Time Travel and Eternity

Time travel, the almost unavoidable constant of all thing sci-fi. Whether is slingshotting around the sun, the worm hole that somehow gets diverted due to the sun’s gravitational pull, an ancient ruin that acts as a gate, or some alien technology that allows us to travel back and forth between the future and the past, the idea of time travel has fascinated us as few other concepts have. For most this is but a flight of fancy, an errant hope of somehow correcting the evils of yesterday, or the hope of knowing what tomorrow holds. It is far flung dream of what we may one day achieve as the human race, the ultimate demonstration that we have cast off the chains of this temporal existence to experience wonders that are inaccessible in our present being.

Few of us ever consider as anything more than this, but what if time travel were possible? What if time did not have the power to define our reality as we currently experience it?

And why is that we are fascinated by something that every reasonable thought rejects? Why would we devote so much time, effort, and money into creating worlds within movies, books, and TV to explore a concept that defies all known logic? It makes no sense unless…

But wait, let me back up for a second. I haven’t lost my mind, and no, I didn’t suddenly come into possession of some whacky telephone both or magic mirror. I know this sounds as if I completely lost my grip on reality, but just roll with me for second. I know that there is a part of you that is going to resist the idea on gut level. I mean, time travel, come on? We all know how impossible that is, but what if we have been looking at it wrong? What if we have been so wrapped up in our experience of reality  - the one in which time in engulfs us, where we at the mercy of ticking clocks that define our days in terms of hours, minutes and seconds? What if our experience has caused us to look at time backwards and inside out?

So gets some ideas in place. Ideas that do not rely on our perceptions of time and space, but are rooted in the revealed truth of God in Scripture.

1. God is eternal. Psalms 102: 26, 27; Romans 1:20, 1 Peter 1:24, 25
2. God knows the beginning from the end. Isaiah 46:10, 48:12; Ecclesiastes 3:11; Revelation 22: 13
3. God’s experience of time differs from ours. 2 Peter 3:8
4. Time was created by God. Psalms 90, Colossians 1:16, 1 Timothy 4:4, Revelation 4:11

Now all of this has led to some very sticky theological questions: Does God exist outside of time? Within time? Is he eternally present? Just how much did Augustine borrow from Plato? I want you to watch this next move very closely, as I dodge all of them. Why? Because, I really don’t care and it’s not part of this discussion of time travel. The point is that time is God’s. He gets to decide how he experiences it and inhabits it. And I am ok with that, and if even if I weren’t it make a rat’s whisker’s bit of difference to him. One of the perks of being sovereign is you get to have your way every day. This is also where I resist explaining how a lot of you need to accept that little fact, and live your lives accordingly.

But moving on –

Let’s go back to that “unless” I left dangling up there.

It makes no sense unless…we were designed for eternity. For many of us eternity has been flattened into a timeline, two points eternally retreating from each other to the distant edges of our imaginations, but eternity is more than a line. It expands in all directions, more of an endless web rather than a line, encompassing all things past, present, and possible. And we crave it in depth of our being, to the point that we fantasize about being able to transcend the bounds of this time and move freely within the totality of its space. Our collective obsession demonstrates that truth Ecclesiastes 3:11 which tells us that God has placed eternity in the hearts of man.

And if this is a fundamental craving of humanity, how then do we fulfill that hunger that God has given us? I think the answer is simple – to draw near to the one who is eternal.

A plan as simple as the words of Psalm 145 which tells us that God draws near all who call on him. Or James 4:8 that tells us that if we draw near to God he will draw near to us. And Psalm 65:4 that declares that blessed is the one that God brings near to dwell in his courts, and how do we come into his courts? With praise! Psalm 100. I could go on, but I think you should be getting the idea. Praise is a key to being in the presence of the Eternal God.

