions that humans have asked through the ages: Where did we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going? It is striking to me that people have assumed, or at least hoped, that there is something more than our brief time on earth—some greater cause, some purpose, some destination. Most worldviews and religions attempt to answer these questions. The Christian worldview believes that God has revealed himself and such answers in the divinely inspired book, the Bible. In our church, we have been studying the book of 1 Corinthians and our next passage is 15:20-28. In vv. 20-23 Paul explains that all those who belong to Christ will be resurrected because Christ was resurrected. He is teaching on the resurrection because the believers in Corinth were disagreeing on how to answer the last big question: What happens after death? Some were claiming that there is no life after death (v. 12). In vv. 12-19, Paul argues that such a claim is logically inconsistent with the Christian faith.

God reveals that there is life after death. This truth is now connected to another great truth: Christ will gain total victory over all his enemies. Paul is arguing that there must be a resurrection because we know Christ will defeat all enemies and one of his enemies is death. Therefore, the resurrection of the dead is part of Christ’s final victory over all enemies (vv. 24-28).

For those who do not believe in Christ, this claim provides a motivation to make sure that he has honestly and carefully selected his worldview. It is possible to critically evaluate the various worldviews based on logic and evidence. This particular claim of a future event cannot be thus evaluated, but the Bible and other claims of Christianity can. Consider your position carefully, because if the Bible is right about this, there will be life after death, and you certainly do not want to be an enemy of Christ in the end.

For believers, this truth is a reminder that we cannot live short-sightedly. We must lay up treasures in heaven instead of on earth (Matt 6:19-21). And we must live without fear, having full knowledge of the final and total victory of Christ in the end.

When I consider the beauty and design of the world and the conscious, moral, creative, loving human existence, it does not seem reasonable to me to conclude that matter is all that is and that we have evolved to this point. Instead, there is evidence throughout history of supernatural longing and experience. Without an obvious physically observable explanation of our existence, it is logical to suggest that there is something else, some spiritual source.

The Vanity of Wisdom

“There is more gain in wisdom than in folly,as there is more gain in light than in darkness. The wise person has his eyes in his head, but the fool walks in darkness” (Ecc 2:13-14).

Wisdom is about seeing. Figuratively, this indicates understanding. I want to “have my eyes in my head.” The writer of Ecclesiastes goes on to explain, though, that even the wise die and are forgotten, so wisdom is also "a striving after the wind." It must be understood that our Christian definitions of wisdom as faith in Christ and biblical truth are not in view here. It is possible for someone to be wise “under the sun” but to not understand eternal things. There are many smart, wonderful, wise people who just don’t grasp eternity.

As Paul wrote:

“For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart. Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Cor 1:18-25)