Creation and Evolution

Many years ago when I was a Pastor, a very troubled teen in our youth group asked me whether a Christian could believe in evolution. Steve had experienced a number of crises of faith, including condemnation by a former minister for his views on evolution. These things had contributed to several suicide attempts, including shooting himself. I promised Steve that I would preach a sermon about evolution, and this is what I came up with. Eventually he went off to college and engaged in graduate work in biology. 

Creation and Evolution 

Texts: Genesis 1:26-31; 2:7, 15, 18-23.

First Story 

1:26 Then ’Elohim [God] said, “Let us make humanity (’adam) in Our image (betzalmenu) after Our likeness (kedimenu). They shall have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the cattle, the entire earth, and over all the creatures that creep upon the earth.” 27 So ’Elohim created (wa-yibra’) humanity (’adam) in His image (betzalmo), in the image (betzelem) of ‘Elohim He created (bara’) it; male (zakhar) and female (nekebah) He created (bara’) them. 28 ’Elohim blessed them, and ’Elohim said to them, “Be fertile and increase, and fill the earth and master it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over all the living creatures that creep upon the earth.” 29 ’Elohim said, “See, I have given you [plural] every seed-bearing plant that is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit; they shall be yours for food. 30 And to all the animals on the earth, to all the birds of the sky, and to all the creatures that creep upon the earth, every living creature (nephesh hayyah), I give all the green plants for food.” And it was so. 31 And ’Elohim saw everything that He had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day. 

Second Story 

2:7 Then Yahweh [the LORD] ’Elohim [God] formed (way-yitzer) humanity (’adam) from the dust of the ground (’adamah), and breathed into its nostrils the breath of life (nishmat hayyim), and humanity (’adam) became a living creature (nephesh hayyah). . . . 15 Yahweh ’Elohim took the human creature (’adam) and placed it in the garden of Eden, to till (literally, “to serve”) it and to keep (literally, “to guard”) it. . . . 18 Then Yahweh ’Elohim said, “It is not good for the human creature (’adam) to be alone. I will make (’e‘eseh-lo) for it a suitable counterpart (‘ezer kenegddo).” 19 So Yahweh ’Elohim formed (way-yitzer) out of the ground (’adamah) all the wild animals of the field and all the birds of the sky, and brought them to the human creature (’adam) to see what it would call them. And whatever the human creature (’adam) called each living creature (nephesh hayyah), that would be its name. 20 And the human creature (’adam) gave names to all the cattle and to the birds of the sky, and to all the wild animals of the field; but for the human creature (’adam) itself, no suitable counterpart (’ezer kenegddo) was found. 21 So Yahweh ’Elohim cast a deep sleep (tarddemah) upon the human creature, and it slept; then He took one of its ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot. 22 And Yahweh ’Elohim formed (way-yiben) into a woman (’ishshah) the rib that He had taken from the human creature (’adam) and He brought her to the (hu)man (’adam). 23 Then the (hu)man (’adam) said, 

“This one at last
is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh.
This one shall be called “woman” (’ishshah),
For from a “man” (’ish) this one was taken.”

We have just read from parts of the two creation stories in the early chapters of Genesis. In both accounts we get the immediate impression that everything in creation is secondary to humanity. In Genesis everything that is said about plants and animals, sun and moon, etc., is only prologue or introduction. The curtain does not rise on the story until human beings enter and begin to play their role as the crown of God’s creation. In chapter 1 the plants and animals are created first, and the human creature is created last, both male and female at the same time, as the crown of God’s creation. 

In chapter 2 a human creature is created first, but God concludes that it is not good for the human creature to be alone, so God creates all of the lesser creatures. These still do not satisfy the human creature’s need, so God creates a companion almost exactly like the first one. And it is only when the female companion is taken from the human creature’s rib that humanity is differentiated into male and female. 

Now just who is this human creature? What is its role in the Genesis stories? The creature’s Hebrew name is’adam, a word translated in the rest of the Bible as “humanity,” “human-kind,” or “man,” in a generic rather than a sexual sense. As I read further in the story I read about talking snakes, about fruit trees, not called apple or cherry trees, but rather, “the Tree-of-the-knowledge-of-good-and-evil,” and “the Tree-of-Life.” The man's wife's eventually receives the name “Eve,” (Hebrew: hawwah) the common Hebrew word that is elsewhere always translated “Life” or “Living.” 

Immediately we remember stories like the Pilgrim's Progress. There a character named “Christian” meets the tests of life on his way to the “City of God,” He passes along the way such places as the “Slough of Despond,” the “Vanity Fair,” the “Interpreter's House,” etc., and he meets persons with names like “True-Heart” and “Faithful.” 

Now all of this is the language of symbolism, of allegory, and of parable. I may not be required to take it all literally as history, but I am certainly meant to take it at least as seriously as one of the parables of Jesus, or the parable the prophet Nathan once told to King David. You will recall that in Nathan's story, David asked Nathan just who the chief villain was, and Nathan replied, “You are the man!” Well, the Jewish Rabbis of the time of Jesus had a saying about the creation stories: “Every person has been the ’adam of his own soul.” 

The Rabbis recognized what we too ought to recognize in Genesis—that you and I are ’adam (and Noah, and Cain and Abel, and the builders of the Tower of Bab-El)! This is our story. These first 11 chapters of Genesis are a mirror held up to our life. Read them and point to yourself, saying, “You are the man [or woman]!” and they will be an even greater blessing to you. 

Well then, what is the role that the human beings play in the stories we read in Genesis 1 and 2? If you go to a movie and are at all interested in it you will probably find out beforehand who the stars of the movie are, who the director or producer or writer is. You may also try to learn something about the plot. But few people really take time to ask about the drama of their own lives. “Just what is really being played out here? What is the script about?” But everything depends on knowing these things, and Genesis gives us that script. Just what is the meaning of our life? Is it just a journey into the wild blue yonder that never gets anywhere? 

Some people find the script in humanity’s animal origins and get hung up on evolutionary theories, the survival of the fittest, and so forth. They would say that a human being is just another animal, fulfilling the role of any other animal—struggling to survive, to reproduce himself, and eventually to die. Other people tell us that the stars determine the script of a person’s life. And they give us all kinds of horoscopes to determine the future and the present for us. 

But the Bible defines a person’s role in life by setting that person in relationship to God. The thing that strikes us from the beginning here in Genesis is that, despite his kinship with the plants and the animals and nature, humanity still remains remarkably unique in the world. Elsewhere God speaks about the things He created, “Let there be . . . .” And thus they have their existence. 

But humans are different, and they are created in a different way. God addresses human beings as “You.” To a human being God says, “You shall” and “You shall not.” This is precisely what constitutes the uniqueness of human beings as opposed to the rest of the animal world and all other created things. Human beings can have fellowship with God and a relationship with Him. 

