How The Bible Actually Works with Pete Enns / Transcript

Note: Can I Say This at Church is produced for audio listening. If able, I strongly encourage you to listen to the audio, which has inflection, emotion, sarcasm where applicable, and emphasis for points that may not come across well in written word. This transcript is generated using a combination of my ears and software, and may contain errors. Please check the episode for clarity before quoting in print.

Back to the Audio Episode


Pete 0:00

Yeah, and you know, wisdom sort of does take on a life of its own in a couple places in the Old Testament. It is not it's not an abstract concept it's something very tangible and very concrete. And I think that speaks to the, the key importance of wisdom as a concept in the Old Testament as a whole, which is sometimes overlooked by Christians, I think. You know, we think like law is a central concept. Well, it's very important obviously, Prophets are important, Kings are important. But wisdom is something that really pervades the Bible as a whole even in these stories. Like the Adam and Eve story is considered by many people to be a wisdom story. The Joseph's story is a wisdom story and other places like that. So yeah, wisdom is key and wisdom is personified as a woman, and the closest you come to in, the New Testament, is Jesus. Jesus, is, you know, has that intimacy with God that wisdom has in the Old Testament in Proverbs chapter 8.

Seth Price 1:27

Hey there friends! Welcome to the Can I Say This At Church podcast! I'm glad you're here. A few quick announcements and then we will jump right into this bad boy. If you are at all interested in diving deeper into contemplation and some of the work of the episodes from Alexander Shaia, and the Heart and Mind journey for Spiritual transformation and a different kind of take on the Gospels, I would encourage you to go to the website. I am eventually I promise going to make sure by now, by now, there should be a button where you can sign up. And I will put you on the mailing list for that so that we can all coordinate appropriately, I will do my best to make sure that we meet at least monthly somehow, to talk about it. But it will require some work on your part, you're gonna have to do some reading, you're gonna have to some prayer, you have to do some soul searching. And hopefully, hopefully, over the course of these conversations, there will be growth in both you and me spiritually, and contemplatively. And I believe it'll be beautiful. Click that button and do that.

If you have not yet jump on board with supporting the show at Patreon. I love every single one of you, you have no idea how much your support goes to continue to make this show be what it is, each month, the show continues to grow. And with that, a little bit of patron support grows as well and you know everything else that goes with that, but the growth is explosive and I appreciate all of you, you literally make this happen. So if you haven't yet, do that. I have a few things planned differently for this year I want to try to be a little more conversant conversational with all of you in less of a text, text space format. So do that go to patreon.com/CanISayThisAtChurch, or you can click the support the show button at the website.

You saw when you downloaded this thing already that I am talking with Pete Enns and so, Pete Enns he is the Abraham Clemens Professor of Biblical Studies at Eastern University. You'll probably know him from another podcast called the Bible for Normal People. He's authored some fantastic books. He's very smart. And most importantly, he is sarcastic and likes puns and so he is near and dear to my heart.

And I will not belabor this anymore. Let's get into this. Let's roll the tape on a conversation on how the Bible actually works with Pete Enns.

Seth Price 4:40

Pete Enns, actually, I'll say Dr. Pete Enns, but that's the last time I'm going to say doctor.

Pete 4:44

Yes, my wife and kids have to say that!

Seth Price 4:46

Sure.

Thank you so much for making the time this afternoon to come on the podcast. At the beginning, I had a list of like 15 or 20 people and you were on the list. And so almost two years later, I'm glad to finally welcome you to the show.

Pete 4:58

(laughts) Yeah, great. It's good to be here.

Seth Price 5:01

I want to start with just a quick, you know, rule of thumb. So Jared Byas was one of my very first interviews, although it was not one of the very first ones that was released. And the fact that you and Jared run the only God ordained podcast on the internet I'm curious if now that since I've had you both on if I am now also a God ordained podcast on the internet?

Pete 5:19

Well, that's not up to us. That's up to God. Right? So we can't really give you that.

Seth Price 5:25

Oh, man.

Pete 5:26

No, I'd like to, but that would be really arrogant on my part.

Seth Price 5:30

Would it?

Pete 5:32

Even more arrogant than saying the only God ordained podcast! You have no idea, Seth, how many people-it's not like thousands of people-but how many people like email me and they say things like, “you know, we really like the content. But do you really think you're the only God ordained podcast on the internet”?

Seth Price 5:50

I feel like they are missing the point.

Pete 5:50

And I don’t even answer that anymore because it's like, obviously we don't think that.

Seth Price 5:53

You should just say yes, like, Of course I do!

Pete 5:58

Just say yes. Yeah, just say of course.

Seth Price 6:05

Yeah, well, I'm glad to then finally count myself amongst the ranks because while you were talking, I prayed about it. And I feel like I also as well have become either way that's neither here nor there.

Pete 6:17

If you feel a calling for that you are good!

Seth Price 6:20

Yeah, absolutely. So I like to start each episode, although you're fairly large enough that I feel like most people are familiar with you. But there will be that one person listening in New Zealand that's not and so can you just take two or three minutes and give me a crash course on who Pete Enns is and why he is what he is?

Pete 6:37

Yeah, well, wow.

Um, I was born that no… Okay, so here's the thing. I am a Bible Professor. I teach the in the theology department at Eastern University, which is in Pennsylvania. And I also went to seminary I taught the same seminary for about 14 years. And you know, I blog And I write some books. And in my main interest is just like making sense of this ancient text for us today. And that sounds really cheesy. But that's a hard thing to do. Because there's a big gulf in between and you want to take the text seriously in its moment, but also say, “Well, what does this have to do with us”? So, I'm really interested in a lot of things and I teach courses pretty much run the whole spectrum of things you could teach on the Bible at the college level. And let's see what else I don't know I have a wife, I have three adult children, and animals.

Seth Price 7:38

…and animals. Assuming that no one at university is listening. What is your least favorite course to teach?

Pete 7:45

You know, I don't want to sound…I like them all. I really do mean I teach intro courses to students who are coming in. Many of them have very little Bible background so it's a challenge to sort of sell it to them, so to speak, like you can't assume they're interested, you have to sort of show them why this might be a value to them. And all the way up to the other end where I have a senior seminar that I usually teach where we focus on one book, and it alternates between Genesis and Romans, year to year, and that's the seniors only.

And everything in between. I teach hermeneutics, Torah, the historical books, wisdom and poetry, I teach a science and faith class, science in the Bible really more than science and faith. And I like them all! Each one is a challenge. And I just I really love teaching,

Seth Price 8:38

Why Genesis and Romans? Like of the 66, and at least our canon, why those two? Did they just randomly come out of the hat or there's a method to that madness?

Pete 8:47

Well see I inherited this when I came to Eastern in 2012. And I think the reason is because those are books that you can really land on every possible important issue. You know, with like Genesis, you're dealing with literary structure, theology, mythology, legend, you know, his whole historical question comes up. And with Romans, you're dealing with a core person, a writer of the New Testament, Paul, and you get into currents of scholarship, like the new perspective on Paul, which is a very different way of reading Romans than a more, let's say, traditional way, at least for Protestants.

But so yeah, it's sort of like these are places you can get into like, very important issues for people who were Bible majors. And so that's why I sort of kept it as that and I just, I think it's fun. You know Romans is often misunderstood as Genesis, so we'll go for those.

Seth Price 9:45

Well, I'd argue, pretty much every book in the Bible is often misunderstood. And probably by me, at least every third or fourth day.

Pete 9:55

That's what I hear!

Seth Price 9:56

You have a book or you have the your news book on How the Bible Actually Works. And then I like your subtitle. And so I usually don't say these because I can't remember them. But I brought yours with me, “in which I” Pete, “explain how ancient ambiguous and diverse book leads us to wisdom rather than answers and why that's great news”. And so two questions on that. I've never known a publisher that would allow that much text to be on the cover. And what the heck does that mean?

Pete 10:23

Yeah, well, \first of all, it's a little tongue in cheek, okay. I don't really mean that. But it's just my way of just sort of talking about things and but again, even there, I've had people see previews of the title. And say “He’s got to be kidding. Is this the Babylon Bee that I'm reading”? How dare he think?

Seth Price 10:44

Well, to be fair, you've got the yellowish color.

Pete 10:47

Right, that's true. (laughs) Yeah, so I mean, how the Bible actually works, and, you know, the word actually is in italics, and, you know, I don't really I think I know how the Bible in total actually works. But this book takes a stab at things that don't normally come into the picture when people talk about the nature of the Bible. And in the subtitle, I have these words, it's ancient, ambiguous, and diverse, which are actually wonderful things because those are the kinds of things that make the Bible, let's say flexible. And I don't like to use the word applicable, but that's not a bad word here, you know, it's usable, applicable, and flexible, which is one reason why I think it sort of keeps hanging around and people keep reading it in very different ways and getting different things out of it. The Bible seems to me set up as it were, to do that kind of thing. So it gives us wisdom rather than answers because it's not just sort of this collection of propositions and if you do them all, or believe them all, everything's fine. It's a book that is diverse, it's ambiguous, and it's ancient, and therefore leads us towards trying to gain wisdom, rather than thinking of the Bible is sort of the field guide for the Christians.

Seth Price 12:11

Right, you talk in the book on wisdom quite a bit. And you make the distinction of the searching for wisdom over answers. And so when you say that, what I hear is the answers constantly change, at least for me, maybe I'm over reading that. Is that what you mean by that with wisdom? Like the answers for next year, you know, and all of my kids are a year older and all of my problems change that the answer is different, or the way that I interpret is different. What is actually the distinction there?

Pete 12:44

Well, I think that the Christian faith and the Bible behind it, you know, our circumstances change, and we see things differently and something that think and I believed very strongly that was true, let's say 20 years ago that I might not or 30 years ago or 40 years ago, but I don't think is correct any longer. I was on the path to seeking wisdom. And my views have changed and or my practices have changed. So that's really what I mean. It's, you know, I'm not suggesting, for example, that the Bible doesn't say anything that we might consider it to be an answer. But every answer still has the follow up kind of question. Okay, well, so what what do I do? What difference does this make? And at that point, you're immediately in wisdom territory, because that can look different for different people and it will get different for the same person, as you said, at different times in their lives under different circumstances. Which is beautiful. This is exactly what the Bible models the Bible models, different writers at different times, communing with God, I even like using the word imagining God, in different ways depending on who they are and when they are what their pressing questions are.

Seth Price 14:33

I spoke with a guest, I don't remember exactly who it was or when it was, but they had said something about, you know, the Hebrew text and the way that that language was written and the Aramaic words, as well, were meant. were limited enough that each word had different meanings depending on your context and the context of who they were written to. And they were meant to be wrestled with and chewed on and they all had multiple facets.

Pete 14:58

I think that's true. Yeah, very much so! And even just the factor of the passage of time, when you have Hebrew texts that are being read, let's say hundreds of years later, by Jews at a later time, even before the time of Christ, you know, some words like they'd start meaning different things. You know, like the last classic example of like fool and English, you know, full meant something to Shakespeare and it means something different today. But, so, you know, it's not always clear what something meant back then originally, but later readers don't care.

You know, it isn't like, I have to go back and do my homework. It's more like, you know, words take on different meanings, they evolved. I mean, there are numerous examples of trying to think off the top of your head, but the language evolves, right. So if you have something written, let's say during the period of, I don't know the monarchy, let's say the seventh century, you know, by something like whoever is writing at that point. And you have Jews reading this in, let's say 200 BC, 400 years later, where Hebrew is no longer the major language, but they passed through Aramaic and now Greek has become important. So the language of the Bible itself forces readers (insert cat meow here) to appropriate these things differently for their time. And that's exactly what happens.

Seth Price 16:30

So when I do that, well, firstly, I don't necessarily believe in inerrancy the way that most people talk about it, although I feel like that conversation is quickly changing as my generation gets older and more vocal, maybe I'm wrong-maybe that's just the circles that are running. But when I'm reading Scripture that way, how do I measure with…what's the word I'm looking for? How do I measure with conviction that what I'm reading the text to say, is a good way to read it and that I'm not just retconning in Scripture? Because I mean, the way that people would do for, you know, slavery the way that people would do to keep women in a place of subservience or the way that people would do for other issues? How do we make sure when we're treating language, I guess loosely is the best way to say it for me, that we're not just retconning in what we need it to say?

Pete 17:19

Well, I mean, that's a surprisingly complex question. And the fact that it needs to be asked doesn't mean that now language has to be very simple, right. In other words, we do have this interpretive problem and there's no question about it. And how do you know? Well, you don't really know mechanically all the time. But it may take time to sort of filter these things through a community and to see, like to be in conversation with, this is a tall order, but as much of the history of your tradition or of the Christian faith as you can be. And I do think that, for example, I want to have a starting point in trying to understand what ancient authors were trying to do. But in the same sense, I don't know if that really can limit us because we have the Bible itself that doesn't do that it appeals to earlier stories and earlier texts. And it goes in very different directions, directions that you might not always expect.

Seth Price 18:22

What's a to drill down language and you use the word fool earlier and you were talking about it in your book about, you know, contradictions. I forget which part of Proverbs but basically, don't answer the fool because that's just a bad decision, but then right after it, answer the fool, or he's gonna, you know, boast that he's obviously. You know, don't answer Donald Trump or answer Donald Trump, but either way, I'm screwed. It doesn't matter which way I go. And so when we're talking about words changing meaning what does fool actually mean? there?

