Lovers are the ones who know most about God; the theologian must listen to them.

• Of Mice and Men © 1937
• Bantam Books (1984)
• 118 pages

I’m going to go ahead and assume you’ve already read this book. If you haven’t, go and read it then come back. It’s a classic for a reason!

I spent the day after I finished to book wondering how I became so emotionally involved in the story. It wasn’t the murder, although the pathos is rich. It wasn’t the injustice of it all—although the renegade “justice” made me cringe. It was the death of a dream.

This book is riddled with characters with crushed dreams: the woman who could have been in pitchers [sic], George’s little plot of land, the boss’s son who was still thought of himself as a famous boxer. I think what disturbed me so much about this book was this certainty: when George pulled the trigger in the last chapter he wasn’t just murdering a friend—he was destroying the part of him that kept his dreams alive. Now there’s nothing left but despair.

The book is brilliant and moving. It’s short enough to read in a couple hours. Everyone should read this one.

The gulf between rich and poor in the United States and in the world keeps getting wider . . . We could begin to reverse this trend only if we paid teachers in ghetto schools more than we do sports heroes.

This book was written in 1980, and revised in 1997, but that sort of comment still has the bite of truth in it.

• The Jesus Creed: Loving God, Loving Others © 2004
• Paraclete Press
• 335 pages

This book is the answer to a question: What would the Christian life look like if everyone loved God with their entire being, and loved their neighbours also? The answer is attractive. In The Jesus Creed, McKnight paints a picture of the sort of kingdom-charged life we all can live.

The structure works quite well: there are 30 short meditations that challenge you to examine your life in light of the creed Jesus and his followers lived by. If you’re looking for some devotional reading, this will offer a solid month of character formation. McKnight includes many anecdotes and illustrations that enliven the points he’s making.

I only had one problem with this book: it felt a little scattered at times. All 30 chapters were good, and the points were important—I just didn’t always see how the chapters fit together with each other.

This is a book from a scholar in the form of a popular devotional. There’s depth beneath the easy-reading style. If you’re reading for information, you’ll probably be dissapointed. There are other books for information. If you want to seriously consider how we as Christians should be living, this will search the heart.

Funerals remind us that we ought not get ourselves confused with God.

This section is the middle of three in the chapter, “Humankind under Indictment”. Now that we’ve seen how Adam completely blew it (§4), we turn to the role of sin and death in the life of a believer. Only after that will we examine the role of the law in human failure. Then (finally), we can move on to some good news!

But for now . . . sin and death:

. . .

Chapter 3: Humankind under Indictment

§ 5: Sin and death

Even a post-religious world falls back on religious categories of evil when inexplicable horror occurs. The ancient world often referred to fate as a force that explained evil. Another term that became popular by Paul’s time was daimones, or spirits that influenced human life. To this point in our study of Paul, you would expect to find the source of evil in ourselves. However, in Romans 3:9, sin is first mentioned and described as a power under which humanity labours. Paul in other correspondence has spoken of other gods and demons which can influence human affairs.

Paul only spoke of these heavenly powers twice in the undisputed letters (Romans 8:38-39, 1 Corinthians 15:24), but the disputed lists overlap so much that we can use their lists without misrepresenting Paul (Colossians 1:16, Ephesians 1:20-21; 6:12). Paul understands these powers as subordinate to God yet with the potential to intervene between God and humans with hostile purposes. Paul uses a variety of terms to refer to spiritual powers, but the most common are rulers (archai) and authorities (exousiai). The pair of terms, “height” and “depth”, in Romans 8:38-39 likely referred to heavenly bodies as they rose to their heights then sunk below the horizon. The pair of terms, “death” and “life”, in the same passage refers to every conceivable human condition, although “death” is also a hostile power. Paul spoke in Galatians and Colossians about stoicheia, which likely referred to the elements of which the universe was assumed to be created with (earth, water, air, and fire). In sum, Paul assumed the worldview of his day that consisted of several heavens, the lower ones occupied by some hostile powers. However, when you press Paul, it’s amazing how little he says about the spiritual powers. It’s as if he writes them in because it’s expected, but quickly emphasizes their impotence under Christ. Paul focuses most of his attention on the powers of “sin” and “death”, which are more existential than ontological.

The term “sin” is astonishingly frequent in Romans (48x in Romans, 16x elsewhere in Pauline lit.). Also (almost) unique to Romans is the stress on the personification of sin instead of “sins” elsewhere (although Galatians anticipates this emphasis in 2:17 and 3:22). Sin in Romans is a slave master, a cunning enemy, and a victorious warrior who constantly prevents people from hitting the target. Given the prominence of Genesis 1-3 imagery in Romans, it’s quite possible that the description of sin as a wild animal (Genesis 4:7) influenced Paul to personify sin. Paul is largely unconcerned with the origin of sin—he focuses on it’s reality in the human experience both as a personal and social force. Paul describes sin in over-the-top terms because he was convinced the gospel had the power to counter it.

Dunn spends the next three subsections describing the effects of sin: misdirected religion, self-indulgence, and sins.

