Gonzalez & Perez on Genesis & Gender

"The story in Genesis 2 that tells of man being created first, then the animals, and finally the woman, has been interpreted as affirming that the woman's purpose in life is to be a "helper" to the man, who is to be her lord. Such an interpretation has no basis in the text. There, God seeks to create an appropriate helper for the man. The word that is here translated as "helper" normally is employed in Hebrew Scriptures to refer to God as Israel's "helper." . . . Therefore, the relationship of dominion and control between male and female among humans is not part of original creation, but is rather the result of sin--as is also affirmed in Genesis 3:16.

"Sadly and tragically, an incorrect interpretation of this passage has been and still is an excuse for much abuse against women. It is time for Christians--male as well as female--to reject such an interpretation, and seek to do justice to all who carry in them the image and likeness of God."

Justo L. Gonzalez and Zaida Maldonado Perez, An Introduction to Christian Theology, 65-66

Hint of Hauerwas

"Rightly reading the signs of the times requires a church capable of standing against the legitimizing stories of the day. American Christians often think that if we had been confronted with someone like Hitler we would have been able to recognize that he was evil. Yet in many ways, the church in Germany was a church more theologically articulate than the American church has ever been; still the German church failed to know how to adequately challenge the rise of Hitler. It failed because Christians in Germany assumed that they were German Christians just as American Christians assume that they are American Christians. Churches that are nationally identified will seldom be able to faithfully read the signs of the time. Jesus's condemnation of the Pharisees and Sadducees for their inability to read the signs of the times, that is, to recognize all that has been and all that is still to be must now be read under the sign of Jonah, remains a challenge for us."

- Stanley Hauerwas, Matthew, 147 

Heretic Award to Bauer

Here at Cramer Comments, we don't throw around the "H" word lightly. You really have to earn it. And earn it is what former Republican presidential candidate, Gary Bauer, has done. Here is an excerpt from Wednesday's article, "Torture debate prompts evangelical soul searching": 

Gary Bauer, a former Republican presidential candidate affiliated with several Christian right groups over the years, said the discussion should not come down to "Would Jesus torture?"

"There are a lot of things Jesus wouldn't do because he's the son of God," he said. "I can't imagine Jesus being a Marine or a policeman or a bank president, for that matter. The more appropriate question is, 'What is a follower of Jesus permitted to do?'"

Bauer said the answer is "it depends" — but the moral equation changes when the suspect is not a soldier captured on a battlefield but a terrorist who may have knowledge of an impending attack. He said he does not consider water-boarding — a form of interrogation that simulates drowning — to be torture.

"I think if we believe the person we have can give us information to stop thousands of Americans from being killed, it would be morally suspect to not use harsh tactics to get that information," Bauer said.

Here Bauer has endorsed a view of Jesus that has been anthematized for over sixteen hundred years: Apollinarianism. In short, Apollinarianism is 

The teaching of the fourth-century bishop of Laodicea Apollinarius (c. 310-391), who declared that in his incarnation Christ took on a human body and soul but not a human mind or spirit (nous). Apollinarius argued that to have a human spirit is to have a free will. But where there is free will, there is also sin. Therefore, Apollinarius concluded, Christ operated solely on the basis of a divine mind or nous. The church officially rejected Apollinarianism at the Second Ecumenical Council at Constantinople in A.D. 381. (S. Grenz, D. Guretzki, and C.F. Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, 13).

Regardless of the somewhat antiquated tripartite view of human nature (body, soul, spirit), there is still good reason for the rejection of Apollinarianism. Bauer's logic is a case in point. The author of Hebrews teaches that Christ was tempted like us in every way, yet without sin. As such, he can sympathize with us in our weakness, including our fear of national or personal harm. And since in Jesus' farewell address, he exhorts us to teach everything he has commanded and promises to be with us always, Bauer's logic is theologically bankrupt. 

As Christ-followers, our discussion should indeed come down to "would Jesus torture." And moreover, if Jesus wouldn't be a Marine, policeman, or bank president, then we Christ-followers should think long and hard about our involvement in these activities as well (especially assuming Jesus wouldn't do them for moral reasons). 

Asking what a follower of Jesus would be "permitted" to do is for the morally immature. As Paul argues, even if "Everything is permissible," not everything is beneficial. Focusing on that which is permissible is not likely to conform us to the likeness of Christ. And, moreover, using consequentialist or utilitarian moral reasoning (i.e., torturing just a few bad guys might save thousands of good guys) is flatly anti-Christian.  

For these reasons, Gary Bauer has gained himself the distinct title of the first ever recipiant of the Cramer Comments Heresy Award. Congratulations, Jack, or um, Gary Bauer.

Carson on the Gospel Coalition's Stance on Women in Ministry

"We're still working that stuff out, to be brutally frank. I don't think we've got it quite right."

I concur. 

[HT: Michael Bird. See full interview here.]

Fact, Value, and God

Why are hordes of people flocking to my site this week to read my review of Arthur Holmes' Fact, Value, and God? Is there a book report for a class due this week or something? If you're here for that reason, do tell me what it is, please. I'm curious. What school are you all from?

Oh, and while you're here, take a couple seconds to vote on my poll questions on the right bar. Thanks.

Take My Survey

In light of the Pew Research Center survey on views of torture, I have added a survey (to the right) for my readers. Please take a minute to answer the questions. Results will be discussed next month.

Thanks,

DCC 

A Just War?

"Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of minimum force. An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy, it must be an attack on a military objective, and the harm caused to civilians or civilian property must be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. This principle is meant to limit excessive and unnecessary death and destruction." (wikipedia: just war)

Civilian deaths mount as Afghan war deepens

Don’t Jump to Conclusions on Afghanistan Civilian Deaths, U.S. General Cautions