Month: April 2017

7 Ways to Interpret the Bible

7 Ways to Interpret the Bible

Versión español

The Bible is the best-selling book of all time. But it’s also probably the most argued-about book of all time as well. It doesn’t take much for a disagreement to start about what a specific passage is describing and how to interpret it. That doesn’t mean that the basic storyline of the Bible is hard to understand – it isn’t. It just means that people bring a lot of assumptions to the Bible, assumptions that influence how they understand different passages or even the whole thing.

Why does this matter? Well, the assumptions and approach we bring to the Bible drastically affects what we take from it. It’s like reading the Bible with different types of glasses that reveal different things. Different approaches have different advantages and disadvantages, and we need to be honest about them. It’s also helpful to understand (especially within Christian circles) where others are coming from, because often we argue and accuse each other of not taking the Bible seriously, which is rather unfortunate and causes a lot of division that is often not really necessary. In some ways, I am writing this post so I can share my approach to Scripture and to ask for honesty and understanding from those who might not share that approach. I hope that in the end you can see some value in some of the other ways to approach Scripture, even if you don’t fully agree with every aspect. As a Christian, some approaches definitely don’t hold much value. But some (more than one) do.

Below are 7 ways to interpret the Bible. It’s not an exhaustive list – there are probably variations on each of those, and maybe categories I haven’t thought of. But it’s a helpful place to start. Where would you fit?

  1. Hearsay – okay, this isn’t really a way to read the Bible, but it is the approach that many people use. People in this category will usually quote someone else and what they have said about the Bible without actually reading it themselves. Obviously, people in this category don’t take the Bible too seriously, and can be frustrating to deal with when they clearly don’t really know what they’re talking about. Like any of us who try to pretend we know more about something than we really do, right?
  2. Mythically – People in this category usually treat the Bible as an ancient document that may or may not have some truth in it, but is largely on the same level as any other ancient religious teaching, such as the gods of Rome or Greece. The stories are mostly considered mythical, especially if there is anything supernatural. They may take the Bible “seriously” as an ancient document, but certainly not as the Word of God.
  3. Casually – many would fall into this category, although for many different reasons. Some believe the Bible has some good teachings, but it’s no more authoritative than any other moral teaching. Others believe the Bible to be the Word of God (they take it seriously), but never really engage with it much. The reasons can be many (too busy, don’t like reading, not disciplined, find it boring), but they often come across as just excuses. It would be fair to ask how “seriously” people in this category take the Bible, but I also don’t want to be unduly harsh to the many who do take the Bible seriously, but don’t read it much.
  4. Historically-Critically – the people in this category may take the Bible seriously – some of them, anyway. They may even consider it to be the Word of God. But they have a tendency to be very critical and/or skeptical of what it says and to put themselves above the text, trying to judge what is really true and not true. I have in mind here people like the German textual critics who divide the Bible into many different sources, as well as approaches such as the Jesus Seminar. The first group will often take the Bible seriously (and can have some very important and helpful insights), but their tendency to carve up the Bible – and their extensive disagreements on how it should be divided – tend to undercut faith in the Scripture. A group like the Jesus Seminar, who divided the teachings of Jesus into various categories from “accurate” to “completely fabricated” (and only affirmed a few small phrases as actually being from Jesus) come across as arrogant and, to be honest, completely clueless. While I am all for studying the history of the Bible, this group has placed themselves so far above the Scripture that they claim they can know far better than the eyewitnesses what Jesus really said, and they have placed themselves in the position of saying that they are the deciders of truth, not the Bible.
  5. Literally (or traditionally) – okay, technically, literally should mean that they read the Bible according to the style of literature it is – read the poetry as poetry, parables as parables, history as history, etc. And most in this category do that. But this term has also been extended to mean, to quote a song I heard often growing up,  “God said it, I believe it, that settles it for me.” In other words, whatever the Bible “clearly” says is what they hold to, even though many of the “clear” teachings (particularly on non-core doctrines) are very culturally interpreted. They hold to “traditional” teachings, which are not always as obvious or traditional as they think they are, and which may not be what the original audience would have understood from them. I don’t want to sound too disparaging to this group, because a) I was in it for most of my life, and b) they take the Bible very seriously. In fact, I have known so many deeply godly and wonderful people in this category that I heartily encourage people to take the Bible as seriously as these! However, I have also seen a lot of anger and dogmatism from this group, and a refusal to allow that anyone interpreting a passage differently than them could have a point. For some, the Bible has become their god instead of a means to know God. As well, I have seen a lot of fighting between members of this group who disagree theologically on various topics (pick one – the return of Christ, free-will/predestination, status of women, etc.) and point to their own verses that “clearly” show that they are right, even though others point to verses that “clearly” show that they are wrong! So while there is a lot of good in this group, there is a lot of potential – too often realized – for stubbornness and insistence on being right.
  6. Historically-Culturally – people in this group view the Bible as a document written by humans under the direction (inspiration) of God. To be fair, many (most?) in these last four categories would agree with that. The difference is that those in this group (who also take the Bible very seriously) place a high value on understanding the influence of culture, history, and our humanity on the text, as well as trying to understand how our own culture and context influences how we read and understand the text. This group tends to raise a lot of questions – how does our understanding of the Ancient Near East culture influence our understanding of the creation account? How did Paul’s cultural reality and upbringing influence his comments and actions regarding the role of women? How do we understand the conquest of the Promised Land and some of God’s commands to kill everyone? They also tend to be a lot less firm on many secondary doctrines, because they see uncertainty in the text. The benefit of this approach is that it digs deep to try to understand the message of what God was really trying to communicate in their culture and context and how we can appropriately convey this message to our current culture and context. The challenge is that it can be easy to move subtly into group 4 that I mentioned above (they are very similar, after all), standing critically over the text, or becoming so skeptical about what is accurate that they end up sliding into a belief that the Bible is not really God’s Word. Another challenge is that of becoming arrogant due to the amount of learning about different topics that is required, and becoming just as dogmatic about secondary topics as those in the literal group. But let’s be honest – arrogance and dogmatism are common traits for anyone in categories 4, 5, and 6. It doesn’t take much for us to think that we’re right and everyone else is wrong!
  7. The Bible as narrative – The basic idea here is that we should understand the Bible as a story (not meaning fiction, just story) that reveals how God was working in a particular time and place. The focus is less on developing theology and doctrines, and more on relationship and how people listened and related to God in a specific time and from there, how we can listen and relate to God in our time. The concept is used rather broadly and in a variety of different ways. The focus on relationship with God can be very beneficial and can both bring alive our relationship with God and assist us to see how He might relate to us in our present situation. On the other hand, some have used this method to move away from key and traditional church beliefs as well as the original author’s intent. It can use a self-centred approach, ignoring theology and church history and using humanity and our feelings and society as a starting point to make the stories (and God) fit into our beliefs. Most proponents would probably argue that they take the Bible seriously; however, depending on their approach and assumptions the results can be wildly different. I believe that adding an understanding of the Bible as narrative or story can be very helpful, but I don’t think we can ignore 2000 years of theology to do so.

