A Hard Mercy

I’ll relate this post to the home page piece concerning the union of God, though his Word, with our messy lives.

There is a hard truth about the mercy of God: it does have limits. God will not violate our free will, forcing us to receive truth about him, ourselves, or the world around us. If we persist in pride and unbelief, if by these things we so harden our hearts against him, he will, with pain, give us what we want, freedom from him. That this delusional freedom results in death becomes our terrible responsibility.

Is there a word from God about this? Yes, in Paul’s caution to the Hebrew Christians, that they not make the same mistake as their ancestors.

“Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. 1For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end. As it is said,

‘Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.’

For who were those who heard and yet rebelled? Was it not all those who left Egypt led by Moses? And with whom was he provoked for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, but to those who were disobedient? So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief.” -Hebrews 3.12-19

Nothing will prove more tragic for a man or women than to learn they hardened their heart against the Word of God and lost forever his promised rest. Clearly, there is a limit to the mercy of God, yet in this warning his mercy still speaks, “Today, if you hear his voice…”. We have today, no promise of a tomorrow of so-called second chances. All we can ever be sure of is the Word we hear in our ear, not what we dream of hearing in the future.

It is true, some are too ill to receive a Word from God in a given moment. For some others, the mind is darkened through ignorance of the truth. But will that be an excuse if we had opportunity, yet built a wall against the tide of mercy?

Exceptions and God’s mercy for our weakness often appear endless. If that weren’t so, there would be no need to warn against presumption. And there is a need. Because many today are assuming an authority for their ecclesiastical decisions that openly contradict the plain sense of Scripture. (I know “plain sense” is an abused term by misguided literalist who refuse to see nuances in the Word, nevertheless, the Bible was written for the personal benefit of the common people. There isn’t a whiff of elitist stench about it.)

Unlocking the book of Revelation: Some helps for Interpretation

Below are 12 helpful principles, some guidelines for getting the most out of your reading and study of the Book of Revelation, also known as the Apocalypse. It is not exhaustive, but certainly a critical list of things to keep in mind. These are principles I use and have found essential in hearing what God has to say, especially about the ‘end of days’, the stream of time I find myself wading, now more than hip deep.

1. Let the Bible interpret itself.

There are more than 600 allusions to the Old Testament in the book of Revelation. By ‘allusions’ I mean that when the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible (commonly abbreviated as LXX) is used for comparison, we find many phrases or words that can be directly attributed to the Old Testament as a source or influence. And there are more direct, explicit references as well. Scholars very on the exact number, but the majority, a large majority, agree that the Apocalypse cannot be read as it was meant to be without using the Old Testament as a guide.

More than this, the book of Revelation is also deeply connected to the rest of the New Testament. It was the last book of the Bible written, certainly after 70 AD and probably closer to 90 AD. All the Scriptures before it, like streams, are tributaries to this vast river of inspired thought .

Therefore, a first principle of interpretation says we should study the book of Revelation in the context of the whole Bible, especially noting the imagery and symbolism of the Hebrew Old Testament. Otherwise, any interpreter can merely add their own gloss to the text, picking loose associations from without and imposing them within the text. We often see this when the daily news of the latest generation is used to interpret the symbolic visions. Imagine the distortions that occur over the centuries when this method is employed to ‘decode’ this sacred text.

If we are going to understand what God is saying to man in this divinely inspired oracle, then we must find the keys consistently in the whole canon of Scripture.

2. Jesus, the Messiah, not Israel, is the central focus of Scripture.

Jesus was rejected by his own people at his first coming because they mistakenly interpreted prophecies according to their political focus on themselves. So it can happened today, with the Church, the true Israel of God, caught out in navel gazing rather than seeing that Christ is the centre of Revelation’s attention.

Theological interpretation that is consistent with Scripture will see all of Biblical history preoccupied with the person and work of Jesus, the Christ. The book of Revelation is not the mere inspiration for spiritual map makers who want to precisely chart every year of the future. Events are certainly foretold and we warned, comparing past history with current events so that we might see our own place in God’s plan of salvation. But the ‘who’ of the story is far more important than the ‘when’. To get the time right, as did the Jews at the birth of Jesus, but miss the Messiah is a tragedy whose horror cannot be exaggerated.

