Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Leithart

Home
Evangelical
To See Themselves Sin

To See Themselves Sin

Last updated on: May 13, 2011 at 8:45 am by Peter Leithart

To See Themselves Sin 2011-05-13T08:45:08+06:00 Peter Leithart

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

A student, Leta Sundet, wrote a quite brilliant paper on Romans 7. The entire paper is posted below.

“I do not understand my own actions,” Paul says helplessly. “I do the things I hate. Oh wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?”

Christians have struggled for a long time over how to interpret Romans 7:13-25. Who is Paul speaking for? Is he remembering his pre-conversion plight? Or is he describing himself in the present: a Christian being sanctified too slowly for his taste? Is he expressing his own frustration? Or is he speaking representatively?

In a lecture this term Dr. Leithart argued that Paul is here speaking for old covenant Israel, describing the tension and frustration Israel felt living under the Law. Before Christ came God’s people were in a sense “subjected to futility”: they wanted to obey God, but they couldn’t stop sinning.

This argument was compelling to me, but my one “beef” with it was this: then wouldn’t the OT saints have expressed a similar frustration to Paul’s? Wouldn’t people like Adam and Moses and David and Solomon have raged against their inability to obey God? I kept slamming up against the fact that there seems to be very little of this kind of fretting over sin in the Old Testament.

But I think that to demand this sort of confirmation is to be ignorant of what Paul is doing. Romans 7 is not simply a summary of the Old Testament mindset. It is the climax of a mindset that was developing slowly throughout Israel’s history, but could only reach full expression after the coming of Jesus Christ. Paul’s words in Romans 7:13-25 are the culmination of Israel’s understanding of sin.

I’d like to explore this first by examining this passage and then by looking at some examples of the OT understanding of sin, using some surrounding passages in Romans as a “commentary” on the OT passages. I know there’s no way I can do justice to everything that’s going on theologically in any of these passages, but I want to look at them in particular light, trace a particular strain through them.

Romans 7:13-25

First of all, what exactly does Paul say in this tumultuous little passage?

It very thoughtfully arranges itself into a chiasm:

A. (13) It was sin, producing death in me through what is good in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.

B. (14-15) For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. I do not understand my own actions.

C. (15) For I do not do what I want, but I do that very thing I hate.

D. (16-18) Now if (when?) I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh.

E. (18) For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.

E. (19) For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing.

D. (20) Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

C. (21) So I find it be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand.

B. (22-24) For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am!

A. (24-25) Who will deliver me from this body of death ? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!

The section is bookended by verses 13 and 24-25, both of which talk about death, and propose different solutions to the problem of sin. In verse 13, Paul says that sin produces death in him through “what is good,” that is, through the Law. Surprisingly, he does not characterize this as a tragedy; there is a deeper purpose behind this commandeering of the law by sin: to disclose sin and make it overwhelming sinful. In 24-25 Paul concludes that his body is a body of death and asks who will rescue him from it. This time he moves beyond the law and the law’s ability or inability; Jesus Christ is his answer now. In verses 24-25 what v. 13 predicted is accomplished: sin has produced death in Paul, has made him see his body as dead. The failure Law is in a sense not a failure, because it has made him reach out for Christ.

Verses 14-15 sets up the contrast, the tension, between the spiritual law and the fleshly person sold under sin who does not understand his own actions. In verses 22-24 this contrast and tension have moved inside the person. He is no longer on one side of the war, but is at war with himself; he is his own enemy. In his inner being, Paul says, he delights in the law of God, but in the members of his body another law is work, fighting against his good desires, overpowering the law of his mind with an oppressive law of sin. In a sense, then, Paul does understand his own actions in 22-24: he recognizes that he is a captive to sin. Although he characterizes the tension inside him as a struggle, it is really a slaughter: the law of sin controlling his flesh is so much stronger than his inner being, that it drags his whole self down, makes his entire person fleshly. It is this realization that makes Paul cry out how wretched he is, and name his body a place of death.

In verse 15 he summarizes nicely: I don’t do what I want: I do what I hate. He echoes and develops this in verse 21: when he wants to do good, evil is instantly at his elbow, grinning, asking him what he’s trying to pull.

Verses 16-18 and 20 say almost exactly the same thing. If I do what I don’t want to do,” he says in vs. 16, I agree with the law that it’s good. So I’m not the one acting anymore; it’s sin, which lives in me. Nothing good dwells in my flesh, he concludes. In verse 20 he repeats himself: If I do what I don’t want, it’s no longer me doing it, but sin. He is, somewhat surprisingly, associating himself not with the far stronger tendency towards evil in himself, but with the timid desire for good struggling for breath. He characterizes sin as a parasite that has settled comfortably inside him, but Paul refuses to associate himself with this parasite; he maintains his identity as a lover of good.

