Elizabeth Marquardt’s research has concluded that even though a good divorce is better than a bad divorce, it is still not good for children. She found that children from a mannerly divorce often compare poorly to children from an unhappy marriage, so long as that marriage is low-conflict (2/3 of marriages that end in divorce are.) As reported in much of the divorce literature, these kids don’t perform as well academically; they are more delinquent; they use more drugs; and they are more sexually active.
But an additional problem that children of divorce face is the problem of developing a unified world view. Though a mom’s and a dad’s personalities, morals, religious beliefs, and parenting styles always differ, in most marriages they recognize that they have the job of rubbing the rough edges of their own worlds together in an attempt to hand [children] something reasonably whole.
But after the divorce, there is little motivation for ex-spouses to be unified. One child explained: So you’d go with one and they’d be like, “Ah, stay out till ten! You can walk to the playground!” And the other one’s like, “You can’t go anywhere! You have a bike but you have to ride it in your yard.” With conflicting rules, these kids have to stay on their toes: We paid close attention to the different rules at each parent’s home and the conflicts in their expectations of us.... We adjusted ourselves to each of our parents, shaping our habits and beliefs to mimic theirs when we were around them. We often felt like a different person with each of our parents.
These kids felt like chameleons as they tried to adapt to their changing environment. But they weren’t designed for such major adaptation: We looked to two worlds that seemed as different as night and day. The chasm between the two worlds made reconciling their differences seem much more daunting, perhaps even impossible. They became mentally stuck when they tried to answer life’s greatest questions--Who am I? Is there a God? What is the good?--because they didn’t have a settled identity.
Though they don’t have to remain caught between two worlds forever—there is renewal through Christ—we make the task of establishing a unified, life-guiding identity much harder when they don’t have unified parents.
2007/11/17
Divorce: Impact on Children
Why are children the biggest losers in the severing of marital ties? Because stable, healthy marriages comprise the scaffolding upon which children mount successive developmental stages. When that structure collapses, the children's world is temporarily without supports.
Children lose their protection because of the nature of divorce: In most crisis situations, such as a fire, parents instinctively reach out and grab hold of their children, bringing them to safety first. In the crisis of divorce, however, mothers and fathers put children on hold, attending to adult problems first. As Mary Pipher explains, children need parents who will talk to them, supervise them, help them stay organized and support them when they are down. Rocked by shock, grief, and anger, divorcing parents often just don’t have the energy to give. And many are busy with new challenges: job hunting, returning to school, dating.
When children of divorce see their parents struggling, it can be terrifying. Elizabeth Marquardt, a child of divorce, explained: As children, seeing our mother or father scared or hurt was frightening. They were, after all, our line of defense against the scary world outside. They were supposed to be bigger than that world. Kids have an expectation that parents will keep them safe and are shocked when they are unable to offer much support. And in a complete reversal of roles, some of these parents turn tragically to their children for support!
Furthermore, many children of divorce are forced to grow up prematurely. When Marquardt was five years old she would fly alone to visit her dad. By nine, she could walk or bike almost anywhere alone. Though she was praised for her “maturity”, she was suffering: "If I was mature on the outside, inside I was still a child, often lonely, sometimes confused, and sometimes very scared. When I was home alone or taking care of my brother, I imagined strangers peeping in our windows. Unfortunately, my parents didn’t have room for feelings such as these. My mother was too overwhelmed, and my father lived too far away." And unfortunately, when these needy teens express their deep pain, they are likely to do it in dangerous ways. Often they feel that their parents broke the rules and so now they can too.
Approximately two-thirds of couples who divorce had a low-conflict marriage. (And as stated earlier, only a minority of people who are unhappy in their marriage today will still be unhappy in five years.) Is it too much to ask them to hang onto a mediocre marriage so that their children will have a stable environment to grow up in?
Children lose their protection because of the nature of divorce: In most crisis situations, such as a fire, parents instinctively reach out and grab hold of their children, bringing them to safety first. In the crisis of divorce, however, mothers and fathers put children on hold, attending to adult problems first. As Mary Pipher explains, children need parents who will talk to them, supervise them, help them stay organized and support them when they are down. Rocked by shock, grief, and anger, divorcing parents often just don’t have the energy to give. And many are busy with new challenges: job hunting, returning to school, dating.
When children of divorce see their parents struggling, it can be terrifying. Elizabeth Marquardt, a child of divorce, explained: As children, seeing our mother or father scared or hurt was frightening. They were, after all, our line of defense against the scary world outside. They were supposed to be bigger than that world. Kids have an expectation that parents will keep them safe and are shocked when they are unable to offer much support. And in a complete reversal of roles, some of these parents turn tragically to their children for support!
Furthermore, many children of divorce are forced to grow up prematurely. When Marquardt was five years old she would fly alone to visit her dad. By nine, she could walk or bike almost anywhere alone. Though she was praised for her “maturity”, she was suffering: "If I was mature on the outside, inside I was still a child, often lonely, sometimes confused, and sometimes very scared. When I was home alone or taking care of my brother, I imagined strangers peeping in our windows. Unfortunately, my parents didn’t have room for feelings such as these. My mother was too overwhelmed, and my father lived too far away." And unfortunately, when these needy teens express their deep pain, they are likely to do it in dangerous ways. Often they feel that their parents broke the rules and so now they can too.