The Apocalypse is called ‘the testimony of Jesus’. No other book in the Bible is given in such a direct way from Christ himself to us. If you will, it is the ‘fifth’ gospel, the most intimate communication of Jesus with his children. Though the messages are hidden in symbols to keep prying eyes and malicious minds at a distance, it is an open book to those whose faith is seeking a Savior.

3. Symbols point to something other than themselves.

A common mistake among ‘literalist’ interpreters is to take a symbol from Revelation and look for an exact replica in their own time or another. This can be illustrated by a recent example.
In one of his videos, Dr. Walter Veith, a zoologist by profession, quotes the following passage:

“And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her sexual immorality.” Revelation 17.3-4

He then shows a picture of a modern coin that has a women holding a cup in her hand. He says this coin, associated with the Catholic church, is therefore connected to the passage in Revelation. If we follow this reasoning, then we must also take the other symbolic images and find corresponding, literal realities. We must look for a seven headed beast with ten horns being ridden by a prostitute in real time, so on and so forth. It is easy to see the ridiculousness of such a method, yet interpretations of this kind are commonly used.

As a result, the book of Revelation, a book requiring close study, becomes the object of scorn by those already struggling with doubts. A cursory surf of the internet will disclose a sad list of similar ‘interpretations’.

Following a simple rule which says symbols are signs pointing to something other than themselves will save the reader of Revelation a lot of grief. Should Dr. Veith and others allow the Bible to interpret itself they would have asked how cups, gold or otherwise, are used symbolically throughout Scripture. They would examine how God has used the same symbols in the past and how they were interpreted by those who received them. If each of the symbols are questioned this way, a rich, coherent, meaningful message from God will begin to emerge, inspiring the reader with a nearness of God’s presence, which this book and all Biblical prophecy was always intended to give.

4. Be familiar with the Old Testament sanctuary worship.

Each vision in Revelation is introduced by imagery from the Old Testament sanctuary service. You can see this from the opening chapter, where Jesus is portrayed walking among the ‘lamp stands’ dressed in the garments of a priest. Succeeding visions are opened in a similar, if less detailed way. We must, therefore, allow the sanctuary service to guide our thoughts as we interpret what follows.

We know from the book of Hebrews, especially chapters 8-10, that this service was a type of Christ’ ministry for us, both on earth and after his ascension to work as our high priest in the heavenly service. It points to him as our sacrifice for sin and our mediator between us and God. This must remain a central truth to guide us, as pointed out by the prominent use of the sanctuary types in the Apocalypse.

5. The book of Daniel is a core source of Revelation’s theology and imagery.

Many notice the similarities between the symbolic use of time and the beastly creatures in the books of Daniel and Revelation. But the connection is deeper. Many of the phrases, such as “what will soon take place” are direct allusions to Daniel (see Daniel 2 and compare with Revelation 1). No other book of the Old Testament has such an explicit link to the Apocalypse. But having said that, there are also very strong connections to other prophetic books, Ezekiel being the most noted, as well as Zechariah, Joel and the other prophets.

6. Jesus’ and Paul’s use of Daniel are also indispensable guides.

Mark 13, Matthew 24, and Luke 21 reveal what a student Jesus was of the book of Daniel and how it formed the outline of his preaching on things to come. Paul also depends heavily on Daniel in 2 Thessalonians 2.

Prominent scholars and commentators have remarked on the link between Jesus’ order of events in the gospels and the vision of the 7 seals in Revelation 6. Any study of Revelation must respect that the teachings of Jesus in the gospels will harmonize with his testimony in the Apocalypse. Of all the teachers one could have, none have more authority than Christ himself.

7. Do not let the trees hide the forest.

A broad, divine, thematic sweep of history is envisioned in the Apocalypse. There is always a danger that a preoccupation with symbols and chronologies while hide the oft repeated brush strokes of a God who is sovereign over all things. We are meant to see, as said Daniel, a God who not only reveals mystery’s but also in control of human affairs, political or otherwise.

Though the end will be a time of terrible events and deep distress, we see a God who not surprised by the twist of circumstances or the threat of evil. If prophecy reveals anything, it shows that the victorious outcome of God and his people is assured through the sacrifice of Christ at Calvary. (See Rev. 12 for an overview of salvation history.)

