My Confessions: My reflections on Job 4-5

 

I continue my reflections on Job.

Synopsis

After hearing the lament of Job in Job 3, Job's friend Eliphaz spoke.

Firstly, he accused Job of being a hypocrite (Job 4:4-5):

Your words have supported those who stumbled;
    you have strengthened faltering knees.
But now trouble comes to you, and you are discouraged;
 it strikes you, and you are dismayed.

Then, he told Job about the righteous judgement of God (Job 4:7-8):

Consider now: Who, being innocent, has ever perished?
  Where were the upright ever destroyed?
As I have observed, those who plow evil
    and those who sow trouble reap it.

Next, Eliphaz spoke of the divine message he received. He exhorts that God is the most righteous and just (Job 4: 16 - 19):

It stopped,
   but I could not tell what it was.
A form stood before my eyes,
    and I heard a hushed voice:
‘Can a mortal be more righteous than God?
    Can even a strong man be more pure than his Maker?
 If God places no trust in his servants,
    if he charges his angels with error,
 how much more those who live in houses of clay,
    whose foundations are in the dust,
    who are crushed more readily than a moth!

Eliphaz concludes his observations that woe is the natural state of man (Job 5:7):

Yet man is born to trouble
as surely as sparks fly upward.

Eliphaz continues with his solution, encouraging Job to appeal to God (Job 5: 8- 11): 

But if I were you, I would appeal to God;
    I would lay my cause before him.
He performs wonders that cannot be fathomed,
    miracles that cannot be counted.
 He provides rain for the earth;
    he sends water on the countryside.
The lowly he sets on high,
    and those who mourn are lifted to safety.

Eliphaz also points out that God may us tough times as a form of discipline. (Job 5: 17-19):

 Blessed is the one whom God corrects;
    so do not despise the discipline of the Almighty.
 For he wounds, but he also binds up;
    he injures, but his hands also heal.
From six calamities he will rescue you;
    in seven no harm will touch you.

Eliphaz concludes (Job 5:27):

“We have examined this, and it is true.
So hear it and apply it to yourself.”

My reflections

Eliphaz was probably well-meaning, as he attempted to give Job practical advice. He sees Job's suffering as a consequence of Job's sin, as (A) God is just (and therefore does not allowed unjustified suffering) and (B) God is a disciplinarian (as Job is still alive and has the opportunity to repent).

Note that Eliphaz's interpretation is wrong (as revealed in Job 42:7). While Eliphaz's idea of suffering as a form of disclipine was correct in some circumstances (eg: 2 Samuel 12: 13-14), he was wrong in assuming it was true for Job also.

But ascribing a supernatural reason to Job's physical suffering without reason, Eliphaz was being superstitious. However, I understand Eliphaz's position. It is much simpler and more practical to reduce the existence of suffering to a simple equation of sin and discipline, and therefore to repent, just in case.

But being practical does not mean being true. 

Alternative Culture: Japan Sinks review

 

It is well known that the Japanese home islands were formed by volcanic eruptions. But what happens if the islands start sinking? That is the scenario that Japan Sinks seeks to explore in the year 2020.

Synopsis

Japan Sinks follows the adventures of the Muto family as they attempt to survive the collapse of the Japanese home islands. Aided by strangers (including the enigmatic Kite) along the way, the Muto family overcome challenge after challenge to find refuge from the disaster. But will there be true safety from the disaster? How different will the Muto family be post-disaster?

Theological review
There are many themes explored in the ten-episode long series. For instance, there was a storyline involving a cult and the strength of their religion. There were also an arc showing the racism of some Japanese nationalists. Yet I just want to write about one of the themes.

When it all falls apart, what do you hold on to?
One of the things that kept the Muto family going was that they hold something to hold onto. Initially it was the unflinching optimism of Koichiro (the father) that drove the family, followed by sheer determination of Mori (the mother). Due to changing circumstances, the family and their associated group repeatedly have to change their motivations for going on.

Thus the members are consistently demoralised as their source of hope is unseated over and over again during the series.

What about us?
Japan Sinks is a thought-provoking film as it brings us to the age-old question: What is our source of hope? When things go wrong, who do we turn to?