So those are the 7 categories that I see. With that in mind, I want to pull out two key concepts.

First, except for categories 1 and 2, there are people in each category who take the Bible seriously – often very seriously. However, their approach to Scripture varies for different reasons. I would encourage us not to assume that someone holds a low (“not God’s Word”) view of Scripture simply because they don’t approach Scripture the same as us – or hold to all the same interpretations as us.

Second, as someone who gets tired of all the fighting, I would like to ask us all to show tremendous grace to people in other categories. This is especially true for those who find themselves in the last four categories, which is where most of the intense disagreements in the church seem to come from. I find myself presently in category 6, and it can be very frustrating to hear people who view the Bible “literally” say, directly or implicitly, that I don’t take the Bible seriously because I differ in my interpretation of a verse or doctrine. I take the Bible very seriously. And I know you do, too (assuming you’re a Christian). But my serious study of the Bible may lead me to a different conclusion than your serious study of the Bible. It’s okay for us to disagree, assuming that we maintain orthodoxy (if we start to ignore Christ and reject primary beliefs and creeds such as the Apostle’s Creed or the resurrection of Christ, then it’s a whole other issue).

My next post will (hopefully) address the creation account, my interpretation of it, and why it is something that has helped me to continue in my faith rather than losing it. But I felt that it was important to challenge us all to be honest about how we interpret the Bible, and to strive for grace and understanding when others interpret some parts differently.

7 maneras de interpretar la Biblia

7 maneras de interpretar la Biblia

English version

La Biblia es el libro más vendido en el mundo. Pero probablamente es el libro más discutido del mundo también. No lleva much tiempo entrar en un desacuerdo sobre un pasaje específico y cómo interpretarlo. Eso no significa que el argumento básico de la Biblia es difícil de entender – no lo es. Simplemente significa que la gente trae muchas presuposiciones a la Biblia, presuposiciones que influyen en cómo entender diferentes pasajes o aún toda la Biblia.