Something else can be said. The egg of a chicken will always become a chicken; the embryo of a dog will always become a dog. The process cannot go wrong. But what about a human embryo? An animal cannot fail to fulfil its destiny. But what about human beings? The human being is a kind of risk of God. A human child can grow up to be human or inhuman. He or she can grow up and make the wrong choices time after time, sabotage the plans of God for his or her life, waste his or her talents, and throw away his or her destiny, until all finally ends up in the pigpen with the prodigal son. 

All too often that happens. We can come onto the stage of God’s world, just as ’Adam did, and play the wrong role. And at our final judgment we may find written in red ink on the margin of the script of our life, the conclusion: “You missed the point!” It’s a terrifying possibility, but it’s a part of the dignity and the freedom of being human. We can have direct contact with God, and if we fall away from God we can’t blame our stars or our environment or our heredity, because we are directly responsible to our Creator for what we have done with our freedom. 

But there is another truth in Genesis that is echoed through the rest of the Bible: namely, that because God created us, we belong to Him. And even when we fall away from Him, He faithfully remembers us and wants to draw us back. Even when we stand in our presumption beside some Tree-of-the-Knowledge-of-Good-and-Evil or at the top of some Tower of Bab-El trying to storm Heaven to become equal with God, we belong to Him. Even when we slink away into some pig sty in a far country, or when we just let ourselves become indifferent to God, God still wants us back, and calls to us as to ’Adam, “’Adam, where are you?” 

Now I have a footnote in closing. Some of you may be thinking, “All of that sounds well and good. But is it true? Can you really take those old-fashioned stories from the Book of Genesis so seriously without doing violence to my intelligence? After all, the Bible says I was made from a clod of earth, but my science courses tell me that the human race developed biologically from lower animal forms over millions of years. Doesn’t evolution disprove the Bible, with its interesting little parables about the creation and “fall” of human beings? 

But if you ask the question that way, I think it is the wrong question. You see, I can ask about the biological origins of human beings and receive the answer from science that human beings descended in some way from “lower” animal forms over millions of years. Or I can ask, “Why is humankind here in the first place? What is the human’s role in the scheme of things? What is the destiny of humanity? What is God’s intention for an individual human being?” and the answer I get from the Bible is that every human being was designed to be one of God’s children, that each one was intended for fellowship with God in Jesus Christ. I must not get the two questions mixed up. 

I don’t sin against faith if I accept the verdict of science (which, hopefully will continue to be open to new evidence) that tells us that humans developed from the animal kingdom over a period of several million years. One truth cannot contradict another truth, whether they be scientific or religious truths. 

But I sin against faith if I assert that I derive the essence of human existence and human destiny, and the very meaning of human life from those pre-human biological origins. If I do that, then the answer I get is that a human being is just another animal that must live by the instinct to devour, to breed, and to plunder. Then human history would be just another chapter in a textbook on general biology. 

But the Biblical faith is something more than that. We need not deny that human beings are “animals” from a biological point of view, regardless of what we believe about evolution. But that is true only from a biological point of view. In his essential being a human being is something else. This is because at some point in time, whether at the moment of an instantaneous creation, or at some point in those millions of years of evolutionary development, God called men and women by their names. God summoned them before His presence, and bestowed on them the dignity of human person-hood that God never gave to any other animal. 

It is of this one point that the Bible speaks when we read that “The LORD God breathed into the human creature’s nostrils the breath of life and the human creature became a living being.” At this point God caused human beings to rise above the ranks of other creatures, whatever they might have been before, and made them something special. This is the decisive point of our becoming human in relationship to God. 

You can understand humanity only if you put human beings in relationship to the One Who gives them their life, the One Who calls them by name, the One Who sacrifices His most beloved for them on Calvary, and the One Who never rests until He has brought humanity out of the pigsty in the far country and returned them home to the peace of the Father’s house. It is a person’s relationship to the One Who does those things that determines the real meaning of his or her existence. 

This sermon has been adapted from, and is heavily dependent upon, a sermon by the Rev. Dr. Helmut Thielicke of Hamburg, “Creation and Evolution, Faith and Science,” in his book, How the World Began: Man in the First Chapters of the Bible (Philadelphia, Fortress Press: 1961; trans. by John W. Doberstein from the German edition, Wie die Welt began. Der Mensch in die Urgeschichte der Bibel, Stuttgart, Germany: Quell Verlag, 1960. The translations are my own, based on translations of Dr. Carol Meyers of Duke University and that of Tanakh, the New Jewish Publication Society version (1985).

Revelation, Chapters 4 and 5

Revelation, Chapters 4 and 5 

A Vision of the Heavenly Court and the Opening of the Sealed Book 

The Heavenly Court Concept 

An important concept that apocalyptic writings often use is that of the Heavenly Court. It is a concept derived from the vision reports and the oracles of the Hebrew prophets. George B. Caird, in his commentary on the Book of the Revelation, pp. 60-61, describes how this concept is used in that work: 

“John sees [Revelation 4:1] an open door in heaven . . . and is transported from earth to heaven in a prophetic rapture. None of this would seem at all strange to readers of the Old Testament. In a prophetic trance Micaiah ben-Imlah had seen the Lord on His heavenly throne, surrounded by His angelic counselors, and consulting them about ways and means of making His purpose effective in earthly history (1 Kings 22:19 ff.). Amos had declared that the Lord of history would never put His secret plan into effect without revealing it to His servants the prophets (Amos 3:7). Jeremiah had given it as the criterion for distinguishing true prophecy from false that the true prophet ‘has stood in the council of the Lord’ (Jeremiah 23:18, 22). 

“The Old Testament prophet, in fact, may be regarded as a privileged press-reporter admitted to sessions of the heavenly Privy Council, in order that he may subsequently publish to Israel what is God’s secret policy, and what part Israel is to play in implementing it. By the same token, John, believing that the Church faces an immediate life-and-death battle, which is not theirs alone, but God’s, is summoned to the control room at Supreme Headquarters. 

“Imagine a room lined with maps, in which someone has placed clusters of little flags. A man in uniform is busy moving some of the flags from one position to another. It is wartime, and the flags represent units of a military command. The movement of flags may mean one of two things: [It may mean (1)] that changes have taken place on the battlefield, with which the map must be made to agree. Or [(2) it may mean] that an order is being issued for troop movements, and the flags are being moved to the new positions the units are expected to occupy. In the first case the movement of flags is descriptive symbolism, in the second case determinative symbolism.

“The strange and complex symbols of John’s vision are, like the flags in this parable, the pictorial counterpart of earthly realities; and these symbols too may be either determinative or descriptive. John sees some things happen in heaven because God has determined that equivalent events should shortly happen on earth. But other heavenly events take place . . . because earthly events have made them possible.” From George B. Caird in Harper’s/Black’s New Testament Commentaries, pp. 60-61. 