Approximately two-thirds of couples who divorce had a low-conflict marriage. (And as stated earlier, only a minority of people who are unhappy in their marriage today will still be unhappy in five years.) Is it too much to ask them to hang onto a mediocre marriage so that their children will have a stable environment to grow up in?
2007/10/25
Divorce: The Truth About Ourselves
Most people who seek a divorce think they are getting away from a troublesome spouse--what many are fleeing is themselves. Mike Mason explains that the closer we are drawn to another person the more we are revealed in the other's light, revealed for what we are. Others are mirrors in which we see ourselves, not as we would like to be, but as we are. Whenever we pull away, searching in one mirror after another for a more pleasing image, what we are really doing is avoiding the truth about ourselves.
In the early years of our marriage Cathy and I battled frequently. We didn't even have the self-control to keep our fights private--I doubt either of our families would have bet a dollar on a 10th, or even a 5th, wedding anniversary! Being convinced that the weight of our problems rested on her, I prayed diligently that God would change her. But my prayers seemed to have little effect. So what was the solution? Was it time to admit my mistake and go fishing in the pond again? Thank God I didn't. Eventually through the Scriptures, and the patience of my wife, I was given sight. She didn’t need near as much help as I did: Lord, forgive me for being so blind. Remove my selfishness and pride. Help me become the husband you want me to be.
When my gardening tools need sharpening I take them to a friend who has a grinding wheel. As I lay the shovel on that rotating stone the sparks fly like it is the 4th of July. If my shovel could speak, it would probably scream at the stone’s grinding away of its nicks and notches. But if it avoids the stone, it looses its effectiveness. So it is in life. It is in the friction of intimacy that our rough edges can be revealed and removed. We must remember the counsel of Solomon: As iron sharpens iron, so does one person sharpen another. (Prov.27:17).
In the early years of our marriage Cathy and I battled frequently. We didn't even have the self-control to keep our fights private--I doubt either of our families would have bet a dollar on a 10th, or even a 5th, wedding anniversary! Being convinced that the weight of our problems rested on her, I prayed diligently that God would change her. But my prayers seemed to have little effect. So what was the solution? Was it time to admit my mistake and go fishing in the pond again? Thank God I didn't. Eventually through the Scriptures, and the patience of my wife, I was given sight. She didn’t need near as much help as I did: Lord, forgive me for being so blind. Remove my selfishness and pride. Help me become the husband you want me to be.
When my gardening tools need sharpening I take them to a friend who has a grinding wheel. As I lay the shovel on that rotating stone the sparks fly like it is the 4th of July. If my shovel could speak, it would probably scream at the stone’s grinding away of its nicks and notches. But if it avoids the stone, it looses its effectiveness. So it is in life. It is in the friction of intimacy that our rough edges can be revealed and removed. We must remember the counsel of Solomon: As iron sharpens iron, so does one person sharpen another. (Prov.27:17).
2007/10/04
Divorce: Divine Math
God, through the prophet Malachi, stated bluntly: I hate divorce. Why does divorce grieve God so deeply? Jesus explained that divorce negates God's original design: "For this reason a
man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate. "
When two people wed, something profoundly spiritual takes place. Marriage is more than a legal contract. It is more than a sexual union. A new math is discovered: 1 + 1 = 1. God has joined together a husband and a wife into a spiritual unity. And when that unity is ripped apart, they feel the pain of dismemberment. A divorce . . . is not like the pieces of a puzzle coming apart, with precisely defined, individualized parts remaining whole and intact. It is more like trying to make two bodies out of a single body. Ouch!
Dr. Judy Wallerstein who has been studying the long-term effects of divorce for the past 30 years, began her research with the prejudice that divorce would be painful, but the wounds would soon heal. Her findings shouted a different message. Decades after the divorce, Wallerstein observed: I was braced for a few tears, reluctance to look back, lingering attachments, and maybe occasional regret that a divorce had ever happened. But I did not expect the experience to endure so fully for so many, with high drama, passions, vivid memories, fantasy relationships, jagged breaks in development, intense anger.
She concluded: There is no evidence that time alone diminishes feelings or memories; that hurt and depression are overcome; or that jealousy, anger, and outrage will vanish. Some experiences are just as painful ten years later; some memories haunt us for a lifetime. God designed us to have one partner for life. When this pledge is broken, it produces sour fruit.
There are certainly conditions in which divorce is the only option. (The Scriptures make provision for these divorces.) But the majority of divorces come out of relationships that could easily be saved. All marriages go through difficult times. One study found that only a minority of people who are unhappy in their marriages today still feel that way only five years later.
Hang on. Divorce is seldom a cure for unhappiness. And there are experiences that are far worse than enduring a mediocre marriage.
man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate. "
When two people wed, something profoundly spiritual takes place. Marriage is more than a legal contract. It is more than a sexual union. A new math is discovered: 1 + 1 = 1. God has joined together a husband and a wife into a spiritual unity. And when that unity is ripped apart, they feel the pain of dismemberment. A divorce . . . is not like the pieces of a puzzle coming apart, with precisely defined, individualized parts remaining whole and intact. It is more like trying to make two bodies out of a single body. Ouch!