The passage centers in verses 18 and 19, both of which repeat the same conclusion in different words: I want to do good, but I can’t. Here is the heart, the crux of the issue, stated starkly. As the passage opens on this hinge, we see a development throughout these verses of Paul’s understanding of sin, a deepening understanding of his wretchedness. He is not merely at odds with God; he is at odds with himself. The solution is nothing so simple as switching sides, because he is a war all by himself. All the law does is aggravate this war, simultaneously increasing his desire for righteousness and his tendency towards sin.

In this passage Paul creates the picture of a man watching himself, a man, helpless and horrified, watching himself sin. “That isn’t me,” he protests, but even as he protests, sin wrestles him down to the ground, begins to gnaw on his mind too.

This passage is tucked inside a lengthy discussion of sin and the law, and the law’s inability to save from sin. Paul’s is insisting to his readers the Law cannot create righteousness in us. The Law, he says, was meant to expose sin, to awaken, to tease and arouse what was lying dormant and festering in the human heart, to make it hot and playful, to get it to rear its head. That was the first step, the first step was making
it show itself, and this the Law did well. Apart from the Law, sin is dead and so wickedness goes undealt with.

It may be too simplistic to say: the purpose of the Law is just to make us realize we can’t keep the Law; it drives us to Jesus. But in a sense ultimately this is what it’s supposed to do. I just don’t think the process is simply that we look at the law, look at ourselves, and then throw up our hands in despair. There is a maturing that the law accomplishes, that it accomplished in Israel. The law accomplishes an intensification of sin.

The story of Israel’s relationship to the Law is the story of the arousal of sin. Israel grows up, and as she grows her sin and her longing for goodness mature simultaneously. Children typically do not have the self-consciousness to see themselves sin, to recognize themselves as sinners, although they can know that they are sinning, be convicted, feel guilt and remorse. As they grow up they begin to see patterns, to see what characterizes their lives. They learn objectivity: they can get outside themselves and watch themselves, analyze their own behavior and see the patterns that emerge. It is only with true maturity that we can see ourselves from the outside, that we can see sin as something foreign dwelling in us. The whole point of the Law was to bring Israel to the place where she could say what Paul says in Rom. 7, where she could watch herself sin and condemn herself.

Vague Sin

In the early days of Genesis, sin tends to be nameless and mysterious. Usually people have to be informed of their sin, convicted by someone outside themselves. When God confronts Cain, Cain smoothly feigns ignorance until God accuses and curses him: only then does he moan that his guilt is too much for him to bear. The world blithely descends into violence and corruption till it is so foul God regrets making it; there is a profound ignorance and ambivalence towards sin. The situation has hardly changed at Babel: God does not even confront them, but puts a stop to their project before they destroy themselves. Sodom’s sins are not named explicitly: God tells Abraham that a outcry has gone up against the city, because their sin is “very grave,” and although we see this sin expressed vividly when the angels visit, it is not “diagnosed” by God or anyone, at least here.

Throughout the stories of the patriarchs sin seems similarly vague and undiagnosed. Ham’s sin against his father, while clearly disgusting, is also quite cryptic. Sarah laughs at the angel’s promise of a son and has her maidservant sleep with Abraham; it is unclear whether or not her actions are faithless. Hagar and Ishmael apparently treat Sarah and Isaac badly, but we are given no specifics of how or why. Esau “despised his birthright,” but his reasons for despising it go unexplained. Laban takes advantage of Jacob and Jacob cheats Laban right back. Rachel steals her father’s idols, defiles them, and a few chapters later, after no apparent change of heart, calls upon the name of the Lord. Judah and Tamar both behave scandalously, but Judah declares Tamar righteous. Sin is a vague, heavy presence, tainting the stories, creating nasty situations. But oftentimes it is next to impossible to go into the stories and pick out the sins or sinners and name them and dig down to the roots of the evil. The characters and their motives are extremely shadowy, the heroes nearly as enigmatic as the villains, and there is an uncomfortable sense that anything goes, anything goes and yet everything has consequences. These stories feel the most foreign to us, I think: it’s as if these people are living by different standards, under a different law. Or, perhaps, as if there is no law? And therefore no sin?

“[S]in indeed was in the world before the law was given,” Paul says in Romans 5:12, “but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam.”