Misdirected Religion. The power of sin leads people to reject God in the name of freedom which in turn (ironically) puts them into the power of sin. The Gentiles then fall into the idolatry of nature worship. The Jews then fall into the idolatry of Torah-possession without obedience. In Romans 2:1-3:18, Paul explained the situation of Jews who had fallen into this idolatry. In this extended passage, he argued against an interlocutor who is schooled in the thought of Wisdom of Solomon 11-15. Essentially, the interlocutor believes that the Jewish people’s possession of Torah gave them a favoured status. Their sins will be treated differently from Gentile sins because God chose them to receive Torah. Paul pulls the rug out from under the interlocutor by emphasizing that God doesn’t show partiality: both Jews and Gentiles will be judged equally.

Self-Indulgence. The first instinct of people independent from God is idolatry—the second is dishonouring sexual activity. This second self-indulgent act is linked to the instinct to reproduce. While Paul had progressive and positive attitudes towards sex (especially in 1 Corinthians 7:3-4), he saw how this instinct, independent from God, led to self-enslavement. Sex apart from God degenerates into perversion, as Paul makes plain in Romans 1:26-27.

Sins. Sin begets sins. Paul listed a number of these subsequent sins in Romans 1:29-31. Vice lists were popular in ancient ethics, especially in Stoicism but also in Judaism. Paul used them on a number of occasions. Here are three interesting notes on Paul’s use of vice lists:

1. They’re varied. Paul doesn’t mindlessly adopt existing lists, but adapts them to the situation he’s writing to.
2. They’re social. The majority of the vices listed by Paul degrade community.
3. They’re petty. Many of the vices seem insignificant, yet they’re precisely the ones that harm community.

Now we can examine the relationship between death and sin:

1. Paul speaks of death in a range of meanings similar to flesh. It can be more neutral, or (frequently) negative.
2. Death is the outcome of life lived in the flesh.
3. Death and sin are closely related.
4. Death is not the intended outcome for humans, instead, it’s the result of sin. Sin is the sting of death, the poison which gives death its final effect.
5. Death is a dominating power like sin

Paul takes death seriously, which leads to the question: will death be a release from sin and fleshliness, or the final triumph of those two interrelated forces?

. . .

There was a lot to digest and appreciate in this chapter. Most interesting to me was the loose way Paul described evil spiritual powers. For some reasons, Christians can easily become obsessed with these powers. We like to systematize and vividly imagine all the diverse evil powers. I love how Paul threw the terms in his letters where appropriate—indicating that there are real evil spiritual powers out there—but avoided paying too much attention to them. What mattered for Paul was the power of Sin and Death, and how they are defeated in Christ.

< § 4: Adam

6: the Law >

• The Snakebite Letters: Devilishly Devious Secrets for Subverting Society As Taught in Tempter’s Training School © 1998
• Ignatius Press
• 155

I’ve read C. S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters many times, and often wondered why someone didn’t pick up that genre of writing and run with it. Last week while browsing the shelves at Crux Bookstore, I found this little gem from Kreeft: a philosopher I’ve listened to often. Since Kreeft is a C. S. Lewis admirer and biographer with a wicked sense of humor, it seemed like the perfect fit.

If you’ve read Screwtape, you’ll know what to expect: letters from a senior to a junior devil with advice on how best to tempt his assigned human. Kreeft uses this narrative to explore topics like Catholic School, theology, liturgy, and sex. There are a number of brilliant insights here. For example, the connection between Molech and abortion is startling but, in hindsight, obvious. The connection he made between the pleasure a human feels during sex and the corresponding pain a devil feels was also incisive.

The wit did begin to wear on me after a while, though. The repetitious nature of taking something we would assume is good (such as: church attendance, Christian education, etc.) and showing how it can be twisted toward evil became a bit wearisome. I suppose you can blame Snakebite himself for that: hell is essentially boredom.

The other thing that frustrated me was the lack of character development in the person’s life. In Screwtape, Wormwood’s human went through a number of stages in his Christian growth. Kreeft only seemed interested in his polemic towards sex and Christian education.

That said, if you enjoyed Screwtape, read Snakebite. There are a number of terse lines that will make you cringe when you recognize those tendencies creeping into your own life!

This book shines a spotlight on the Devil’s chief maxim: dim the lights.

It is the part of wisdom never to revisit a wilderness, for the more golden the lily, the more certain that someone has gilded it. To return not only spoils a trip, but tarnishes a memory. It is only in the mind that shining adventure remains forever bright.

Or more cynically, we have the words of the Qohelet:

Do not say, ‘Why were the former days better than these?’
For it is not from wisdom that you ask this.
— Ecclesiastes 7:10, NRSV

• On the Ground: Poems ©2004
• Graywolf Press
• 64 pages

Appreciating poetry is akin to fine wine-tasting or jazz collecting. It can seem like a mystery to the uninitiated, but a consuming passion to the lovers. I’ll be honest: my poetry acumen is woefully inadequate, but I still enjoy reading it. There were times in this book that I knew the words were important—even beautiful—even if I couldn’t explain why.

This is a book that wrestles with the grand topics of life: war, love, and religion. This book deserves to be read out loud. Even when the traditional way of understanding language disintegrates, the cadence feels somehow appropriate.

I’m afraid that’s the best review this poetry rookie can offer for this book. I enjoyed it, even if I’m unsure quite why.

All interpretation is a matter of probabilities and possibilities.