Rex Tremendae- Requiem Mass in D minor -Mozart

This was composed in Vienna in 1791 and left unfinished at Mozart's death. Many myths and controversies surrounded the piece, especially around how much of the piece was completed by Mozart before his death.

Evil & Suffering XIX: Glory To God

Potential Reasons For Existence of Evil & Suffering IV:

This will be a short post but Scripturally dense. You really should get your Bibles out for this one and read surrounding passages of these verses so that you fully understand the context that these verse sit in. It is the reason I have not included them here. Bible study time! I could've included this portion in the last post but chose to break it out due to the verse references.

As Christians, when we discuss the issues of evil, suffering, illness and pain we understand that God is inevitably going to be glorified and we accept this because many Christians have a better concept of who and what God is as compared to the secular non-believing world. Many view this as a morbid and downright uncompassionate view of the Almighty but we need again recheck ourselves and our views and realize that we would not even be here if it wasn’t for God and he put us here for His glory (1 Pet. 4:11, Gen 1:27). Everything we do should be done to the glory of God (l Cor. 10:31) and the best way to do this is to do as He has commanded us (John 14:15). If he was anything less than perfect, even I would view Him as egotistical and a megalomaniac, but He IS perfect and being perfect He is deserving of all our praise (Ps 18:3, Psalm 34:1, Isaiah 43:21, Philippians 2:9-11, Ephesians 1:6, Ephesians 2:8-9, etc) and anything we can do to glorify Him, even if it means submitting our lives. We must die to self to live in Him. It’s the least we can do considering His Son has already laid down His life on our behalf.

Evil & Suffering XVIII: Pushes Us To Persevere and Trust God

Potential Reasons For Existence of Evil & Suffering III:

This is another case where the rubber meets the road. This is where you bend or give a little under the weight of the onus that is on you or collapse and fail. God doesn't just want people to talk the Good talk, He wants people that can walk the walk even under a hail of bullets aimed directly at them. Grace under fire. Tested in fire. Destroyed or redeemed. Penitent or released to punishment and judgment. To be forged in the fire and to walk out stainless and pure.

When you are in a really bad situation and have nowhere else to turn you can always turn to God as the old saying goes. When you’re at the bottom the only way to look is up. When people are totally driven to their knees in suffering and pain we are painfully aware of our hopelessness, our finite nature…our humanness. We are also in the exact position we need to be in to plead our situation to God and supplicate to the only One that can cause or make a change. When we are broken and especially when we are broken slowly and by degrees we often turn outside of ourselves for help since our internal resources are quickly drained. When the issue we confront defies rational or human explanation we tend towards the divine in our pursuit of support and/or answers. I do not believe this is an accident. It very well may be a sovereign God working through the evils of the world or through our pain and suffering to steer us to what is eternally important and quite often, it works. We know them as teachable moments. When people are broken they are more receptive to solutions they wouldn’t normally have considered or entertained as viable options. It turns us towards our faith and hope to the unseen. Along these lines, if we are Christians, we learn to trust God’s promises (Psalms 145). We know that God is immutable and unchanging. His promises stand forever because he is unchanging. This is rock solid assurance to those adrift on stormy seas. It gives those being tossed to-and-fro in suffering or driven totally under in a deluge of pain to anchor to or get solid mooring. (Howard, 139, 144).

Rightly understood suffering breeds patience and teaches mankind to turn to God as there are often few other places to turn for comfort at the peak of suffering and pain. Paul is clear on why a believer suffers also when he speaks of suffering in relation or its correspondence to glory in Romans 5. He is clear that the suffering believers endure is in direct proportion to the hope they will acquire in the character they’ve attained through endurance.

“Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope…” Romans 5:1-4

The mettle of one’s faith can only be tested in a time of suffering. Finding out how far the bar can be bent, twisted or distorted before it breaks can only be done under pressure or by force directed on it from an outside source. We must endure the refiner’s fire to help us burn off the impurities in us. The heat of the fire is a tempering heat. We either wilt from the flame or we persevere.