Dr. Judy Wallerstein who has been studying the long-term effects of divorce for the past 30 years, began her research with the prejudice that divorce would be painful, but the wounds would soon heal. Her findings shouted a different message. Decades after the divorce, Wallerstein observed: I was braced for a few tears, reluctance to look back, lingering attachments, and maybe occasional regret that a divorce had ever happened. But I did not expect the experience to endure so fully for so many, with high drama, passions, vivid memories, fantasy relationships, jagged breaks in development, intense anger.
She concluded: There is no evidence that time alone diminishes feelings or memories; that hurt and depression are overcome; or that jealousy, anger, and outrage will vanish. Some experiences are just as painful ten years later; some memories haunt us for a lifetime. God designed us to have one partner for life. When this pledge is broken, it produces sour fruit.
There are certainly conditions in which divorce is the only option. (The Scriptures make provision for these divorces.) But the majority of divorces come out of relationships that could easily be saved. All marriages go through difficult times. One study found that only a minority of people who are unhappy in their marriages today still feel that way only five years later.
Hang on. Divorce is seldom a cure for unhappiness. And there are experiences that are far worse than enduring a mediocre marriage.
2007/09/18
Divorce: A Modern Day Tragedy
The car was shrouded in silence as dad drove his son home. Finally the seven-year old blurted out angrily: "When you comin' home?!" Dad paused, trying to put his own agony into a child's
words. He, too, wanted to come home. He wanted to be there when his kids scrambled out of bed in the morning. He longed for the chaos of family dinners. He yearned for someone to talk to in the evenings. Finally he answered: "I don't know. Mom and I aren't getting along right now. I hope it's soon." Dad never made it home. The separation became permanent.
During my entire childhood I knew only two divorced families. Today, it is estimated that somewhere from 40-50% of first time marriages will end in divorce. (Second marriages fail at an even higher rate.) Each year over one million new children experience the breakup of their families.
Because of the pervasiveness of divorce, I will devote the next several posts to this subject. Why is this important for all of us? "`Each divorce is the death of a small civilization.' When one family divorces, that divorce affects relatives, friends, neighbors, employers, teachers, clergy, and scores of strangers. . . . divorce is not a them-versus-us problem; everyone in one way or another, has been touched by it." I had a woman tell me that the divorce of her son was harder on her than the unexpected death of her husband. She mourned the loss of her daughter-in-law.
The purpose for these articles is not to beat people up who have had a divorce, but to offer hope and encouragement to those impacted by our divorce culture. The next post will examine God’s perspective on divorce.
words. He, too, wanted to come home. He wanted to be there when his kids scrambled out of bed in the morning. He longed for the chaos of family dinners. He yearned for someone to talk to in the evenings. Finally he answered: "I don't know. Mom and I aren't getting along right now. I hope it's soon." Dad never made it home. The separation became permanent.
During my entire childhood I knew only two divorced families. Today, it is estimated that somewhere from 40-50% of first time marriages will end in divorce. (Second marriages fail at an even higher rate.) Each year over one million new children experience the breakup of their families.
Because of the pervasiveness of divorce, I will devote the next several posts to this subject. Why is this important for all of us? "`Each divorce is the death of a small civilization.' When one family divorces, that divorce affects relatives, friends, neighbors, employers, teachers, clergy, and scores of strangers. . . . divorce is not a them-versus-us problem; everyone in one way or another, has been touched by it." I had a woman tell me that the divorce of her son was harder on her than the unexpected death of her husband. She mourned the loss of her daughter-in-law.
The purpose for these articles is not to beat people up who have had a divorce, but to offer hope and encouragement to those impacted by our divorce culture. The next post will examine God’s perspective on divorce.
2007/05/17
The Love of Reading, Part 3
While the average American reads less than two hours each week, he watches T.V. 15-20 hours each week--that’s about an 8-1 ratio. Does anyone believe that T.V. is eight times more valuable than reading?! If you truly want to read more, you must control your T.V. habits. You may want to unsubscribe to cable T.V. or banish the T.V. from your bedroom or read 30 minutes each day before you pounce on the remote. Author Roald Dahl pleads with us:
Please, oh PLEASE, we beg, we pray,
Go throw your TV set away.
And in its place you can install,
A lovely bookshelf on the wall.
Cathy and I recently finished reading Susan Howatch’s novel, Absolute Truths. Two of the primary characters are clergymen who are antagonists throughout the novel. One is liberal, the other is conservative. One was educated at Oxford, the other at a lesser college. One had an affair. The other preached regularly against immorality. But they both shared the same mentor, Jon Darrow.
One evening the two men coincidentally arrive at Darrow’s door at the same time. During the following difficult conversation between the three of them, Darrow expressed a desire that they know each other better: I know so much about you both. I know not only about all your difficulties but about how hard you’ve worked to overcome them. You look at each other and see only your faults, but I look at you in the light of my special knowledge and find I can overlook those faults because I know your virtues are far more important. How impressed you would be with each other if you knew what I knew! What heroes you would be in each other's eyes! As we read this book we were reminded again and again that we don’t know others very well. Our adversaries are never as foul or feeble as we think they are. Through reading this novel I was able to release a judgmental attitude that I have carried for a long time.