Something happens when we start to praise, when we proclaim who he is, and let that reality flood our soul. Time and all that it contains is no longer what defines us or the realm we inhabit. We confronted by the God who is both Ancient of Days and the Lord of What Shall Be. We recognize that time does not hold our God captive, nor is his reality engulfed in time's dictates. Time, that cruel dictator of our lives, bows before our God and proceeds at his bidding and good pleasure. The ticking clock, the changing season, and passing moments become nothing more than tools that he picks up and lays aside as it suits him. That alone should stir our hearts to praise!

And when we praise him, we join our voices with those who have sang his praise since the dawn of time, and our songs will echo in the ears of those who follow. For his praises endure forever, as we are told in Psalms 111:10, and by choosing to praise him we are stepping into the realm of the eternal to experience something far greater than the here and now. To live beyond this tangible moment, to proclaim the events of history as a demonstration of his power for this age, and to proclaim his eternal reign not as some distant future event, but the defining element of our lives today. To lay hold of it all - past, present, and future - as our defining reality and reason to life our voice to him.

So perhaps we are not time travelers, not in the sense that we move through time, but rather that in those moments of praise time moves through us. The past, present, and future aligning in one splendid truth, our God is the God of all time and his steadfast endures forever. Love given since before the thought of creation and will endure past the edges of time, love that we chose to embrace today, so that we might know the God of Eternity in this moment.

Of Prophets - We will worry about the kings later

Last night, I did something new. I watched the new television series “Of Kings and Prophets” while following the buzz on Twitter. It was interesting to see people’s reactions in real time as they protested the Biblical inaccuracies, the artistic license to spice up the story line, but most of all, I was intrigued by the reactions to Samuel. To be sure the rather enigmatic and ever so slightly spooky prophet who rips the arms off of hired assassins is not completely in line with the perceptions that most modern audience have of prophets. We like to think of them as leaders, and our ideas of leaders tend to be ones of men and women who exemplify the best, the most noble, and desirable of our society.

However, our ideas about prophets and the reality as presented within the Bible do not always line up. The prophet of the Bible was not a pretty character. He was bold, raw, and often offensive. His language was not soft or genteel, but rather what most of us would consider straight up vulgar. He lived on the outskirts of society. Yes, he was often present in the courts of kings, but not as one of the fawning masses. Instead, he stood apart as someone to be feared, and sometimes that fear was not out of respect. Many times that fear was based in disdain and expressed in ridicule. These men had the power to depose kings, elevate the poorest to position of authority, and generally upend the status quo at any given moment. They dangerous not only to those in leadership but to all who desired to that standards and mores of their culture be maintained by propriety and proper observance of established convention. Thus his presence was not always welcome or celebrated.

Of all the descriptions written of the Biblical prophet, Abraham Joshua Heschel’s is by far my favorite:

“A strange, one sided, unbearable extremist…His words are shocking and often offensive to the more genteel of society. Dignity is cast aside in favor of emotion and he does not flinch from offending his audience…He lacks refinement and the passion with which he reveals God’s message seems wildly out of control to the masses but to the one inspired the means barely capture the intensity of passion.” From his book The Prophets.

 J. Lindblom describes being a prophet as a “condition”, and he supports this view by noting the taunting note in 1 Samuel 10:11:

“Is Saul among the prophets?”

Lindblom explains that question demonstrates that role and office of prophet was considered to be beneath one from a good family. No one of status would desire to become of these wild eyed individuals whose inexplicable behavior did not conform to society’s expectations. This was not position of honor as the cost was too great, causing those chosen to walk in this role to move away from societal standards and moved deeper into the truth revealed to them by God.

The level of conflict in their lives was epic. Jeremiah describes himself as “a man of strife and contention to the whole land.” (Jeremiah 15:10). Not only did he confront the king, he stood in direct conflict with the false prophets of his day – the prophets whom the people affirmed for the smooth words and happy predictions for the future of their land. He denounced the religious elite and the condemned the masses for offering God only empty forms of worship without engaging him with their hearts. His message was warning that not only would Israel as nation be subjugated to foreign powers for their disobedience, but that the symbols and means through they worshipped God would be stripped away because institutionalized observances of faith were a lie that God would no longer tolerate.