Evil & Suffering XVII: Suffering To Sanctification (or Beyond)

Potential Reasons For Existence of Evil  and Suffering II:

Evil and Suffering to Build Character

The Bible is replete with examples of evil being used to shape individual people and mankind in general. I will briefly outline a few the I believe have their undergirding based in the bible. What I will say in preface to this is that these examples and explanations bring glory directly to God because in most of them it is God clearly working providentially behind and through these stories/narratives. This idea in and of itself is the primary overriding "acceptable" reasoning for any evil or suffering in my mind (as if God needed my acceptance of it). Any other reason to me seems passe and nearly or totally unacceptable from any human perspective.  When humans themselves are unsettled by the existence of these evils and sufferings, how much more would man's Creator be moved by it and wish its eradication? If it has not been eradicated...then logic and reason points towards an ultimate purpose or even a need for it.

To Assist In Sanctification

As we become more sanctified we become more holy. When we become more holy we become less like the world and more like Christ (John 17:16-19). As we become more like Christ we become more kingdom/heaven minded. Suffering is part of Christ’s story and its part of His life. In this way it is also part of our story since we have accepted His supreme acts of sacrifice which also included endurance of pain. It is through this suffering that we begin to share our humanity with Christ in a way that makes us become like Christ (Romans 8:29). In our sufferings as humans we begin to “be conformed to the likeness of his Son” [God’s]. When we share in his suffering and His death we share in His life (as mentioned elsewhere). The more we become indwelt by the Holy Spirit and the more of Christ we take on in our lives the more we die to self. God brings trials and suffering into our lives in way that builds us and makes us stronger in the Lord, just as the heat brought to bear on steel in the right amounts tempers the steel or case-hardens it to make it stronger or more durable. Justification (in righteousness) and salvation happens in an instant but sanctification (made more holy) takes an individual’s remaining life to take effect. This view is similar to the Irenaeus/Hick view except that it does not implicate God as the cause of evil and suffering. Instead He works through it now that it has been put into motion by His creation and their free will. The truth is that we need to be chipped and chiseled away and to die in multiple ways (figuratively and literally) in the process of sanctification to achieve our true glorification in Jesus Christ. We need to have the world scraped out or us and off of us before we can be presented in our glorification at physical death to the Father. The multiple “deaths” or chipping looks are done as noted below (Howard 133-139, 152).

(1) Death to Sin - Legal death: It happens to all Christian by the fact of our union with Jesus Christ, His death and His Resurrection. In this union not only are we forgiven but we also share in the benefits of God’s gift of eternal life but we also share in His death as is symbolized in our baptism. Where we can we must kill the sin in our lives and/or resist it. Sin cannot be free to manifest itself whenever it feels like it wants. You are to control it through a sanctification process with Christ (2 Corinthians 10:4-6).

(2) Die to Self - Moral Death: It is called self-mortification, to denying one’s self or taking up one’s cross. The result is a committed fellowship with a fellow suffering servant. It is not a death that we have done directly to ourselves but rather something that we do to ourselves through the power of the Spirit. We kill our old nature (Col 3:5-11).

(3) Carrying Christ's Death in Us - Physical Death: We must carry the life and the death of Jesus Christ in us so that it is revealed to the world in our bodies (2 Corinthians 4:9-10). This is clearly carried out plainly in our bodies. It speaks of our infirmities, weaknesses and our mortality. It is why Paul said, “I die daily” in 1 Corinthians 15:30-31. It is human frailty. The subsequent resurrection is the inward vitality or renewal in a Christian’s life with Jesus that continues to renew us in hope until our last breath (Stott, 273).

It is this last “death” that fits squarely in the area of theodicy because no matter how you go, physical death is not pretty. We are brought down in our physical bodies either quickly or slowly. If we die slowly there is an element of suffering involved more so than if we went quickly. There is pain and anguish involved in some way usually physically, mentally or both. At some point we will need to be weaned from this world anyway. It is better to start early and make it a gradual process than have it be a traumatic event towards the twilight years of our lives (or not; death stinks...period). The sooner believers can accept that their mortality is inevitable the sooner they can think clearly on things that are of heavenly importance and realize that everything they see around them is transient and temporary, especially the evil and suffering (Howard 156, 158) unless of course they have not repented and accepted Christ.