The Heavenly Worship 

4:1 After this I looked, and there in Heaven a door stood open! And the first voice, which I had heard speaking to me like a trumpet, said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this.” 2 At once I was in the Spirit,[1] and there in Heaven stood a throne, with One seated on the throne! 3 And the One seated there looks like jasper and carnelian, and around the throne is a rainbow that looks like an emerald. 4 Around the throne are twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones are twenty-four elders, dressed in white robes, with golden crowns on their heads. 5 Coming from the throne are flashes of lightning, and rumblings and peals of thunder, and in front of the throne burn seven flaming torches, which are the seven spirits of God; 6 and in front of the throne there is something like a sea of glass, like crystal. 

Around the throne, and on each side of the throne, are four living creatures, full of eyes in front and behind: 7 the first living creature like a lion, the second living creature like an ox, the third living creature with a face like a human face, and the fourth living creature like a flying eagle. 8 And the four living creatures, each of them with six wings, are full of eyes all around and inside. Day and night without ceasing they sing, 

“Holy, holy, holy, 

the Lord God the Almighty, 

Who was and is and is to come.” 

9 And whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to the One Who is seated on the throne, Who lives forever and ever, 10 the twenty-four elders fall before the One Who is seated on the throne and worship the One Who lives forever and ever; they cast their crowns before the throne, singing, 

11 “You are worthy, our Lord and God, 

to receive glory and honor and power, 

for You created all things, 

and by Your will they existed and were created.” 

4.1–5.14: Vision of the glory of God and of the Lamb. 

4:1: The first voice, mentioned in Revelation 1:10. 

Come up, John was exalted in spirit, as was Ezekiel, to behold visions of God (Ezekiel 3:12; 8:3; 11:1). 

2: A throne, Ezekiel 1:26–28. This represents in symbol the sovereignty of God. In spite of the apparent victory of evil on earth, behind the shadows there is a throne. The last word is always with God. We may recall the great saying of Jeremiah (17:12): O glorious throne, exalted from the beginning, shrine of our sanctuary! The word throne occurs in almost every chapter of the Revelation, over forty times. It sounds throughout the book like the ground-bass of a great organ theme. 

3: Notice the great reticence in describing the One sitting on the throne . . . like . . . . The glory of the Divine Presence is described in terms of precious gems. No shape of any kind is indicated, although in Revelation 5:1 “the right hand of the One seated on the throne” is mentioned. This almost complete absence of any description is in contrast to Daniel 7:9 with its “Ancient of Days” with hair like wool (a detail transferred to Jesus in Revelation 1:14), and Ezekiel 1:26, “and upon the likeness of the throne was a likeness as the appearance of a man upon it above.” (NEB). 

4: Twenty-four elders, probably angelic beings of the Heavenly Court. There is a possible clue to interpretation in Revelation 21:13-14. In the New Jerusalem there are two sets of twelve: the gates correspond to the twelve tribes of Israel and the foundation stones to the twelve apostles of the Lamb, i.e., the twelve patriarchs of the Old Testament and the twelve apostles of the New Testament. 

5: Flashes of lightning, and rumblings and peals of thunder, expressive of the majesty of the Most High as seen in the great “theophany” (i.e., appearance of God) at Sinai (Exodus 19:16; cf. Revelation 11:19). Again there is mention of the Seven spirits of God, Revelation 1:4; 5:6. 

6: A sea of glass suggests the distance between God and His creatures, even in Heaven. This reference may be explained by considering a larger question. Several times in the book mention is made of a Heavenly Temple; and since the present chapter is dominated by the thought of the throne, we may wonder how these two things are related. Does the imagery of Heaven change from a royal court to a Temple, and back again? This would not be impossible; both types of imagery are needed to bring out the full reality, and one fades into the other, as in a dream. 

Isaiah tells us in chapter 6, "I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lofty; and the hem of His robe filled the Temple." He thus combines in one picture the throne and the Temple. There was a sense in which the ark in the Holy of Holies of the earthly Temple was thought of as God’s throne. Psalm 80:1 speaks of God sitting upon the cherubim; and in the description of the Tabernacle in the wilderness, the precursor of the Temple, the place of the Divine Presence is above the “mercy seat,” the top of the ark between two cherubim (Exodus 25:22). John was very influenced by Isaiah’s vision. The “six wings” of Revelation 4:8 of the “living creatures” come straight from Isaiah 6:2. This strongly supports the view that in the Revelation the dwelling-place of God is pictured as a combination of Temple and royal court. This would be in agreement with Revelation 1:6, a passage that combines together the kingly and the priestly, as the people of God are referred to as kings and priests. This may also help us to interpret the sea mentioned here. In Solomon’s Temple there was outside an enormous bronze basin of water that was called a “sea” (1 Kings 7:23-26). And it may be that this sea of glass that John saw in the Heavenly Court corresponds to this. 

The four living creatures are taken from Ezekiel’s vision in his first chapter, but the six wings come from the description of the seraphim in Isaiah 6. Ezekiel 1:10 speaks of the faces of the four living creatures that he saw, though in his interpretation each one of them had four faces. Thus, these angelic beings appear to representing humankind and all animals that God created (Ezekiel 1:5, 10). Full of eyes, likewise goes back to Ezekiel 10:12 and symbolize unceasing watchfulness. 

8: Six wings . . . Holy, holy, holy. The song is reminiscent of the cry of the seraphim in Isaiah 6:2–3. This emphasis upon worship is characteristic of the Book of the Revelation. Again and again it bursts into song, and it may preserve for us here and there fragments of early Christian hymns. The song of the living creatures leads on to that of the twenty-four elders. 

10: Cast their crowns, acknowledging that all power comes from God. 

11: They existed in God’s mind from all eternity. 

The Scroll and the Lamb 

5:1 Then I saw in the right hand of the One seated on the throne a scroll written on the inside and on the back, sealed[2] with seven seals; 2 and I saw a mighty angel proclaiming with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” 3 And no one in Heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it. 4 And I began to weep bitterly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. 5 Then one of the elders said to me, “Do not weep. See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that He can open the scroll and its seven seals.” 

6 Then I saw between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders a Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth. 7 He went and took the scroll from the right hand of the One Who was seated on the throne. 8 When He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell before the Lamb, each holding a harp and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. 9 They sing a new song: 

“You are worthy to take the scroll 

and to open its seals, 

for You were slaughtered and by Your blood you ransomed for God 

saints from[3] every tribe and language and people and nation; 

10 You have made them to be a Kingdom and priests serving[4] our God, 

and they will reign on earth.” 

11 Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels surrounding the throne and the living creatures and the elders; they numbered myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, 12 singing with full voice, 

“Worthy is the Lamb that was slaughtered 

to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might 

and honor and glory and blessing!” 

13 Then I heard every creature in Heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, singing, 

“To the One seated on the throne and to the Lamb 

be blessing and honor and glory and might 

forever and ever!” 