¿Por qué es importante esta idea? Pues, las presuposiciones y el planteamiento que traemos a la Biblia afectan drásticamente lo que entendemos de ella. Es como leerla con diferentes lentes que nos muestran diferentes cosas. Planteamientos diferentes nos revelan diferentes cosas. Tienen ventajas y desventajas diferentes y tenemos que ser honestos sobre ellas. También es útil entender (sobre todo entre los cristianos) el planteamiento de otros, porque a menudo discutimos y nos acusamos mutuamente de no tomar en serio la Biblia, que es lamentable y causa mucha división que no es necesario. De alguna manera, estoy escribiendo este post para poder compartir cómo abordo las escrituras y para pedir honestidad y comprensión de los que tal vez no comparten ese planteamiento. Espero que con este post, puedes ver un poco del valor en algunos de los otros planteamientos hacia las escrituras, aun si no estás de acuerdo con cada aspecto. Como cristiano, es cierto que algunos planteamientos definitivamente no tienen mucho valor. Pero algunos (más que uno) sí lo tienen.

Lo que sigue son 7 maneras de leer la Biblia. No es una lista exhaustiva. Probablamente hay variaciones de cada uno de estos grupos y tal vez categorías en que no he pensado. Sin embargo, es un buen lugar para empezar. ¿Cuál planteamiento utilizes tú?