“If it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin,” Paul says later in 7:7-8, “I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, ‘You shall not covet.’ . . . Apart from the law sin lies dead.”

Perhaps this explains why we can see death reigning in widespread violence, in broken families, and yet we cannot move in and say: “Jacob was greedy. Esau was an idolater.” Without the Law these sins have no names, and humanity has a very childlike ignorance of them.

At the same time, I can’t deny that certain characters emerge with fierce consciences, insisting on righteousness, and claiming that they can distinguish it from sin. Certainly God , when he chooses to speak, is not unclear as to what is unacceptable to him, and certainly there are people who listen to him and model their lives after his goodness. Lot tries to dissuade the Sodomites from raping his guests, urging them not to “act so wickedly” by breaking the law of hospitality. (Of course, Lot offers them his daughters instead: morally questionable at best.) Joseph resists Potiphar’s wife, refusing to steal the one thing his master has not given to him. Both Noah and Jacob curse their sons for particular sins, and at least for Jacob, it is the sin of violence that is unforgivable. God has not left the world to lawlessness; even before the Mosaic Law he issues commands that both constrain and provoke man.

Sin Cycles

As soon as the law is given, Israel begins a lifestyle of sin and repentance. The moral and ceremonial laws, and particularly the sacrificial system, are crafted around the cycles of sin expected of Israel. There is no hope, implicit or explicit, that eventually the law will be successful and start to cancel itself out, make itself needless. Rather, the law is designed in expectation of its own failure.

After the Law, Israel’s sin is not so much controlled as regulated; it emerges in patterns so consistent they can almost be predicted. The book of Judges is sickening in its repetition: Israel sins, gets punished, whines for God, follows her judge into righteousness, and devolves as soon as the judge dies. Like a child, Israel says she’s sorry when it hurts, and God is endlessly patient.

Israel’s sins in the wilderness are named and immediately condemned and punished: idolatry, ingratitude, rebellion against God lead to plagues, defeat in battle, wandering and homelessness. Obviously Israel is getting no holier, but the very wealth of her sin is evidence that the Law is at work, provoking sin, damning it when it rears its head.

Ugly as Sin

Although the exilic era prophets like Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Hosea challenge Israel with the sins that have plagued her for generations, the language and particularly the imagery they use to describe this sin gets darker and uglier. Yes, they are doing the same things they’ve always done: but what are they really doing? Israel, the prophets say, is not only disobeying the God of her fathers, the God who took her out of Egypt. What she is really doing is fornicating, committing adultery against her husband.

Why does the imagery become so much more intense? Not because their sins are new and worse, but because now Israel is mature enough, and her sins are mature enough that she can see them for what they are. She is coming out of generations of knowing God. He’s not the stranger that he was to the patriarchs, or even to the Israelites of the exodus. She has had years of learning him in his law, watching him deliver her from her enemies, following men like David and Solomon into deeper communion with him, living with him at her center, at her heart. She’s
lost him from time to time and she knows how miserable that is and she remembers why he left. She can’t feign ignorance about what it is he wants from her, and she knows exactly what it is he can’t stand.

God calls her a whore, and she’s too old now to put on an innocent face and ask, “What’s that?”

This is what the Law was teaching Israel, was driving Israel towards. She had to mature to see her sin in its fullness, and as she matured her sin had to mature too, had to stand up tall and flaunt the numerous facets of its ugliness.

When Jesus came, Israel was at the height of her maturity and so her sin was full-grown.

In All its Glory

When she kills Jesus Israel displays her sin in all its glory. Her God comes to her and, swiftly, smoothly, like she has been practicing for it all her life, she rejects him. Like Cain, like Saul, she envies and kills the man God loves. When Pilate, Lot-like, tries to reason with her, she plays a new Sodom and breaks every law of hospitality, humiliating this guest to the world. Like the old Israel dancing on the edge of exile, the new Israel shamelessly makes love to Rome in her husband’s face.

Of course, she has been practicing for it all her life.

Every sin Israel has ever committed blossoms full in this last; every wrong she has ever done against her God is beautifully embodied here. The Law had done its work well; sin is wide awake and all grown up.