Evil & Suffering XVI: John Hick’s-Soul Building

Within Evil & Suffering there is a subcatagory that needs to be addressed.

Potential Reasons For Existence of Evil & Suffering I

Although I strongly disagree with Mr Hicks I will lead off with his explanation as it will serve well as an antithetical point of view to the reasons that I do support in later posts.

This character building portion attempts to reveal evil and/or suffering as vehicle or catalyst allowed by God for humanities proper growth and sanctification: It allows God to teach us. It gives mankind a gauge or antithetical measuring stick so we know exactly how far away from God and His holiness that man has moved. There basically two ways to go about explaining this one Biblical and one unbiblical. The first of which will serve as the unbiblical explanation. This explanation is also an extension of the previous section as John Hick’s adheres to the Irenaeus’ line of thinking when it comes to theodicy. Hick’s is a more recent view derived from Irenaeus. It is the idea that man was actually created imperfect and in need of moral development which is opposed to the view that man was created perfect but chose, through sin, to fall (Genesis 3, Romans 5:12-21) (“Fundamental Truth” #4). Man was place on the earth to perfect his moral and spiritual character to prepare him for participation in the Kingdom of God. As such the most conducive environment for doing this would be a world in which a person confronts evil and suffering. Hick is in agreement with Irenaeus. They both believed that God created man with the need and tools for spiritual growth. Hick then sees the theory of “soul making” as a reaction to the evils and suffering in the world, not necessarily as the cause of some of them. Strangely, to show the distance between the biblical view and Hicks view I should note also that Hick believes that mankind isn’t born knowing of God’s existence, and it is not something easy to gain knowledge of (God’s existence). This is in direct contradiction to statements in Romans 1 that,

“the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.”

Hick also believes that the process of soul making also involves a battle to attain religious faith. This statement seems unsound biblically as the Scriptures are quite clear that faith comes from hearing and responding to the gospel (Romans 10:17). Hick’s exact argument is quoted verbatim. Please note that I do not adhere to this premise.

If the world were a paradise from which all possibility of pain and suffering were excluded, then the consequences would be very far-reaching, nothing bad, nothing suffering would exist in this world, no one could ever be injured by accident, people could do anything immoral they want without hurting other people… As a result, in a world free of real dangers, difficulties, problems, obstacles, there will be no meaning for the real good qualities as generosity, kindness, love, prudence, etc to exist. God had to allow the possibility of evil, because if there were no such possibility man would not be free to choose good over evil. If there were no evil and suffering humans would always follow God’s law because there would be no difficulties in doing so. The evils in this world are required by a God of love who seeks the development of his free creatures from their original innocence into fully mature spiritual beings. In other words, we human beings learn to be morally mature enough to grow closer to God. Evil can lead us to the final goodness and perfection. In this regard, God is partly responsible for the evil in the world ~ John Hick

In the last sentence Augustinian and Irenaean theodicy are incompatible and divergent theodicies. Augustine emphasized the role of The Fall, and sees evil as either sin or the result of sin. Therefore evil and suffering originated with men. Irenaean/Hick theodicy regards evil as a requirement by a God of love to let his free creatures to develop from their original innocence into fully mature spiritual beings thereby making God responsible for some of the evil (Hicks 88-105 [synopsis]; Richards).

Enigmatic Melchizedek

Some of my Bible studies are rather easy and flow smoothly. The Bible easily reveals its truths and original meanings. I see its significance for me and try to show how it may be significant for others by applying it to modern day scenarios and contemporary issues. At other times the are not easy. They are painful for reasons stemming from the fact that as I uncover information or the Holy Spirit reveals things through the Word I struggle with it. Struggle because it is a new concept or worse, struggle because it rubs against the way I am, sinful. The Bible reveals things about the reader as a reader reads. It distinguishes itself as holy and the reader is not. What they never are is boring. Difficult yes, boring, never. Fortunately, this one was easy. The air of mystery added to its appeal and made it more akin to a detective's case. So I broke out my magnifying glass and Sherlock Holmes hat and got down to brass tacks (for non-English speakers: I got down to business). My first study of 2011.