  1. Por Los rumores – bueno, esto no es una manera de leer la Biblia, exactamente, pero es el planteamiento que muchos utilizan. La gente de esta categoría normalmente citan a alguien y lo que que esa persona ha dicho sobre la Biblia sin haberla leído por sí mismo. Obviamente, la gente de este grupo no toman la Biblia muy en serio, y puede ser muy frustrante tratar con alguien que claramente no sepa de que está hablando. Sería igual por nosotros si tratáramos de hablar sobre un tema de que no sepamos nada, ¿verdad?
  2. Como Mito – por lo general, la gente en esta categoría tratan la Biblia como un documento antiguo que quizás sí, quizás no tiene un poco de verdad, pero es principalmente en el mismo nivel como cualquier otra enseñanza religiosa antigua, como los dioses de Roma o Grecia. Las historias se consideran míticas, sobre todo si hay algo sobrenatural. Tal vez “toman en serio” la Biblia como un documento antiguo, pero definitivamente no como la palabra de Dios.
  3. De manera informal – hay muchos en este grupo, aunque por diferentes razones. Algunos creen que la Biblia tiene algunas enseñanzas buenas, pero que no tiene más autoridad que cualquier otra enseñanza moral. Otros creen que la Biblia es la palabra de Dios (la toman en serio), pero nunca interactúan con ella. Las razones son diversas (son demasiados ocupados, no les gusta leer, no tienen disciplina, les parece aburrida, etc.), pero a menudo estas razones solamente parecen ser puros pretextos. Sería justo cuestionar cuan “en serio” este grupo toma la Biblia, pero no quiero ser excesivamente duro a los muchos que toman en serio la Biblia, pero no la leen mucho.
  4. Histórico-crítico – algunos de esta categoría toman en serio la Biblia. Tal vez aún la consideran como la palabra de Dios. Pero tienen una tendencia a ser muy crítico y/o escéptico de ella y a menudo se ponen a sí mismos encima del texto, tratando de juzgar qué es verdadero y qué no. Tengo en mente personas como los críticos textuales alemanes quien dividen la Biblia entre muchos diferentes fuentes o las del el “Jesus Seminar”. El primer grupo a menudo toma en serio la Biblia (y puede tener unas percepciones muy importantes y útiles), pero su tendencia a partir la Biblia – y sus desacuerdos extensivos en cómo partirla – tienden a debilitar la fe en las escrituras. Un grupo como el “Jesus Seminar”, que divide las enseñanzas de Jesús en varias categorías desde “cierta” a “completamente fabricada” (y al fin solamente “validan” unas frases como verdaderamente de Jesús) me parece completamente arrogante y, para ser honesto, completamente sin idea de lo que habla. Aunque estoy muy en favor de estudiar la historia de la Biblia, este grupo se pone tan encima de las escrituras que dicen que ellos pueden saber mucho mejor que los testigos contemporáneos de Jesús lo que él verdaderamente decía. Ellos (los del “Jesus Seminar”) se han puesto en la posición de decidir la verdad mejor que la Biblia.
  5. Literalmente (o tradicionalmente) – técnicamente (por lo menos en inglés), esto debería significar que estas personas leen la Biblia de acuerdo con el tipo de literatura que es – la poesía como poesía, la parábolas como parábolas, la historia como historia, etc. Y la mayoría en esta categoría hacen eso. Sin embargo, este término se ha extendido a significar que no hay otra manera de leer la sino por la interpretación “tradicional” y la que más fácil a nuestro entendimiento. En otras palabras, cualquier cosa que la Biblia diga “claramente” (sin mucho estudio o interpretación) es lo que ellos creen, aunque muchas de las enseñanzas “claras” (particularmente sobre doctrinas no centrales) han sido interpretados a través de una cultura específica. Las enseñanzas tradicionales que ellos afirman no son tan tradicionales como ellos piensan, o los a que estas enseñanzas fueron escritas originalmente no las hubieran entendido en la manera que este grupo las entienden. No quiero menospreciar los de este grupo porque a) fui parte de este grupo por la mayoría de mi vida, y b) ellos toman la Biblia muy en serio. De hecho, he conocido muchísimos en este grupo que son muy devotos y maravillosos – te animo a tomar la Biblia tan en serio como los de este grupo! Sin embargo, también he visto mucho enojo y dogmatismo en este grupo y a menudo un rechazo completo de cualquier interpretación de la Biblia que no está de acuerdo con sus doctrinas e interpretación. Ni siquiera conceden la posibilidad de otra interpretación. Por algunos, la Biblia se ha convertido en su dios en vez de ser su herramienta para conocer a Dios. También, he visto muchos desacuerdos dentro de este grupo entre personas que no están de acuerdo sobre varios puntos teológicos (escoge uno: le segunda venida de Cristo, libre albedrío contra predestinación, el rol de mujeres, etc). Cada uno apunta a sus versículos favoritos que “claramente” validan su opinión, ¡aunque otros apuntan a versículos que “claramente” muestran que están equivocados! Entonces, mientras que hay mucho bueno en este grupo, también hay mucha potencial – que desafortunadamente se convierte a menudo en realidad – por terquedad y una insistencia en estar correcto en vez de vivir en amor.
  6. Histórico-cultural – los de este grupo ven la Biblia como un documento escrito por humanos bajo la dirección (inspiración) de Dios. Para ser justo, muchos (la mayoría) en estas últimas cuatro categorías estarían de acuerdo con eso. La diferencia es que los en este grupo ponen un valor alto en entender la influencia de la cultura, la historia, y nuestra humanidad en el texto, además de tratar de entender como nuestra propia cultura y contexto influyen como leemos y entendemos el texto. Este grupo tiende a tener muchas preguntas: ¿Cómo influye nuestro entendimiento de la cultura antigua del cercano oriente nuestro entendimiento de la cuenta de la creación? ¿Cómo afectó la realidad cultural y la crianza de Pablo sus comentarios y acciones en cuanto al rol de mujeres? ¿Cómo entendemos la conquista de la tierra prometida y algunos de los órdenes de Dios a matar a todos? Ellos también tienden de ser mucho menos firme con relación a doctrinas secundarias porque ven incertidumbre en el texto. Lo bueno de este planteamiento es que investiga muy profundamente el contexto para tratar de entender el mensaje que Dios quería comunicar en la cultura original y cómo podemos expresar este mensaje apropiadamente en nuestra cultura y contexto. El desafío es que puede ser muy fácil de pasar a grupo 4 y ponerse encima del texto en vez de bajo su autoridad, o de volverse tan escéptico sobre qué es cierto en la Biblia que terminan en creer que la Biblia no es verdaderamente la palabra de Dios. Otro desafío es la posibilidad de hacerse arrogante debido al monto de aprendizaje requerido sobre diferentes temas, y también de hacerse tan dogmático sobre doctrinas secundarias como los de la categoría 5. Pero seamos honestos – la arrogancia y el dogmatismo son características comunes por cualquier persona en categorías 4, 5 y 6. No tarda mucho para hacernos pensar que nosotros tenemos razón y los demás están equivocados.
  7. Como narrativo – la idea en esta categoría es que debemos entender la Biblia como una historia (no como ficción, sino como un narrativo) que revela cómo Dios estuvo obrando en un tiempo y lugar particular. El enfoque de las escrituras no es tanto en desarrollar teología y doctrina, sino en mostrar una relación con Dios y cómo la gente escuchaba y se relacionaba con Dios, y desde ese punto, aprender cómo podemos escuchar y relacionarnos a Dios en nuestro tiempo. El concepto se usa muy ampliamente y en una variedad de maneras diferentes. El enfoque en la relación con Dios puede ser muy beneficioso y puede traer vida a nuestra relación con Dios y ayudarnos a entender cómo Él se relaciona con nosotros en nuestra situación actual. Por el otro lado, algunos han utilizado este método para alejarse de creencias claves y tradicionales de la iglesia, y también del intento original del autor. Ellos pueden empezar desde una perspective egocéntrico, pasando por alto la teología y historia de la iglesia, utilizando la humanidad y nuestra sociedad y sentimientos como el punto de partido para hacer que las historias (y Dios) se acomoden a nuestras creencias. La mayoría de los defensores de esta posición probablamente dirían que toman en serio la Biblia, sin embargo, dependiendo en su enfoque y presuposiciones los resultados y interpretaciones pueden variar muchísimo. Creo que aumentar nuestro entendimiento con esta idea de la Biblia como narrativo puede ser muy útil, pero no creo que podamos ignorar 2000 años de teología para hacerlo.