14 And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” And the elders fell down and worshiped. 

In chapter 4 the emphasis was upon God as Creator. Now comes the theme of human redemption from sin. The presence of this Lamb as if it had been slaughtered speaks of the sovereignty of sacrifice and the victory of love. But the vision is also closely related to the following chapters. The sealed book that the Lamb is to open unfolds the secrets of God’s sovereignty in the present and the future and its contents are about to be unfolded. 

5:1: A scroll, containing the fixed purposes of God for the present and the future (Ezekiel 2:9–10). In pre-Christian times there were few books with pages that could be turned (Latin name: codex). Writing was generally done upon single sheets, or, if this was insufficient, upon lengths of papyrus or parchment that could be rolled up into scrolls. It was customary to write on only one side, naturally the inner side, so that all the writing would be concealed when the papyrus was rolled up. But occasionally both sides were used, as here. Ezekiel, early in his ministry, was given a scroll with writing on the front and on the back, and written on it were words of lamentation and mourning and woe (Ezekiel 2:9-10). This scroll in Revelation 5 was sealed with seven seals, therefore both unalterable and unknown to others. It was sealed in such a way that the breaking of each seal meant that a further portion of the scroll could be read. 

3–5: No created being is worthy to carry out God’s plan, only the Messianic King can do so. Christ is first announced as the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David; compare Genesis 49:9–10; Isaiah 11:1, 10. 

5:6–9: The Lamb . . . slaughtered, refers to Christ’s sacrificial death, by which God’s purposes contained in the scroll are accomplished. This is one of the most frequent titles applied to Jesus in this book (twenty-nine times), and it demands special attention. Jesus is called a Lamb in John 1:29, 36; and the same idea is implied in 1 Peter 1:19. For the Old Testament background of this term we should take into account the Passover lamb, and more importantly, the description of Yahweh’s servant in Isaiah 53:7, who was like a lamb that is led to the slaughter. 

The Greek word used for Lamb throughout the Revelation is interesting. It is not the word used in the Greek text of John and 1 Peter, or even in the Greek Septuagint translation of Isaiah (amnos), but a synonym, arnion. There is a contrast in the Book of the Revelation between the Christ-figure, the Lamb, that appears here for the first time, and the anti-Christ figure that first appears in Revelation 11:7, that is referred to as the beast (Greek: therion). John may have preferred to use the word arnion because of the similar ending to therion as a means of heightening the contrast. In the last half of the book we will follow the struggle between the arnion and the therion. 

Seven horns . . . seven eyes, plentitude of power and insight. This description suggests that the Lamb is actually both strong and all-knowing. The influence of Zechariah 4:10 (cf. 2 Chronicles 16:9) may be traced here. Originally the reference to “eyes of Yahweh” may have referred to the seven visible planets that wander across the heavens. 

Seven spirits, Revelation 1:4. Probably the reference is simply to the completeness of the Holy Spirit of God, as expressed in Isaiah 11:2. 

8: Golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. The prayers of the saints on earth are joined with the worship rendered to the Lamb by the heavenly creatures. 

9–10: A new song, because Christ has inaugurated a new era (Revelation 14:3). The Lamb (Christ) is adored in terms similar to the adoration rendered to God (Revelation 4:11). 

By Your blood you ransomed [literally, purchased] for God. The blood of Christ is a vivid way of referring to His death on the cross. The idea of purchase may seem strange at first. But anything that is obtained at great cost may be described as purchased. The idea is that by His death on the cross Jesus won people from all over the world to God’s service and secured them in such a way that they acknowledge that they belong to God. As Paul once put it, . . . you are not your own? For you were bought with a price (1 Corinthians 6:19b-20a). 

A Kingdom and priests, the vocation promised to Israel. As in Revelation 1:6 there is an echo of Exodus 19:6 (cf. Isaiah 61:6). Here this promise is extended to the Church (cf. 1 Peter 2:9). 

11–12: The sevenfold praise of myriads in Heaven honoring the sacrificial Lamb. “Worthy is the Lamb that was slaughtered . . . ” This song in celebration of redemption answers to the song of creation at the end of the previous chapter, “You are worthy, our Lord and God, . . . ” In the Revelation the same kind of worship is offered to Christ as to God the Father. 

13: Universal praise to the Creator and to the Redeemer as equal in majesty. First the elders sing (verses 8-10), then countless angels join in (verse 11), and finally every created thing in the universe brings the swelling song to a climax. 

Before leaving this chapter we need to add a further note about its significance. When no one in all creation appeared who was able to open the scroll, John began to weep. He is frustrated, because until the scroll is opened, God’s purposes remain not merely unknown, but apparently also unaccomplished. John has been brought up on the messianic hope of the Old Testament that promised that one day God would assume His Kingly power and reign openly on earth, punishing the wicked and redressing the wrongs of His oppressed people. Especially in times of persecution God’s people had longed for that day to bring an end to their sufferings, but also to vindicate their faith. 

But then John’s tears are checked by what he hears and sees. It is particularly unfortunate that in most editions and translations of the Revelation a paragraph break has been inserted between verses 5 and 6 of chapter 5, so that we often miss the full impact of the juxtaposition of images: 

5 Then one of the elders said to me, “Do not weep. See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that He can open the scroll and its seven seals.” 6 Then I saw between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders a Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth. 

What John hears is couched in the traditional messianic imagery of the Old Testament; what John sees constitutes the most impressive rebirth of images he anywhere achieves. The Lion of the tribe of Judah is a title with an obviously violent ring, and the Root of David reminds us of the ideal King of Israel. But then John looks for the person who fulfills this description and what he sees is a Lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered! The Lamb is a symbol of self-sacrificing and redemptive love. By this one stroke of brilliant artistry John has given us the key to all of his use of the Old Testament. John constantly echoes the Old Testament writings (without actually quoting any of them), partly because this was the language that came most naturally to him, partly because of the powerful emotive effect of familiar associations, and partly no doubt because his vision had actually taken its form, though not its content, from the permanent furniture of his well-stocked mind. 

It is as if John were saying that the Old Testament is indispensable to the understanding of the character and purpose of God, but it must be read in the light of the fuller illumination of Christ. It is almost as if John were saying at one point after another: “Wherever the Old Testament says ‘Lion,’ read ‘Lamb’.” Whenever the Old Testament speaks of the victory of the Messiah or the overthrow of the enemies of God, we are to remember that the Gospel recognizes no other way of achieving these ends than the way of the Cross. This conception of the Lamb on the throne of the universe is one of the most sublime in the Bible. It suggests that love is the strongest power in the world. 

It must be admitted, however, that the rest of this book does not bring out in a consistent way the great truth of this vision. If only John had found some way of maintaining this principle throughout the book what a great work this would be, and how many misunderstandings of its messages could have been avoided! But in many ways in the coming chapters the appearances are that the final victory of God is finally envisaged as springing from sheer force. There are clues along the way that this is not actually the case, but they are hard to spot. I will note some of them when we get to them, however. 