“Now the law came in to increase the trespass,” Paul says in Romans 5:18, “but where sin increased, grace increased all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom. 5:18-21)

“For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh could not do,” he says later in chapter 8, “By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh.” (Romans 8:3)

N. T. Wright says that sin “burned [itself] out in killing the son of God.” (Wright, Evil and the Justice of God , 102)

Luke tells us that when Jesus died, “all the crowds that had assembled for this spectacle, when they saw what had taken place returned home beating the breasts.” (Luke 23:48)

When Peter preaches to the Jews at Pentecost, telling them in no uncertain terms that “God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified,” everyone is “cut to the heart” and asks what they must do (Acts 2). Peter cheerfully tells them all to repent and be baptized in Jesus’ name, and 3000 people who killed Jesus follow his advice.

In his sermon in Solomon’s portico Peter boldly informs his listeners that they “killed the Author of Life, whom God raised from the dead” (Acts 3). But instead of issuing a general condemnation and proclaiming the dawn of God’s righteous vengeance, Peter urges the Jews to repent, so that their sins “may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord.” At least 2000 more men believe him and join the church.

You would think that crucifying God would be the last straw, the test it is not okay to fail. But neither the apostles nor the first converts seem to think of it this way. No one agonizes over how God can possibly forgive them for killing his Son. The knowledge that they have killed God’s Son makes them confidently seek forgiveness. Their murder of Jesus does not condemn them; it acts as a catalyst: it breaks their hearts and makes them new men.

“Father, forgive them, they don’t know what they’re doing,” Jesus cries from the cross, and it seems that God hears him. Is Paul echoing Christ when he says, “I don’t understand my own actions”?

Paul the Microcosm

Of course, persecution of Christ’s followers immediately begins too, headed up by Paul himself. Some of the Jews refuse to be convicted of their sin and instead try to shut up everyone who is talking about it. Saul and the people he represents are as blind as Paul becomes on the road to Damascus.

It is, I think, Paul’s blindness that breaks him. God strikes him blind to manifest outwardly the state of his soul. Later he describes himself as a “Hebrew of Hebrews,” so perfectly Jewish he has reason to boast in it, blameless when it comes to the righteousness of the law (Philip. 3). Paul is in microcosm the pinnacle of Judaism, Judaism all grown up, a mature Jew.

But in 1 Tim. 1:13-16 Paul names himself differently: he is the worst of sinners, he is sin mature and grown up, saved simply so that Jesus Christ could display his abundant graciousness. Paul goes on to say in Philippians that he considers his righteousness according to the law rubbish; he counts it all as loss. For Jesus’ sake, Paul says, he has “suffered the loss of all things.”

Paul does not dismiss his preconversion days as insincere, as hypocritical. He does not say that he thought he was obeying the law but was actually a filthy sinner, disobeying the law and lying to himself. His zeal and his sin grew up side by side; he is simultaneously the best of Jews and worst of sinners.

When he meets Jesus, when Jesus tells him that he has been persecuting his God, Paul goes blind. Here is Israel’s plight embodied: all her zeal for the law has left her blind with sin, so blind she can’t recognize her God when he comes. Paul’s salvation is his blindness; his salvation is learning that he is blind. What effects Paul’s transformation is learning the true nature of what he is doing, seeing his blindness laid out before him like a view: “You’re persecuting me, ” Jesus tells him.

It is only, I think, when we can see ourselves sin, when we can get out of ourselves and watch ourselves rebel against God, watch our lives play out in these sick patterns, watch in horror as once again we devolve into idolatry, that we have seen our sin for what it is. I think, paradoxically, that it is only when we can gasp, “But this isn’t me! This isn’t what I want!” that we have actually owned our sin, and owned it in such a way that we are ready to drive it out. Thus Paul’s wretched cry in chapter 7 is the triumph of the Law, what the Law was always meant to drive her to say. It is Israel’s saving cry.

In 7:25 when Paul calls his body a body of death, he is echoing 4:19: Abraham’s body was as good as dead. Paul is equating himself with Abraham: he is a dead body too. Like Abraham, his only hope is a God who raises the dead, a God for whom death is not a failure, but in fact the substance of all hope, the place where things finally start to get exciting.

I can anticipate an objection to this, because it was my objection: it always comforted me to think that Paul was describing the typical post-conversion life. Romans 7 describes how I feel now ; it captures me and my daily struggles like nothing else. But now it sounds like we’re supposed to have moved past this, that we should be footloose and fancy-free in the Spirit of life.

By no means! Paul is shouting the death cry of Israel in the face of her sin, but also the death cry that each individual Christian needs to shout for each individual sin. We repeat Israel’s history in microcosm with every besetting sin we deal with. The sin lies dormant and potential in us; it has to be awakened, aroused, incited, let out to play. It has to be displayed in all its glory, it has to escalate until it gets its teeth into the Son of God. Only then do we see it, see ourselves doing it, gaze at it in horror, slack-jawed beneath the c
ross and whisper, “O wretched man that I am.” It is only then, only when we have killed Jesus with that specific sin, when we have died with Jesus to that specific sin, that God can begin to untie the knots that bind us to it. It is then that the Spirit can get to work.