Pete 19:02

What does it actually mean, you mean historically in the context. Fool is like a casual term in the book of Proverbs that describes people who are slanders who are lazy, who, don't look out for the well being of the other—it's just many, many things that involve the fool. And we might think of that as basically someone who was “not righteous”.

And unrighteousness means how you are towards other people, really. This isn't like pious theology in Proverbs it is actions towards other human beings. And that's really what a fool is there. It's, it's not somebody who's like, is such a fool like you're an idiot, or you know, you don't see the obvious thing in front of you. Fool is a little bit more of a treacherous category in Proverbs, and you're warned, don't be a fool, but be wise.

Okay, great. So let's go to what you were citing before Proverbs 26:4-5, “don't answer a fool/answer a fool”. Well, which do you do? Because I don't want to be foolish. I want to be wise. So what do you do? Well you know what to do if you have wisdom that's the circle here in Proverbs. It's a book that's meant to help you along the path of wisdom, but not just by delivering these “nuggets of truth” but by forcing you to enter into it and to experiment and to think. Like, sometimes you have to really sit down and think, should I say something right now or should I not say something? Right, so it's about more than reading the book. It's about reading the situation that you're in and that's what wisdom is about. I think the Bible really, not just Proverbs, but I think the Bible forces us into sort of a situation like that where we have to think and do our best. You know, it's just so not set up as that rule book that sometimes people make it out to be and Proverbs 26:4-5, putting them next to each other like that is a glaring example of, I think, not just Proverbs but how the Bible as a whole seems to be functioning.

Seth Price 21:15

Yeah, well, I mean, the Bible as a whole has so many contradictions. Do you think that humanity as a creature, I guess is the best word requires a rulebook? Because it seems like we always try to turn things into that. It doesn't really matter what the dogma is and it doesn't even matter that it's in a religious context but so often people look for the order of things to process in?

Pete 21:39

Yes, I think that's true. Whether it's just endemic to humanity, I would probably say, yeah, we keep coming also the history of humanity. And that's why it's interesting (insert dog barking for the next little bit) that the Bible is such a long, winding, complex collection of narratives and different genres that go in and out over, spanning, you know, roughly a millennia, right, roughly, and millennium. And all these genres and all these potential differing circumstances that, you know, it's the Bible is really set up not to be taken as a rulebook. That's really the point.

Even if you can say “I can point to some rules” that's great but like, Okay, how about you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and your neighbor as yourself. Okay, that's a rule what do I do though? That's where the wisdom part comes in, like, how do you actually enact that? And that's where people will have different opinions. And, to me, that's part of the beauty of the Bible that makes it really worth reading because we have to own this stuff for ourselves, and not just check off some boxes.

Seth Price 22:57

You've written basically two books in this book. I would argue. So there's the text itself. And then there's the footnotes at the bottom of many of the pages, which are almost an entirely different book unto themselves. I literally flipped through and just read those. And I like them a lot. But I'm curious, you give so many footnotes about your kids, and about other things. And basically saying, I'm using this word this way. I'm aware that it's wrong, but for the purposes that we're using this in, this makes the most sense to the people that live right now.

But you don't give me a footnote about, you know, Joshua 10, and Judges 4 and 19, where there's tent poles and dismemberment. So you talk about all that like right around the same chapter, as you know, making sure that we don't screw our kids up, which is a big goal of mine with three kids under 10. Not to screw them up! And they ask really hard and tough questions, but then you don't give any disclaimers about the parts of the Bible that I should maybe avoid for the tent poles and the dismemberment. Which one of those was more fun to write the book itself or the footnotes?

Pete 24:00

Well, they both were I mean, the footnotes are just places where I can sort of riff on things that I think are important or a chance for an occasional snarky comment. But you know, I try to, as people can tell from the Bible Tells Me so and the Sin of Certainty and now this book, that I really don't want to use footnotes for a lot of content, because it's just distracting. A few places I do because I mentioned Isaiah, and like the exile and I said, listen, you know, most scholars think that Isaiah is probably a compilation of a long tradition that maybe three people put together or something like that. And I just want people to sort of know that because a lot of my readers are very curious about things. You know, they want to understand something of the scholarship, but footnotes with citations and books and things like that, I may do that once. But for me the footnotes to replace just to say sort of relevant but semi-fun things too that that might help with some of the concepts of the book itself.

Seth Price 25:07

I think you did only do it once you're talking about I think homosexuality, you're like, yeah, I'm not going to talk about that. Please see this book, this book or this book—end of footnote, although I will say my favorite footnote was about Asherah and Yahweh as possible archaeological evidence for them being (husband and) wife. I think you just said, Here's another free piece of trivia for you. There you go. Here you are.

You brought up the term exile and you deal with exile in a way in this book that I'm not really familiar with you deal with exile as a term and like exile is a form of death. You know, that were exiled from Eden, exiled into Babylon. And that obedience in turn, is what brings you out of exile, which I've never really connected those two together before. Can you break that apart just a bit for those that have not read the book?

Pete 25:54

Sure. Yeah.

You know, there's this thing called the Babylonian exile which it began in 597 BC and lasted till 589 BC I'm already boring all your listeners by saying that…

Seth Price 26:09

I doubt it.

Pete 26:11

I would say that is the pivotal moment in Israel's history as far as the Bible's concerned. Because, you know, I'm collapsing a lot here, but it's during the exilic period that the Israelites who would soon come to be called Judites, because that's the southern nation that actually survived. They, you know, they were writing their story within the context of the pressure of exile, and the sense of God’s abandonment in exile. And that's when the ancient stories started coming together and being edited together and grouped together in a certain way and new stories were being written. And, after the exile, stories were being written for even like, two 300 years, at least after the exile was over. And thing about exile is that it was so traumatic, because it was a sense of God's abandonment. And you see how pivotal that exilic and post exilic perspective is on much of the Bible.

So in other words, you know, you can have stories of David, and Abraham, Adam, and Moses, and Joshua, and whatnot and those traditions are very old. Almost every Biblical scholar acknowledges that some of these things are trained in archaic, very, very old traditions, but the form of the Bible in which we have it, no, they weren’t written five minutes after Joshua, or five minutes after Moses. These books are the product of post exilic reflection on an ancient tradition, they were retelling their story in the context of this period of suffering and what came out of it and what they learned from it, quite frankly. And I think that's a very important concept and so you see exile woven in to the Bible in various points and one of those points is the Adam and Eve story. Where, you know, they're exiled from the garden for disobedience. And that parallels very nicely how Israel is exiled from the promised land because of disobedience.

It's like the Adam and Eve story is really a preview of coming attractions. And you have this hinting going on like in Deuteronomy about if you do this, you know, one day I'm just gonna, like, throw you out of the land I haven't even put you in yet.

Right, they haven't gotten to land yet and they're really talking about leaving, because Deuteronomy is a later perspective. It's near the exile and probably during and maybe even a little bit after the exile as far as we know. And so death, like the Adam story, death and exile are the same thing, in a sense. Because on the day you eat of it, you shall surely die. On the day they eat of it, they're driven out of the garden, because to be exiled is to be in the place of death.

And Ezekiel says that to you know, what is it 37, the Valley of the dry bones, you know, I saw this vision, there's a valley and all these dry bones and those dry bones represent the exiled Judites. And they slowly come back to life little by little and God then breathes life into them, Adam sorry, breathes life into them. And well, okay, what does that mean? What Ezekiel for heaven's sake tells you exactly what it means. He explains the metaphor at the end of that chapter says basically this is about the Judah hikes coming back from exile to the promised land.

So to come back to the land is a sort of a resurrection. And that’s why I mean, I just, this is such an important thing because this is why all four gospels introduce Jesus' public ministry by citing Isaiah 40 in the first few verses. Sometimes it's John the Baptist or just the narrator, but they cite this in Isaiah 40 is like the classic big return from exile passage in the Old Testament. You know, comfort my people says your God, speak tenderly to Jerusalem tell her that her warfare is ended. She's been repaid double for her sins. But now it's time to come home. Now it's time for comfort.

And Jesus’ story begins with him identifying with Israel's national plight into death. And what happens at the end of the gospel stories? Well, Jesus comes back to life! Right, it's a retelling, so to speak, of this story that really goes back to Adam, that all has to do with the reality of exile and what that means. Now, the New Testament interprets it very differently you know, it's not about land. It's a different kind of exile and different kinds of resurrection. But that's still mean that the ideas are there and, you know, I just can't think of a more simple concept for understanding the structure of the entire Bible, then the stress of exile and what it means to be Jewish in the midst of that.

Seth Price 31:34

You give Wisdom almost a personification. So you give wisdom like, I'm a banker for my day job and so you give wisdom like an equation of time + diversity = wisdom. But you also give wisdom, like a feminine trait, which I've never really given much credence to. What does wisdom look like when it's given that phenonom…. oh my gosh, I can't talk…that attribute

Pete 32:00

Feminininiom..

Seth Price 32:02

All of that. Yeah.

Pete 32:02

Yeah, well, you know, first of all wisdom is personified in the Old Testament as female and referred to as “she”. And Proverbs chapter eight is a great place like wisdom is like, be gotten by God and is with God at creation and wisdom is a feminine concept. The reason that happens is probably very grammatical because wisdom, the Hebrew word, is a feminine noun, wisdom is personified as a woman, probably for that reason. But yeah, and that's what you know, wisdom is sort of does take on a life of its own in a couple places and the Old Testament is not an abstract concept. It's something very tangible and very concrete. And I think that speaks to the the key importance of wisdom as a concept in the Old Testament as a whole, which is sometimes overlooked by questions, I think. We think like law is a central concept. Well, it's very important. Obviously, prophets are important things are important. But wisdom is something that really pervades the Bible as a whole, even in the stories. Like the Adam and Eve story is considered by many people to be a wisdom story, Joseph's story is a wisdom story, other places like that. So, yeah, wisdom is key and wisdom is personified as a woman, and the closest you come to in you know, the New Testament is Jesus. Jesus has that intimacy with God that wisdom has in the Old Testament in Proverbs 8

Seth Price 33:49

A good answer. Anytime we're discussing the Bible is to say the best example is Jesus. So that almost always works.

Pete 33:56

I mean, for the Christian Bible, they're great and I respect that. But for the Christian Bible, that's, it's like, you know, the concept of wisdom doesn't predict, like Jesus or anything like that. But Jesus embodies this ideal, that is taken by wisdom, that's occupied by wisdom in the Old Testament. And in John's Gospel, you know, in the beginning was the Word the Word was with God, the Word was God, everything was created through him. This word is, in John's world, very much connected to the idea of wisdom. It's not the same thing like in Greek philosophy, but it's this sort of intermediary kind of your that like to be connected to this has to be connected with the deity. But you know what, what turns the tables in, in John's Gospel is that this logos becomes flesh. Which logos is the Greek word for word, but this word becomes flesh. Which would be anathema both to Judaism into Greek thinking. So it's taking this wonderful idea but then flipping it on its head a little bit and saying the unexpected here.

Seth Price 35:14

You seem to easily work in books that I'm entirely not familiar with, although I have a copy of them and so like the Wisdom of Solomon, and Maccabees, you know, 1 and 2 Maccabees. And so, I'm familiar with what they are, but I don't really know how to use them. Well, so what is what are we talking about when we say apocrypha, and its relationship to the Bible? And what use should it be of?

Pete 35:39

Well, I mean, my orthodox friends, my Eastern Orthodox friends, remind me that the Apocrypha was in everybody's Bible until, I don't know, sometime relatively recently. I mean, well after the Reformation. So these books are not a waste of time and Apocrypha means hidden, which is wildly biasing you against them. Like they're hidden books, well, not very well, because you can go buy them anywhere you want. But the Apocrypha are a collection of books that were essentially written in Greek but they're Jewish books. So they stem from roughly the time of week conquests of Palestine of that part of the world, which happened…like Alexander the Great around 332 BCE he conqured stuff. And you see a lot of Greek influence in Jewish thinking, certainly by the year 200.

And so what Jews did was they kept writing, they didn't like, “well, the Biblical period is over, we're not going to write anything anymore”. They were writing a lot of stuff, to talk about what it means to be Jewish in a very different kind of world, not a Semitic world. Judaism in a Greek world, right, and that changed something for them.

And one reason these books are so important is that we can see these Jews before the time of Jesus thinking out loud about what it means to be Jewish in their world. And also you see some concepts that are not in the Old Testament, the Christian Old Testament, the Protestant Old Testament, they're not in the Old Testament, but they are in this apocryphal literature. And the New Testament talks about some of these things rather casually, as we all know. So actually there's this broad gulf of time, where again, the caricature for many Christians is that like, “Well after the exile you had some books, and then people were basically twiddling their thumbs waiting for Jesus to show up for about 500 years”. Oh, no! They were being Jewish. You know, and the New Testament is an extension of the whole Jewish development, especially coming out of Greek thought.