Entonces, esos son las 7 categorías que yo veo. Con eso en mente, quiero dirigirnos a dos conceptos claves.

Primero, excepto por categorías 1 y 2, hay gente en cada categoría que toman en serio la Biblia. Sin embargo, su manera de abordar las escrituras varía por diferentes razones. Nos animo no asumir que alguien no tome en serio la Biblia solamente porque no abordan las escrituras en la misma manera como nosotros o porque no tienen las mismas interpretaciones como nosotros.

Segundo, como uno que se cansa de todas las discusiones cáusticas, les pido a todos que aprenden a mostrar mucha gracia a personas que interpretan la Biblia desde otra perspectiva. Esto es especialmente necesario por los que se encuentran en las últimas cuatro categorías, donde ocurra la mayoría de las disputas intensas en la iglesia. Ahorita, me encuentro en la sexta categoría, y es muy frustrante cuando alguien me acusa (directamente o implícitamente) de no tomar en serio la Biblia porque tenemos interpretaciones diferentes de un versículo o doctrina. Yo tomo la Biblia muy en serio y yo sé que tú también lo haces (suponiendo que eres un cristiano). Pero mi estudio de la Biblia a veces me lleva a una conclusión diferente que la tuya. Está bien que no estamos de acuerdo, siempre que mantengamos la ortodoxia (si empezamos a ignorar a Cristo o rechazamos credos y creencias primarias como el credo de los apóstoles o que Jesús resucitó, eso es otro asunto).

Mi post siguiente tratará con el relato de la creación, mi interpretación de ella, y por qué esa es algo que me ha ayudado a seguir en mi fe en vez de perderla. Pero sentí que era muy importante animarnos a ser honestos sobre cómo interpretamos la Biblia, y esforzarnos por tener gracia y entendimiento cuando otros interpretan algunas partes de la Biblia en una manera diferente.

The Resurrection

The Resurrection

To all my skeptical (unbelieving) friends and family,

I get it. As we celebrate Easter today, I just wanted to let you know – I stand with you. This whole resurrection thing (Jesus coming back to life) is hard to believe. I like things that I can see and touch and feel, things that fit into what is normal. God, a spiritual world, and especially the resurrection don’t fit into those nice categories. The idea of the resurrection is incredible, even ludicrous. And yet, even though I stand with you in being skeptical and incredulous, at the end of the day, I stand on the side of faith and belief. Here are a few of the reasons why:

  • Something happened. I can’t get away from the fact that something happened those many years ago – something so momentous that 11 out of 12 of his disciples were willing to die for it, and it eventually upended the Roman world.

    Some say it was a lie – a fabrication of the disciples. But 12 people willing to die for something they know is a lie is hard to believe. Basing a tremendous moral teaching on a lie makes them deceitful, not great. Casting yourself as the dunce (as the disciples did in the gospels) goes contrary to the normal trend of someone looking for a following, where you try to show off how smart you are and why people should believe you. The usual motives of sex, money and power are all contrary to what they taught (sexual morality and restraint, poverty or at least sacrificing material well-being for others, and serving others/suffering was the teaching and lifestyle of the disciples). And crafting such a wild story in the place where it can best be proven false is also a ridiculous idea. In sum, it’s hard to believe it was a made-up story, or that they disciples were gaining anything by this belief.

