Theology 1.0: What is the Inquisition?

Martin Luther, a target for the Inquisition

A dark period for Christianity?

In a period where accusations of heresy and witchcraft were rampant, the Western Churches  (Catholic) started a series of trials in 1184 to combat such claims. Their punishments include imprisonment, banishment and execution. The last execution was carried out in Spain in 1826. This series of actions is called the Inquisition.

This is often raised as a sore legacy of Christianity but is the story really as simple as that?

Law and Order

Regardless of whatever you think of it now, we must remember that the Inquisition was set up as the first attempt at a universal legal system to investigate heresy (Hannam, 2010). Before the Inquisition, a victim could be convicted based on the accuser's reputation. In other words, if a noble accused a peasant of committing theft, the peasant would be found guilty.

The Inquisition (introduced by the Catholic Church) set up the requirement of evidence (in the form of witnesses) in the persecution of a alleged heretic. Furthermore, it provided the accused some level of defence as he/she could name people who had "mortal hatred) for him/her, and this would dismiss the accusations.

In addition, while torture was used, execution (by handing heretics over to secular authorities) was often avoided by the Catholic as it was seen as a failure to convert.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

A modern person may ask, "why was fighting heresy so important?" Unlike religious disagreements in developed countries now, we must remember that heresy was often associated with rebellions and disorder.

Let's clear the air

Let me state some things clearly before I conclude:

1) I am not justifying the violence or punishment that happened during the Inquisition.

2) Fatalities did happen during the Inquisition, sometimes to innocent people.

3) Sometimes proper procedures are not carried out during the Inquisition.

But if we think about, are our modern secular courts perfect? While we must remain appalled for the wrongly sentenced, we also must recognise the Catholic Church for initiating a system to protect the innocent accused.

References

Hannam, J (2010) God's Philosophers

For further reading

Wikipedia

Alternative Culture: The Law Demands Grace Supplies review

[Disclaimer: I have reviewed this DVD as part of my Lent series. Before watching this DVD, I had only listened to Joseph Prince preached once on Leviticus, a long time ago. Thus before this review I had a neutral view of Pastor Prince.

I do not claim to be an expert in theology or apologetics. I merely attended a few theological courses in my free time in university. I consider myself a Christian who is interested in knowing God better and more.]

Pastor Joseph Prince

A few years ago, a friend passed me the DVD from New Creation Church, The Law Demands Grace Supplies (2011). After promising to review it, I chucked it in my cabinet and clean forgot about it. Recently, as part of my Lent series, I decided to review some of the Christian literature I have. Thus I pulled it out to do a review.

Synopsis
After an enthusiastic introduction by two Americans, a band begins to play a few worship songs I am unfamiliar with. Then Pastor Prince begins his sermon.

He starts by talking about the Passover, specifically on how God promised physical deliverance to the ancient Jews. He then explains that God also promised us to deliver us from sickness.

Then he moves on to the meat of his sermon -- how under the law, we are all condemned. However, under the grace of God, we all can obtain his blessings which includes "health and wealth".

Theological Review
Law demands
I liked this segment. Prince accurately how under God's law, no one is justified, and all are guilty. This follows closely to what the Apostle Paul writes in Romans 3: 19-20:

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

If we follow tightly to God's law and justice, our rightful reward is death. As in Romans 6:23:

 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Grace supplies
Although I looked forward to the second part on grace, unfortunately I found much of this part disagreeable. While I passionately agree with Pastor Prince that Christ died for our sins (past, present and future), I depart in the area of blessings.

 Pastor Prince eloquently asserts that we can access God's blessings for us and that included the "lesser blessings" of "health and wealth", using the example of Abraham. We just needed enough faith in grace of God.

One of his quotes that irked me was "Jesus lived a short life so that we can live long lives". I find that quote disingenuous. Christians for the first 300 years after the death of Christ were severely persecuted by the Roman authorities. Presently, Christians in North Korea and the Middle East are hunted down. To say that Christ died so we can all materially benefit is neither safe nor right, especially when so many of my siblings-in-Christ suffer so much.

Misquoting the New Testament
Furthermore, Pastor Prince's draws references to 2 Corinthians 8:9 which says

 For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich.

and follows it up with the next chapter (in the video he says "next verse", but I will treat it as an honest mistake) in 2 Corinthians 9:7:

Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver

He then concludes that God wants to makes us (financially) rich so that we can give back to him.