Though we all need some occasional fluff, easy reading shouldn’t be the staple of our diet. Compare a Danielle Steele novel with a Howatch novel. A Steele novel has more twists and turns than an episode of Fox’s “24”. Though you may be entertained, how have you benefited? Have you gained any insights into how to love your mate? how to direct your children? how to view your enemy? how to invest your life? You may be tempted to quit reading most good novels in the first 100-150 pages because they slowly lay the ground work for their characters and plot. One of the reasons that we don’t read more and better literature may simply be that we are lazy.
Please, oh PLEASE, we beg, we pray,
Go throw your TV set away.
And in its place you can install,
A lovely bookshelf on the wall.
Cathy and I recently finished reading Susan Howatch’s novel, Absolute Truths. Two of the primary characters are clergymen who are antagonists throughout the novel. One is liberal, the other is conservative. One was educated at Oxford, the other at a lesser college. One had an affair. The other preached regularly against immorality. But they both shared the same mentor, Jon Darrow.
One evening the two men coincidentally arrive at Darrow’s door at the same time. During the following difficult conversation between the three of them, Darrow expressed a desire that they know each other better: I know so much about you both. I know not only about all your difficulties but about how hard you’ve worked to overcome them. You look at each other and see only your faults, but I look at you in the light of my special knowledge and find I can overlook those faults because I know your virtues are far more important. How impressed you would be with each other if you knew what I knew! What heroes you would be in each other's eyes! As we read this book we were reminded again and again that we don’t know others very well. Our adversaries are never as foul or feeble as we think they are. Through reading this novel I was able to release a judgmental attitude that I have carried for a long time.
Though we all need some occasional fluff, easy reading shouldn’t be the staple of our diet. Compare a Danielle Steele novel with a Howatch novel. A Steele novel has more twists and turns than an episode of Fox’s “24”. Though you may be entertained, how have you benefited? Have you gained any insights into how to love your mate? how to direct your children? how to view your enemy? how to invest your life? You may be tempted to quit reading most good novels in the first 100-150 pages because they slowly lay the ground work for their characters and plot. One of the reasons that we don’t read more and better literature may simply be that we are lazy.
2007/05/02
The Love of Reading, Part 2
Whenever historians list the greatest U.S. Presidents, Thomas Jefferson is always included. What was the source of his greatness? Jefferson biographer, Fawn Brodie, believes it was rooted in his early training which she called an “apprenticeship for greatness.” While most law students served an apprenticeship of no more than two years, Thomas Jefferson was tutored by George Wythe for five full years. (Patrick Henry boasted that he studied no more than six weeks. That’s something to be proud of?!)
Jefferson’ training consisted of five years of “uninterrupted reading, not only in the law but also in ancient classics, English literature, and general political philosophy.” As a young man “when most of his friends were hunting, gambling, cockfighting, speculating, marrying young, or wenching among slaves, he seems to have buried himself in books and the kind of books most of his friends avoided as difficult or esoteric.”
Jefferson’s lifelong commitment to reading was obvious when he advised a young lawyer to spend his pre-dawn hours reading "in physical studies, Ethics, Religion, natural and sectarian, and natural law.” Then from 8 A.M to noon he should read the law, from twelve to one in politics, and in the evening criticism, rhetoric, and oratory. Over half of a lawyer’s day should be spent in reading. Wow! This commitment to reading became a “necessity for Jefferson, like music and gardening, a special nutrient without which he withered.”
When I look back on my life, I shudder to think how withered my life would be without reading. Books (including the Scriptures) have been my primary source of learning how to parent, how to be a husband, how to educate my children, how to steward God’s gifts, how to prepare for eternity, how to care for my body, and much, much more.
Sadly, nearly 40% of American adults seldom or never read a book. The average American spends less than two hours reading each week--this includes light reading like newspapers and letters.
Harry Truman said the “not all readers are leaders, but all leaders are readers.” Like Jefferson, do you want to be an effective leader? in your home? at work? at church? Then you would be wise to develop the discipline of reading.
Jefferson’ training consisted of five years of “uninterrupted reading, not only in the law but also in ancient classics, English literature, and general political philosophy.” As a young man “when most of his friends were hunting, gambling, cockfighting, speculating, marrying young, or wenching among slaves, he seems to have buried himself in books and the kind of books most of his friends avoided as difficult or esoteric.”
Jefferson’s lifelong commitment to reading was obvious when he advised a young lawyer to spend his pre-dawn hours reading "in physical studies, Ethics, Religion, natural and sectarian, and natural law.” Then from 8 A.M to noon he should read the law, from twelve to one in politics, and in the evening criticism, rhetoric, and oratory. Over half of a lawyer’s day should be spent in reading. Wow! This commitment to reading became a “necessity for Jefferson, like music and gardening, a special nutrient without which he withered.”
When I look back on my life, I shudder to think how withered my life would be without reading. Books (including the Scriptures) have been my primary source of learning how to parent, how to be a husband, how to educate my children, how to steward God’s gifts, how to prepare for eternity, how to care for my body, and much, much more.
Sadly, nearly 40% of American adults seldom or never read a book. The average American spends less than two hours reading each week--this includes light reading like newspapers and letters.
Harry Truman said the “not all readers are leaders, but all leaders are readers.” Like Jefferson, do you want to be an effective leader? in your home? at work? at church? Then you would be wise to develop the discipline of reading.