Based on the comments in the New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha, New Revised Standard Version, ed. By Bruce M. Metzger, et. al., 1996 ed., and T. F. Glasson, The Revelation of John in the Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New English Bible, and G. B. Caird, The Revelation of St. John the Divine, in the Harper’s/Black’s New Testament Commentaries series. 

[1] Or, “in the spirit” 

[2] Or “written on the inside and sealed on the back” 

[3] Greek: “ransomed for God from” 

[4] Greek: “priests to”

Revelation 12—The Woman and the Dragon; “War” in Heaven

Revelation 12—The Woman and the Dragon; “War” in Heaven 

Background 

In chapters 6 through 11 of the Revelation the readers have observed a series of plagues upon the earth, such as both Christians and Jews expected would take place during the climactic time at the End of the Present Age. But these events as our writer has described them, were not actually predictions at all. They were expressed in traditional Jewish apocalyptic language, but there are clues throughout them all that the writer was using his symbolism to describe the kind of actual events that already had been taking place in his own lifetime. And there are hints throughout chapters 6-11 that John was reminding his readers that they too had already experienced or observed such a series of disastrous events. Among these events were the following: 

1. Severe earthquakes in the Roman province of Asia (to which John writes the Revelation) beginning about 60 CE; 

2. A humiliating defeat of the Roman army at the hands of the Parthians in 62 CE; 

3. The persecution of Christians in Rome at the instigation of the Emperor Nero, following the great fire in Rome in 64 CE; 

4. The horrors of the Jewish War with Rome in Palestine from 66 to 73 CE, resulting in the siege and destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE, and the siege of Masada and the mass suicide of its defenders in 73 CE; 

5. The suicide of Nero in 68 CE followed by civil war in the empire as four claimants for the throne fought it out for a whole year (the “year of the four emperors”), while the Roman world echoed with the tramp of marching armies; 

6. The eruption in 79 CE of Mount Vesuvius, that resulted in the burial of the cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum. This created a pall of darkness so widespread that people throughout the Mediterranean world feared the very destruction of the physical order was upon them; 

7. The serious grain famine of 92 C.E. throughout the entire Roman Empire, which was being ruled at the time by a madman named Domitian, who seemed like Nero returned from the dead. Domitian was the first Emperor to demand universal worship of himself throughout the Empire. Failure to comply was punishable by death. 

The visions described in chapters 6-11 were describing a world like that, and were asserting the sovereignty of God over a world like that. And now, after the triumphal shout of Revelation 11:15-19, the readers would seem to have come to the End, the final victory—yet half of the book is still left to come. On the one hand, Revelation 11:15-19 is a summary of all that is about to come. On the other hand, the victory already has been accomplished. The remainder of the book is about to describe the “mopping-up” operations, and the background as to how and why the victory has taken place. 

Revelation 12:1-6 - The Woman and the Dragon 

The series of visions beginning with chapter 12 provides answers to a question the writer’s first-century readers may be asking: “Why is persecution coming upon Christians in the near future?” The answer given is that “the Satan”—the dragon—is the enemy behind it all, working through his agents in the world. These agents are the “Beast” from the sea—which will be identified as the Roman Empire—and the “Beast” from the land—which will be identified as those in authority in the province of Asia who promote the cult of emperor worship. The writer asserts in the strongest possible way that the Satan and his agents are doomed to fail, and to be destroyed. 

Revelation 12:1 speaks of a “sign” or “portent” in heaven. In the Gospel According to John the word used here (semeion) was used to speak of what the Synoptic Gospels called “miracles.” The word semeion speaks of an unusual or amazing appearance that gets attention and points to a meaning beyond itself. Semeion is also the common Greek word for a constellation of stars in the sky, often interpreted as a “portent” of things to come (cf. Matthew 2:1-12, although the term itself is not used there), and that is probably the meaning here. 

Is the constellation Virgo, the sixth sign of the Zodiac? And is the dragon the constellation Draco, or Serpens, or Hydra, or possibly some combination of all three? That may be a starting point. But actually, we must look beyond the symbols of astrology and the phenomena of astronomy for our interpretation. The woman with her child, and the dragon, are figures of the writer’s inspired imagination, projected onto the starry heavens. 

There are several mythological stories from the ancient Near East and the Mediterranean that may illuminate this passage. But first we should remind ourselves that a “myth” in the technical sense is a story from the remote past that is told to explain facts, expressions, practices, or beliefs held in the present. A “myth” embodies some ultimate truth about human existence or some universal aspiration; and it provides imagery by which people in every generation interpret and express their own experiences. 

A “myth” is capable of being re-enacted in every succeeding age by those whose imagination has been awakened and illuminated by its truth. Thus it can serve as a stimulus to the imagination and a spur to action. This, of course, is a different use of the term than that used in everyday society, in which, when we speak of an idea as a “myth” we imply that it is untrue. But in the technical literary and religious sense as we use it here, for a story to be a myth at all, it must speak of ultimate truth. Such a story may be about something that never actually happened historically, yet something that happens to us every day. 

In the myths and folklore of many nations not far from the writer and his readers there were a number of stories about a usurper king who, doomed to be killed by a prince as yet unborn, attempts to cheat the fates by killing the prince at birth. The prince is miraculously snatched away from the usurper’s clutches and hidden away until he is old enough to kill the usurper and claim his inheritance. This theme occurs in many forms in the mythology of the ancient Near East and the Mediterranean. 

In Egypt, the red dragon Set pursues the goddess Isis and is later killed by her son, the sun god, Horus. Some interpreters have suggested that the Biblical story of the baby Moses, hidden in the bulrushes of the Nile, might be related to this legend. 

In Greece, the dragon Python attempts to kill the soon-to-be-born son of Zeus, who will be the sun god, Apollo. Python is foiled when the sea god Poseidon aids Apollo’s mother Leto in her escape to the Island of Delos. There Apollo is born, and he subsequently returns to Mount Parnassus to kill the dragon in its cave at Delphi. The Island of Delos, incidentally, would have been visible to John from his imprisonment on the neighboring Island of Patmos, and it is quite likely that he would have been familiar with this story. 

But both stories are forms of the “solar myth,” in which the dragon of darkness tries to kill the sun god, only to be killed by the sun god as the new day dawns. 

When Biblical writers utilize such myths they generally “demythologize” them by pointing out more directly the universal truths implicit in the imagery used. Here, for example, the writer of the Revelation apparently finds similarities between the old legends and the current situation of Christ and His people in the Roman Province of Asia about 95 CE. 

On the earthly scene, according the tradition preserved in the narrative of Jesus’ birth in the Gospel According to Matthew (2:1-12) Jesus was born at a time when Herod the Great feared a Messiah might come to take his throne away from him. So Herod sought out and killed the children of Bethlehem. But Jesus and His family escaped to Egypt, and later returned so that He could complete His mission. It is possible that John was aware of this Gospel account, or of the tradition behind it. 

On the heavenly scene Jesus’ resurrection and ascension could be considered a kind of escape, from the realm of the Satan on earth, to God’s Heavenly realm, from which He would shortly return to destroy the devil. 