However, a close examination of 2 Corinthians 8:9 shows that the richness of Jesus did not refer to material finances (Jesus was a carpenter, and did not have enough money to feed his followers at times, like in Matthew 14.). Thus I am puzzled how Pastor Prince can pull such a reference to material richness.

Conclusion
I took a long time to write this article, as I wanted to be accurate. It was not easy to write as I find myself a bit too eager to condemn, so I re-watched several parts in order not to misrepresent any view.

I must say I am disappointed with the DVD. I expect him to emphasise on justification -- not that we rely on our good works for salvation, but faith in God.

On the issue of law and receiving grace, I find myself in agreement with Pastor Prince, but I start to depart from him on the issue of the blessing that grace supplies. To give the idea that God blesses us materially as long as we have faith is false.

God was with Joseph in Genesis 39, but he was in prison. John the Baptist was a holy man, but he was beheaded in Mark 6. To empahsise God's blessings as "health and wealth" is neither safe nor right.

For further reading
Persecution of Christians

Alternative Culture: Erasing Hell review

[This is yet another of my reviews on Lent.]

Introduction
Earlier this week, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore passed away. This made me think deeply about mortality and final judgement.

Thus I decided to re-read a book I bought a few years ago, called Erasing Hell (2011). Written as a response to Pastor Rob Bell's book Love Wins (2011), Francis Chan and Preston Sprinkle set out to closely examine what the Bible's say about hell.

The main issue
In 2011, Bell argued (in Love Wins) that everybody will eventually recognise Jesus as Lord and saviour and be with in heaven, even if they did not believe in Jesus in their lifetime. (In Christian theology this is called universalism. To be fair to Rob Bell, he does not use this term in his book.)

In Erasing Hell, Chan and Sprinkle argues that the person who talks most about hell in the Bible is Jesus Christ. While admitting the temptation to water down the concept of hell is high, the duo managed to present hell and judgement as realities described in the Bible.

For instance, Jesus uses the word gehenna (from the Greek New Testament, one of the earliest copies we have) to refer to hell. Chan and Sprinkle explain that this gehenna is a place of punishment, and Jesus used imagery of fire to described the place, in contrast to Bell who described it as a garbage dump (to be fair to Bell, he got the idea from a commentary of a Middle Ages rabbi David Kimhi).

Theological review
Again, I appreciate the duo's attempt at exegesis. Erasing Hell forces me to think closely about my own theology. Do I believe things about hell because I am comfortable with it? Or do I believe in the real hell that Jesus spoke about?

For further information

Alternative Culture: The Encounter Review

Professional wrestler Sting playing the businessman Nick in the Encounter

[As part of my Lent series, I decided to review some Christian books and films that I have watched recently. Here is my review of The Encounter.]

Synopsis
Five people get stranded in a mysterious, remote diner due to poor weather conditions. The dinner is manned by a stranger named Jesus (Bruce Marchiano) and he reveals that each person has an important decision they have to make concerning the ultimate destiny of their lives.

Each of the stranded has their own set of problems and grievances. Businessman Nick (Steve "Sting" Borden) is prideful. Runaway teenager Kayla (Madison Gibney) is suicidal. Couple Hank (Jamie Nieto) and Catherine (Dannah Davis) have marriage issues. Melissa (Jaci Velasquez) has relationship problems.

Theological Review
Jesus's ability
One of thing the film plays up is the omniscience of Bruce's Jesus. He's revealed to know all events in the past, present and future. This causes the stranded strangers to accept that he is really Jesus, and not an impostor or charlatan.

The film also emphasised that everyone falls short of the perfectness of God, although Catherine and Nick trust to justify themselves via their morality and achievements respectively.

The reasons for disbelief
Another potent thing the film brings up is objections to Christianity. Nick objected to the apparent cruelty of God in the Old Testament, and calling his Kayla's attraction to Jesus an emotional "exploitation". Kayla objects to apathy of God in the face of evil.

Nevertheless, I found it weird that this film's Jesus seem to hesitate to answer when Nick grills him. Another thing I felt should be in the film should be that most people should reject God's message of love and salvation. In fact real Jesus said in Matthew 7: 13-14,

“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."

Conclusion
Despite having a generally unknown cast, the movie is decent. I give it a 65/100.

Alternative Culture: Rust review

A scene from Rust

[As part of the season of Lent, I will be reviewing some Christian literature over a course of 40 days. So let me begin with the movie Rust (2010).]