    Some say the disciples were just wrong, that they only thought Jesus rose again, or that it was just a spiritual resurrection. But that assumes a level of stupidity on their part that is just insulting. They knew what death looked like – they were likely far more familiar with it than us. They also knew that people didn’t rise from the dead, and were just as skeptical as us. Yet that’s what they proclaimed – a physical resurrection. Thomas didn’t believe at first (John 20:24-29), and even as Jesus was going up to heaven, Matthew tells us some doubted (28:17). The people of Israel were not simpletons or religious, fanatical fools. They were people like you and me, who were just as likely to scoff as believe. And yet, in the heart of Jerusalem, a mere 50 days after the resurrection, the church exploded. Among the people who had seen Jesus, heard his teaching, and had access to all the disciples, to all the people who knew him, to the tomb, and to all of his enemies. It was these people, who were best able to verify (or not) the truthfulness of the story of his resurrection, who first accepted his resurrection as true – even many of the priests. It seems unlikely that a “made up” resurrection would have gone anywhere.

  • Science doesn’t explain miracles. The resurrection is a miracle – something out of the ordinary. Science does it’s work in the natural world, observing and explaining normal patterns and events. (See here for a scientists views on the matter.) Yes, science clears up many mysteries that seemed miraculous. But by definition, miracles are one-time, unrepeatable events. Science doesn’t explain them, nor can it prove that they didn’t happen. Science is limited in it’s explanatory power – it doesn’t explain the meaning of life, the mystery of our souls (that most people believe we have) or the existence of anything beyond this observable world (metaphysics, spiritual realities, etc.). Heck, there are still a lot of gaps in what we can study – why would we think that science can “explain away” the resurrection? That’s where we turn to history, as I briefly outlined above.
  • I believe in God. When I look at humanity around me, I see something pretty common – people long for justice, beauty, love, and life. Our longing for these things doesn’t prove that God exists, but as many others have said, thirst indicates that water exists. Our longing for all of these things indicates that there is something (someone) who can fulfill that longing. Science can’t disprove God any more than it can prove His existence, and once we open that door to the possibility of God, miracles and even the resurrection are not so implausible. On the other hand, if God is removed from the equation, then our death is the end – we simply cease to exist. And there is no justice for those who experience a life of injustice, no beauty to look forward to, no love that carries on beyond this life. My longings (echoed by what I would say is the vast majority of people) for all of these things causes me to believe that there is fulfillment somewhere. Then you add in a story (incredible, yet credible) that Jesus defeated death and promises eternal life, justice, love and beauty (what we all long for), why are we so hesitant to believe?
  • The person of Jesus. It’s hard to look at the life of Jesus and not be impressed by him. His love and compassion were off the charts, his moral teachings are considered among the best ever, and his miracles were incredible. Then he kept claiming that he was God (ability to forgive sins, claims that he would judge the world, saying he and the Father were one, etc.). Finally, you add to that his resurrection, and suddenly him being God is not so far fetched, even if it is hard to believe for us materialistic, “prove it!” types.

Look, I know that Christians and the church have a bad reputation in many circles right now. Sometimes even for good reasons. Certainly the church has not always been right and definitely has not always been a reflection of Jesus. But I also think that much of the bad reputation is undeserved. Think about it – it’s pretty significant that science, hospitals, universities, democracy, and things like free speech/freedom of worship have all developed primarily in the western, “Christian” world. I know that not all – maybe not even most – individuals were christians, but our western society did have as its base Christian concepts such as mercy, freedom, compassion, justice, and a belief that we could learn about our world (since God made it and it would be logical). For all its missteps, I believe the church has been very positive for society as a whole, and I believe that the teachings – and the resurrection! – of Jesus is the basis for that, regardless of how that has been twisted or forgotten at times.

If you’re skeptical and you’re reading this, I don’t expect you to drop everything and suddenly follow Jesus. But I don’t think it would hurt to pick up the Bible and start reading the stories of Jesus and who he was (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in the New Testament). If you’re really interested, you could search for some Christian sources who explain why the resurrection is actually a realistic idea (Ravi Zacharias and Lee Strobel would be two sources to get you started). You might be surprised to realize that as crazy as it sounds, perhaps it’s not so crazy after all.

So happy Easter. And with many other Christians around the world, I proclaim (as incredulous as it sometimes is to me), “He is risen. He is risen indeed.”