2007/04/15
The Love of Reading, Part 1
Roald Dahl, the immensely popular children’s author (James and the Giant Peach, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The BFG, etc.) was certainly one of my boys’ favorite authors. (Well, O.K., he is one of my favorites, too!) His imagination, wit, and eloquence combined to create marvelous literature.
Most of Dahl’s childhood, however, was very bleak. His education took place in an English boarding school, which Dahl described as “days of horror, of fierce discipline, of no talking in the dormitories, no running in the corridors, no untidiness of any sort, no this or that or the other, just rules, rules and still more rules. And the fear of the dreaded cane hung over us like the fear of death.” He hated school and the feelings were reciprocal. His report cards described him as “incapable” and “of limited ideas.”
But one Saturday morning a woman was hired to look after the boys while the school’s staff had a morning to themselves. Mrs. O’Connor loved literature and spent most of those Saturday’s reading to the boys. “Her enthusiasm and love of books were so contagious and spellbinding that she became the highlight of the school week for Dahl. Within a year he’d become an insatiable reader, and Dahl credits Mrs. O’Connor with turning him into a reader—which made it possible to become a writer.
A lifelong devotion to reading good literature is the cornerstone for all learning. Educator Jim Trelease explains why he believes teachers should read regularly to their students: When you take time to read to your class you are not neglecting the curriculum. Reading is the curriculum. The principal ingredient of all learning and teaching is language. Not only is it the tool with which we communicate the lesson, it is also the product the student hands back to us.
Similarly, Emilie Buchwald has written that “children are made readers on the laps of their parents.” One of my fondest childhood memories is my mother reading books to me--Swiss Family Robinson, The Little House on the Prairie books, The Hardy Boys. With our boys, vacations were a time to indulge in books--reading in the car, at the dinner table, at bedtime. We packed age-appropriate books about the flora and fauna and the history of the places we visited.
Children need time to read. Train them to read quietly in their rooms while you prepare dinner. Give them time in the evenings before bed to read by themselves. ("Do you want to turn your light out now or would you like to read for a while?") But remember--you can’t pass on what you don’t possess. If you aren’t a reader it is unlikely that your children will be readers.
Most of Dahl’s childhood, however, was very bleak. His education took place in an English boarding school, which Dahl described as “days of horror, of fierce discipline, of no talking in the dormitories, no running in the corridors, no untidiness of any sort, no this or that or the other, just rules, rules and still more rules. And the fear of the dreaded cane hung over us like the fear of death.” He hated school and the feelings were reciprocal. His report cards described him as “incapable” and “of limited ideas.”
But one Saturday morning a woman was hired to look after the boys while the school’s staff had a morning to themselves. Mrs. O’Connor loved literature and spent most of those Saturday’s reading to the boys. “Her enthusiasm and love of books were so contagious and spellbinding that she became the highlight of the school week for Dahl. Within a year he’d become an insatiable reader, and Dahl credits Mrs. O’Connor with turning him into a reader—which made it possible to become a writer.
A lifelong devotion to reading good literature is the cornerstone for all learning. Educator Jim Trelease explains why he believes teachers should read regularly to their students: When you take time to read to your class you are not neglecting the curriculum. Reading is the curriculum. The principal ingredient of all learning and teaching is language. Not only is it the tool with which we communicate the lesson, it is also the product the student hands back to us.
Similarly, Emilie Buchwald has written that “children are made readers on the laps of their parents.” One of my fondest childhood memories is my mother reading books to me--Swiss Family Robinson, The Little House on the Prairie books, The Hardy Boys. With our boys, vacations were a time to indulge in books--reading in the car, at the dinner table, at bedtime. We packed age-appropriate books about the flora and fauna and the history of the places we visited.
Children need time to read. Train them to read quietly in their rooms while you prepare dinner. Give them time in the evenings before bed to read by themselves. ("Do you want to turn your light out now or would you like to read for a while?") But remember--you can’t pass on what you don’t possess. If you aren’t a reader it is unlikely that your children will be readers.
2007/03/27
The Tomb of Jesus?
Part 2, The Biblical Witness
When James Cameron's documentary claims that finding The Burial Cave of Jesus “is the biggest archaeological story of the century,” is this bad news for the good news? Not at all. Soon after the news of the possible find of Jesus’ bones came out, I had a non-Christian friend gloat to me: “So, this disproves Christianity, right?” This documentary gave me my first good oppor-tunity to talk to him about Jesus.
As opposed to the unfounded assertions of the documentary, the testimony of numerous eye-witnesses is clear: Jesus was bodily resurrected from a rich man’s tomb. (Thus there are no bones to find.) Jesus repeatedly (Matthew 16:21; 17:22f; 20:18f) predicted this (“the Son of Man must suffer many things ... and after 3 days will rise again.”) It was proclaimed by the angels at the tomb (“Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here. He is risen.” Lk.24:5,6). It was believed by the disciples (“It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.) During the 40 days the resurrected Christ met with his disciples, hundreds saw him alive. (I Cor.15:6). (Some have conjectured that the disciples so wanted Jesus to be alive again that they hallucinated his resurrection. But do 500 people have a mass, unified hallucination?!)