And Jeremiah was not the only one who quite literally danced with death almost every time God commanded him to speak. Nathan calls David out for committing adultery and murder, Samuel condemns Saul and declares that he will lose his throne, Moses demands that Pharaoh release his labor force, and Jesus damns the religious elites for their hypocrisy. How else would you classify such people, other than mad?

Nor were the extreme elements of their nature limited to their prophet announcements. Isaiah was commanded to preach naked for three years, Hosea was told to marry a prostitute, Ezekiel shaved his head with sword and then did various symbolic acts with the hair, and John the Baptist ate locusts and honey exemplifying the voice of one from a wilderness. It is to read these accounts and accept them as part of the Biblical narrative to which we have become accustom, but if we stop and think of what it would be like to witness these events, to actually be in the presence of the prophets as they fulfilled God’s command to live out their message, would we still be able to blithely accept them as part of God’s plan?

I do not think so. In fact, I think most of us would be even more shocked and offended than their original audiences. I think we would see their bizarre behavior as vindication of our right to deny them the authority and wisdom that God bestowed upon them. There God had command protection for those he placed in this office. God knew that everything in us would resist paying heed to one so far removed from societal and cultural norms, and we should not make the mistake of believing that the Biblical prophets were normal for their day and the only reason they seem so strange to us is due to the years that stand between us.

Nor should we be shocked that one who walks so closely with a Holy God who defies our definitions and boundaries would also be radically different than his contemporaries. For how does encounter a God whose ways are not our ways and thoughts are not our thoughts without being radically changed? We often forget that the prophet was not simply a telephone, or some other mechanical devise, to be used as tool. The prophet was flesh and blood, sensitive and response to their environment, and when environment has been infused by the very presence of God – you are never going to be normal again.

So maybe it is time we acknowledge a difficult and distasteful truth, prophets were not meant to be normal. They don’t often popularity contests, and they don’t usually don’t experience what this world defines as success except perhaps through the lens of history. They set people on edge with messages divinely designed and ordained to upset the status quo. The comfort they offer only follows obedience and repentance. They are hard individuals demanding hard things from their audience, rejecting pretty lies in favor of ugly truth so that we may find the beauty in a God who redeems. For how else could they find the strength and courage to live a life so far removed from the expected, unless they had fallen so deeply in love with the Lord that all of their being was at odds with a fallen creation? What else could cause them to give up their lives, their hopes for a future, except for a God inspired desire to see their Creator design manifest in the lives of a people they learned to love as he loved them?

And maybe, just maybe, it is time we held the self-appointed prophets of this day to the Biblical standard. Truth before comfort, radical boldness before conformity, and terrifying obedience before self-indulgent justification. For the prophets who spoke peace and prosperity were exposed as frauds as their soothing words did nothing to move the people closer to the God they claimed to serve and plunged them deeper into forms of religion without heart, conscience, or moral obligation to God or their community. Maybe it is time we stopped buying the hype, stopped worshipping at the alter of nice or proper, and recognize that God’s message to the world is greater than anything we hold dear including our dignity and worthless prestige.

Readers' Questions: Why Wasn't The Book Of Enoch Included In The Bible?

My Study Tools

Readers’ question: Why wasn’t the Book of Enoch included in the Bible?

I don’t know if you caught it in the sentence above, but several of you have asked me to answer this question. It seems that lately the Book of Enoch, otherwise known as Enoch 1, has been getting a lot of attention. I cannot begin to count the number of YouTube videos and articles that have flooded the internet either praising this book as prophecy or condemning it as blasphemy, and the controversy over it seems to be heating up as experts on all sides are chiming.  And since this is the internet, a lot of non-experts have been happy to join in too!