Seth Price 37:55

This isn't really the conversation at hand, but I'm just curious because I feel like you must at least know and breathe the answer. Why are they not allowed to be in my Bible now? Like I say, not allowed that's that's a bad metaphor. But why the apathy for these books? Because they're not preached on and I've only read them in current books a handful of times yours being among them; but each time I read something from there it's it's a fresh of breath air and that's probably because I'm not familiar with any of it and so that helps it. You know it's like it's the second string quarterback of the defense never prepared for it really penetrates all of the game plan because they play entirely different than Tom Brady, or whoever. Why is it not canon I guess is the best word but I know that's an entirely off topic, but…

Pete 38:51

Well remember it is canonical or what's sometimes called canonical but of a secondary nature deuterocanonical in both Roman Catholicism and in the Eastern Orthodox churches. So that's two thirds of the church basically has these this as canonical. The question really is why Protestants don't.

And there are a couple of interrelated reasons for that. One is, it was never part of the Jewish canon, these books. They were respected, it isn't like Jews and ignore them back and saying, well, this isn't part of the Bible. But what, but the reason they're not part of the Bible is because they're not old enough. These books are written in Greek, not Hebrew.

And so it's of a different level. And Jews recognize that but that doesn't mean they don't find them to be you know, I mean, Jews think different things about topics and not every Jew is the same, but you know, Jews are maybe more historically inclined or whatever, they will look at these books and read them and research them, even if they're not, let's say, preached on. Right.

And for Protestants, you know, in the wake of the reformation, the decisions were made. And I'm not clear exactly how the decisions were made, but they were made, that their Old Testament is going to go back to the Jewish standard and not to the Roman Catholic standard. Because you remember, Protestants and Roman Catholics didn't always get along. Right? So you have this historical divide that began for us for all intents and purposes, let's say around 1500. And, there was sort of like an anthema, like if you start looking for wisdom from these books, you know, you're treading in dangerous territory, right? And you're really not supposed to be doing that if you're Protestant. But I find it invaluable for filling in the pieces of a lot of key information of the New Testament that there's so many things the New Testament that like, if you only referenced the Old things just don't make a lot of sense. Like where do these ideas come from?

Things that we just take for granted that actually have a history and a development behind them. And it's fascinating to see how faith in this God of Israel moves and changes and I don't mind using the word “evolves” in some cases. Because that is a model for our own way of living and doing theology because we're still a part of that process of, you know, what does this God of old have to do with us right here and right now? That's a hard question.

And the Biblical witness as a whole, within the Old Testament throwing the apocryphal books in the New Testament, we're seeing some pretty major shifts in thinking; not just Jewish versus Christian, but within Judaism.

Seth Price 41:52

You’re talking about right now?

Pete 41:54

No back then. So, this ancient corpus of material is modeling for us something that I think thing is very vital for us, which is that it's not just about looking for the answers, it's seeking answers in your day in time, while engaging these texts, and looking to them for wisdom, but not expecting them to sort of answer the question for you.

Seth Price 42:18

So two things, and I want to connect them, I don't remember exactly what chapters they're in. But you say that

the Bible was created for when Israel needed it.

And if I'm following Christ, I'm hoping that the Bible is also created for when I need it. But then you also say that

the entire history of the Christian church is defined by moments of reimagining God to speak here and now.

And so, practically, and for you know, the next decade to 50 years, let's focus on decade or maybe even five years. What do you-just because you have your finger on the pulse of a youthful generation and you deal with many demographics with what you do-and so what currently do you think needs the most attention for being reimagined or reworked through or relanguageicized…I don't know what the word is—really voiced for the for the future of our faith to not just implode? Because everyone that I talked to I've asked the same question recently and each of them very easily have been able to say within a few generations the churches we know it will cease to exist. At least in Western culture if something doesn't change and so all supplant change with reimagining what do you see those things as for today?

Pete 43:38

Um, yeah, that is something that I do think about and the young people at least that I engage that's sort of where they are, even if they don't articulate quite as well. But you know, one thing, for example, is to really look at what the gospel is. And that is basic but you know, is it individualized salvation, so you can avoid the wrath of a retributive God and not go to a very hot place when you die; or is salvation something else? Like what is the purpose for Jesus even being on earth? I think it's that fundamental. Well it's to die. Oh, is it just to die? Because we have a lot of wasted space in between, you know, birth and death. There's a lot of stuff going on. So what what is the purpose of Jesus's life and death? And how do we appropriate those things and how do we think about those in ways that are meaningful today that may be different from meaningful back then?

I mean, I think salvation if I may make a very inadequately blanket answer to a very complex issue, but I really don't think salvation in the New Testament is about what happens to you when you die. It's about what happens to you right now. And whether you're a part of this kingdom of God, which is a present thing, which is going to get bigger in the future, but it is a present reality, because the king is here, right‽ So, you know, what sorts of things would you want to do if you're part of this kingdom? What kind of a person would you want to be?

Well, I can point to things in the New Testament that suggest, you know, basically, helping the poor, not aligning yourself with power. Many of the things that, you know, in my growing up evangelical, I would see the opposite. I would see power grabs and not real concern for the poor but concern for building empires. And so, I think in part, it's a matter of revisiting some of those older ideas as a corrective for us without even having to like rethink language. But even words like salvation, or justification, or righteousness, these are all terms that I think have become skewed. And for us to write like we think those terms is very, very important for understanding like, what is God doing in this world? I don't think it's to build little “Jesus clubs” where we isolate and sort of hunker down and wait for the end of time. That's a very non New Testament way of thinking.

Seth Price 46:35

So what you're talking about there's like eschatology, but yeah, I've stopped using the word sanctification or any of those and I just started using the word theosis for two reasons. A: I like the idea of slowly, contemplatively, becoming, you know, Christlike and B: it forces people to stop what they're doing and actually have to pay attention because I used a big word that I learned three weeks ago or whatever. And so I intentionally I've stopped using those words. And I only use that one as a very blanket term. Because it moves the conversation, at least to a point of new information can be gathered or proffered from both parties. But that's just me, personally.

Pete 47:16

Well I think that's great. I mean, the most difficult writing I've ever done in my life is working on a children's Bible curriculum, which I did a few years ago. And I wrote like three volumes. It's called Telling God's Story, which is excellent, by the way, and other volumes have come out since I had to stop doing that. But it's hard. It was hard writing because I couldn't use those buzzwords we're used to using. You can't use sanctification like this or that right? You just you have to like talk differently.

Seth Price 47:47

To bring it back together. And I like to close our time with this question. Partially because I am entirely bias in the answer and I have an inherent, what's the word I'm looking for, I want to do it better than I do it because I know I don't do as good of a job as I could. And so you give an analogy of raising children as a good way for how the Bible works as a wisdom book.

And so I'm hoping that in this answer, I can both learn something about a better way, with intention, to help raise children in a way that they have a good knowledge of Christ, but also maybe helps me read Scripture in a better way.

Pete 48:24

That is a big wisdom question, right? Because the point is that growing in faith, is not about making for you follow…it’s not treating the Bible as again, that rulebook. Because rulebooks for parenting don't work. You can't anticipate every scenario. You can't anticipate your child's personality beforehand. You can't treat each of your children exactly the same way. “Well, these are the rules”. Well, different kids respond differently and they have different things going on inside of them.

I think the life of faith and how we read the Bible is very similar to that. Different people will pick up different things from the Bible, and it simply doesn't work well, or I think at all, as that kind of a script to follow to crank out perfect Christians. Don’t do this just do the other thing. Well, no, I just I mean, it's, the Bible just will frustrate you at every turn, when you try to make the Bible into something like that, because the Gospels don't even agree. And Proverbs is messing with your head and the laws of the Old Testament…you know, there are laws given by Moses, from God through Moses, and depending on who is reading Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, they will say different things. That's not a mystery. People have known this since the beginning. Right?

So the Bible will frustrate our wanting to have let's say a parenting book for being raised in the faith, rather than I think God is a good parent, and we are left to figure things out. So like a friend of mine puts it “winging it in the Holy Spirit”. And the Bible models a process like that for us. And sometimes there are anchor points where we can touch down, but they're not ready made. They're not these 10 things that “this never changes”. No, again, God's love never changes. Okay. What does that mean? What's the impact of that for us? And so, you know, at the end of the day, it's about seeking wisdom through experience and through communion with God and trying to be in God’s presence and be mindful of that presence all the time. And then going through life thinking how is God showing up right here and right now, you won't find the answer to that by flipping in the index in back of the Bible.

Seth Price 50:57

So screw the concordance and know that the day that I got my first Bible is very similar to the day that they trusted me 48 hours after my wife gave birth to my son to just “here you go, just don't read the concordance and just go for it!”

Pete 51:12

But here's the thing, though, if you used the concordance well, you're going to be really well off because you're going to see how the same word doesn’t mean things in the same way and every place that it's used. Yeah, you'll be alerted to the variety of a right away and the variety of Scriptures.

Seth Price 51:32

Yeah. Well, Pete, where can Well, obviously this book will be available everywhere that fine books are sold, but how do they engage with you? I know you're very active. Well, you're semi active on Twitter. I have no idea. If you're active on Facebook, where would you direct people to be to get in touch with you and kind of engage in this text and the work that comes with it?

Pete 51:50

Sure. I mean, Twitter is always good. I have Facebook/author page which sounds really snooty, and it's meant to be but it's a place where I will post things regularly and people comment and engage back and forth there. My website Peteenns.com, aka theBiblefornormalpeople.com has all sorts of stuff, you know, comments there on blog posts, and you can access our podcasts there. We're also Jared Byas and I who were you know, we both run the Bibles for normal people, we have a Patreon account. And if you're not familiar with ash, don't worry about it. But if you're right, but therefore, you know, as little as $1 a month, there's extra content that we give and different levels of engagement that we have for people who are interested, including things like being part of a book study. People occasionally too, so. So those are the best ways to to connect with me and there are a lot of them.

Seth Price 52:51

They they should be familiar Patreon because I plug it every single week. Although I will say most people rise to the occasion. The Patreon community around specific this show and I'm sure it's similar with yours. Those people that become the people that I text phone call, email, like their feedback, not because they pay money, but because they're engaged and this is the best and the best feedback of anyone's because just the engagement.

Pete 53:16

We have a level of pay at our Patreon for what we call producers and these are people we get on, like quarterly calls with them, and they have like special access to sort of give feedback about stuff. And it's really valuable it is fantastic

Seth Price 53:30

Well, Pete, thank you for your time.

Pete 53:32

Thanks for having me.

Seth Price 53:58

Wouldn't it be crazy in twenty years our kids, my kids, your kids, maybe you I don't know how old you are, listen into this actually did what we need to do with the Bible; if we treated it not as an instruction book, and we tried to just live quote unquote, “biblically”? If we actually wrestled with the text and allowed the text of Scripture to change us, if we allowed the voice of wisdom to help inform our decisions, and to help change our hearts. I can't imagine what the world would look like. But I think it would look better than it does today. I know that it would look better than it does today. And so let's keep in mind, let's meditate on and let's be clear that the Bible has many opposing views on many different issues. And at all times both those views are true, and that's okay. Because if anything, I've learned that the Bible gives me permission to doubt. And the Bible gives me permission to question. And it's through prayer and discernment that the answers actually come and it's worth all of the uncomfortableness and all of the effort to get to the resolutions of the issues that come up day to day for me.

The music today is from a repeat artist Matt Tipton. I used some of his music in a previous episode and it was beautiful. He has a new album called Blessed King that you can get everywhere music is sold. It's everywhere. Just Google bless it King Matt Tipton, beautiful music. But check out Matt and then as always the songs from today's episode all four of those will be mixed into the Spotify playlist for the music of this show that playlist is called Can I Say This At Church. It is fantastic playlist you should be listening to it.

I will talk with you next week and I'm excited to be blessed everybody.

Radiance and the Cosmic Christ with Alexander John Shaia / Transcript

Note: Can I Say This at Church is produced for audio listening. If able, I strongly encourage you to listen to the audio, which has inflection, emotion, sarcasm where applicable, and emphasis for points that may not come across well in written word. This transcript is generated using a combination of my ears and software, and may contain errors. Please check the episode for clarity before quoting in print.

Back to the Audio Episode


Alexander 0:00

The beauty of Christianity, which is divinity and matter, as the full incarnation of each one of us. This is what's distinct about our tradition. This is the conversation and the offering that we have at table with all the other great traditions. The other great tradition left a little bit off of the fullness of incarnation and Christianity comes in and says, “Oh, no, divinity is totally within matter and matter lives totally with divinity”. Again, it's this Aramaic oneness, where is divinity? Divinity is in matter. There's no desire to separate divinity from matter or matter from divinity. So therefore, going to this concept of theosis, the first theological perspective of Christianity is that we are made fully from the nature of God, which is divinity and matter brought together; that’s who we are, and that we're going to live our lives ever more living into this great nature that is who each of us is.

Seth Price 1:34

Hello, my friends, welcome to the Can I Say This At Church podcast, I'm Seth. I'm so glad you're here. Brief announcement: see the show notes go to the website as soon, hopefully in March, there will be a smaller community group inside of the Can I Say This At Church community intentionally digging into some of the work that Alexander writes about, it has been very impactful for me over the last December of 2017 until today and actually was reading a bit of it again today. And by today, I mean, you know, end of January here. I look forward to doing that with you. And if that's something that interests you digging in deeper to the text of Heart and Mind, I will begin plugging that on social media. And there'll be links for that. And we will walk through it together as the best way that we can. Before the episode starts a recent uptick again. And it seems like every few weeks, there's another uptick in patron support. And if you've not yet done that, I appreciate every single one of you that does so I would encourage you to do that; it is entirely affordable and makes a much bigger impact for making the show become something more. So do that. Spend some time today take a minute and a half go to patreon.com/CanISayThisAtChurch and jump into the community. I look forward to meeting and talking with you there.