But what evidence do we have that the Biblical eye-witnesses are reliable? Much indeed. First, what event could have caused the dramatic change in the disciples? When Jesus was arrested, his followers fled. Peter wouldn’t even admit his allegiance to Jesus to an insignificant servant girl. But a few months later, he boldly preached a risen Christ in the streets of Jerusalem. Would the disciples have risked the murderous wrath of the Jewish officials for a rotting carcass lying in a coffin? I don’t think so. Chuck Colson has pointed out that when Richard Nixon’s presidency was sinking, his closest aides jumped ship and testified against him to save their own skins. Self-preservation is one of our strongest urges.
Furthermore, even if we grant the possibility that the disciples concocted this story about a Living Jesus, wouldn’t his enemies have exhumed the corpse and dragged it through the city streets to disprove this dangerous “heresy”? A dead body would have buried Christianity before it sprang to life.
Be prepared to “give an answer for the hope within us” when people talk about the purported burial cave of Jesus. The belief that best fits the facts is that HE IS RISEN!
When James Cameron's documentary claims that finding The Burial Cave of Jesus “is the biggest archaeological story of the century,” is this bad news for the good news? Not at all. Soon after the news of the possible find of Jesus’ bones came out, I had a non-Christian friend gloat to me: “So, this disproves Christianity, right?” This documentary gave me my first good oppor-tunity to talk to him about Jesus.
As opposed to the unfounded assertions of the documentary, the testimony of numerous eye-witnesses is clear: Jesus was bodily resurrected from a rich man’s tomb. (Thus there are no bones to find.) Jesus repeatedly (Matthew 16:21; 17:22f; 20:18f) predicted this (“the Son of Man must suffer many things ... and after 3 days will rise again.”) It was proclaimed by the angels at the tomb (“Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here. He is risen.” Lk.24:5,6). It was believed by the disciples (“It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.) During the 40 days the resurrected Christ met with his disciples, hundreds saw him alive. (I Cor.15:6). (Some have conjectured that the disciples so wanted Jesus to be alive again that they hallucinated his resurrection. But do 500 people have a mass, unified hallucination?!)
But what evidence do we have that the Biblical eye-witnesses are reliable? Much indeed. First, what event could have caused the dramatic change in the disciples? When Jesus was arrested, his followers fled. Peter wouldn’t even admit his allegiance to Jesus to an insignificant servant girl. But a few months later, he boldly preached a risen Christ in the streets of Jerusalem. Would the disciples have risked the murderous wrath of the Jewish officials for a rotting carcass lying in a coffin? I don’t think so. Chuck Colson has pointed out that when Richard Nixon’s presidency was sinking, his closest aides jumped ship and testified against him to save their own skins. Self-preservation is one of our strongest urges.
Furthermore, even if we grant the possibility that the disciples concocted this story about a Living Jesus, wouldn’t his enemies have exhumed the corpse and dragged it through the city streets to disprove this dangerous “heresy”? A dead body would have buried Christianity before it sprang to life.
Be prepared to “give an answer for the hope within us” when people talk about the purported burial cave of Jesus. The belief that best fits the facts is that HE IS RISEN!
2007/03/07
The Tomb of Jesus?
Part 1: The Archaeological Facts
James Cameron who produced the movie, The Titanic, is trying to float a theory that a recent (1980) discovery of a tomb in Jerusalem is the tomb of Jesus’ family and one of the ossuaries (coffins) in the tomb contains his bones. But the iceberg of facts sinks this theory faster than the Titanic.
First, where would we expect to find the crypt of Jesus of Nazareth? Not in Jerusalem but in Jesus’ ancestral home of Nazareth.
Secondly, this tomb is the tomb of a wealthy family. It has a large central room surrounded by alcoves which contained the ossuaries of the different family members. Jesus was a poor man from a poor family. It is very unlikely that they could have afforded the tomb that was discovered.
Cameron’s documentary also claimed that the names on the coffins was a major piece of evidence. But even though some of the names were the same, others didn’t fit. And the names in Jesus’ family were very common. One source contends that Mary was a name that was given to nearly one-fourth of all girls born at this time!
Furthermore, the documentary claims that one of the coffins contained the remains of Mary Magdalene. What is the evidence for this? Simply that one of the coffins contained the bones of a “Mariamene” (which is the Greek name for Mary). Then the documentary suggests (much like the Da Vinci Code did last year) that Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married. And the evidence for this wild claim? DNA samples of the supposed bones of Jesus and the bones of “Mariamene” show they didn’t share any family blood. But even if “Mariamene” and “Jesua” were married, there isn’t more than a speck of evidence that they were the Jesus and Mary Magdalene of the Bible.
If all of this seems like a giant leap, it is. Israeli archaeologist, Amos Kloner, who has researched the tomb thoroughly and has written about those findings, claims that there isn’t “any proof whatsoever” for the documentary’s claims. Another researcher believes it is all “about money and headlines.”
James Cameron who produced the movie, The Titanic, is trying to float a theory that a recent (1980) discovery of a tomb in Jerusalem is the tomb of Jesus’ family and one of the ossuaries (coffins) in the tomb contains his bones. But the iceberg of facts sinks this theory faster than the Titanic.
First, where would we expect to find the crypt of Jesus of Nazareth? Not in Jerusalem but in Jesus’ ancestral home of Nazareth.
Secondly, this tomb is the tomb of a wealthy family. It has a large central room surrounded by alcoves which contained the ossuaries of the different family members. Jesus was a poor man from a poor family. It is very unlikely that they could have afforded the tomb that was discovered.