The question, as most of you presented it to me, is easy to answer. “Why wasn’t the Book of Enoch included in the Bible?”  One of the Jewish tests for canonicity (read that worthy of being included in the Bible) is that a book had to be written to all generations. Now if, we read the first two verses of Enoch, we will find:

The words of the blessing of Enoch according to which he blessed the chosen and the righteous who must be present on the day of distress which is appointed for the removal of all the wicked and impious. And Enoch answered and said, “There was a righteous man whose eyes were opened by the Lord and he saw a holy vision in the heavens which the angels showed me. And I heard everything from them and I understood what I saw, but not for this generation, but for a distant generation which will come.”

So pretty much, the Book of Enoch excludes itself as it was not written for all generation, “but for a distant generation which will come.” But I don’t think that this is really what y’all wanted to know, so I am going to answer the question I think you meant to ask: Should we, as Bible believing Christians, be reading the Book of Enoch?

Hold on to your seats, this is where it starts to get a little more complex.

We know from other writings that the Book of Enoch was a pretty big deal. Ancient writers often referred to it in their work, and when I say ancient writers I am talking about some pretty big names in Church history. Names like: Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement, and Ambrose. However, times were changing, and not unlike today, the main attack centered on the supernatural elements within the Bible. “Why were grown men reciting fairy tales, and believing in ghost stories? Hadn’t they figured out that this was modern age and that we needed to be rational and stop putting credence in such outdated texts?” If any of that sounds familiar, it is because it is the same arguments running around the internet today. It seems that in over 2000 years of existence, the opposition to the Christian faith has yet to come up with any better arguments either, but moving on.

So in an effort to tone down the more fantastical elements of the Bible certain stories were explained away, and the main one is found in Genesis 6.

When man had begun to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came into the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men of old, the men of renown.

If you continue reading, you will see that we are looking the events leading up to the flood. When we study this passage in the church, we often skim by it and talk about how evil people were being at this time and that is why God had to flood the earth, or you are told that the “sons of God” were the sons of Seth and the “daughters of men” were the daughters of that wretched murderer Cain.

Well, uh, yeah, about that? That isn’t what the text says.

A rule that every serious student of the Bible should follow is “Scripture interprets Scripture.” This simply means that when a word or phrase is used in one passage and it has an ambiguous meaning, you should look at other passages where the same word or phrase is used to determine what it means. When we encounter the phrase “sons of God” in other parts of the Bible, we find that is always refers to angels. Now, go back and reread that passage, but this time use the word “angel” instead of “sons of God”. See why it is so disturbing? And why some might want to tone it down?

Cut back to Enoch. The book of Enoch contains what is essentially a retelling of the Flood narrative with greater detail, and he doesn’t pull any punches. He plainly states that the “sons of God” were angels. He recounts conversations that he had with both angels who remained in service to God and with the fallen angels. He records the fallen angels’ punishment, and how he relayed messages between them and God. To be honest, it’s some pretty out there stuff that will blow your mind if you believe that the “sons of God” were really the sons of Seth.

Accepting what was then a new view of Scripture, and the flood in particular, people stopped reading the Book of Enoch, reading it was eventually banned by the church, and for awhile, it seemed to have been lost altogether. Enter James Bruce, and explorer in Africa, who made his way into Ethiopia. The history of the Ethiopian church is fascinating, but for now all we need to know is that they developed essentially without any outside influences after the fifth century AD. This meant they didn’t get the memo that they should do away with the Book of Enoch. During his time there, Bruce managed to secure three copies of the Book of Enoch. All of this went down in 1773, but it would take almost fifty years for the first translation to be made.

Since that time there have been many who claim that the Book of Enoch must have been written by Christian due to all the typically Christian references that are in the book. Others claim that it was, in fact, originally a Hebrew text but that Christians had inserted various passages in order to make it appear more Christian and less Jewish. However, some of this controversy is dying down as at least ten fragments from the Book of Enoch were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls verifying those passages as authentic to the original text.