If you ask anyone on the street, and I've done this, who is Jesus Christ? They will give a whole bunch of answers but no one for the most part. Nobody says, you know, he's more than words can comprehend, or the Christ is more than Jesus can contain. Or Jesus is the best representation of the Christ that we've had on planet Earth. No one says that no one breaks the Christ apart into a larger context, for the most part, where I'm at here in Virginia, where you live may be entirely different. But Christ is so much more than words on a page and Christ is so much more than words can explain scripture is pretty clear on that. And I would argue so are my interactions with Jesus to this day. The weekly interactions, the daily interactions, that I have, I shot Alexander an email right as he got back from his last Camino and said, Hey, will you be willing to come back onto the show, and let's talk about theosis and let's talk about a cosmic Christ and let's talk about truth and let's talk about radiance and light and darkness. And let's see how they fit together for 2019. This is the very beginning All beginning of an entirely much bigger conversation and it's a conversation that requires intention. And it's a conversation that requires patience. And I'd like to leave that there. And so I'm going to roll the tape on this Martin Luther King Day recording with Alexander Shaia.

Seth Price 4:36

Alexander Shaia, you are the first three times let's say friend of the show repeat guest that's come on and I am so delighted to have you on the show today. Thank you for coming back on to the Can I Say This At Church podcast.

Alexander 4:49

Seth it's an honor. It truly is an honor. I love every minute that we're together in conversation.

Seth Price 4:55

So one of the things that I have valued most of getting to know you a bit is a lot of the guests that I've had on prior, we may email back and forth or get on Twitter or something and talk back and forth. But I've developed a relationship with you that I would come closer to calling you friend than anyone else for the most part, except for maybe a handful of people that I've had on the show. And so from the bottom of my heart, thank you so much. It truly means a lot to have someone dive in and engage in to the work that you do, and the community that you try to build, and then be intentional in sustaining that. And so before we get going, I did want to say thank you for that.

Alexander 5:33

You are welcome. And you've got me almost speechless and a bit teary. Thank you.

Seth Price 5:39

So I wanted to bring you on because the work that you do, touches a lot on many things, and specifically the way that you talk about the Gospel of John, it blows up Jesus in such a manner that doesn't sit well with the way that I think church works today in America. I find so often that we don't talk about Jesus as the Christ; it's just Jesus Christ as if Christ is Gods last name. And so I wanted to talk a bit about that the concepts of theosis, the interplay between light and dark, and kind of where all that goes. But before we get into that, what is new with you? I know that you're recently back from the Camino and you're currently traveling. So for those listening, what's been new with you since the last time that they heard from you?

Alexander 6:33

Well, at this very moment, I am in Sacramento, California in a dear friend's home, and it's the first sunny day in a week and everybody around me seems to be out with a leaf blower. So I'm wandering rooms to see if we can get a quiet portal here. I, yesterday, here in Sacramento, I presented to a pilgrim group on my new book Returning From Camino and it was really touched that so many people came out who have not walked or even intend to walk the Camino but are understanding so many journeys in their own life is pilgrimage. And we just had this rich conversation.

I woke up this morning, with my mind and heart sort of buzzing from this conversation yesterday about life as pilgrimage. There were people there who are recovering from cancer as pilgrimage, people who have gone through other sudden death experiences as pilgrimage etc. And so that's new. And the other piece, which is new is I now have seriously begun the next book, which I'm tentatively calling the 13 Days of Christmas, and the title might change, although that that title seems to be working for folks. It's just enough of…it's like Well, what do you mean 13 days and Christmas? Anyway, that's that's what's new and with grace and breath, I hope to have that book out by the Fall.

Seth Price 8:05

I hope you do as well. I remember the last time that we spoke, it was around lint of 2018. Well, the last time we spoke for the podcast, you were talking about doing that, but also working on the Camino book as well. So I'm, I'm glad I've heard some of that stuff and other parts of your work. And so I think that that book, specifically around Christmas is needed, mostly because I find myself wholly inadequate when my kids asked me about, hey, why do we have a Christmas tree? Or X, Y or Z? I didn't have good answers.

Alexander 8:38

Yeah. And, it hurts my heart for people to think that those are not related to the Christ, that it's “some foreign element” which has come into Christianity and come into Christmas and nothing could be further away from the truth. And that really kind of kind of leads into this topic of Christ. I think that our early ancestors were very focused on the Christ and Jesus as the Christ, but the Christ is what's foremost and Jesus is the doorway into that reality.

Seth Price 9:14

So when we say that, just to recenter that, well actually let me…one thing on Christmas. So, oddly enough, one of hopefully by the time this airs, The Work of The People has some of your videos coming out and one of them you talk about the winter solstice. And the reason you know, for it being or the reason that we center Christmas around that time, and I was driving to church with my son, and we got to talking about why it was so dark. He's commented, like, it's been dark all day. I was like, Yeah, but that's this is how it works. And he's like, okay, so why does that matter? And I was able to kind of take some of your stuff and reframe it. And you could just see him get quiet and process in the backseat. And I was like, here we go, we're doing it right. I'm really hoping that maybe my kids have a bigger concept. have Jesus, then I did. And that is what it is.

Alexander 10:05

Well, you know, and just to piggyback on that, for a moment, I'm already being urged as soon as the 13 Days of Christmas is done, is to immediately take that material and to write a children's story with beautiful illustrations. And so the next piece is to begin to find that incredible Illustrator.

Seth Price 10:31

When we talk about Jesus as a bigger concept and Jesus filling into the shoes of Christ. I feel like most people today say Jesus Christ, like I say, Seth Price or like you say, Alexander Shaia. When we blow that apart I feel like we're really good about talking about Jesus the man and we're not good about thinking about Christ as a part of the Trinity or Christ as it's related to the cosmos. And so how do we rip that apart a little bit?

Alexander 10:57

Thank you for bringing us to this discussion because it's core. And for me, let's go back to first century Israel, Palestine, and try to understand what's there as our tradition is birthed from our mother Judaism. So their word because they were Hebrew / Aramaic, was not “Christ”, their word was “messiah”. And hear how I'm pronouncing that I'm not pronouncing it as you might say it in English “Messiah”. I'm using the Aramaic meh C..ha. And the actual end of the word is the expulsion of breath from your mouth. And Aramaic as a language has very few words in it. It's a very, you want to use the term primitive. I think Aramaic has something like 2000 words in it and Aramaic was the language of the common folk in Israel, whereas Hebrew was the language of the priests and the scribes in the temple. So, Jesus probably is speaking Aramaic as he travels around Israel, certainly as he travels around Galilee, etc.

Aramaic, having so few words in it, has to use body posture to also convey what the meaning is. So when messiah ends with that out breath, well what does messiah mean in Aramaic? It's, it's more like a verb than a noun. Aramaic is a language which does not have defined tenses. It's a language that tends to be more about “nowing”, rather than yesterday or tomorrow. And it's a language which is about an ongoing now. So there's very little in Aramaic which is static.

So it's really important that when we say messiah in Aramaic, that we're understanding about a present moment, ongoing, reality, not, as we might think a figure back in time somewhere or forward in time somewhere, but a reality that's right now, and is dynamic right now. So the other thing about this word messiah is it can mean “anointing”, but in the Aramaic, in the Jewish metaphor of the day, anointing is to breathe on someone else. Anointing is something very close to the miracle of breath into the ongoing reality of breathing.

So just what's in this name messiah is like the ongoing breath of God that's living in you right now. It's like you're breathing, because God breathing in you. And, Paul is going to be the person, St. Paul, first century, who is the educated type, who obviously knows Aramaic and Hebrew, and apparently knows Greek and Latin as well. It falls, Paul, to convey this very dynamic reality of God's breathing in us and to try to put it into a Greek word. And Paul is the one who chooses the word, the Greek word, (Χριστός ) Christos, and here's how I pronounce that again. There's, a clearing of your throat at the beginning of the word. And as you say this word again, there's the expulsion of breath.

So Paul is translating messiah, from the Aramaic, into the Greek word Christos. But when he does that, he also has to inform people that the Greek word, which sounds like a figure in time, is actually an unknown reality. And so Paul has got to begin to break down this static reality of the Greek language because the Greek language is very much about time; past, present, future. Aramaic is about the eternal now and the ongoingness of now. And so, Paul has got to surround the term Christos, with this ongoing “in” breathing reality. So it's not, though he is using the Greek word, he's trying to give the Greek word an Aramaic understanding. And so he's got to teach the Hebrew even and he’s got to remind them. Who was with Moses in the desert? Who was with you as you came out of Egypt? The Messiah! So this Messiah, is an ongoing reality. Messiah certainly didn't start when Jesus was born it is a visible manifestation of a reality that's always been. And so Paul is trying to help us understand that in the presence of Jesus, we have a way to fully appreciate and touch something that has always been true-that's been there from the beginning of time.

Seth Price 16:49

I hear you say all that and two things come to mind when you talk about breath and anointing. I can't help but think of the poetry and allegories in Genesis 2 to specifically on what humanity is, you know, God breathing in or maybe I'm stretching it too far I don't know, Hebrew or Aramaic. And so if I'm wrong, please tell me but you know God breathing in or anointing humanity in that, but that that seems to elevate. I don't want to anthropomorphize Christianity in a way that's undue but it also breaks my brain as I'm sure that it would have been in Paul's time. How does a word like that in Aramaic deal with the concept of eternity if everything is currently now?

Alexander 17:34

Eternity is a Greek concept. If we go back to our Jewish mother, our Jewish nature in Christianity is only about now. And the “nowness” was so important that they didn't actually develop a concept of what happens after you take your last breath, in terms of an afterlife. And we Christians today have gone back and put in a lot of afterlife focus into the Scriptures which is not there in the original time of their writing. They are focused on heaven and earth, here and now, the reign of God now. And that if we live the reign of God, now God will take care of whatever's going to happen after our last breath.

There is this huge transition, Seth, and I don't think that we totally appreciate this. You know, what continent is Israel and Palestine on…they are on the continent of Asia. And there is more in common with Hebrew and Aramaic with Japan and India than with Greece. Even though they are right next door to Greece, the Aramaic and the Jewish mindset is Asian. Greek is about breaking everything in reality down into its smallest parts and examining it. The Asian worldview, everything is about how everything fits together in right relationship. And so in an Asian worldview, it's very hard to do what, in many ways science has beautifully done the last couple of hundred years in terms of breaking things down into its specific classification. Because the Asian worldview is, let's put everything together and look at it in its whole-there's a very different understanding of Christianity when you stay in the Middle East.

Seth Price 19:49

So I can hear that Asian influence in the Walking The Camino book specifically with that concept of I'm gonna say it wrong. Kintsugi. No, that is how you say it. The thing where the pottery is broken apart and then melded back together with gold, I find that whole allegory beautiful. rBut when I say when we're talking about truth and in basically epistemology like you know all the way back to Aristotle and whatnot and Christianity, or faith or religion as a whole, being Hellenized, what does a wisdom of oneness and science How do those two counterbalance each other? Because they have to for today's world there's no way to detach one from the other.

Alexander 20:34

Say that again…what do you mean by counterbalance? How do they fit into harmony or how are they in tension of opposite?

Seth Price 20:43

So either those really but what I hear you saying is, you know, Paul is writing to people that have to break things down to their logical common denominator. And India and Japan and other Asian cultures were dealing with the the whole truth, not a two plus two plus three plus five equals, I can't do the math in my head, because I made those numbers up. And, so one if one of those if the math is what I want to call science, and if the Asian or Indian or you know, you know Israel culture, is dealing with what we're going to call oneness and wisdom, how do those two interplay because both of those now, both of those cultures, greatly influenced the world that you and I live in?

Alexander 21:25

We do and we need to understand how each has a beauty and in some ways, how each has a limitation. Think of the incredible scientific advances that have come from being able to break things down into their smallest units and observe them and theorize about. It's like, we went to the moon and came back partly because of that ability. And yet when it comes to spirituality, that sort of reality is largely not helpful because the spiritual nature is, let's look at how everything is rather than a separate increment, let's look at how everything fits together and an incredible recipe.

So we need both of these realities, and we need to know which one is appropriate to the task at hand. And so much, Paul, I think, would be greatly saddened to see the state of religion today, which has taken Aristotelian Greek concepts and thought of it as the paragon, when he sees it as the sin. He sees Greek and Aristotelian thought as missing the mark, sin, missing the mark. Because it's breaking things apart, and in the Aristotelian world they thought of the world as a series of competing opposites. They thought if Heaven is fighting Earth, and that our obligation was to align with Heaven. I thought that men and women fight each other and in their view, men should win and so we should align with men, etc, etc,. They thought that light and dark are opposites that were in competition with each other and that our job was to align with light.

So it is the Greek mindset that Paul is so strongly against, the language of the Greek concept of the world is competing opposites where everything is intention and fighting the other, is the language and the worldview of oppression. And the Christ reality is to bring us away from that repression back to understand everything belongs.

Seth Price 23:53

I heard you say light and that makes me think of two things. I recently read. Something by Merton. And he was talking about walking around and trying to…he was talking about theosis, which is a fancy word for becoming like Christ, you know, becoming little gods. And he said,

How is it possible to tell them

…and he's talking about all the people around him,

that we're all walking around, shining like the sun.