Bible - NT - Romans

Previous Post

May 13, 2011

Real Men and Austen

Next Post

May 13, 2011 Angel

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 Corinthians 1-2 Samuel 1968 Abelard Abortion Abraham Acedia AD 70 Adam Smith Addiction Advent Advertising Aeneid Aesthetics Africa African Christianity African Church African religion Age Aging Agriculture Airline industry Alabama Alasdair MacIntyre Albania Alcohol Allegory Alms Alternative Medicine Ambrose America American Christianity American culture American economy American Evangelicals American Foreign Policy American history American Literature American Military American Politics American Religion American Revolution Anagogy Analytic Philosophy Anamnesis Ancient Egypt Ancient Greece Ancient history Ancient Near East Ancient Religion Angels Anglican Church Anglicanism Animism Anointing of the Sick Anselm Anthropology Anthropomorphism anti-Catholicism Antiquities Antonio Lopez apocalypse Apocalyptic Apocalyptic language Apostles Creed Aquinas Archeology Architecture Arianism Aristotle Ark of the Covenant Art Art History Ascension Aseity Assurance Athanasius Atheism Athens atonement Attention Attributes Augustine Austin Farrer Authority autonomy Avant-garde Awe Bach Ballooning Balzac Banking Bankruptcy Baptism Baptists Baseball Basketball Bavinck Beatitudes Beauty Behavioral Economics Being Benedict XVI Benjamin Benjamin Franklin Beowulf Berkeley Bernie Sanders Bertrand Russell Bestiary Bible Bible - criticism Bible - NT Bible - NT - 1 Corinthians Bible - NT - 1 John Bible - NT - 1 Peter Bible - NT - 2 Corinthians Bible - NT - 2 Peter Bible - NT - Acts Bible - NT - Colossians Bible - NT - Ephesians Bible - NT - Galatians Bible - NT - Gospels Bible - NT - Hebrews Bible - NT - James Bible - NT - John Bible - NT - Jude Bible - NT - Luke Bible - NT - Mark Bible - NT - Matthew Bible - NT - Paul Bible - NT - Philippians Bible - NT - Revelation Bible - NT - Romans Bible - NT - Thessalonians Bible - NT - Timothy Bible - OT Bible - OT - Amos Bible - OT - Chronicles Bible - OT - Daniel Bible - OT - Deuteronomy Bible - OT - Ecclesiastes Bible - OT - Esther Bible - OT - Exodus Bible - OT - Ezekiel Bible - OT - Ezra-Nehemiah Bible - OT - Genesis Bible - OT - Habakkuk Bible - OT - Hosea Bible - OT - Isaiah Bible - OT - Jeremiah Bible - OT - Job Bible - OT - Joel Bible - OT - Jonah Bible - OT - Joshua Bible - OT - Judges Bible - OT - Kings Bible - OT - Lamentations Bible - OT - Leviticus Bible - OT - Malachi BIble - OT - Micah Bible - OT - Nehemiah Bible - OT - Numbers Bible - OT - Pentateuch Bible - OT - Proverbs Bible - OT - Psalms Bible - OT - Ruth Bible - OT - Samuel Bible - OT - Song of Songs Bible - OT - Torah Bible - OT - Zechariah Bible - OT - Zephaniah Biblical Law Biblicism Billy Graham biography Biology Biololgy Biotechnology Blasphemy Blindness Blog news Blogging Blogroll Bloomsbury Group Bob Dylan Body Body symbolism Boethius Boko Haram Bonhoeffer Book of Common Prayer Books Botany Boundary Brexit Britain British History British Politics Bruce Springsteen Buddhism Bureaucracy Burial Business C. S. Lewis C. S. Peirce Calendars Caliphate Calvin calvinism Camille Paglia Canon Capitalism Cappadocians Carl Schmitt Catholic Social Teaching Catholicism Catholicity Causation cemeteries Cervantes Charism Charismata Charity Charles Dickens Charles Hodge Charles Simeon Charles Taylor Charles Williams Chaucer Chermistry Chess Chesterton Chiasm children China Chinese Exclusion Act Chivalry Chopin Chretien de Troyes Christendom Christian Democracy Christian reconstruction Christianity in Britain Christianization Christmas Christology Chronology Church church and state Church architecture Church Calendar Church history Church of England Church Year Cicero Circumcision Cities City of God Civil Religion Civil Society Civil War Civility Classical Theism Classics Climate Change Clothing Coleridge Colloquy of Marburg Colonialism Color Comedy Comenius Commodity Communio Communism Community Comparative religions