Who do We Think We are?

In 2004, a TV series titled “Who Do You Think You Are?” first appeared on British television screens. The TV show starts with a famous figure outlining the limited knowledge the family circle has about those of earlier generations and the famous figure outlines possible avenues of enquiry that they want the TV programme to explore. Often the results are surprising. Sometimes ancestors are shown to have been squanderers or criminals. On other occasions previously unknown parental heroism and suffering has been revealed. Occasionally filming has been abandoned where ancestral research has not revealed anything out of the ordinary. The TV show title could be adapted to “Who Do We Think We Are?” to investigate the church family.

A 1975 Peanuts cartoon shows Sally writing a paper on church history. She states “When writing about church history, we have to go back to the very beginning. Our pastor was born in 1930.” Charlie Brown rolls his eyes on hearing this. To a child, someone in their 40s can seem rather ancient but adults too be can caught up with the here-and-now with their interest in church history focusing on their particular congregation rather than the distant historical reaches of the church.

Some Christians are prepared to consider the bigger picture. Yes, the true church existed during the apostolic era and shortly thereafter but then Catholicism extinguished it until its resurrection during the reformation. The Seventeenth Century Anglican theologian Mark Frank addressed this “And indeed in itself it is most ridiculous to think the custom, and practice, and order, and interpretations of all times and Churches should be false, and those of yesterday only true, unless we can think the Spirit of Truth has been fifteen or sixteen hundred years asleep, and never waked till now of late; or can imagine that Christ should found a Church, and promise to be with it to the end of the world, and then leave it presently to Antichrist to be guided by him for above fifteen hundred years together.” So likewise a view that dismisses three quarters of church history contradicts Christ’s promise to always be with the church (Matthew 28:20).

Let us be clear, church history incorporates much more than the history of our particular local church. There are benefits in knowing the circumstances how our assembly of Christian believers came into existence and the struggles and blessings it has known. However, when we ignore the history of the universal church there is much of value that we are missing. We need to see beyond the historical myopia we impose on ourselves with such thinking. It's good to remember that we are part of God's family and God has never deserted the Church.

Anti-Semitism and a man-made view of God

Somewhere circa 2004 I found myself in a theology class discussion concerning the book of Hebrews with a group of about 10+ others. The topic under discussion was the alleged anti-Semitism of the book of Hebrews. After listening to a paper the group was asked if they believed the author was anti-Semitic but no one agreed that the author was anti-Semitic.

Realising this made for poor discussion the leader then asked what anti-Semitism was. Answers were given that it was hostility towards or prejudice against Jews or Judaism. The leader said that was not strictly accurate as the Semitic peoples also included Arabs but particularly after the Third Reich’s atrocities the definition narrowed to mean Jews.

This man had been living in Beirut during the 1982 Lebanon War in which Israeli forces surrounded West Beirut. It was not clearly stated but I believe that our class leader was not exactly an enthusiast for Israeli military actions in the Middle East and his prejudice possibly extended somewhat beyond this. He had mentioned at one point driving away from Israeli bombings.

He asked when anti-Semitism began. One of us suggested that it extended back to the book of Esther and the actions of Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite (Est 3:1). Haman was upset that Mordecai refused to bow down and give reverence to Haman and he planned revenge (Est 3:2-5). That revenge is outlined in the following verse:

Esther 3:6 And he thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone; for they had shewed him the people of Mordecai: wherefore Haman sought to destroy all the Jews that were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, even the people of Mordecai.

In Esther 3:10 Haman the Agagite is referred to as “... the enemy of the Jews.” In the class discussion it was mentioned that the Agagites (Link to ISBE on Agagite) were usually associated in Jewish tradition at least with the Amalekites. The Amalekites had attacked Israel on their exodus from Egypt and God urged the destruction of Amalek.

1 Samuel 15:2-3 Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.'"

The class leader rejected Haman’s actions to destroy the Jews as anti-Semitism calling it inter-tribal disputes. At this point the class leader said that he was glad he taught New Testament as this passage in 1 Samuel did not fit in with his “concept of God” and this passage was “not within his preaching canon of scripture.”

He then went on to reject the expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290 (Link to "Readmission of Jews to Britain in 1656") as anti-Semitic and said that anti-Semitism first appeared in the nineteenth century and was largely the product of German theologians.

Not only was this teacher wrong on the origins of anti-Semitism allowing his bias to cloud his opinion on this matter but even more worrying was that this supposed evangelical tried to make God fit the image that he held within his mind’s eye. I believe the class was shocked that he regretted that the 1 Samuel ch. 15 passage existed. Needless to say, I did not hold that man’s opinions of scripture very highly after this incident. That man has since retired.

I wonder how many of us find scripture texts we're uncomfortable with. Perhaps we put them down to some error by the biblical author but we don't want to declare it openly. God gave us all of scripture without error for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness so that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Let us be wary of thinking we know better than God about our needs. We should go to Scripture to learn about God rather than constructing him as we wish. We need to remember the words of Romans 9:20f. that we are merely the clay and God is the potter.