And then he went on to talk about the sun as more than light and more than dark, and all about glory, and radiance. And I know a lot of the work that you've done recently talks about light, and dark, and radiance. And so I'm curious, how do you reconcile the way that we as a church, the big church, a capital C church, talk about light and dark, radiance and glory, and I guess the inverse of that would be sin and darkness?

Alexander 24:52

Well, yeah, I mean, and I we’re recording this conversation today on the feast of Martin Luther King, Jr. And what I want to raise up for us to take very seriously now, in my mind, we've got to rewrite most of our prayer books. And we've got to rewrite almost all of our hymnity. Because if any of us want to stand against racism, we must scrub from our minds and our hearts every concept that darkness is sinful. And if you go back to the English language, particularly all the way back to five to 600 years ago, you're going to understand that in English darkness has meant “soiled, contamination, garbage, the sin of Cain”, all of these associations, which are the “missing the mark” of the Anglo culture that were in the minds and the hearts of the Europeans who went to Africa and saw dark people and felt obligated to evangelize them. Because they were black because they were dark skinned they were therefore garbage and sinful and had to be retrained.

And just yesterday I was in church and we were singing this hymn and I had to stop singing, because the whole humn kept talking about dark in sin, dark in sin, dark in sin. Do we not understand that dark is of God? Do we not understand that dark is beautiful? Do we not understand that dark is not sinful in and of itself. Light can be sinful. Dark can be sinful, but dark and light can equally be of God. And every time we make this very simple equation of dark is sin or dark is pain, how many times do we describe a painful or a chaotic situation as a dark experience? There is nothing dark about it! It's painful, it's chaotic, it's hurtful, (and) we suffer. But there's nothing dark about suffering inherently. We've have written racism into our prayers and our hymnity, and we need to stop it.

Seth Price 27:18

How do you go about the practice of fixing that? I mean, there's so much, not tradition, but there's just so much inherent, I don't know what the word is foundation. That's not the word either. It's built in, whatever that word is called. Like, it's built in, like the church that you go to in the in the conversations that you have. It's the inherent foundation of the topics. So how do you go about that?

Alexander 27:43

So I mean, I've been at this for 40 years, and I have no illusion that we're going to change because we have this incredible conversation. What I'm trying to do is I'm trying to wake us up to stop the unreflective(ness) about how we use the word or the colors of darkness. And to realize I mean, I was reading a Martin Luther King talk the other day and realized that he talked about darkness as pain. Just because he was a black man doesn't mean that he was totally aware of his own language. So we've got a long journey ahead.

And I don't know when we're ever going to get there if there's anywhere to get. But what I'm asking us to do is to wake up and begin. That's all-just wake up and begin. Just immediately begin when we see the word dark in our songs and in our prayers to look at how it's being used and disconnect it. Disconnect the equation sign we have inside of ourselves, between the word dark and sin, or the word dark and pain. One of the things I like to talk about is the most destructive reality on the planet is light. A nuclear explosion is the closest thing we have to pure light. So actually, the word light is probably closer to evil than the word dark.

Seth Price 29:16

I don't like that. I don't like hearing that out loud because I don't have an adequate response like the part of me that wants to logically say something finds no words, it's painful.

Alexander 29:30

It is painful. But go back to the Thomas Merton quote because, you might notice in my languaging and the poetry that I write and the prayers that I compose, is that I removed light and dark from the conversation and basically have gotten to the word radiance. Because radiance has two things at the word light and dark do not have. It has movement and radiance is the interplay of light and shadow.

Seth Price 30:06

I like that.

Alexander 30:07

And that's my offering at the table. I don't know if this is the best way to go. It's like, we're too early in this conversation to have answers. What I'm inviting us into (in this conversation) is let's have questions. And let's really notice what happens inside of ourselves. And let's notice the beauty of nature. And let's understand that the beauty of nature is the holiness of God. One of the metaphors for the holiness of God, and the night sky is utterly beautiful. But our languaging has made it sinful.

Seth Price 30:48

I think I emailed this to you when I read when I when I watched one of your most recent videos and you talked about radiance, I actually got up and went outside and in the cold, it's like 20 degrees out here. I tried to see what I could see tried to look for new stars that have always been there and I've just never had to use a Biblical language. I've just never had eyes to see them. They've obviously always been there. One of them was an airplane that isn't always there, (laughter) but most of them, most of them, we're always there. But it left me longing to go to open spaces, because I'm curious what else I'm missing. And if I drill that down to my life as a person, I'm curious what else I'm missing. Because all I see is the light and dark that's currently around me and not the light and dark that actually is there.

Alexander 31:39

And if we go back to the Aramaic for just a moment, the Aramaic language was a language of nature. The Greek language was a language of concepts and concepts are beautiful and helpful, but concepts don’t really live anywhere in nature. So Aramaic could only describe what a person could experience in nature. So therefore, Aramaic has no word for light and has no word for dark. You can't say that. Aramaic, if you want to talk about daytime, the Aramaic language will have words in it that describe the quality of the light say at 10 o'clock in the morning, and the type of shadow that might be cast on the ground. Or if you want to talk about dark, the Aramaic language is going to have words that describe the night sky on a night it's moonless on a night that has clouds, on the night that has full starlight, so that you see what Aramaic is doing is saying, dark and light are always in interplay with each other. You can't separate them in Aramaic, therefore, because you can't separate them you certainly can't say the dark is evil.

Seth Price 33:36

When I think about light and dark in nature, as you were talking there I thought to myself that the only way to then feel home is when I'm out and engaging with nature and creation. Because the light and the dark on the trees and on me only looks the way that it looksw hen I'm where I belong. If that makes sense. Like if I go to Australia, the light is different. The stars are different. The moon is in a different position, the Earth is at a different angle. Everything is entirely different. And I can still fit in but I'm not necessarily home. Curious with parallel archetypes of a cosmic Christ or the cosmic man. You're like, in Buddhism, there's the Buddha nature in Hinduism, there's the cosmic man. And so I'm curious your thoughts on how multiple religions talk about this concept of a being that needs to be incarnated physically here.

Alexander 34:34

Well, and I think I'm going to slip a little bit to the left of that, and talk about The beauty of Christianity, which is divinity and matter, as the full incarnation of each one of us. This is what's distinct about our tradition. This is the conversation and the offering that we have at table with all the other great traditions. The other great tradition left a little bit off of the fullness of incarnation and Christianity comes in and says, “Oh, no, divinity is totally within matter and matter lives totally with divinity”. Again, it's this Aramaic oneness, where is divinity? Divinity is in matter. There's no desire to separate divinity from matter or matter from divinity. So therefore, going to this concept of theosis, the first theological perspective of Christianity is that we are made fully from the nature of God, which is divinity and matter brought together; that’s who we are, and that we're going to live our lives ever more living into this great nature that is who each of us is.

I mean the psalmists have said that you are God's. Thomas Merton talks about the fact you are brighter than the sun shining. That to be a follower of Jesus the Christ is to aspire to do the work to fully live into our divine human nature. And Jesus shows us how to live into our divine human nature. And most other traditions will pull back from that with the fear that that's too much for a human to assume most of the other traditions will set quote unquote, the Buddha nature or divinity as something over there, not something that truly lives inside of us. I think, yeah, I'm going to always be listening to the other great traditions and have them teach me but I think that's what's been being shared. And Christianity comes in and goes oh no theosis. We don't get atonement theory in Christianity for a good 400 years. The first 400 years of Christianity is seeped in this idea of theosis. That we are fully born conceived in the fullness of the Divine human nature, and that we will spend our whole lives gradually becoming evermore that in which we already conceived. We don’t come from a sinful nature, we don't come separate from God. We come with the ability, the innate ability, to draw ever closer into the union with God, which is who we’re intended to be.

Seth Price 37:43

I like that. I like the part you said we don't come with an innate ability to not do it, and this does not require response, but all I keep thinking when you say that is nobody told that to Augustine and in Augustine, is what, you know, filtered down to most of the church or at least the Protestant church today. I wish that had been communicated better to him.

Alexander 38:04

Well, actually, the problem with Augustine is that we read Auguatine by the lesser people who followed him and interpreted him. If you really read Augustine for Augustine and had the idea of theosis; yes, he does talk about about sin and how we need to overcome that. But it's not really a starting place. I don't think, I think that Augustine is was was lessened by the people who came after him and interpreted him to us.

Seth Price 38:35

I don't know enough about all that all I know, is what I've read of people that I trust.

Alexander 38:41

Yeah, and what's happened by the time of adjusting is the foundation that theosis are being undermined. Because Christianity, in my mind, is always best when we're not part of a state government. When we stay is primarily a process of transformation. But by Augustine’s time, we're tripping over into the trappings of state, and government. And we're taking on powers and privileges, which I don't think are the role of search spiritual traditions.

Seth Price 39:20

Knowing that the bulk of a lot of the cosmic language you know, in Ephesians and Colossians, and John 1, the first paragraph of Hebrews and 1 John, I don’t remember the verses, but definitely the first part of 1 John. I'm curious, o how and I know that most of those were written, if not all of them were written before the gospels were all the way written. So in Matthew and Mark and Luke, and all leave john out because john talks very well about a cosmic portion of Christ or cosmic knowledge of Christ. How do we drill this knowledge back into the Gospels because knowing that we're, right now as we come in by the time this airs will be Lent and coming up on Easter and so we're gonna have a lot of conversation about the incarnation, about resurrection, about glory and about salvation, and so how do we hear a cosmic Christ in the other gospels that aren't John?

Alexander 40:17

In my heart mind, I always go to what I think of is the high point of before gospel journey which is John and which is the prologue and which is John's passion, death, and resurrection account. And then through that doorway, I understand how Matthew and Mark lead to that door and how Luke is the outflow from that door. But if I want to understand the deepest reality of who Jesus Christ is, I go to John's prologue; and I understand that what John is doing that, John, is the first spiritual text, and you probably heard me say this, and I'll keep saying it. John is the first spiritual text that we have on the planet that we know of; there may be other texts that have been lost or that are not generally known to us, but right now John is the first text that was written as a spiritual text for all people. Even Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the first audience for Matthew, Mark and Luke, were for the Hebrew people or for the Hebrew people who are adding to their understanding of the Messiah in Jesus the Christ.

John’s text is written primarily to all the tribes, all the people on the planet, and saying, there is this reality from the beginning of time in which you are all formed by whatever name you call it. So John has to go back and because we're going to be the tradition, the first tradition on the planet, again that we know of that resolves tribalism. We're the first tradition that no longer made people go to any particular temple site and say that this is where your god or goddess lives. We are the first tradition that said, we are part of a tradition that understands that God is everywhere already. We're not going to go anywhere and bring Jesus we're going to go everywhere and find Jesus already there. Because this reality that we call Jesus is across all time, and already across all place. So it's like, go discover the great truth that's already another in the soul of the cosmos, that don't have any arrogant belief that you're gonna go bring Him there.

And that all comes from John's text because John doesn't want to create a hierarchy amongst Christians, it doesn't matter whether your doorway into the Christ was your Yahweh or Zeus. The reality is go through whatever your doorway was back to the Oneness that was there at the beginning of the time. And that Oneness comes from God in is of God and God has put God’s very self into the diversity of the cosmos. And we are going to be the tradition that welcomes the cosmos to sit at our table, not to be some bland uniformity, but to be a rather dynamic diadem in tension. That's who our God is. So, John has got to in his text, go back and finish the work to the book of Genesis particular. In the book of Genesis we hear about a God who breathed out into creation and ultimately all of that led to the Jewish people being the first people to hear the promise. And John wants to say, and the Jewish people's promise is a promise that actually was given to every part of creation; and was given to every people and has been the radiance within them this whole time.

Go back and look at the prologue because you have the reality of this oneness that God has breathed out into everyone and everywhere for three stanzas. Before you get to the stanza that opens up and the Word became flesh and the flesh lives amongst us. So when John is talking about this oneness in this reality, this incarnational reality of God which is everywhere. He's inviting you if you are a follower of Dionysus, great go through Dionysus back that to the One. If you're a follower of Zeus, if you're a follower of Isis, if your a follower Hector, wherever your starting point is, don't stand in the doorway and say this is the final reality (but) go through that doorway, back to the one breath of God, from which we have all come. And we understand that one breath in the reality and the name of Jesus the Christ.

Seth Price 45:27

Amen.

I can't think of a better way, then to end on that, except for to tell people as you deal with this (to) be prepared, and honestly, Alexander, as you were talking, I realized the faults in my question. My question was how do I break apart the Gospels individually when really, I shouldn't be breaking them apart? There's still that left part of my brain that I cannot seem to dissolve myself of breaking things apart. That's what makes me tick, but it's not always the right way to do it.

Alexander 45:59

Seth can I bear on you just one last thought before end, knowing that this is going to come out somewhat as we are in the lead up to Lent or as Lent begins.

Seth Prie 46:10

Yes.

Alexander 46:12

The idea of Lent beginning by our being marked by ashes, comes in the Sixth and the Seventh century, it's a very late development. It's not how the early Lent started. The early Lent did not start by being marked with ashes and understanding that we need to grow ourselves or have the grace to grow or so back to God. The early Lent was something called the Rite of election. Because an election was not going to the polls and checking people in ballots. It comes from this beautiful word, that at the first moment of creation, God “elected” the cosmos. And that in our conception God elected each one of us.