Computer Science Confederacy Confessionalization Conflict Congregations consciousness Consecration Conservatism Constantine Constitution consumerism Contra Faustum Conversion Coriolanus Cormac McCarthy Cosmology Cosmopolitanism Council of Trent Counter-culture Counter-insurgency Courage Courtly love Covenants Crafts Craftsmanship Cranach Creation Creativity Creator-creature Credit Crime Crime and Punishment Crisis Critical scholarship Criticism Cross Cubism Cultural theory Culture Culture War Dance Daniel Dennett Dante Darwin Dave Eggers David David Foster Wallace David Hume David Jones Deadly sins Death Debt Dechristianization Decolonization Deconstruction Defoe Deja vu Democracy Denis de Rougemont Denominationalism Derrida Descartes Developmental psychology Devils Diocletian Discipleship Disenchantment Disgust Diversion Diversity Divine energies Divine Impassibility Divine Simplicity Divine Warrior Doctrine dogma Dominion Donald Trump Dostoevsky Douglas Campbell Douglas Farrow Dreams Dualism Durkheim Dystopia E.M. Forster Early Christianity Early Modern Europe Easter Eastern Europe Eastern Orthodoxy Ecclesiology Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Eden Edgar Allan Poe Edmund Spenser Education Egypt Election Elites Emergence Emma Emotion Empire England English History English Reformation Enlightenment Entertainment Entrepreneur environmentalism Envy Epic Epiphany Episcopals Epistemology Epistles Equality Erasmus Ernst Kantorowicz Eros Eschatology Eternity Ethics Eucharist Europe Evangelicalism Evangelicals and Catholics Together Events Evil Evolution Exile Face Fairie Queene Fairy Tales Faith family Family and Marriage Fantasy Farming Fashion Fasting Fatherhood Fear Femininity Feminism Fertility Fetishization Feud Feudalism Feuerbach Fiction Figs Film Finance Finland Fire Flag Flags Flannery O'Connor Flood myths Folly Food football Foreign Affairs Foreign Policy Foreknowledge Forgiveness Foucault Fracking France Francois Mauriac Franz Rosenzweig free will Freedom Freedom of God French Revolution Freud Funerals Future G. K. Chesterton Gambling Gaming Gay Marriage Gender gender identity Genealogy Geography George Berkeley George Eliot George Herbert; Poetry George Romanes Gerald Manley Hopkins Germany Gethsemane Gift Gifts Giorgio Agamben Global Christianity Global economics Globalism Globalization Glorious Revolution Gnosticism God's sovereignty Gods Goethe Golf Good Friday Gospel Gospels Gothic Gothic architecture Grace Grammar Gramsci Gratitude Greek Literature Greek Philosophy Greek Religion Greek Science Gregory of Nyssa Guillermo del Toro H. Richard Niebuhr Haiku hair Hamann Hamlet Handicap Handles Hands Hans Urs von Balthasar Happiness Harold Bloom Harper Lee Harvest healing Heaven Heavenly treasure Heavenly treasure Hebrew Bible Hebrew language Hegel Heidegger Hell Hellenism; Judaism; Revelation Henri de Lubac heresy Herman Dooyeweerd Hermeneutics Herod Heroic Heroism Hesiod Hidegard of Bingen Hierarchy Hieronymus Bosch Historicism Historiography History History - Early Modern History - Middle Ages Hoaxes Hobbes Holiness Holy Saturday Holy Spirit Home Homeless Homer Homosexuality Honor hope Horror Hospitality Housing Hugh of St. Victor Human Rights Humanism Humor hylomorphism Hymns Hypocrisy. Iago Iconoclasm Identity Ideology Idleness Idolatry Iliad Images Imagination Immigrant churches Immigrant Religion Immigration Imperialism Improvization Imputation Incarnation Incest India Individualism Indonesia Inequality Inerrancy Infant Baptism Infant mortality Infanticide Ingratitude Innovation Inspiration Institutions Insult Intellectual History Intellectuals Intelligent Design International Politics Internet Intimacy IQ Iran Iran-Iraq War Iraq Ireland Irony Islam Islamic State Islamism Ismail Kadare Israel Ivan Illich J. Gresham Machen J.N. Figgis Jacob Jacques Lacan James Bond James Jordan James Joyce James KA Smith James Wood Jane Austen Jane Jacobs Jealousy Jed Perl Jeff Koons Jeroboam Jesus Jewish War 66-70 AD Jihad Johann