8. Do not confuse classical prophecy with apocalyptic prophecy.

Classical prophecy is defined as those that deal primarily, though not exclusively, with events within the lifetime or near lifetime of the prophet and people of a certain epoch. What is called apocalyptic prophecy has a distinctly ‘end-time’ focus. Its visions are sharply pointing to the final events of earth’s history.

We need to make this distinction to keep from misapplying a local prediction with an end-time event. For example, the prophet Joel uses both types of prophecy. He speaks of a real-time locust plague for Israel, but one that will foreshadow or typify final events. Most other prophecies have this flavor and it is important to understand what is carried forward to the end-time or to what is often called the “day of the Lord” and what is not.

This is especially true when interpreting references to Israel as the people of God. Some believe that literal Israel or literal Jews will play a major part in last day events. Others, including myself, believe Scripture teaches that from the cross and resurrection of Christ, the Church, that is those of faith or with “the faith of Abraham” are now the covenant people of God. For the more detailed argument on this, see Hans K. LaRondell’s excellent book, “The Israel of God in Prophecy”.

9. Never study the Scripture without prayer and an attitude of dependence on God.

The book of Revelation opens with a promise to of grace and understanding, a blessing, for those who hear and read this prophecy. It is a revealed, not hidden, book. God has sent a message though is Son, his angels, and his prophet to his people. He has spoken and will bless those who come to him in faith. He will help, especially those of us living in the end of days to understand and do his will.

10. Respect the literary structure of the book.

Revelation is an intricately woven, beautiful tapestry of thought modelled on a Hebrew literary structure called a chiasm, a pattern that moves from the two ends toward the middle. This places the primary emphasis on chapters 12-14.
Patterns of seven are repeated. These, using Daniel as our guide, must be understood as continuous-historical unfolding of events. What follows repeats and expands on what has gone before. Take Daniel 2 as your model and compare it with Daniel seven.

This is the way of apocalyptic prophecy. A succeeding prophecy repeats a previous vision in a parallel pattern, covering the same times, people, places, and events while adding more detail. Each vision culminates in the same way, the dominion being returned to Christ and his people. Such a pattern of revelation must also be followed in revelation given its close dependency on the book of Daniel.

Few things with respect to the problem of the ‘when’, of the problem of time and it’s chronological unfolding of events in the book, can have more importance than understanding this principle of parallelism and repetition.
Let the previous use of vision, clearly seen in Daniel, be your guide.

11. Give special attention to the Exodus / Babylon motifs.

     The historical events surrounding the Exodus of Israel serve as types of the Church’s ‘exodus’ from the wilderness of sin in the last days, looking toward the ‘promised land’ and ‘heaven’. Also, the captivity of the Jews in Babylon in the 6th century BC is a type of the Church’s captivity and apostasy in the end times. We need not slavishly follow every historical detail in searching for a corresponding present-day type. Yet the references are clear enough to suggest a strong thematic similarity, history, in the principle features of the conflict between Christ and Satan, good and evil, are repeated according to the laws of cause and effect. What has been will be again in some form. History repeats itself.

     For example, the reasons God brought the plagues on Egypt will inform our understanding of why he will bring more in the last days. The reasons Israel was taken captive to Babylon…idolatry and spiritual adultery…are the same things enslaving the apostate Church now. Just as Israel was called to come out of Egypt and Babylon in her history, so the Church is called to repentance and faith today. (See Revelation 18.4; chapters 15-16 and 3.14-22 as examples).

12. Remember, always remember, the Covenant theme.


Again, the safe course is to let the Bible speak for itself. I will offer one hint. The ‘New’ covenant does not replace the ‘Old’ but renews, fulfils, and consummates the Old. Given the closing revelation that the “old” covenant is radically consummated at the end (21.3), no other view makes sense.

You might want to look at some of the download able files I have here on prophecy and biblical interpretation in general. These are .pdf files for the most part and you can find them here. 

Dating the Book of Daniel

I came across an excellent paper on dating the book of Daniel in my research on the Beast of the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation. [See links at end of post]

As conservative scholars know, perhaps the single most glaring affront to Biblical scholarship by the liberal academy is their refusal to even examine the most current data supporting a 6th century B.C. date for Daniel. To do so would destroy their arguments against the supernatural, prophetic revelation of God to man, a philosophical presupposition they refuse to subject to their own rules of evidence.