Synopsis
Many years after his pastorate falls apart, ex-pastor James Moore (Corbin Bernsen) returns to his hometown to find that his friend Travis (Lloyd Allen Warner) in prison. Travis confessed to arson and manslaughter of an entire family, but James refused to believe him.

With a sudden purpose and anewed vigour, James set out to find out the truth forcing him to confront his estranged father, his bitter sister, forgotten friends and even the problems caused and faced by the town's youth.

Theological review
As usual, I will doing a short review on the theological issues I felt were raised by the movie.

Quest for truth
One thing I felt was very engaging about the movie was James's attempts to discover the truth about the arson. Even though the matter inconvenienced him and further strained his relationships with the community, James found himself unable to rest till he unearthed the truth.

On the flip side, the mentally-challenged Travis chose to cover for the community. In doing so, he sought to find peace for and with the community whom he felt he never belong to the first place. It was not a surprise he obtained neither.

For us Christians, do we often choose inclusive peace with the world over the divisive truth of the Gospel? We should be choosing the liberating truth of the Gospel to find peace with God.

They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. -- Romans 1:25.

Suffering
One issue that I felt the film handled poorly was the issue of suffering. Although bringing up ideas about suffering that builds character, the film does not address the origin of suffering (i.e. sin) and the purpose of Jesus's sacrifice (i.e. to die for the sins of mankind).

Instead, God is portrayed as a problem-solver, only if we have faith in him.

Conclusion
A decent film, considering that the producer used a the local cast and a low budget. I like the emotionalism and flashbacks used in the film. I give it a decent 65/100.

With Due Respect-- The Bible is not history!

You can't trust the Bible because it is not history

Well, it depends on what you mean. The Bible is a collection of books, inclusive of differing genres. For example, Psalms is poetry, while Proverbs contains advice and Isaiah is regarded as prophecy. Some like Daniel is a mixture of history (Daniel 1-6) and imagery/prophecy (Daniel 7-12).

Even among certain" historical" books like 1 Kings and 2 Kings, the books only present a theological relationship of the kings of Israel and Judah with God. The books emphasis this by saying that other events of the kings' reign were written elsewhere (namely the annals of the kings of Israel or Judah).

But some parts of the Bible are intended to be literal history

Of course, we cannot expect Biblical history to be exactly like how modern history is written, as the concept of history (as a academic subject) was formalised much later (Lewis, 1946).

That said there are parts of the Bible intended to be literal history. For instance in Mark 14, it is recorded that there was man who was almost caught by the Romans.

A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind. -- Mark 14: 51-52

This naked youth played no further role (literal or metaphorical) in the narrative. Thus the only reason for including this part was that the events actually happened.

Conclusion

While some parts of the Bible was not meant to be literal history, it does not mean the other parts are not.

References

Lewis, CS (1946) Mere Christianity

For further reading
Bethinking resources 

Alternative Culture: Taken 3 Review

World's most wanted?
Having watched Taken and Taken 2, I could not wait to watch Taken 3. The premise of the movie takes retired CIA agent Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) on a race to prove his innocence after he is framed for the death of his ex-wife.

Chased by Inspector Dotzler (Forest Whitaker), Mills has to throw the cops of his trail while he interrogates the murder suspects.

Theological issues
This, being a theological site, will focus on certain issues raised by the movie. The issue I want to examine here is on the investigation and the run from the authorities.

Truth claims
Whereas Inspector Dotzler is interested in finding out the truth of the matter, most of the police were content to see Mills as guilty, most evident by their interactions with Mill's daughter Kim (Maggie Grace). Unfortunately, for most people (whether believers or not) rather be not investigate truth claims too carefully lest it challenges what they deeply believe in.

After if Jesus claimed to be "the way, truth and the life" in John 14:6, why should Christians be afraid of examining the claims of Christianity?

Versus the world
Jesus predicted the following for his followers:

“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you." (John 15: 18-19)

Like Mills on the run from the authorities, Christians should not be surprised if the world tends to reject them. That does not mean Christians should knowingly and purposely violate secular law to prove a point, but rather that their lifestyle and truth claims would tend to offend people around them.

My review
To be honest, this movie was decent. It was definitely not as good as Taken, but comparable to Taken 2. The lack of twist and turns of plot made me miss the first Taken, and the lack of a nationwide search for Mills really hampered the urgency of the story. I thought it might have been better if the French intelligence from the first movie tried to take revenge on Mills (or demand extradition), and then Mills would be on the run.

Nevertheless, Neeson's gruff acting and the action scenes were the movie's saving grace. I give this movie a 60/100.