Georg Hamann Johannine Epistles John Ashbery John Behr John Bunyan John Calvin John Donne John Frame John Howard Yoder John Knox John Milbank John Milton John Owen John Rawls John Ruskin John Stuart Mill John the Baptist John Webster John Wesley John Williamson Nevin Jonathan Edwards Jorge Luis Borges Joseph Conrad Joseph Ratzinger Journalism Joy Judaism Judaize Judgment Judith Butler Jurgen Moltmann Justice Justification Kalevala Kant Karl Barth Karl Marx Karl Polanyi Karl Rahner Kazakhstan Kazuo Ishiguro Kenneth Lonergan Kierkegaard King Lear Kingdom of God Kitsch Knighthood Knowledge Korea Labor movement Lactantius Lamech Lament Landscape Language Latin America Laughter Law Law and Punishment Leftism Lent Les Murray Levi-Strauss Levites Leviticus Liber Mundi Liberal arts Liberal Theology Liberalism Light Lighthouse Linguistics LIstening Literacy Literary structure Literature Liturgics Liturgy Locke Logic Love Luther Lutheran Lutheranism Lying Lytton Strachey Macbeth Machiavelli Machines Madness Mainline Manhattan Manicheanism Manners Manufacturing Manuscripts Mao Zedong Maps Marcion Marilynne Robinson Marketing Marriage Martha Nussbaum Martin Bucer Martin Chemnitz Martyrdom Marx Marxism Mary Mary Douglas masculinity Mass Materialism Mathematics Maundy Thursday Max Weber Media Mediation Medication Medicine Medieval Church Medieval exegesis Medieval Literature Medieval theology Medieval Thought Medievalism Memory Merchant of Venice Mesopotamian Religion Messianic Metaphor Metaphysics Methodist Mexican-American War Michel de Montaigne Michel Faber Middle Ages Middle East Midwifery Mikhail Bulgakov Military Millennium Mind Miracles Miscellaneous Mission missionaries Mixed constitution Modern self modernism Modernity monasticism Monotheism Monroe Doctrine Monsters Montaigne's Essays Moral philosophy Mormonism Moses Mother Teresa Motherhood Motive Mount of Olives Movies Multiculturalism Murder Music Musicals Mutability Mutability Mystery Mysticism myth N. T. Wright Narrative Nation-State Nationalism Natural Law Natural-Supernatural Nature Nature and culture Nature and Grace Nazi Nazirite Necrophilia Nero Nestorianism Neuroscience Nevin Lectures New Atheism New Testament New York City Newbigin News NGOs Nibelungenlied Nicholas of Cusa Nicholas of Lyra Nietzsche Nigeria Nihilism Nobel Prize Nobility Nominalism Norbert Elias Norman MacCaig nostalgia Novels Numerology Obama Objectivity and subjectivity Occasionalism Odysseus Oil Old Testament Oliver O'Donovan Ontology Origen original sin Orthodoxy Othello Owen Barfield Pacifism Pactum salutis Paedocommunion Paganism Pain Painting Paleoconservatism Palm Sunday Pannenberg Parenting Pascal Passions Passivity Pastoral Care Pastoral theology Patrick Modiano Patristics Patronage Paul Peace of God Peace of Westphalia Penal substitution Pentecost Pentecostalism Perichoresis Pericles Persecution Person Peter Peter Enns Petrarch Philip K. Dick Philip Melanchthon Philosophy Philosophy of Action Philosophy of History Philosophy of language Philosophy of science Phone booth Photography Physics Pictures Pierre Bourdieu Place Planned Parenthood Plants plato Play Plot Plotinus Pluralism Pneumatology Poetics poetry Poetry & Stories Poland police Political Philosophy Political theology Political Theory Politics Pop Culture Pope Francis Popular Culture Populism Pornography Porphyry Post-Colonial Theory Post-Structuralism Postmodernism Postmodernity Potential Poverty Power Practice Pragmatism Prayer Preaching Predestination Prediction Prehistory Premillennialism Presbyterian Priesthood Prince Charles Prison Reform privacy Private Prodigal Son Progress Progressivism Property Prophecy Prophet Propitiation Prosperity gospel Prostitution Protectionism Protestantism Providence Prudentius psalms Pseudo-Dionysus Psychological Warfare Psychology Public intellectual Public Life Public Philosophy Public Theology Publishing Punk Rock Pure nature Puritanism Purity Pushkin Putin Pythagoreanism R.J. Rushdoony Race Racism Radical Orthodoxy