But John is also re-writing the old pagan myth, deliberately intending to contradict its contemporary political applications. We know from extant contemporary records that the solar myth was a living myth during the late first century. During the reign of the Emperor Domitian, when the Revelation was composed and published, Domitian thought of himself as an incarnation of the sun-god Apollo, and expressed this belief with images on Roman coins. But John in the following chapters is about to portray that emperor as one of the agents of the Satan, doomed to destruction. Likewise the goddess Roma, representing the Roman Empire, was worshipped in Asia in connection with local cults of the mother-goddess. But John is going to portray her as a great prostitute, the seducer of the world, who will go to her own destruction. 

Who, then, in John’s version of this story, are the woman clothed with the sun, and the great red dragon with the seven heads and ten horns? 

The woman in the vision does not actually represent Mary, mother of Jesus. She the people of God, who, as Israel in the Hebrew Bible, produced Jesus the Messiah, and who, as the Church, the “new Israel,” is now the persecuted “offspring” of the woman (Revelation 12:17). The sun, moon, and star imagery is taken from Genesis 37:9, where Joseph tells of his dream about the sun, moon, and stars bowing down to him. Thus, the woman represents, not Mary, but the Messianic community. 

The child is Jesus, the Messiah. The reference to his “ruling with a rod of iron” is an allusion to Psalm 2:7-9. That Psalm, originally written for the coronation of one of the kings of Israel, had become understood in tradition as referring to the coming Messiah. John appears to speak in these chapters only about Jesus’ birth and his resurrection/ascension, omitting His life and death entirely. 

The portrayal of a flight into the wilderness has two antecedents in Hebrew history. In 168 BCE loyal Jews fled from the Syrian tyrant Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (1 Maccabees 2:29 ff.; 2 Maccabees 5:27) so that they could keep the Torah. 

Throughout the Book of the Revelation and the Book of Daniel there occur references to a time-period of 1260 days (1290, or 1335 in some cases), 42 months, 3½ years, or a time, times, and half a time. Historically this period began in June 168 BCE when Antiochus published an edict forbidding observance of the Jewish religion (1 Maccabees 1:41-53; 2 Maccabees 6:1-6 ff.). About the same time his forces polluted the Jerusalem Temple and its altar (1 Maccabees 1:54-61; 2 Maccabees 6:4-5). This was the so-called “abomination of desolation” (1 Maccabees 1:54; cf. Daniel 9:26b-7; 11:31; 12:11; Mark 13:14; Matthew 24:15-16; Luke 21:20). In December 165 BCE, almost exactly 3½ years after its altar had been polluted, Judas Maccabeus returned from the wilderness with his guerrilla army to cleanse the Temple (1 Maccabees 4:36-59; 2 Maccabees 10:1-8). 

Likewise, in 70 CE the Christians of Jerusalem fled the city of Jerusalem to a town named Pella, across the Jordan River just before the Romans came to besiege the Holy City (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3:5; cf. Mark 13:14; Matthew 24:15-16; Luke 21:20). Thus such a time-period came to symbolize a time of oppression and persecution. 

The great red dragon with seven heads and ten horns is an ancient figure from Near Eastern mythology. The Babylonian creation story told of a great red-gleaming serpent or dragon named Tiamat, who was killed by the god Marduk, and from whose carcass the world was created when Marduk divided the carcass into two halves. A much older Akkadian version lies behind the Babylonian story. An Akkadian seal from 2500 BCE pictures this dragon as a seven-headed monster. Fragments or allusions to this story also occur in the Hebrew Bible, where the Canaanite names for the dragon are used: Rahab (Isaiah 51:9, and Leviathan (Psalms 74:12-14; Isaiah 27:1; Job 40:15-24). 

The early chapters of Genesis reflect knowledge of the Babylonian mythology. In Genesis 1 the tehom, the "great deep," is divided when God creates the world. The Hebrew word tehom is derived from the Babylonian name Tiamat. And of course Genesis 3 provides the most famous serpent story in the Bible. But there are more than just allusions to the myth within the Hebrew Bible. There is also “de-mythologizing.” Jeremiah likens the historical Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon to the famous monster in Jeremiah 51:34; and Ezekiel likens an actual Egyptian Pharaoh to such a dragon in Ezekiel 29:3); the inter-biblical work Psalms of Solomon (2:29) makes the dragon represent the Roman General Pompey "the Great." 

Revelation 12:7-17 – “War” In Heaven 

Revelation 12:7-9 seeks to explain why the dragon’s fury has been directed toward the earth. The dragon is identified in verse 9 as “the Devil, [the] Satan.” John says the dragon was defeated during a “war in Heaven,” and was therefore cast down to the earth, where he turned his rage against God’s people. We ought to avoid pressing the details of this story in too literal a fashion. But it is worthwhile to examine its very complicated background. 

There is in Scripture the echo of an ancient Near Eastern myth about a primeval war in Heaven. In that story a minor god was ambitious to become the supreme god. The result of this was that the minor god was cast out of heaven. The Assyrians and the Babylonians had the story of Ishtar, the god of the morning star, who rebelled and was cast down. 

There is a definite reference to this story in the Book of Isaiah 14:3. The prophet describes an ancient Near Eastern king as being brought down to defeat and death, and entering Sheol, the place of the dead. The prophet likens this ruler to “Lucifer,” the god of the morning star, child of the goddess of the dawn. Isaiah probably had in mind the historical Assyrian ruler Sargon II, or less likely, his successor Sennacherib. A later editor of the text seems to have in mind a Babylonian ruler, probably Nebuchadrezzar II of Babylon. 

The Canaanites also had a version of the Babylonian myth of Ishtar. Their name for the god was helel ben shahar, the very name Isaiah uses for him. The apparent name “Lucifer” is from the Latin Vulgate translation of the Hebrew. Both names mean “light-bearer.” Here is another instance of “de-mythologizing,” in that the old story of a mythical god has now become only an illustration of the fall of an actual Near Eastern tyrant. Certain early Christian writers interpreted that story in light of Luke 10:18, connecting “Lucifer” with the Satan, and thus reviving a mythology that the prophet had already overcome. Revelation 12 may be an echo of the original myth. 

Of course the actual figure of the Satan does occur in the Hebrew Bible, although not in Isaiah 14. The Hebrew word satan itself simply means “an adversary, one who opposes another in his purposes, or one who accuses, a prosecutor” (Numbers 22:22-23; 1 Samuel 29:4; 2 Samuel 19:22; 1 Kings 5:4; 11:14, 23, 25; Psalms 71:11, 13; 106:6, 20). 