And so this ancient lent began with this ritual called a Rite of Election, that may be a bad word that we need to change today—don't get hung up on that. The impact of the ritual was, we begin lent celebrating that we are made in the image of God, that we are loved, and that the love that we are made of is called to be more love. We are elected to love the cosmos, we are elected to love each other. And the work that we do this Lent, in the ancient Lent, the work that we do is not because I feel guilty about being separated from God, but rather I understand God's love for me and because that love is so enormous I want to be a better vessel of that love.

The ancient call of Lent was the call of love to love. And everything of the Lent was not about your sinful nature. The reason purple was put on for Lent—purple is not a penitential color, purple is the Royal color. We put purple before our eyes in Lent, for those who do, to remind ourselves of the royalty of our nature as human divine beings created in the image of God

Seth Price 48:25

Yes.

Alexander 48:26

Another book.

Seth Price 48:29

Write it, right after the Christmas book because I need you to finish that one. So well and the children's book with it, honestly, I find that I want to read the children's book more than the other one. Because I feel like the other one…I find in children's books, I get more heart knowledge and less head knowledge and oftentimes I need heart knowledge and need people to explain things to me at an emotional level, not a logical one; so often.

Alexander 48:55

I understand that and for me, the process of writing the “adult book” will help me find what the children book will be. But I got you, I got you. I have a great lover of children's books.

Seth Price 49:11

So there's no telling how much longer you'll be on this continent, and so while you're here, how can people connect with you and get involved in both, you know the message of the Quadratos? And in all the stuff that you're plugged into how would people connect with you, Alexander?

Alexander 49:29

Well, thanks. Yes, I mean, firstly, I would say go to the quadratos website, and sign up for my sort of, maybe twice a month blog that I'm sending out a small video with some aspect of understanding where we are in the seasons and and the gospel.

Secondly, these films are coming out, I think even next week, they're going to be To be released by The Work of the People. And you can access them by going on the work of the people website and signing up for a year's subscription to a whole host of films that they offer incredible work. Or you can go on the Quadratos website and rent those films, I think are films are going to go for $4.44 cents, sort of a metaphoric number for a two or three day rental, and each one of the films is like 35 to 40 minutes.

What I'm hearing back from people who have seen the films is that there's some magic that's going on and then no credit goes to me it's totally the beautiful people at The Work of the People that have created these.

Lastly, I really want to invite people to do something countercultural, which is begin a long, slow journey of transformation by Perhaps reading the book Heart and Mind with one or two other people and using the companion guides that we have available through the Quadratos website. And people, and I know this is this is a real stretch, people have been walking through this process, a year and a half, two years and more and without fail every group, every circle, has communicated back to me that their lives have changed. Their perspective on how to live as a Christian has changed. This is not an intellectual, philosophical, or Bible study class. This is a…you want to really transform your heart and mind? Here's a journey that has the grace of 2000 years of our ancestors, let them and God work on you.

Seth Price 51:56

Absolutely. And I would I would echo that. So I've been dealing with your work. Now for when did I buy that book and send it to Christmas of 2017? I feel like that's right. It's…I well, either way, that's a different podcast, but I highly would echo that. The book itself but more importantly, the work that's associated with a book is entirely worth it is not the right adjective or not the right disclaimer, I don't know what the word is, but it's definitely doable.

Alexander 52:29

I don't either. I just know if people will slow down and let the grace of Christ work on their heart. They grow. They change.

Seth Price 52:39

Absolutely.

Alexander 52:40

They become people of deeper love and the ability to access love and to share love.

Seth Price 52:46

Well, Alexander, I will give you back to the leaf blowers, and to California, and to temperatures that are not it's like 24 now, right now it's the hottest part of the day and it's 24.

Alexander 52:59

Oh geez.

Seth Price 53:01

I’m very appreciative of you coming on.

Alexander 53:01

Seth, it's always a delight and you are very close to my heart in my words and my prayers and your listeners as well, thank you and take care.

Seth Price 53:38

So it's been a few days since that conversation with Alexander and the more that I think about it, the more that I realized that I'm still, and I probably always will be, in the middle of whatever journey religion is intended to take me on. There are parts of my brain that still break things apart to logically often in their other parts of my brain that still refuse to embrace emotion. And until I personally figure out how to make those to blend in and out of each other like a braid of thought, you know, the logic and the emotion and my heart. There'll be parts that I always struggle with. And I think that that's just gonna have to be okay. I hope that you will wrestle with the concepts of truth and light in radiance in Christ as a bigger piece of everything and Christ is something entirely bigger than what you thought Christ was yesterday.

Today's music was used with permission from Joshua Leventhal. His music is fantastic, you should definitely check out his new EP and I am in love with his song Goliath, which was also included in this episode. The other tracks that were with this episode will be included as always on the Can I Say This At Church Spotify playlist, which if you have not listened to go to the website, find the Spotify playlist, or you can just go to Spotify and search Can I Say This At Church, one will be the podcast, the other will be like 200 songs. It is it's very good hope that you'll engage in and I will talk with you next week.

Thank you all for being here.

The Gospel of Wheat with Chuck McKnight / Transcript

Note: Can I Say This at Church is produced for audio listening. If able, I strongly encourage you to listen to the audio, which has inflection, emotion, sarcasm where applicable, and emphasis for points that may not come across well in written word. This transcript is generated using a combination of my ears and software, and may contain errors. Please check the episode for clarity before quoting in print.

Back to the Audio Episode


Chuck 0:00

First and foremost, I want to say that when God looks at us, God is not primarily seeing us in terms of sinfulness and guilt, and what we have done wrong and what needs to be half a man made for when God looks at us, God is looking at us as children, because we are all God's children. And this is a point that many on the Calvinist and Armenian side would disagree with, they would say that only Christians are the children of God. But I would say very strongly, no, we are all children of God. Paul says this on a number of occasions, Jesus, all throughout his teachings, refers to God as “our father” and even “your father”, even when talking to people who didn't believe in Him in any sense and rejected him, he would talk about God as being your father. So clearly, Jesus was not making this distinction between the saved and the unsaved being children of God or not, to Jesus God is the Father of all. And so I want to emphasize that and I want to frame every bit of theology in that understanding that God is treating us as any good parent would treat their children.

Seth Price 1:20

Hello amigos and amigas. I don't know Spanish, but it sounds like I do now. So there we go. Welcome to the show. I'm so glad that you're here. So January was one of the best months period, the growth of the show surpassed almost the first seven months of the show of all of last year (in total). And I want to be real clear there was a lot of growth there still continue to have exponential growth. So continue to share this with your friends. share it on social media, tell your people to listen, find an episode that speaks to you and just give it to someone else. The conversations that I think that are happening here and that I have with many of you online and I see a lot of you having with each other online are worth it. And so if you haven't yet, follow the show on Facebook, Twitter, I am creating an incubated. I don't know what the word is a newer community around Slack (update…it wasn’t good—don’t look for it), mostly because there's so many channels that I struggle sometimes to communicate with you all as emails and conversations and messages come in. So I want to try to consolidate those. And so if you're looking for a free way to engage with everything The show has, I'm going to give slack a try. That does not mean I'm turning off the other things at all really just trying to mitigate duplicating messages when I can, and perhaps you might want the same and so you'll find links to that in the show notes. And as well in the newsletter, sign up for that at the website.

Patron support again, continues to have continual upticks and thank you, every single one of you that does that. I always find it awkward to read out the names. I tried that once and it didn't feel right. So I'm not going to do that. But you know who you are. And I'm grateful for you and I appreciate you and your generosity. You're the engine, the fuel, the combustion part of the engine. That makes this show continuing to function.

So Spring is almost here. And so really quickly, everyone's going to run to Lowe's or ACE or wherever you go, maybe you grow your own. Maybe you have incubated seeds from last year, but you're going to plant new tulips you know, in the winter, they're they're going to begin breaching the ground soon. In new growth, you're going to plant your roses, you're going to mulch that you're going to cultivated and all of that work, that hard effort is going to turn in to something entirely beautiful, but we don't talk about other things that we plant. So we sow soy, and corn, but we also so WHEAT and so that acronym is intentional. And so I had a conversation with Chuck McKnight. And he is just has a new acronym for kind of an overview of something different than Calvinism or Molinism or Arminianism. And, and so instead of using the acronyms or TULIP or ROSES, or DAISY, we're going to use the acronym WHEAT as we go throughout this conversation over the next little bit. And so I'm really looking forward to your feedback on this one, let me know and let us know What you think about this conversation about the beautiful gospel?

Seth Price 4:38

Chuck McKnight, welcome to the show man. I've enjoyed reading quite a bit of your Patheos blog and then gradually and slowly became more accustomed with some of what you had to write a really love what you had to say recently about you know, Brian's Zahnd and a bunch of other things. So I just I like the way that you approach things. So I'm excited about today's conversation and, and welcome again to the show.

Chuck 4:58

Well, awesome. Thanks so much for having me on. I'm excited to talk with you.

Seth Price 5:01

I always like people to give me a brief overview a bit of kind of where they started spiritually or theologically, all the way up until now. Although I feel like the topic at hand we could probably talk for hours. And so as brief as you want to be, and if not, I'll hit the magic edit button. Kind of what is the story of Chuck, how did you get from where you were, and whatever that was to now?

Chuck 5:26

So I was born to missionary parents. We lived in Jamaica till I was 16 years old. And they are super fundamentalist Calvinists. So that's kind of my general theological background. After coming back to the States, I went to college, a Bob Jones University, which for those who may not be familiar with it is like the bastion of fundamentalism. It's almost as far as you can get in that direction. From there, I went to work for Answers in Genesis, which is a fairly equally fundamentalist Creation apologetic thing, that's Ken Ham, the Ark Park, all that stuff, huh? Although the ark Park, they started building after I was done there.

While there, my view started shifting in some senses with little stuff here and there. But the first big one that got me in trouble was just considering as a possibility the idea of hell being annihilation rather than eternal conscious torment. Per the statement of faith that Answers in Genesis, I had to actually explicitly affirm eternal conscious torment in hell, or I would have to resign and after some time deciding I could not affirm that so I resigned my position there, ultimately got a job at Logos Bible software out in Washington State. So that brought my family and I out here, and it's a Christian business, but it's not a ministry. So there's no statement of faith and that gave me the freedom to kind of explore openly and honestly, where the questions led me and from there, just kind of one One Piece after another bit by bit, working through deconstruction reconstruction kind of all at the same time. Inerrancy was like the next very big piece to let go of in that process.

Seth Price 7:11

I'm curious. So you said Bob Jones, right? So I went to Liberty, so you would hear Bob Jones and Oral Roberts in Pensacola constantly used in in vernacular there, so if liberty is a 7.7 on the “rigidity scale”, where does Bob Jones rank in there?

Chuck 7:33

Well, Liberty was the “liberal college” to Bob Jones. Like for those, seriously, for those of us on campus, you know, they allowed worldly music and didn't have a restrictive dress codes, and were too ecumenical and speakers they brought on so they were too liberal for us. Pensacola was about on the same par except they were even stricter with KJV onlyism; Bob Jones only used the KJV But they allow for other translations with I believe Pensacola is a strict KJV only, but I could be wrong about

Seth Price 8:06

How many years were in between, you know, your youth and you deciding to go to Bob Jones unless I guess, I mean, there were a lot of people at liberty that were forced to go there. I guess their parents thought that it would finally, you know, cement and everything that needs to be there. So I'm assuming that that's not the case. But maybe it was but how many years? Was it from there too Answers in Genesis to where you're at now, like, how quickly is that happened?

Chuck 8:30

Fairly compactly. Back when I was going to Bob Jones, it was definitely at the the prompting of my parents that's like it's been predestined for me to go to Bob Jones since the beginning of time. But I was also on the same page with them basically, in theological terms and whatnot at that point, so I didn't have any strong objections to it. And then I actually started working with Anwers in Genesis from a job fair at Bob Jones, I got an internship and then that turned into a full time job so I'll all right back to back there.

Seth Price 9:00

(Goodness gracious) So I got your small dig there at Calvinism with the predestined to go to Bob Jones thre. So, you wrote an article and then I heard Danny Prada, who's a pastor for those listening that I've had on the show to listen to talk about other things. But he did a sermon based on, I believe, an article that you wrote, and the article that you wrote is based on other people's work, from what I understand and correct me if I'm wrong, and it's basically a new acronym or a different acronym for what the gospel and what Jesus should look like. For those that call him Christ. But before that, and that that gospel is called wheat, the acronym of WHEAT. How would you define that? So before we kind of break those five letters apart into all of the theology that comes with them, what would you say the main difference is or the main definition for the Gospel of wheat as opposed to something that a Calvinist would say, or an Arminianist would say or as I read your article Molinism is something I don't know anything about Molinism. So what would be the big key point differences?

Chuck 10:11

Yeah, so like I mentioned, this is definitely um, it's my acronym, but it's based on theology that well predates me. Really, I'm going back more than anything to the early church fathers to like Athanasius and his work on the Incarnation of the Word of God, that's one of the central texts I'm drawing from. Draw a lot from George MacDonald and recent people like Brad Jersak and Brian's Zahnd. The best term I know to describe it is the “beautiful Gospel”, which I believe Brian's Zahnd coined that term for it. Centrally, the the main point that differentiates it from the rest is looking to Jesus as the absolute, full and complete, picture of what God looks like.