As this well researched paper by David Conklin concludes, rather than admit their abject failure to discredit Daniel’s early dating based on the evidence, they even refuse to publish any conservative documentation to the contrary in the bibliographies of books most available to the general public, thus falsely perpetuating a suspect theory as sound scholarship. Conklin rightly notes that the same treatment cannot be said of conservative counterparts, who have published extensive examinations of the liberal position. Their not so hidden, aging and outmoded liberal agenda undermines the very academic process in which they take so much pride.

Should you doubt my strong statements, please read the Conklin paper. I’ve provided it in .pdf format here or you can find it online here.  

No scholar who uses sound principles of research seriously and consistently could continue supporting a later2nd century Maccabean date for the book of Daniel. Therefore, the arguments previously used to undermine the very idea of prophetic revelation and its consequent implications for humanity are unsustainable. God did indead foresee and foretell the broad range of salvation-history.

The Unbound Word

Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound! — 2 Timothy 2.8,9

Paul, in writing to his young son in the Christian faith, Timothy, declares that though his body is bound with chains in a dungeon, the word of God not bound, but free to do it’s work in the power of the living God, whose word it is.

If we would remember this truth, that the Word of God cannot be held by deceit or even death, that it lives in the freedom of the Spirit to do it’s work of revival and reformation, then we would be more willing to give our own selves to the service of the Word.

What chains are binding us that could be undone by the Word of freedom? What lies have bound us down to despair and other forms of misery, lies that could be challenged, refuted, and destroyed by the power of God’s living Word? Are we free from guilt and the bondage of disobedience or do we remain slaves of the ruler of this world, the dark lord who hates our Christ?

Our freedom does not depend on the human mobility, the ability of the preacher or teacher sent from God. Even when the apostle was imprisoned he had confidence that the work of God would continue, perhaps through the remembered Word he had preached or the Word proclaimed by new, young servants like Timothy. We too must have this attitude in Christ. We too must believe that God’s word never returns to him void, but accomplishes all it was sent to do.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.  — John 1.14-18

So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” They answered him, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, ‘You will become free’?” Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.  John 8.31-36

Being What He Is

Jesus accepted the self-authenticating nature of Scripture, which for him was the Old Testament. There is no evidence of Jesus using modern critical methodologies of form or source criticism. Nor did he use extra-Biblical sources to interpret the Word of God. He accepted and applied the Scriptures with an authority that transcended culture, be it culture within or without the church. Unless a figure of speech was being used, he read the Scripture in it’s literal meaning. In doing so he also revealed the far-reaching connections of one truth to another, seeing a unity of thought running like a scarlet thread from cover to cover of the divine text. Jesus did not trouble himself with pointing out imagined or real textual difficulties within the canon. He concerned himself with the practical application of the truth to the heart, his own and his listeners. “And the common people heard him gladly”.

The methodology of Jesus was analogous, within limits, to an incarnational paradigm, to that of himself as the divine Word becoming flesh. Doing came out of Being. He was what he taught; the same can be said for Scripture. It is consistent in what it accomplishes with it’s character as the Word of God. It is mysterious yet always true, paradoxical without contradiction. Clear, simple, profound, beautiful, deep, firm, just, loving, and gentle in spirit, Scripture carries all the ethos and pathos of it’s divine-human authorship.

Jesus Christ is the fully human, fully divine Son of God, Son of man; his word is no more, no less. Any methodology used to “read” the Word of God, if it is true theology, will “live and move and have it’s being” by this rule.

The Theology of the Cross for Revival and Reformation

If you want further insight into my burden for the Biblical doctrine of revelation, of how God makes himself known to us, you might want to read the posts on my recent time at the BUC (British Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventist) Ministerial Conference in Rogaska, Slovenia. Here is the link to a page of eight postings.

I am convinced of a great need on the part of gospel teachers, preachers, and administrators to understand how and why a theology of the cross is necessary and sufficient to meet the needs of the church today. I Corinthians, chapters one and two, are the place to start. It was one of the major Scripture passages on which Martin Luther founded his theology of revelation (a theology of the cross) that we find in articulated in his Heidelberg Disputation. This, far more than the over-romanticized “95 Thesis”, laid down the gauntlet to the Church for revival and reformation. I believe it will serve the same purpose for us today.