In Job 1:6-9 and 2:1-6 and in Zechariah 3:1-2 the Biblical writers portray a being called “the Satan” as a member of Yahweh’s Heavenly court, an inhabitant of Heaven who has every right to be there. He is God’s prosecuting attorney—an “accuser” or “adversary,” one who acts solely within the express permission of God and who keeps within the limits God has fixed for him. Even in the New Testament there are suggestions of the Satan’s role as prosecutor (1 Timothy 3:6 and 1 Peter 5:8), and Revelation 12:10 specifically refers to that role. 

In 1 Chronicles 21:1, a very late passage in the Hebrew Bible, the personality of this being has become even more focused. Here the word “Satan” has become a proper name, and not just the title of an office. Now this being is seen as a tempter who was able to provoke David to conduct a census of Israel (presumably against the will of God). (The later Chronicler has altered the much earlier text in 2 Samuel 24:1 that indicates Yahweh Himself incited David to conduct the census). 

It appears that from the concept of the Satan’s function as a prosecutor there eventually developed during the inter-Biblical period the concept of a “devil” (Greek: diabolos). This word means “slanderer.” William Barclay has pointed out that it is not a great step from being an “accuser,” one who brings true charges, to being a “slanderer,” one who makes false charges. 

Furthermore, all of the ideas we have presented above became combined during the inter-Biblical period to make the “Devil” into an angel who had rebelled against God and who had been cast out of Heaven (2 Enoch 29:45). Having been cast out of Heaven, by the time of the New Testament writers he had become for their readers the “prince of the air” (Ephesians 2:2 and the “prince of this world” (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11) and the Evil One par excellence (Matthew 6:13). In the temptations of Jesus he is called “Satan” (Mark 1:13; Matthew 4:10; Luke 4:8), “the Devil” (Matthew 4:1, 5, 8, 11; Luke 4:2, 3, 5, 6, 13) and “the Tempter” (Matthew 4:3). 

But there is another figure from Yahweh’s Heavenly court in the Hebrew Bible who also makes an appearance in the New Testament—the Angel (Hebrew: malakh = “messenger”) of Yahweh. This being operates generally as the guide and protector of those who revere God (Genesis 24:7, 40; 1 Kings 19:5 ff.; 2 Kings 1:3, 15) and occasionally as one who brings plague and destruction upon those who do not revere Yahweh (2 Samuel 24:26 f.; 2 Kings 19:35 f.). He is sometimes pictured as being who serves in Yahweh’s Heavenly court as a Heavenly judge and/or defense attorney to represent Yahweh’s people (Zechariah 3:1 ff.) against the “Satan,” the prosecutor. 

Sometimes the Angel of Yahweh is given the name, “Michael, the archangel” (Daniel 10:13, 21; 12:1). According to 1 Enoch 40:6 he was thought to be the guardian angel of Israel, and he fills that role in Daniel 10:13, 21 and 12:1 also. His task in Daniel 12:1 is to be leader of Israel in her last battle against evil. In the New Testament, Jude, verse 9, refers to a passage in the non-canonical Assumption of Moses (assuming it to be an authoritative Scripture?) in which Michael disputed with Satan about the body of Moses. 

Revelation 12:7 speaks of a “war in heaven.” If we were to take this literally it would seem unthinkable that the Almighty God would actually allow such a situation to develop. But the writer of the Revelation nowhere describes what he means by “war” in this chapter. The nature of this war is not disclosed. No weapons are named and no fatalities are reported! A very strange “war,” indeed! 

Our previous knowledge of the backgrounds of the figures of the Satan and Michael suggest to the readers that the contest in Heaven was a bloodless and purely verbal conflict (Revelation 12:11), taking place in the Heavenly law court, in which Michael proves victorious (cf. Revelation 2:16!). The dragon (the Satan) is not slain, as one might expect in a literal war. The struggle was essentially a legal battle between opposing counsel, with the result that one of the attorneys was disbarred. And the Satan, having lost his cause in the Heavenly court, also has lost his job. There is no room for him any more in Heaven. 

At this point we should remind ourselves of previous discussions about the relationship between earthly events and heavenly events in apocalyptic symbolism. Every earthly event has its counterpart in heaven, and vice-versa, for the apocalyptist. And sometimes the symbols represent things to come, and other times they represent things that have already happened. 

So just what events on earth would be the counterpart of the victory in Heaven? Revelation 12:11 provides a clue: the victory in Heaven can only be the crucifixion of Christ, His self-offering on behalf of sinners in taking up the cross. The Heavenly chorus joyfully proclaims that the victory was won, not by the legal expertise of Michael, but by the life-blood of the Lamb! 

This would explain why it had to be Michael, not Jesus Himself, portrayed in the Heavenly “war” as God’s representative. As the victory is represented in Heaven as being won, Jesus was hanging on the cross! Because Jesus was at that time a part of the earthly reality, He could not at the same time serve as a part of the Heavenly symbolism. Michael’s victory was simply the Heavenly and symbolic counterpart of the earthly reality of the cross, according to the writer of the Revelation. 

One might even say, going back to the original analogy, that Michael in fact was not the general who led the fighting, but only the staff officer in the Heavenly headquarters. He was able to move the Satan’s flag (the dragon) from the Heavenly map because Jesus had won the real victory on Calvary. Thus, we conclude that the vision in Revelation 12 is a picture of the recent past and present more than one of the distant future. 

Revelation 12:11 further declares that the martyrs who have suffered persecution for their faith have by their own testimony also had a part in the overcoming of the Satan: 

1. Their martyrdom is in itself a conquest. The person who dies rather than deny his faith has proved himself superior to every seduction of Satan—cf. the promises to the “conqueror” in the letters to the seven churches in Asia (Revelation 2:7, 10-11, 17, 26, 28; 3:4-5, 12, 21). 

2. The martyrs’ victory is also due to Jesus’ sacrifice. Jesus’ death and resurrection of Jesus were a victory over evil as Jesus overcame the worst that evil could do to him. So also the martyrs. Because of the cross they have been forgiven of their sins, and now there is nothing of which the Satan, the accuser, can accuse them. 

3. The martyrs did not love their lives even unto death. They did not consider that life was more important than loyalty to God. This does not necessarily refer to actual dying, but it certainly means setting loyalty to Christ above safety, security, and comfort. 

Based on commentaries by George B. Caird in the Harper’s/Black’s New Testament Commentaries, William Barclay in the Daily Study Bible Series, T. F. Glasson in the Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New English Bible, I. T. Beckwith, Henry Barclay Swete, R. H. Charles in the International Critical Commentaries Series, and others.

A Letter Concerning Prayer in Public Schools

This essay won first prize in the Silver Arts competition of the Johnston County (NC) Senior Games of 2004. 

A Letter Concerning Prayer in Public Schools 

Recently a very dear niece of mine sent me a petition to be forwarded to President George Bush requesting him to work to reinstate prayer in the public schools by rescinding the decision on school prayer that was rendered by the US Supreme court some years ago. The following essay is my letter in reply to her. 

Dear Amanda, 

I appreciate your sending me your petition. Because I love you and respect you, I feel your request deserves my serious attention. And out of my deep love for you and my genuine respect for you I feel I have to explain why I am returning it to you without my signature. 