Where can I go from your Spirit?
    Where can I flee from your presence?
 If I go up to the heavens, you are there;
    if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.
If I rise on the wings of the dawn,
    if I settle on the far side of the sea,
 even there your hand will guide me,
   your right hand will hold me fast.
 If I say, “Surely the darkness will hide me
    and the light become night around me,”
 even the darkness will not be dark to you;
    the night will shine like the day,
    for darkness is as light to you. -- Psalms (139: 7-12)

With due respect: Is good something in itself, or is something good because God command it?

A few year's ago, my agnostic friend asked me a question, "Does God approve something because it is good? Or is something good because God approves it?"

At that time, I did not know that this question was known as Euthyphro dilemma. This dilemma presents the monotheist (people who believe in an active God) with two paths:

A) Moral goodness is independent of God

B) God determines what is good

In this post I will examine both paths, A and B, and the problems the paths posed for Christianity.

A) Moral goodness is independent of God
God is subordinate to morality
The most prominent problem to the Christian arising from Path A is that God has to follow an abstract entity known as moral goodness. This challenges traditional understanding of God as being omnipotent (Murray and Rea, 2008).

God is not needed for morality
Another problem is that if morality exists independent of God, then this challenges the necessity of God as a law-giver. In other words, there is not a moral need for God to be involved in the world (Oppy, 2009).

B) God determines what is good
Morality is arbitrary
Adopting this stand is also problematic to the Christian. This means that what morality is dependent on the whims of God (Murray and Rea, 2008).

Morality is subject to the strongest

Another issue is that it makes into a "might makes right" situation. This makes God as a tyrant, since he enforces what is moral.

False dilemma?

St Thomas Aquinas, the medieval theologian did address Euthyphro dilemma. He argued that it is a fallacy to separate morality from God, as God is the definition of good. That means that objective good and God's will is the same thing.

References

Murray, M.J., Rea, M. (2008) An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion.

Oppy, G. (2009) Arguing about Gods.

For further reading

Reasonable Faith's link 

William Lane Craig's lecture

Summary:

My confessions: Reflections on Job 3

I continue my reflection on Job.

Synopsis of Job 3
Surrounded by his friends Eliphaz, Bilad and Zophar, Job starts his lamentation. He shares his despair with his friends, saying in Job 3:11:

"Why did I not perish at birth
and die as I came from the womb?"

In other words, Job wished he was dead. He even cursed the day he was born (Job 3:8). He then concludes his lament in one of the most hopeless way possible in Job 3: 26.

"I have no peace, no quietness;
 I have no rest, but only turmoil."

Reflections
It is only natural that Job felt extremely depressed. In the previous chapters he had lost his children, his health and his property. Instead of comforting him, his wife encourages him to curse God (Job 2:9).

Job's lament reminds me of Psalms 39 and 88. Job and the Psalmists both languish in the despair and there are no hints that even indicate the slightest glimmer of hope. Yet such despair was left in the Bible.

Could it be God wants our honesty, rather than flattery? This would mean that God is not some earthly monarch who only wants to hear us in the good times, but to also comfort us in the bad times.

Prayer can be used for lamenting in our conversation with God.

Alternative Culture: The Big Show Show review

 

When I was younger I used to watch professional wrestling. Paul Wight (aka the Big Show) was one of my favourite wrestlers. So when the Big Show Show aired on Netflix, I had to catch it.

Synopsis

The Big Show Show stars the fictitious family of the Big Show: Paul Wight, his (second) wife Cassy, his eldest daughter Lola (from Paul's first marriage), second daughter Mandy and youngest daughter JJ.

The series starts off with Lola moving from Minnesota to stay with Paul and Cassy in Florida. Lola's mother had taken a job in Belgium. Tension and hilarity arises as the family has to adjust to Paul's retirement and Lola's unfamiliarity with life in Florida.

Theological thoughts

I know this movie is not meant Christian show, and that the "family" are all actors. Yet the strength of the family bonds, especially between Lola and her rest of the gang appeals to me all the same.

Even though Lola is not off Cassy's blood, Cassy still managed to adjust her lifestyle (such as finding out Lola's music tastes etc) to allow Lola to feel as comfortable as possible. This made Lola feel part of the family.

This echoes the family-nature of the Church, and how attractive it is to non-Christians.