His voice and ours

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. John 1.1 

Jesus, the Word of God made flesh, said man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God (John 1.14; Matthew 4.4). Therefore, we live by him.

A question: Because the Word of God is true life, why is not the word of man superfluous?  

The answer: We were made in the image of God, that is, we are persons with a voice of self-expression.  

Our problem is not that we too speak, but that we speak against God. When we are reunited with God through Christ, our voice is one with his. We then speak with the same voice, the voice of God’s Word made flesh, one in character and purpose. This is our true life and true freedom.  Separated from God, we die in slavery. The truth sets us free.

Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. Perhaps we should only speak the truth.

Authority, Necessity, and Sufficiency of Scripture

I work from a certain basic presupposition, one that that immediately defines my position in the world of thought. That presupposition says I accept the Bible as the authoritative, necessary, and sufficient Word of God. I believe it is the means by which God speaks to man, that his written word carries all that is implied by his spoken word, and that God not only reveals truth to us by his word, but also reveals himself. In other words, I know him in a personal way as I “hear” him speak in the Bible.

Two of the clearest passages supporting my presupposition are 2 Timothy 3.16-17 and 2 Peter 1.16-21:

“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”

“For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

For those of us who accept this testimony as what philosophers call, “justified true belief” (JTB), we have an inexhaustible source of truth that is, as I said above, is authoritative, necessary, and sufficient for all that pertains to this life and the promised one to come.

With those who do not accept this presupposition, I have no influence. Nothing I say will carry any authority, be necessary or sufficient to meet their needs. Because this is a crux, a fulcrum on which so much is balanced, it is the first thing I listen for when I talk with someone else. In other words, I want to know what their relation is to the Word of God. By knowing that, I have some sense of where we stand with one another regarding our view of reality. For the Biblical view of reality is the only true one. All others are false.

Of course, this last statement is rejected by many modern and nearly all postmodern thinkers. We live in a world where the vast majority of people have accepted the false teaching that says, “all truth is relative”. They would like to believe there is no truth outside of themselves which will judge them in the end. They would like to believe we can all hold “truths”, no matter how contradictory, and still be on a journey to God. For the world, the most that matters is our sincerity or good intentions.

Few today believe there is a definitive, propositional word from God about what is true and what is not. Postmoderns do not believe in truth, only interpretation. You have “a” truth, I have “a” truth, but they do not believe there is “the truth” which is a standard for us all.

Such thinking, in it’s predominance and pervasiveness, has so deluded the world that we are rapidly descending into a chaos of conflicting values. Therefore, war is not only inevitable, but even now engulfing the world. This convinces me as much as anything else that Christ will return soon. Should he not, what would be left?

Subject and Object: The Relation of Self to Itself and Others

Intro: Here is a draft of a letter, an email, I did not send. The reason for not sending it and for posting it here will remain with me, though the discerning reader might hazard a guess. In it’s place I simply asked a question or two. I’m publishing it here to serve as a starting point. And if the truth be told, I spent so much time with it I it seems a waste not to put the thoughts to work. Should I change my mind, the delete key isn’t far from hand.

Dear _____, 

If we accept that words are a means of self-expression, a way for the self to make itself known and relate itself to itself and to another, then I would think Jesus would want to be known as he is in his person. An absolutely subjective self, one that cannot relate itself to another outside itself can only exist alone. Without some measure of objective existence that relates to our self, there is no other reality than the single self. To say there is an “other” is to say there is something other than me, something other than me as the subject. To have another is to have an object. I may choose not to relate to the “other” but if I acknowledge their existence, then in that acknowledgement I have created a relation with an object, i.e. an objective reality other than my self.

If I will say that Christ is a self, one apart from and outside myself, then I begin to ask questions about who he is. And who do I ask? Do I ask myself who this other self is or do I ask the other self itself? Should I try to form my own image of this other self or allow it to express its own self to me? Of course, you know I’ve chosen to allow Christ to express himself, to make himself known as he chooses. I do so simply because I believe he is. I believe he is because he has spoken and I have heard him. And I believe he is greater than my self, that the relation of myself to himself is not one of equal to equal but of a greater to a lesser. Therefore, the voice that has pre-imminence should be his rather than mine. That is, he as object, an objective self, takes precedence over me as subject, a subjective self. Both exist and do so in relation to one another. For the relation to exist, both the objective self, him, and subjective self, I, are necessary.  