"This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever." ~Hebrews 7:1-3

This is the peculiar introduction to Hebrews 7 and the strangely shadowy character of the Melchizedek (righteousness is my king) the priest of the Most High God who is first mentioned in Genesis 14 in the narrative of Abraham. When we first read of him in the Pentateuch we see an indistinct image of a man that is of God and appears nearly as a drifter wandering the desert akin to A Man With No Name or a High Plains Drifter of the Old Testament if you will. We know nothing of his origins and hear nothing of his demise. He appears almost like an apparition and just as quick exits Scripture. Hebrews 7 brings attention to this fact and boldly makes claims that he is (1), "priest of God Most High" that oddly, he is (2) "without father or mother, without genealogy" and surprisingly (3) without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God...a priest forever.

Although the narrative in Genesis does not explicitly state that he has no mother or father the writer of Hebrews extracts this from the text. We also see Melchizedek is a form of priest that is totally unlike the chosen Aaronic or Levitical line. It use to be that if you could trace your lineage you  had a right to be a priest. Jewish priesthood had been founded on genealogies. Yet here we see the first of at least two hapax legomenon or a unique single usage words. The first of which alludes to Melchizedek's family tree or lack of one. Being such a unique usage of wordage it should be looked at more closely. A word that is used nowhere else in Scripture except here. We know then that the usage of this word is deliberate and specific to get a point across. It is not a very common word. Word study time! So what are the words and what do they mean?

The first of which is [ ἀγενεαλόγητος/agenealogetos ] meaning without descent. He is a priest, or of a priesthood that is totally "other" yet he is the priest of the Most High God. In the case of Melchizedek other means "different" from the Levitical Priesthood, in the case of Christ other will end up meaning "superior" to the Levitical Priesthood. We read all throughout the early portions of Scripture about family trees and ages at time of death. We get none of this about Melchizedek. No age, no indication of parents and no children. Again we see manifestations of : other. He is separated and distinct from a proper earthly family tree. The word agenealogetos is further embellished by statements of Melchizedek having no father or [ἀπάτωρ /apator] meaning: "whose father is not recorded in the genealogies" or "father unknown/illegitimate" a term used in legal papyri / birth certificates. It is also stated that he has no mother in the same manner or [ ἀπετωρ /ametor ] meaning: "born of a base or unknown mother". The Hebrews author used these words specifically to stress meanings. What is interesting here and draws a deliberate parallel with Jesus is "Father unknown/illegitimate" at the time of birth. That fact being that no one knew Melchizedek's father and although Jesus' father was known (no earthly father), most found it hard to believe. So they chose instead to believe that Jesus, born of Mary was...illegitimate. Even today people deny Jesus' deity and still believe He was illegitimate. By claiming illegitimate birth and saying Jesus was born of an illicit relationship between Mary and a human father allows people to imply a lack of divinity. Conversely, clever usage by the author of Hebrews to make a point does just the opposite. Everything the author says of Melchizedek can be said of Jesus. We see the author of Hebrews is an eloquent master of the Greek language.

So we then see the comparisons of Melchizedek to Jesus Christ in the "resembling the Son of God" statement. So do we take the story or Melchizedek by the author of Hebrews as literal which would make him a spiritual being or are we to view him as flesh and blood which is what the Genesis account would have us believe? We then see a paradoxical statement that does nothing to clear the waters..."he remains a priest forever".

Our clue dwells in a single word in Hebrews 7:3 and the word translated "resembling" ἀφωμοιωμένος /aphomoiomenos. This is a perfect passive participle which tells me that it is a word that emphasizes endurance/duration. As best as I can tell from the theological dictionaries of the New Testament it means: "to be made similar to" or "made of similar stuff". The word is a compound of apo/ἀπό meaning "from; derivation of" and (h)omoios/ὅμοιος meaning "like". Understood properly we we begin to see a clever use of wordage to show a unique similarity/relationship between Jesus Christ and Melchizedek. Today I believe the word would be a "facsimile" or "photocopy". A copy of something that is identical in nearly all outward and inward appearances...but not the same. Identical how? In terms of duration: Eternal. In terms of character: Holy. In terms of who's service: God's. Even some of the irregularities or divergences from what man would consider normal are "copied" or foreshadowed as in the case of their genealogies and both being separated from the Levitical line and still being holy.