Now, all Orthodox Christian theology will say that to some degree, God looks like Jesus. But what we what we mean when we say this is we go to Jesus exclusively for a picture of what God looks like. And in as much as that disagrees with portions of the Old Testament, for example, we're going to side with what Jesus says about God. So for example, when the Old Testament has God wiping out people in a flood or ordering the genocide of the Canaanites, or all these other atrocious things, we might have different ways depending on who you're talking to, of explaining that. But we're definitely going to say that does not represent God that that is not an accurate picture of God because Jesus reveals God to be perfectly loving and non violent, and all these other things. And then this is a more on the deeper theological side of that, but it definitely branches out from that core difference.

Seth Price 11:45

So if I said that to a friend of mine, that's Calvinist or shoot neighbors of mine that are Calvinists, they would just say that I am emotionally making Jesus look like the God that I want. And so what would you say to someone that gives you that rebuttal to that view, of defaulting to Jesus, which really, I just want to be clear, I don't agree with that. But I do want to make sure that I've voiced that objection.

Chuck 12:08

For sure. Yeah. And it's definitely an objection I get a lot. If I'm being frank, I might not say this to the person. But I'd say that's kind of a lazy response to it. Because you could make that same argument about anything, whatever picture of God you have, you could just say, that's a picture of God you want to have and you're projecting that. You know, it's not accurate, that that's how it's coming about.

My intention, and certainly, I have my own biases, I have my own presuppositions, I'm going to be honest about that and own those and try to work through them as best as I can. But we're doing the best we can to look at Jesus, the life of Jesus as recorded in the gospels, specifically what Jesus teaches about God and use that as our foundation for understanding any point of theology.

Seth Price 12:53

One of the things that I didn't get and most of it's probably because I haven't really gone past some of your research on it. I honestly just haven't had the time to dig into it a lot. If this is going back to some of the Church fathers some of the theology behind this, how did we get from this, if it goes back that far to where Calvin and or Arminianism started, like what would have caused that shift, that change?

Chuck 13:16

Really, the shift has mostly happened in Western Christianity in the Great Schism, when the Eastern Orthodox broke off from the Roman Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox have more or less maintained exactly the same kind of theology that I'm talking about. Some of it gets a little more culturally specific, and I'm not presenting this as an Eastern Orthodox view, but it definitely aligns way more with Eastern Orthodox then with westernized Christianity. The primary dividing point in that was probably (Saint) Augustine. He had all sorts of ideas that were heterodox at best; that went against what a lot of the earlier church fathers were teaching primary among them being his idea of original sin. This idea that not only does Adam sin affect us, but we're actually born guilty of his sin and are liable before God for the sin of Adam. That's completely foreign to the earlier church fathers. Augustine pioneered that and that would later on with satisfaction theory of the atonement would be based somewhat off of that. And then that would turn more into the penal substitutionary idea of the atonement under John Calvin and Martin Luther. And that's really where the main stronghold comes in. Basically, all of Protestantism follows, even Catholicism kind of adopted more of that Calvinist idea in some senses, and it's basically continued on from there.

Seth Price 14:41

So the concept of original sin is the, well it's honestly I think it's a lot of times the implied nature of every human born on the planet, if you grew up in the Western part of the world. And so the the beautiful gospel version of that would instead of being totally depraved, would call that “wounded children” for the W of WHEAT, correct?

Chuck 15:04

Yeah, per my acronym.

Seth Price 15:07

So flesh that out a bit when you say wounded children what is the inverse of that if I'm not born broken? Well, I guess, wounded is still a brokenness. So what are you trying to get out there?

Chuck 15:20

So yeah, I'm contrasting the T in TULIP, total depravity from Calvinist side, which total depravity kind of plays off of original sin and takes it a step further and basically saying that every action we do is marred by saying that we can't do anything in any way free of sin it just affects everything we do. So in contrast to all that, first and foremost, I want to say that when God looks at us, God is not primarily seeing us in terms of sinfulness and guilt and what we have done wrong and what needs to be half payment made for. When God looks at us, God is looking at us as children, because we are all God's children. And this is a point that many on the Calvinists and Arminian side would disagree with, they would say that only Christians are the children of God.

But I would say very strongly, no! We are all children of God. Paul says this on a number of occasions, Jesus, all throughout his teachings, refers to God as our Father and even your Father, even when talking to people who didn't believe in Him in any sense and rejected him, he would talk about God as being your Father. So clearly, Jesus was not making this distinction between the saved and the unsaved, being children of God or not. To Jesus God as a father of all and so I want to emphasize that and I want to frame every bit of theology in that understanding that God is treating us as any good parent would treat their children. Now that said, I do believe that sin has an effect on us. But it's not so much this idea of the guilt that just needs to have payment made for. Sin causes harm, it wounds us, it leads to death, and God is wanting to save us not only from the consequences of sin but from the sin itself ;so that we're not following down this path that leads to death.

The the Eastern Orthodox would, instead of original sin, they call it ancestral sin, which is basically saying that yes, Adam sin has affected us all, we've inherited the effects of that sin simply by picking up on our parents, imitating the sins that they they modeled for us and them, their parents and on and on all the way back. There's definitely a way in which sin comes down through the generations and affects all of us and causes everyone harm. And I'm not in any way the denying the severity of sin. It's a very real problem. But we need to make sure we're approaching it from the correct angle, which is a sickness that we need to be healed from.

Seth Price 17:51

I'm reminded of one of the very first people that I interviewed Robin Parry, talking about salvation as an act of cosmic hospital. And that's really a bad metaphor. It's been over a year since I talked with him. And he was arguing for universal salvation, are you arguing for that or, no with that view of woundedness?

Chuck 18:16

Yes and no. The overall paradigm of WHEAT is certainly a hopeful Universalist. I wouldn't say that it necessarily demands universalism. And, you know, we'll get into that somewhat more with the later points. But I certainly believe that God desires the salvation of all, I also believe in free will, and the possibility of humans rejecting God and resisting His love. I am uncertain whether or not that would be something possible to continue rejecting for eternity or, potentially to the point where you basically opt out of humanity and opt out of everything and just cease to exist. I'm very hopeful that that won't happen that way once the truth is revealed, and people see God for who God really is, there will be no reason to reject him anymore. But I can't say with certainty given free will.

Seth Price 19:08

That's entirely fair. And I honestly think I agree with you people ask me all the time my views on eschatology and my answers usually, I'm not overly concerned with that because I have very little control over it. But here's what I hope happens and I'm still not 100% certain that that's what I should invest a pile of my time into. Although who knows that could change next year, I find sure what I need to invest time into changes.

Moving on to the H in the acronym. You call it “human solidarity”. And those two words for some reason don't jive in my head. They almost seem oxymoronic, because solidarity to me is a bunch of people acting together in harmony, and in unison, which doesn't often happen unless it's forced because of trauma or fear. And so how do you take humans solidarity, what does that actually look like?

Chuck 20:04

Sure.

So there are two main aspects of that. One is this idea that all of humanity shares in a single human nature. And that, in some sense, what happens to any one of us happens to all of us. So that's not so much like an active choice to all act the same, but just acknowledging that we're all in this together. And the next part would be on God's side, on Jesus’ side, the truth that Jesus stands in solidarity with all of us. That God became a human, not just to come die on a cross and satiate justice, but to declare, I'm in this with you. My fate is your fate. Your fate is my fate. We're wrapped up in this together.

Jesus took his divine nature and united with our human nature, so that he could bring our human nature to the divine. And again, this is something that the Eastern Orthodox Church teaches a lot more strongly than the Western church and Athanasius is really big on this stuff here. Irenaeus before him famously said that the Word of God

became what we are so that we can become even what he is.

So it's it's this idea that Jesus is standing in solidarity with us. And that because we are united with Him as all of human nature, that's, that's where our hope is and that's where our salvation lies.

Seth Price 21:57

This is what you were alluding to earlier and this is the part of WHEAT that I most understand the best. That's a very bad sentence, but I don't care. I'm gonna let…I'm gonna let it stay the way it is. The one thing that I feel like growing up as a four point-19 point Calvinist is total depravity, not total depravity. It's just what's the word I'm looking for? I can't think of it the inverse of exhausted reconciliation, the basically that

Chuck 22:28

Limited atonement?

Seth Price 22:30

Yeah, there it is limited atonement. Just I couldn't come up with the L. Every view is basically a reworded metaphor of penal substitutionary atonement. And I can remember when I spoke with Brad Jersak and I remember bringing up this article, and I don't know that he was aware of it at the time, or maybe he wasn't aware of the acronym. And I read it out to him. And he's like, yeah, I can definitely get on board with that. And so I asked him what, what purpose that we had for atonement. And I remember him saying, well, you're framing it wrong. And I really like the way on what you say about exhaustive reconciliation. I really like the way that you break out the purpose of atonement and what that is actually atoning, specifically in rebuttal to penal substitution, and you alluded to it earlier. So if penal substitution is a legally binding contract of “I did A and now Christ must pay Y” what is exhaustive reconciliation in contrast to that?

Chuck 23:20

So is that exhaustive reconciliation.

First of all, I'm rejecting entirely that legal paradigm of needing payment for sins in order for God to forgive us, that really goes against the heart of the idea of what forgiveness is in the first place. You know, forgiveness is a release from debt. If God has to pay the debt before he can forgive us, that's ultimately not forgiveness at all. God simply forgives and that's that.

And then just this idea of reconciling the world to Christ to God. God has never turned away from us, but we have turned away from God. And God is doing everything that God can to show us what he's really like and Jesus shows us what God is really like and ultimately is bringing us back to him. We need to be reconciled to God and to each other for all the harm we caused each other. And that ultimate reconciliation is what everything is pointing toward.

Seth Price 24:19

I have to think you've talked about this with your friends and family, and specifically your parents. And unless they've changed their mind, it sounds like they're still Five point Calvinist correct?

Chuck 24:29

Yeah, yeah. They're very, very strong in that stuff.

Seth Price 24:31

I would think that this view of atonement, because it's really the whole reason for Easter is the big sticking point. And so what Scripturally do you stand on as you engage in a dialogue with people that are, entrenched is the wrong word, that are invested in the viewpoint that they've grown up knowing it's true?

Chuck 24:54

Well, I guess it depends on which Scripture they're going to use as their proof text first. Depending on where they're going to provide their support, I'll have a different answer for why I don't think that's accurate.

Seth Price 25:10

Let me rephrase the question then. So what is the best Scripture to support exhaustive reconciliation?

Chuck 25:15

So we've got like 2 Corinthians 5:18-19.

All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us.

or Colossians 1:19-20.

19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and through him God was pleased to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, by making peace through the blood of his cross.

…then like Act 3:21, that Jesus

must remain in heaven until the time of universal restoration…

And that word, by the way, is word, this concept that is often used theologically to represent universalism; anyway

…until the time of universal restoration that God announced long ago through his holy prophets.

Is that enough for now, do you want a couple more?

Seth Price 26:18

No, no, that's good. So that Greek word so earlier you said

Chuck 26:25

I'm probably butchering the pronunciation. I don't professionally know Greek.

Seth Price 26:30

I tried a long time ago to try to pronounce words correctly. And I find I struggle with the English language and so I'm not gonna judge you at all Chuck on that. It's fine. I think I would call it I'm not gonna try. I'm not I'm not gonna do it. I'm not gonna do it at all.

How do you then use that Greek word, which you say a lot of people use this view for universalism, for all for universal salvation. There's a big difference, I think between those two, and then you'd said earlier, you're hopeful that that's the case. So how do you personally manage that? I'm hopeful that this is the case and then you have texts like this that seem to show that and I do want to be clear that I hold an annihilation of this view or conditional immortality view. Similar to Edward Fudge, I mirror a lot of what of what he espoused. So how can you take these two texts that seem to seem to imply you know, God doesn't want anyone to perish? Which I think is 2 Peter, I can't remember where in 2 Peter and, and basically God's God so he's gonna get what he wants.

Chuck 27:31

2 Peter 3:9.

Seth Price 27:33

That sounds right. I'm gonna take your word for it. That's Yeah, that's from…that's from memory from a while I spent a long time going into all of that Hell is one of the first things that broke apart for me when I started to break apart the dogma that I believed in as opposed to the Jesus that I believed in so how do you how do you reconcile personally that a Apocatastasis? There, I said, I was not going try it and I did anyway, with what it sounds like earlier, you lean more towards hoping that that's true but not quite knowing.

Chuck 28:06

So on the one hand, I want to go back to this idea of inerrancy that I do not hold to. I don't believe that just because an author of Scripture wrote something down, it is absolute truth from God. I think there's an awful lot of human sensibilities that (is) mixed in with divine truth in the Bible and Jesus is kind of our focal point and our guide to sort out those things. Now that said, there are some possibility for elements of that in these especially apocalyptic texts, where we're talking about things that haven't even happened yet. But what I want to do is take all of these texts, because there definitely are some that lean more toward annihilationism, there are some that lean, potentially a little bit toward eternal conscious torment, although I think those are more bad interpretations. And then there are lots that lean very strongly toward universal reconciliation. And rather than trying to force an agreement between all of them, I kind of want to hold them all in tension, and view them as sincere warnings that we ought to pay attention to, while at the same time remaining absolutely firm on the character of God, and what God actually wants to happen.