 "By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." (John 15:35)

Review

The Big Show Show is a call-back to the wholesome nature of family-centric comedies. While not ground-breaking in any way, it has interesting scenarios like a politically-active daughter and a career-focused wife during a holiday cruise.

I considered it as a decent show. 

Theology 1.0: What is TULIP?

Is it predestined that I drew this card?

There is a lot of misunderstanding about Calvinism and its founder John Calvin. While I have to address some of those, in this post I would like to summarise what the famed acronym TULIP is.

Most people summarise Calvinism via TULIP. However, this fails to understand why TULIP was created (and that Calvin did outline much more stuff). TULIP was created to summarise Calvinists' objections to the Arminians, rather than condensing the entire theology of Calvin.


Who are the Arminians?The Arminians follow the theology of Dutch reformist Jacobus Arminius, who argued that salvation was a cooperation between God and humans. Traditionally, Methodists do adopted Arminianism.

Calvinists, on the other hand, argued that salvation was purely God's choice, and outlined their argument points through the acronym TULIP.

T- Total Depravity

Calvinists believe that humans are unable to choose to follow God due to sinful human nature. In others words, humans cannot follow God through their own effort.

Arminians believe that while humans are sinful, they can make themselves "saveable".

U- Unconditional Election

Calvinists argue that God chooses (or has predestined) who He will save and not save based on His mercy alone.

Arminians on the other hand, explain that humans can be saved by making themselves "saveable" (such through repentance and submission to God).

L- Limited Atonement

Calvinist believe that since God chooses who to save, only some (who were elected) will be atoned by Jesus's sacrifice.

On the other hand, Arminians believe that every human has the potential to be saved. It depends wheteher they cooperate with God to be "saveable".

I- Irresistible GraceCalvinists believe that if it is in God’s plan for a person to be saved, then they will definitely be saved. No one can overwrite God's will.

On the other hand, Arminians believe that humans can reject cooperation with God's will.

P- Preservation of Saints

Calvinists assert that since God is sovereign, then He will save who ever has been predestined to be saved.

Arminians assert that people, through lack of coopeartion with God, can lose their salvation.

For more details:

AP European history

Desiring God

Theology 1.0: The four views on the Lord's Supper

Obviously not bread and wine

One of the major theological issues that divides the Christian world is the issue of the Lord's Supper. The four words "this is my body" (Luke 22:19) caused much arguments between the churches. Is God physically or spiritually present during the Holy Communion?

In this post I will summarise the four major views on this: (A) Roman Catholicism, (B) Lutheranism, (C) (C) Zwinglianism, and (D) Calvinism.

Pope Clement V

(A) Roman Catholicism

At the Communion table (with the ordained priest's blessings), the bread and wine are converted to the actual literal Body and Blood of Christ. This process is called transubstantiation. Thus, Roman Catholics believe that Christ is physically present during the Lord's Supper, while the bread and wine retain their appearance and taste.

By partaking in the Lord's Supper, believers enter a union with Christ and are therefore part of the true church.

(B) Lutheranism

Luther's view is sometimes called consubstantiation (but he did not use that term). He felt that the presence of Christ does join the bread and wine of communion in a "glorified body". No priestly input is needed.

He rejected the term "transubstantiation" (as it came from Greek philosophy) and argued that Christian faith should be separate from reason (i.e. Aristotle's philosophy). He also argued that any attempt to deny Christ's physical presence is to overwrite His actual words "This is my body."

Institutes of Christian Religion by John Calvin

(C) Zwinglianism

Zwingli's view is often called memorialism. Zwingli argued that Christ was present symbolically, rather than physically in the bread and wine. Therefore Christ's presence is already present by partaking in faith, so Christ did not need to be particularly present during the Holy Communion. The bread and wine symbolises spiritual assets.

(D) Calvinism

Calvin takes a position that Christ is present spiritually but not physically. Sometimes called virtualism or receptionism, The Body and Blood of Christ are thus sacraments or vehicles of grace to allow believers to participate in the body of Christ.

Conclusion

Regardless of your church's tradition, remember to take the Holy Communion seriously, and in remembrance of Christ's love and sacrifice for us.

For more information:

Simply Put

Inview

Two Pilgrims