I know, great history lesson, but that still doesn’t answer the question: Should we, as Bible believing Christians, be reading the Book of Enoch?

My answer is yes, but with caution. Here is why.

If you read the book of Jude, that single page book right before you get to Revelation, you will find this:

It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes down with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgement on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds and ungodliness that they have committed, in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”

Nowhere else in the Bible to learn that Enoch prophesied. In fact if you read his story in Genesis 5:21-23, you are going to find one of the shortest and most amazing stories recorded of man. He lived, had a son, walked with God, and then “he was not for God took him.” What crazy, but utterly fascinating way to be remembered!

But here in Jude, we do see that he prophesied, and we have reason to believe that his prophesies were credible and respected. If that is not enough for you flip back a few pages 2 Peter 2:4, 5:

For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them down into Tartarus and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until judgement, if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Nowhere else in the Bible do you find anything close to this, but you do find it in the Book of Enoch. Some scholars believe that these verses are just the tip of the iceberg that proves that the Book of Enoch is a valid record of a supernatural revelation given to Enoch.

But before we jump to that conclusion, let’s consider a few things. Throughout this piece I have used various expressions common to our time and culture. You skimmed right by them because you are familiar with these expression, because they are everywhere, and they did not signify any type of connection to another writing. Why would we suppose that every time an ancient writer used the same words as his contemporaries he was doing more than I? So I think we should use restraint when using similar words to prove a connection between Enoch and the Bible. That being said, neither should we dismiss almost exact quotes of any significant length. It’s called balance, and that is always a good thing.

The second thing we should consider is the fact that the Book of Enoch did not enjoy the same protection that the canonical books of the Bible did. The text may well have been tampered with. For if the original story was an actual account of what Enoch said, then his account is thousands upon thousands of years old, and even our oldest manuscripts do not come close to the time of authorship.

The third thing to consider, if knowing Enoch was necessary for the practices of faith and salvation, it would have been included in the Bible. So in reality, it has little bearing on Christianity today.

So back to the question: Should we, as Bible believing Christians, be reading the Book of Enoch?
Yes, but with caution.

My personal beliefs are that the text we have today is based on an earlier work. I believe that Enoch did prophesy, and I think his words carried weight and authority as attested to by Jude. I believe that by studying this book we learn much about the culture preceding and during the time of Christ’s life. I think it shows how willing the ancient audience was to accept the supernatural and divine intervention in this life, and I think we can learn from that. After all, our God is supernatural, our salvation is supernatural, and our entry into his eternal presence will be amazingly supernatural, why would we deny that it can be seen in this world?

I urge caution because, honestly, I haven’t taken the time to pick the book apart or to thoroughly examine it for ideas or beliefs counter to the teachings within the Bible – the book that we have been commanded to honor and obey as God’s holy word. I urge caution because we should never put an extra-biblical text above the Bible. I also urge caution because most of you need to dive deeper into the Book you can trust before you start tampering with something that may not be fully trustworthy – for how will you know a lie if you don’t first know the truth?

Reader Question: A Look At the Devil

Question 1: Why is the devil portrayed as an ugly twisted red thing with fangs and horn when he is said to be the most beautiful angel of all Do you have any idea where the (relatively) modern version of him came from?

There is no straight path to the answer, and most of what we think we know is based on probable leaps of logic by those long dead. I think that unless further evidence is found, the best anyone can offer is conjecture. However, having acknowledged that, the conjecture is based on ideas and concepts accepted by most scholars to be historically accurate.

Let’s begin by looking at the role of goats in Judeo-Christian thought.

They have a rather mixed role within both religions. Goats were considered to be “clean” under Levitical law and therefore an accepted part of the Jewish diet and an acceptable sacrifice. It was a ram that Abraham found in the thorn bush when he was released from the command to sacrifice his son, Isaac. (Genesis 22).