So, you know, I mentioned earlier, I can't be certain, on the human side, that every human will ultimately accept reconciliation with God, I can be absolutely certain that that is what God wants, and that God will do everything within God's power to bring that about. Exactly how that's going to resolve, I can't say.

Seth Price 29:40

I read a book recently, Faith in the Shadows. I'm not sure if you've read that book or heard of that book from Austin Fischer. And he has a chapter in there on hell and he breaks down a bunch of different chapters, or not a bunch of different chapters, a bunch of different views on Hell very succinctly. And there's a part where he's like, yeah, so if everybody gets in and so he pretends he's like in your what if Hitler shows up at Heaven. And, you know, he's really upset that, you know, he's greeted in heaven by Jews, he really just breaks the whole metaphor apart and basically argues that, you know, hell for a person wired as Hitler wanted to be wired, would be a hell, like he would not want to be there. And he would be like, Well, can I just opt out I would rather not exist anymore. But I can't be here with you because I'm not going to bow to some lamb. I conquer continents, I don't bow to lambs. Which I really like that metaphor. I've used it often in conversation. The one part of Calvinism that I always loved probably because of Jesus is is the “I” in the tool of the irresistible grace because that's always rang the most gospel(ly) to me growing up of the love of God is so wooing that I have to come to it. There's something in that that's beautiful, but you argue for something called absolute grace. And so I like to phrase a question a different way, what do you have against irresistible Grace?

Chuck 30:58

Consent is what Primarily comes down to. I don't believe that God controls in a unilateral sense whereby he overrides freewill or forces anyone to do anything. God is perfectly loving and perfect love does not violate consent, it does not demand action or twist our arms to make things happen. So I believe that God is perfectly gracious. That his grace is continually poured out on everyone all the time, without restraint that God is always doing the most good possible at a given moment for everyone. And certainly extending that invitation to everyone at every moment. But I don't believe that God will override freewill or violate consent or force us to do something that isn't our choice to do.

Seth Price 31:54

Well see the way I've always been, maybe this is because I didn't listen enough in Sunday school, but the way I always viewed irresistible grace was the God's love for humanity is like the “siren song”. And as long as you don't tie yourself to the mast, you'll always turn the boat that direction to use a bad analogy and metaphor of the Odyssey; of it not being a force thing, but a, you can't help but not turn towards me. And maybe I'm wrong with that. Maybe I'm butchering the intent of irresistible grace. But that's always the way, and I can always remember holding it that way, although I will say it liberated didn't really have to talk a lot about Calvinism, because everybody was Calvinist for the most part, so it made it easy to not have to discuss it. Would you take issue at all with that view of irresistible Grace, or am I just using those words and redefining what it intends?

Chuck 32:45

I think it depends on the Calvinists you talk to there are certainly those who would have that kind of view. But the overarching idea in Calvinism is that whatever the means, ultimately, it is impossible to resist if you're among the elect, if God's called you. Somewhere along the lines that has to come into play with freewill. And if you're not actually choosing for yourself, that means an overriding of well, and that's what I'm going to object to.

I hope, I sincerely hope that everyone in the end will make that freewill choice to be reconciled to God. Because why would you not make that choice once you understand who God really is? I feel like pretty much anyone I talked to who doesn't believe in God or doesn't want to follow God it's because they have this picture of God that is horrible in many ways.

I know very few….well, I don't want to speak for atheists too much because I don't want to presume upon them, but most of the atheists I meet put it this way, are atheists of the Calvinistic God? Does that makes sense? Like when I talk to them the picture of god they're rejecting I reject as well.

Seth Price 33:57

I wholeheartedly agree. Some of the favorite people that I've been gauged with on this show are atheists. And as we email back and forth, sometimes phone call back and forth, I come to realize that what you say is 100% true. That the God that they say they can't believe in I also no longer believe in. And honestly in a different world had I not been engaged, honestly had it not been for the internet and the ability for me to find other resources that weren't necessarily in my stream, I probably would have been an atheist. I'm fully comfortable saying that, although part of that is terrifyingly blunt. The fact that I can admit so openly that may have happened.

Earlier at the very beginning, you talked about the importance of the the Beautiful Gospel as a view of the incarnation of the Word of God. And when we say incarnation, especially as recording this, you know, we're here just a few months. I mean, we're out we're a week away from Christmas and by the time this releases, we will probably be close to Lent, so we will hear and think and pray on and talk about a lot, the incarnation of the Word of God and what it means from Christmas to Easter. How does that, you know, if we're all wounded children, we're all human, we're all impacted by sin, you know, we're all going to be reconciled and God's grace is what God's grace is. So what does the Incarnation hold for us? What's a better view of incarnation as opposed to the way that a Calvinist or an Arminianist would hold the Incarnation?

Chuck 35:33

Yeah. So just a quick point of clarification, when I mentioned incarnation earlier, I was actually referencing the the work on the Incarnation of the Word of God, by Athanasius. It is a fantastic, easy, accessible, short book from an early church father, absolutely recommend everyone read that if you haven't yet. It's really easily and accessible. You can find it free online, as well.

Seth Price 35:55

It is free? That's even better.

Chuck 35:56

Yeah, yeah. You can find a number of different translations of it free online. So when the average Calvinist, Armenian, regular Western Christian, talks about the incarnation, more often than not, at least the impression you get is that it's basically just about the baby Jesus. And it sort of is just the launching point when Jesus came here, and then that really is just the first stepping stone to get up to the cross where the real action happens. You know, it all revolves around this death to make the payment for sin, so that God's wrath can be satisfied and all this stuff and specific importance of the Incarnation gets set aside.

Whereas I would say, you know, going back to some of the stuff we talked about earlier, the Incarnation is about Jesus divine nature being united with our human nature, and thus our human nature being united with the divine nature. It's this merger together, this declaration that God is standing with us, and that our fate will be God's Fate, and God's victory will be our victory. So there’s an awful lot more going into that act of incarnation itself. Really, I would personally point to the incarnation as the defining moment of salvation history far more so than the the cross and the resurrection, as important as those are as well it was that moment of joining the divine nature and the human nature that is what ultimately secured us at our salvation.

Seth Price 37:29

As a Christian, or as someone that follows Christ when does that process of I think the the fancy word for that this is a Greek word that I can do is theosis; or, I guess a Southern Baptist might call that sanctification. Actually, I'm not certain if theosis and sanctification are the same thing. But so when…

Chuck 37:47

…sanctification is like theosis “light” it's like the Protestant version of theosis.

Seth Price 37:53

…it's distilled. It's the but it's the Budweiser of a theosis.

Chuck 37:57

Yeah. Protestants are too worried about saying that we become “gods” and confusing that with Mormonism to go the full theosis route typically, which of course, that's not what theosis is about in the Mormon sense, but the concept is the same. It's this idea of walking with God and becoming transformed more and more into God's image.

Seth Price 38:16

Why do you think Protestantism is so afraid of that?

Chuck 38:20

You know, it's hard to say. I think part of it is just an element that, for whatever reason has been lost. It just doesn't happen to be talked about much. But that's changing to some extent, I've heard more talk about it in recent days than prior (days). And I think that's a really good thing Protestantism could use to reclaim that a bit. And I believe like Martin Luther actually talked a bit about it, too. It just didn't really stick for whatever reason, and I definitely think like I mentioned, the Mormon idea of us all becoming “Gods” has overshadowed the Orthodox idea of us partaking in the divine nature, to the point where when you start talking about theosis, the average Protestant just gets scared that you're talking about Mormonism and can't really hear it at that point.

Seth Price 39:04

Yeah. When would that start?

So there's that process of theosis start the moment that I'm born, does that process of theosis start the moment that I “accept” Jesus? When would you'd argue that that I think on your on your writings, you call it transformative love is where you talk a lot about theosis? The T part of WHEAT. But when does that process actually begin? And I guess, does it ever, I can't see that it ever really ends?

Chuck 39:30

It's a great question.

On the beginning side, one that I can't say I've really thought about much off the top of my head, I'm going to say probably when you're born. Yeah. Because I do think God is seeking to influence us and work in our lives from birth. So yeah, probably there's an element there. I know my young kids have more theological insight than I do in many cases. So yeah, probably when you're born, but certainly in a more intentional way, when you make a commitment to follow up Jesus.

That said, I also don't want to make it sound like it's just like a specifically Christian thing. I do believe that those in other religions who are following the way of love that Jesus exemplified even without knowing his name, can still be disciples of Jesus and partake in that process of theosis; this side of eternity even. But yes, it certainly continues on the next side of eternity. I don't really know if there's going to be a point where it's like, yes, we are fully Christlike or if that's kind of a infinite thing, where we become more and more Christlike for all of eternity. I guess I kind of lean towards that because God is infinite and becoming like God seems like an infinite process to me, but no hard answers there.

Seth Price 40:39

The more that I wrestle with what in my life needs to change to better be a representation of Christ? It's always something and it's usually a bunch of tiny, little bitty things, that make small little ripples that that end up being a huge river. You know, years from now you look back and you're like, oh, man, that was like 27 different things there over the course of a decade, and you're now a different human in an entirely different place, so.

Chuck. So it's a question I haven't asked in a while but I'm curious because I like I like the way that your mind works. What do you think would be the biggest thing that if anyone was listening, that they could change tomorrow, that would be both hard but also generative to better the world that we live in and around? And I don't necessarily mean that for the church. I just mean that for humanity, like what would be, as a Christian or as a non Christian, one thing that we could intentionally do to make the world a better and more generative place?

Chuck 41:39

Hmm, that's a really good question. It's feels like an awfully broad question. Is it okay, if I go totally outside of the stuff we're talking about right now?

Seth Price 41:49

Absolutely. You could literally say root for the Browns for all that I care and it would be totally fine. Don’t say that though…

Chuck 41:56

I'm going to say especially in today's geopolitical climate, and especially for straight white Christian males like myself, the most important thing we can do is to start truly listening to the marginalized and the oppressed, and stop speaking over them and telling them how they should be experiencing things. (But) really listen to them and follow through on their advice for how to help them and how to make this world a better place for everyone.

Seth Price 42:29

Listen with intention and then be man enough or woman enough to actually do what they asked for when I asked you what you need for help.

Chuck 42:36

Yeah, don't assume that, again, I'm talking mainly about people of privilege. Don't assume that we need to come in as the saviors with our ideas and decide how how the marginalized should seek justice.

Seth Price 42:53

I like that a lot.

Chuck, where can people get more of you? I know that you have a book that you're writing specifically on this topic for people that want to blow it up. And I do want to be clear, I have pages and pages and pages of questions. But to go over five very high level, broad theological topics, in under an hour is more difficult than I intended.

Chuck 43:18

Well hey, send me those pages of questions, and that'll help refine my process for writing the book.

Seth Price 43:23

Okay, I can.

Chuck 43:26

Yeah, awesome. And I'm co-authoring that, by the way, with my friend Keith Giles. He's helping me flesh out into a full length book.

Seth Price 43:35

Keith is great, I've had the privilege to talk with him twice. I love his stuff. And, I really like the fact that he doesn't often argue with people. I don't honestly know how he constrains himself. oftentimes.

Chuck 43:47

He is an incredibly gracious soul. I don't know many people who have his level of patience.

Seth Price 43:52

I certainly don't. I just turn everything off and go to sleep. So well Chuck where can people engage with you interact with you and get more of you?

Chuck 44:03

So definitely the Patheos blog, Hippie Heretic. If you go to hippieheretic.com, that'll take you there. And then on social media, I'm most active on Facebook, you can just search my name Chuck McKnight. And as long as you look like a real person, I'll generally accept friend requests and start a conversation.

Seth Price 44:19

(laughter) What are the qualifications for looking like a real person?

Chuck 44:24

(laughts) As long as you look, well, you get plenty of spammy things that are fairly apparent. They're either a sex ad or someone trying to scam you out of money over in some other country. But if you have a real profile picture and content that lets me know you're a real human, that's somewhere in the realm of conversation that I am I'm happy to add pretty much anyone and start talking

Seth Price 44:50

So I just never heard it said like that. Prove it. So you should just have like a, I know when you make a Facebook group, you can add questions and you should just add that for a friend request, I wish there was a way…are you an actual human? Check the box.

Chuck 45:05

I mean, it's I feel like it's usually pretty obvious when you see someone's profile if they're legit or not.

Seth Price 45:13

I agree. Well Chuck thank you again for coming on.

Chuck 45:17

Yeah, you bet. Thanks for having me on.

Seth Price 45:41

This whole conversation would take like 10 hours to actually do well. There are a few resources that I would recommend. One would be prior guests of the show Danny Prada. He did a sermon like over a year ago or possibly, he did a sermon a while back maybe last summer on this topic. It's as brief as this conversation but takes it in a different direction, more from a pastoral mindset preached to a congregation. And so I would encourage you to listen to that. There'll be a link to that in the show notes as well as you'll see a link to the beginning of some of Chuck's writing that we referenced often on throughout this entire conversation, go and read those wrestle with it. There are many many links to other books and topics and conversations and resources dealing with the beautiful gospel as it's been coined in those articles and so do that. The music today was used with permission from Alice Paisano you'll find links to her music in the show notes, links to her website also there and as well as the tracks feature today will be on the Spotify playlist called Can I Say This At Church.