Rape Rationality Reactionary reading Realism Reason Red State Blue State Reformation Reformational Catholicism Reformational Philosophy Reformed theology refugees reinhold niebuhr Relationality Relativism Relics Religion Religion and science Religions Religious Freedom Religious Liberty Religious Right Renaissance Rene Girard Republican Party Resurrection Resurrection. Revelation Revelations Revenge Revivalism Revolution rhetoric Richard Flannagan Richard II Richard III Richard Wagner Richard Wilbur Righteousness Ritual Robert Frost Robert Herrick Robert Jenson Robert Mugabe Robert Spaemann Robinson Crusoe Rock n' Roll Rod Dreher Rodin Roman Catholicism Roman Empire Roman Religion Romance Romanticism Rome Rootedness Rosenstock-Huessy Rousseau Rowan Williams Rural America Russia Russian literature Russian Orthodoxy Rusty Reno Rwanda S. Y. Agnon Sabbath Sacrament Sacramental theology Sacraments Sacred Sacred Space Sacrifice saints Salt Sam Harris Same-sex marriage Sanctuary Satan Satire Saudi Arabia Scapegoat Scarcity Schism Schleiermacher Scholarship Science Science and Theology Science Fiction Scopes trial Scotland Scott Adams Scott Cairns Scottish Reformation Scotus Scripture and tradition sculpture Sea Second temple Secularism Secularization Self-Help Self-trust Semiotics Semper reformanda separation of church and state Sermon on the Mount Sex Sex Trafficking Sexual abuse Sexual Politics Sexual Revolution Sexuality Shakespeare Shame Culture Shema Sherlock Shopping Silence Simone Weil Simplicity Simpsons Sin Sincerity Sixties Skepticism Slavery Slavoj Zizek Sleep Sloth Social capital Social change Social Imaginary Social Science Socialism Socialization Sociology Sociology of Knowledge Sociology of Religion Sola scriptura Sonnets Sophocles Soteriology Soviet Union Space Spain Speculation Spinoza Spirit Sport Sports Star Trek State State-formation Stephen Masty Steven Bannon Strangers Structuralism structure Subject-object Substitution Suburbs Suffering Suicide Super-Rich Superheroes Supersessionism Supplication Supreme Court Surveillance Symbol Synagogue Taberancle Tabernacle Tax Taxes Tears Technology Teens Teleology Television Temple Ten Commandments Terence Terrence Malick Terrorism Thanksgiving The South The West Theodore Roosevelt Theogony Theological Education Theological Language Theology Theology - Anthropology Theology - Christology Theology - Covenant Theology - Creation Theology - Ecclesiology Theology - Eschatology Theology - Liturgical Theology - Pneumatology Theology - Soteriology Theology - Trinity Theology proper Theopolis Theopolis Institute Theosis Theresa May Thomas A. Clark Thomas Aquinas Thomas Carlyle Thomas Mann Threshing Thucydides Time Tocqueville Tolerance Toleration Tolstoy Tom Wolfe Tools Torah Torture Toscanini Totalitarianism Trade Tradition Tragedy Transhumanism Translation Transubstantiation Travel Trees Trinitarianism Trinity Trinity House Tristan Troilus and Creysede Trump Trump Truth Turkey Twelfth Night Two Kingdoms Typology Ukraine Ulysses Uncanny Uncategorized Uniform Union with Christ United States Unity University Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Value Vatican II Vengeance Vico Victorian Age Victorian Literature Vienna Violence Virgil Virgin Birth Virginia Woolf Vladimir Nabokov Vladimir Solovyev Vladimir Solovyov W.H. Auden Walls Walt Disney Walt Whitman Walter Benjamin Walter Lippmann War Wars of Religion Washington DC Wealth Weddings Will William Carlos Williams William Gilpin William Golding Wine Wisdom wonder Word of God Wordsworth Work Works World Council of Churches World History World War I World War II Worldview Worship Wrath Writing Youth Youth Ministry Yuja Wang Yves Congar Zimbabwe Zwingli Zygmunt Bauman

Select a Month January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did Ezra famously do upon learning about the people's intermarriage?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Fled to Babylon Tore his robe and pulled hair Broke the tablets Fasted for 40 days