Cameron’s documentary also claimed that the names on the coffins was a major piece of evidence. But even though some of the names were the same, others didn’t fit. And the names in Jesus’ family were very common. One source contends that Mary was a name that was given to nearly one-fourth of all girls born at this time!
Furthermore, the documentary claims that one of the coffins contained the remains of Mary Magdalene. What is the evidence for this? Simply that one of the coffins contained the bones of a “Mariamene” (which is the Greek name for Mary). Then the documentary suggests (much like the Da Vinci Code did last year) that Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married. And the evidence for this wild claim? DNA samples of the supposed bones of Jesus and the bones of “Mariamene” show they didn’t share any family blood. But even if “Mariamene” and “Jesua” were married, there isn’t more than a speck of evidence that they were the Jesus and Mary Magdalene of the Bible.
If all of this seems like a giant leap, it is. Israeli archaeologist, Amos Kloner, who has researched the tomb thoroughly and has written about those findings, claims that there isn’t “any proof whatsoever” for the documentary’s claims. Another researcher believes it is all “about money and headlines.”
2007/02/15
Forgiveness: Part 7
John and Diane were close friends of ours who shared numerous family vacations with us when our kids were young. Though we saw tension in their marriage we didn’t think it was anything fatal and were shocked when John moved out of his home and eventually asked for a divorce. He had become involved with another woman and eventually married her.
Some years later we were with Diane for a few days and we asked her what she had learned about forgiveness. She explained that she had had to learn how to forgive John again and again and again. When she was lonely, she had to forgive him for deserting her. When she struggled financially, she had to forgive him for not providing security for her. When they struggled with issues related to their children, she had to forgive him for destroying the family unity.
Forgiveness is not a once-for-all-time event. It is a state which must be maintained. When Joseph’s brothers came trembling to him when their dad died, fearful that Joseph’s forgiveness had been a sham to please Dad, Joseph repeated his enduring perspective: “God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.” Every time Joseph was tempted to become bitter for his lost years or his lost family life or his lost innocence, he probably repeated to himself: “God intended it for good.”
Therefore, to maintain our forgiveness we must be very careful how we view the past. David Augsburger explains: “You may recall the hurt but you may not relive it. No constant reviewing, no rehashing of the old hurt, no going back to sit on the old gravestones where past grievances lie buried.” There is no indication that Joseph ever relived the day he was thrown into the pit or the day he was sold as a slave or the day he was thrown into the dungeon. Instead, he diligently performed his God-given tasks--whether it was serving a prison warden or the Pharaoh.
Forgiveness, especially for life’s deepest hurts, is “a journey; the deeper the wound, the longer the journey.” May God give us the strength and grace to forgive “seventy times seven.”
Some years later we were with Diane for a few days and we asked her what she had learned about forgiveness. She explained that she had had to learn how to forgive John again and again and again. When she was lonely, she had to forgive him for deserting her. When she struggled financially, she had to forgive him for not providing security for her. When they struggled with issues related to their children, she had to forgive him for destroying the family unity.
Forgiveness is not a once-for-all-time event. It is a state which must be maintained. When Joseph’s brothers came trembling to him when their dad died, fearful that Joseph’s forgiveness had been a sham to please Dad, Joseph repeated his enduring perspective: “God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.” Every time Joseph was tempted to become bitter for his lost years or his lost family life or his lost innocence, he probably repeated to himself: “God intended it for good.”
Therefore, to maintain our forgiveness we must be very careful how we view the past. David Augsburger explains: “You may recall the hurt but you may not relive it. No constant reviewing, no rehashing of the old hurt, no going back to sit on the old gravestones where past grievances lie buried.” There is no indication that Joseph ever relived the day he was thrown into the pit or the day he was sold as a slave or the day he was thrown into the dungeon. Instead, he diligently performed his God-given tasks--whether it was serving a prison warden or the Pharaoh.
Forgiveness, especially for life’s deepest hurts, is “a journey; the deeper the wound, the longer the journey.” May God give us the strength and grace to forgive “seventy times seven.”
2007/01/30
Forgiveness, Part 6
“The Cost of Unforgiveness”
As I have meditated on Joseph’s life, I have wondered, When did he forgive his brothers? Though not stated explicitly, I think it happened early in Joseph’s trials. Why do I believe this? Because the fruit of unforgiveness would have prevented him from successfully serving Potiphar, the prison warden, and Pharaoh.
I have a friend named Jeff who for the last 40 years has lived an unstable, alcohol-dependent life. During one of our conversations, my slightly drunk friend became riled when the subject of his dad came up. He yelled: “And when I was in 8th grade he bought me right-handed golf clubs!” Left-handed Jeff has let that bitter memory drip poison into his life for over 40 years! Does time heal wounds? Only when it is combined with forgiveness.
How many of you would willingly let the person who has hurt you do it again? Would Joseph have wanted his brothers to throw him in a pit, threaten to kill him, and sell him again into slavery? Heaven forbid! But Jeff is letting his father continue to abuse him in his memories. If Jeff doesn’t learn how to forgive, his dad will keep abusing him – even after Dad is dead!