Interestingly, like Christ, Melchizedek's priesthood do not appear to me limited solely in time as is alluded to in the references to no genealogy and no mother or father. The rabbinical exegesis drawn out of the text of the Old Testament is that Melchizedek possessed special "being" and "office". So we will continue to see Melchizedek was an enigmatic character of the Old Testament and used by comparison in the New Testament to show the uniqueness of Jesus Christ's priesthood.

We can't know for sure because the importance of the Hebrews 7 passage is to establish Jesus' priesthood. The eternal priesthood. We do not know how Melchizedek's priesthood was forever but we know for certain how Christ's is and will be. The Bible speaks to that abundantly. What makes it forever lies in the nature of Jesus Himself...eternal. The culmination or realization of the Old Testament type is infinitely more glorious and holy than the type or shadow itself.

So who was Melchizedek? ...or should I say Who was Melchizedek? The only other mention of Melchizedek is in Psalms 110 which ironically is a  "Messianic Psalm" or “Prophetic Psalm” or it can also be known to a lesser extent as a "Royal Psalm". This is to say it has prophetic or eschatological implications as believers look forward in the future to some tremendous victory over God’s enemies and evil. He had enough authority from God and was great enough that none other than the patriarch Abraham would offer tithe to him in verse 2. He also has the authority from God to bless Abraham...without genealogies. Authority that can only come from God. Why was he compared and so closely associated to Jesus? It is obvious that he was a shadow or a typology of the coming priesthood of Jesus but was he actually a theophany? It makes one wonder...he was quite enigmatic drifting in from the desert and leaving Scripture the same way.

Evil & Suffering XV: A Divergence: Opinion of Irenaean Theodicy

As I have in previous sections I have added an opposing view for contrast. In this section I have add the Irenaean theodicy and its philosophical/theological offspring. The Irenaean theodicy comes in two parts. The first stems from Irenaeus (130-202 AD), an early Christian Church father that said mankind was not created perfect and needed growth spiritually to reach spiritual perfection. In Irenaeus' point of view, God does not intervene in human affairs to prevent evil because that would be to interfere with free will. Irenaean theodicy does not see the Creation as created all-good. Irenaeus’ theodicy is nearly opposite Augustine’s view. Irenaeus basically says that humans were initially created as immature and imperfect beings; they were created in the image of God, but not His likeness (Irenaen Theodicy).

Mankind's goal is to achieve that likeness. Such perfection and likeness of God cannot be created per se, it has to be developed through choices, and we can only become moral and develop through making moral judgments. Natural evil on the second hand has to be created in order to help man progress. In this philosophy suffering will be rewarded inevitably by heaven and heaven for all. This is pretty much where I depart from this theodicy as this is not Biblical in my worldview and in my mind and understanding, doesn’t adhere strictly to Scripture but rather relies on a human precept to explain the Bible. What I think I see here is half correct in that man does need to grow spiritually to become more like God. Where I believe this theodicy goes errant is in its presupposition of mankind’s original created state. According to the Bible I read, mankind was created immortal and in God’s image. When man sinned this condition changed and became distorted. We now have to work to attain that condition humanity had pre Genesis 3. This is contradictory to what I have understood as Irenaeus’ and Hicks position on the matter. I will continue to elaborate on it as an antithesis to the Augustinian philosophy but I will do so in its most current incarnation: The “soul-making” or “soul-building” ideas of John Hicks which are the logical fallout from Irenaeus’ philosophy. We can now jump topics to the possible reasons that evil and suffering exist in the realm of mankind.

Spem In Alium - Thomas Tallis

An extraordinary piece of music to start the new year. Great to listen to watching the sun rise on a new year.