To do that He must speak in a way that communicates His real self and I must hear in a way that receives Him as He is. Therefore, I believe in the paradox of the Word made flesh, of Christ manifest as a self within human time and space. I don’t believe I know him in any way that approaches the absolute, but in whatever way he has chosen to make himself known. I receive what he gives of himself as his true self, the only self called Christ that is knowable for myself. And I accept that he is able to transcend the limits of my subjective self to make himself known- as he was, as he is, and as he will be. His transcendence is not my achievement but his revelation within time and space, i.e. he has made himself known historically.

My thoughts above come from such questions: How will I have the true image of Christ, kept separate from a Christ who merely reflects my own? Is he a revealed Christ or an imagined self? Will He be formed or in-formed within me as an imagined Jesus who can never be more than my conception or will He be the Jesus who has made Himself known through His Word within time and space?

Some things I think about from time to time.

Jan

An unscientific postscript: On rereading my words, especially the first phrase, I thought I should offer something else. If by “mystical” you are saying you have formed a relation within yourself that makes a knowable language superfluous, then that is something, by definition, that I could not speak to, for I have developed no such way of communicating myself to another self. Nor have a discovered a way, by drugs or some other means, of in-forming a relation within my self to my self. When I have, on occasion approached such a thing, it looked and felt like a cold, dark, consuming abyss. I hope never to go there again by choice. I have known and spoken to others who have such a relation, a divided self, but have not found it possible to form a cohesive relation with them. They have remained alone and unable to interact with others. And I can’t say I’ve found them particularly happy, not by my standard of that term, but by their own. Uncertainty and a consuming fear seemed to dominate their perceptions.

For me, the state of being implied by absolute subjectivity would be absolute aloneness. If I believed “I” am all I am, then I would choose not to exist. But if I admit another, on what terms will we relate? I do not believe an absolute autonomous self can admit another into relationship with itself. To do so defies the absoluteness of it’s autonomy. Therefore, if an absolute autonomous self exist, it is unknowable, unrelated to my self. In short, it would not, could not, be real to me. But, in reality, I do relate to others, not in any absolute sense, but within mutually prescribed bounds of reality. Those “bounds of reality”, to be mutual, must be communicable. Therefore, I believe God communicates to me within the bounds of reality in which I exist, that is, he communicates himself in words that are knowable enough to me that I can apprehend his person and make choices about our relation. Though completely “Other” than my self, he makes himself known in a way that enables me to form a relation with him.

Pushing further, I have found that meeting point to be the crux of all reality, a crux posited at a specific time and place in human history where communication between God and a self are possible, where we see things as they are. At Calvary, “God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself”. The Word made flesh was laid open and God was seen, as were we. Faith alone resolves the paradox of God, who is transcendently other than us, being “God with us” on a cross. That he would do that for me is beyond anything I call reasonable.

Romans 1.3 B

“…concerning his Son…”

Having identified himself, Paul identifies his message. He answers the question, for the moment, about who he is and what he is going to say. Such answers go to the heart of our most basic questions about ourselves as well. “Who I am?” Not being able to answer this question  about  ourselves or about others in our immediate world produces feelings of anxiety and fear. Having little or no knowledge of who we are means we will be alienated from others we meet. If we are also ignorant of who they are and what they are wanting or saying, the fear will only increase.

Many of us live lives infected with self-doubt and doubt about those around us. This becomes more intense the closer we come to others, perhaps because we have learned that pain can be created when human beings rub up against themselves and the world.

By seeking and creating identity we feel more secure and in control of our world. We can give a name or description to people, places and things. This is part of what we call learning and it keeps us from losing valuable information that we need to negotiate the pitfalls in life. We need identity to know what we should cherish and what we should avoid. Without it we are at the mercy of the unknown.

In the book of Romans Paul is doing more than identifying himself or his message; he is giving identity to the soul itself. He does this by revealing the “who” and the “what” of God and man. This is book of truth about who God is, what God wants. It is a book about who we are and what we want. It is a book defining or identifying the relationship between God and man that will mean true life for us.

Romans is very much about identifying what is real and what is not, what is true and what is false in the things that matter most to the human soul.