First I want you to know how very much I appreciate your concern for the practice of religion in our country. I am concerned about these things too. It is definitely time for all of us Christians to live more Christ-like lives. It is time for all of us to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world. It is time for all of us to demonstrate the love of God in all of its attractiveness, so that others will want to experience it as you and I have been privileged to experience it. If we can all do this individually, one by one, day by day, then there will be no need for our public schools to attempt the job of making Christian disciples that Christ Himself commanded our churches and individual Christians to do. 

But because you and I both desire to obey that command, I have to tell you that the petition you are asking me to sign is not the way to get the job done. There are several reasons for this, and I want to share them with you. 

The first reason is simply that I don’t believe that the President has the authority to rescind a decision of the Supreme Court as your petition requests. The US Constitution just does not allow for that. In any case, the current President’s religious views are well known. No doubt, if he had thought he did have such authority, he would have exercised it during his first days in office. I suppose our Congress could pass a law restoring prayer in public schools, but I doubt if it would pass, and even if it did, I think the Supreme Court would probably declare that law unconstitutional also. So why waste the effort, unless you just want to put your opinion about the matter on the record? 

Second, I have never been convinced that the Supreme Court ever actually banned the practice of prayer in the schools. So far as I know anybody can pray in his or her school anytime they want to do so as individuals. I don’t even think there is any law against bowing your head for a few moments before your meals in school. Of course, good manners would require that a person not disturb other students or school staff in the performance of their duties, so the prayer should probably be silent. Also, respect for other people who may have differing beliefs should obligate us not to expect or require them to listen to our private prayers. If you want to pray in a school, then do so silently so that you don’t disturb anyone else, and you will not be breaking any law. As somebody once said, “As long as there are algebra tests there will always be prayer in schools.” 

As I understand it, the Supreme Court decision prohibited only prayers that are organized or promoted by governmental agencies, schools, school systems, or persons in authority in the schools, where you have a sort of “captive audience.” It prohibited religious exercises that required all students to participate whether they want to or not. I happen to think that was a very appropriate interpretation of the US Constitution. 

Third, you and I were raised as Baptists. And our heritage, from the very beginning of the Baptist expression of Christianity, about 1609 in England and Holland, has always been to oppose any form of state sponsorship of religious beliefs or practices. In my humble opinion a requirement that students participate in prayers or other religious exercises would fall into that category. State sponsorship of religion has been the cause of many of the terrible wars in Europe since the 1500’s. It is part of the cause of the violence we have seen in Northern Ireland and in the former Yugoslavia. Do we really need that? 

It has only been in the last 20 years that our beloved Southern Baptists have joined with the so-called “Religious Right” in attempting to turn back the clock on our own Baptist heritage of separation of Church and State. This to me is a dangerous form of “liberalism” that departs significantly from our historic Baptist roots. Our historic Baptist experience has always been that whenever religion and government get into bed together, they do not make love. Rather, one ends up attempting to rape the other. We do not want or need that. 

Fourth, I grew up before 1963, when we actually did have required times of prayer in school. The Supreme Court decision was not made until after I had graduated from high school in 1960. I can well remember when we even had required chapel services once or twice a week in the public schools led by local clergymen. In our town we had primarily just Baptists, Methodists, and Presbyterians, and they all apparently believed mostly the same things, so my basic beliefs probably did not suffer by undue influence from one or the other of them. 

But while it is certainly true that I experienced no ill effects from those experiences, on the other hand, I know of no person in any of my schools who ever became a Christian as a result of those practices—not one. If those services and those prayers were meant to convert me or change me in some way then they were a colossal failure! Of course that was just my local community. 

But what if I had lived in a community where the predominant religious culture was not so similar to the Southern Baptist religious culture in which I was raised? Suppose that I had lived in a community where the beliefs of local Christians were radically different from my family’s Baptist beliefs. Or suppose that we had lived in Utah, where Mormonism reigns supreme. Or would we have wanted a Roman Catholic prayer leader to lead us in asking the intercession of Mary and the saints? And how many Christian parents would object if the prayer were spoken in Arabic or in Hebrew? Or chanted in an Asian dialect?

If the prayers and devotionals were really designed to influence the children toward some other religion, would my parents have wanted their Baptist child to be influenced by them? On the other hand, if the prayers and devotionals were watered down to be, in fact, neutral, or “politically correct,” so that no one would be influenced by them, then what good would they do anybody? Required prayers and devotions in school situations, in the end, would then just be a very ineffective means of evangelism, or even of just instilling “values.” 

Fifth, although I and my friends, and even our parents and grandparents participated in schools where publicly led prayer was common, and required chapel services were held, still, it is certain that those prayers and religious exercises did not accomplish a great deal. I was raised in a small suburb of Atlanta, Georgia. And despite the atmosphere of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Christianity that prevailed, most of the parents and the children continued to hold on to their (to my way of thinking) “un-Christian” and “un-Biblical” racist and segregationist views. 

The 1954 Supreme Court decision determined that there could be no real racial equality in our country so long as segregation persisted in our schools. Yet as “religious” as we all were in the American South, we and our families resisted and delayed implementing the declared law of our country for as long as we could. In our schools and churches we often sang, “Jesus loves the little children, all the little children of the world; red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight.” But somehow we Southern Whites were not influenced in our schools, or even in our Churches, to love our Black neighbors, and both our schools and our churches remained segregated for years thereafter. 

Also, out of my generation there arose the hippie culture, and the drug culture and the so-called “sexual revolution,” and the rebellion against any and all forms of “authority” that continues even today. I’m afraid that our required prayers in the public schools and required religious exercises in the public schools did nothing stem those tides. So again, if the intent was to make our children into more religious or religiously moral adults, the effort was a colossal failure and a waste of time. 

Finally, I think the places for our children to be taught religion are, and always have been the churches and the homes of our nation. And I think the most effective evangelism is one-on-one evangelism in which one person shares with another person the love of God that he or she has experienced. Schools can teach the American “values” of equality and fair play and justice for all people without ever having to teach religion, without requiring prayer, and without requiring Bible reading. So basically, I think compulsory prayer and religious observances in public schools are about as appropriate as compulsory prayer and religious observances would be in the check-out lanes at Wal-Mart! They might have some use in some rare instance, but basically, they are just totally ineffective and inappropriate in such a setting. 

I don’t have to tell you how much I love our Lord Jesus Christ and how much I revere our faith as Baptist Christians. You well know that I have been a Baptist minister for over forty years now, and a college teacher of religion, including teaching in a public college, off and on for over twenty years. So you know how deeply I hold my spiritual beliefs. Yet I feel that it would be totally irresponsible for us to abandon our concepts of religious liberty and thereby to entangle our religious beliefs with government sponsorship. You also know how much I love you and want what is best for you. So I cannot in all good conscience sign your petition. 

Your loving uncle, 

Mike