Reliving painful memories corrodes our strength for daily living. As Jesus said, “Each day has enough trouble of its own.” If I relive yesterday’s trouble, I won’t have the strength for today’s trouble.
Unforgiveness, then, is simply too costly to me: “Hatred is self-destructive. It is cheaper to pardon than to resent. The high cost of anger, the extravagant expense of hatred, and the unreasonable interest on grudges make resentment out of the question!”
As I have meditated on Joseph’s life, I have wondered, When did he forgive his brothers? Though not stated explicitly, I think it happened early in Joseph’s trials. Why do I believe this? Because the fruit of unforgiveness would have prevented him from successfully serving Potiphar, the prison warden, and Pharaoh.
I have a friend named Jeff who for the last 40 years has lived an unstable, alcohol-dependent life. During one of our conversations, my slightly drunk friend became riled when the subject of his dad came up. He yelled: “And when I was in 8th grade he bought me right-handed golf clubs!” Left-handed Jeff has let that bitter memory drip poison into his life for over 40 years! Does time heal wounds? Only when it is combined with forgiveness.
How many of you would willingly let the person who has hurt you do it again? Would Joseph have wanted his brothers to throw him in a pit, threaten to kill him, and sell him again into slavery? Heaven forbid! But Jeff is letting his father continue to abuse him in his memories. If Jeff doesn’t learn how to forgive, his dad will keep abusing him – even after Dad is dead!
Reliving painful memories corrodes our strength for daily living. As Jesus said, “Each day has enough trouble of its own.” If I relive yesterday’s trouble, I won’t have the strength for today’s trouble.
Unforgiveness, then, is simply too costly to me: “Hatred is self-destructive. It is cheaper to pardon than to resent. The high cost of anger, the extravagant expense of hatred, and the unreasonable interest on grudges make resentment out of the question!”
2007/01/12
Forgiveness: Part 5
“Defining Forgiveness”
When Donald Trump called Rosie O’Donnell a “low-life” and a “mental midget”, what would it mean for Rosie to forgive Donald? (Understand—this is completely hypothetical!) The primary New Testament word for forgiveness means literally to “release” or “let go”. In the same way that Joseph relinquished his opportunities to punish his brothers, Rosie would have to give up her verbal counterattacks (no more comparing Don to a “snake oil salesman.”)
And this desire to return evil for evil, must be relinquished again and again. Throughout the rest of Joseph’s life, he never brought up his brothers’ sin again. In fact, many years after their reconciliation, the brothers dredged up the past when Dad died. They were afraid that Joseph had only been waiting for Jacob’s death. But Joseph still would not blame them, clinging to his enduring conviction that “God intended it for good.” And when they offered themselves as his slaves, Joseph turned them down. Complete forgiveness releases the offending person from any obligations. Joseph asked for no apologies, no reformation, no restitution. Forgiveness steps “outside the systems of law” and steps “into the world of mercy.”
If there is no God, then Rosie and Donald should exact a pound or two of flesh. But Joseph believed in a different sort of justice. When his brothers expressed fear of retaliation, he asked: “Am I in the place of God?” When he forgave, he was releasing his brothers to the True Judge who will give to each person “what is due him for things done in the body.”
Jay Adams has written that when I forgive, I am making three promises:
I will not bring the matter up to you.
I will not bring the matter up to others.
I will not bring the matter up to myself.
Trump and O’Donnell have repeatedly broken all three of these promises. (It’s sad to watch two adults humiliate themselves in such a public brawl.) Adams’ last promise—to not bring the matter up to myself—is the basis of the other two. When I don’t hold onto bitter memories, I won’t use my tongue to hurt you or your name.
When Donald Trump called Rosie O’Donnell a “low-life” and a “mental midget”, what would it mean for Rosie to forgive Donald? (Understand—this is completely hypothetical!) The primary New Testament word for forgiveness means literally to “release” or “let go”. In the same way that Joseph relinquished his opportunities to punish his brothers, Rosie would have to give up her verbal counterattacks (no more comparing Don to a “snake oil salesman.”)
And this desire to return evil for evil, must be relinquished again and again. Throughout the rest of Joseph’s life, he never brought up his brothers’ sin again. In fact, many years after their reconciliation, the brothers dredged up the past when Dad died. They were afraid that Joseph had only been waiting for Jacob’s death. But Joseph still would not blame them, clinging to his enduring conviction that “God intended it for good.” And when they offered themselves as his slaves, Joseph turned them down. Complete forgiveness releases the offending person from any obligations. Joseph asked for no apologies, no reformation, no restitution. Forgiveness steps “outside the systems of law” and steps “into the world of mercy.”
If there is no God, then Rosie and Donald should exact a pound or two of flesh. But Joseph believed in a different sort of justice. When his brothers expressed fear of retaliation, he asked: “Am I in the place of God?” When he forgave, he was releasing his brothers to the True Judge who will give to each person “what is due him for things done in the body.”
Jay Adams has written that when I forgive, I am making three promises:
I will not bring the matter up to you.
I will not bring the matter up to others.
I will not bring the matter up to myself.
Trump and O’Donnell have repeatedly broken all three of these promises. (It’s sad to watch two adults humiliate themselves in such a public brawl.) Adams’ last promise—to not bring the matter up to myself—is the basis of the other two. When I don’t hold onto bitter memories, I won’t use my tongue to hurt you or your name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