Despite all these good things, we also find the goat present in the story of Jacob and Esau where the goat skins become a means of deception. (Genesis 25). Jesus declares there will be a time when the sheep will be separated from the goats in reference to judgement. (Matthew 25:32). But the most damning element is found in Leviticus 16:8-10, in a puzzling ritual sacrifice in which two goats are chosen for sacrifice and then the priests casts lots for which one shall be offered up on the altar and which one shall become a “scapegoat”. The scapegoat is released, symbolically carrying the sins of the people out into the desert to a demon or fallen angel known as Azazel.

The Bible offers no explanation as to who Azazel is, but his story is recorded in an extra-Biblical work called “The Book of Enoch” which tells us that “the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin.” (1 Enoch 10:8) Many Biblical scholars believe that Satan, and Azazel are all the same entity as the description of each one is mirrored in the others. Additionally, Satan is not strictly a name, despite how it has been commonly used, and is more accurately a title meaning “accuser.” (This is where I will spare you the long theological debate about on how many satans there are and if or why they may or may not be different.) The point is Azazel predates any concept of Satan, and he has always been closely linked with the goat.

A key aspect of Azazel’s story, as told in the Book of Enoch, is that he was the leader of a group of angels known as the Watchers who came to earth and raped human women, giving birth to what were called the Nephilim. It was for this sin that Azazel and all the angels who followed him were condemned.

And we should also bear in mind that the Levitical law was given directly after the Exodus. In Egyptian culture the goat was also sacred – the point that it was not sacrificed. (Think Hindu cows.) In fact, Moses original request to Pharaoh was to release the people of Israel so that they might sacrifice to God in the desert away from the Egyptians who would be offended by the slaughter of their sacred animal.

In Egypt the Goat of Mendes was linked to fertility and some of the rites performed were even said to be sexual as recorded by Herodotus.  This goat god was later absorbed by the Greeks to become the god Pan. Pan would be known for his love of drinking, food, and women and would be worshipped by excessive consumption of all three just as Banebdjetet was.

Skip ahead a few millennium or so, and we have Christianity on the scene. A new religion with deep roots in Judaism and attempting to make a place for itself among the many religions practiced in the Roman Empire. Believing that all gods, apart from the Hebrew God, were demonic being masquerading as the truly Divine the imagery of the Greek/Roman gods was used to depict any spiritual entity in opposition or perceived competition with the Hebrew God.

Additionally, Pan’s mythology shared in several of aspects associated with Satan/Azazel. Pan was deceptive, a glutton, loved to drink, was a talented musician, and was basically the personification of lust. Combine that with the fact he was goat-man creature and that his image was everywhere, and you have the easiest target in the world. Particularly, if you are have two fold agenda:

1. Convince people that the pagan gods are abhorrent by equating them with pure evil. So the most popular god becomes Satan.

2. Strike fear into the hearts of your followers by portraying your enemy as something disgusting so that they will not be tempted to give into temptation. So Satan becomes ugly in the image of Pan.

Personally, I think as Christians we shot ourselves in the foot with this seemingly brilliant move. For while I do believe that there are demonic forces that masquerade as gods demanding to be worshipped, we have allowed the world to believe something that is counter to the teachings of Scripture. Satan is not ugly - the Bible teaches us this. He is beautiful and seductive in his beauty, but no one is on guard against beauty. We are all waiting for the man in red pajamas to scare us because we think we know that this has to be what evil looks like. We have based our ideas about God and Satan on movies, not Scripture. We have accepted superstition, folk lore, and Hollywood scripts as theology instead digging into our sacred text, and in doing so allowed offered up a lie to the world instead of the truth we were entrusted to share.

Speaking of red, I almost forgot. I could find no ancient sources that gave me any indication of color. So I will offer my speculation. Red has long been associated with passion, lust, and fire. Plus, it looks good on film and producers needed to dress up their characters in ways that immediately conveyed who and what this person was to embody. If I had to guess where the red came from, that would be it, but I am open to correction.

Photo from PhotoPin