“Wasn’t Jesus just a failed apocalyptic preacher?”

I was speaking at an event on the University of South Carolina campus when a student read the question another student had submitted. While I imagine some might bristle at questions like that, it actually filled me with hope. A student from a generation rapidly finding the American Church devoid of anything worth sticking around for asked what essentially is the million-dollar question.

It was the question that prompted Paul to write many of his most powerful words. A question with an answer that has served as the fulcrum of much of humanity’s search for meaning for the last 2,000 years. Put simply, and perhaps less antagonistically than my Q&A attendees would, “What makes Jesus so special, and why should it matter to me?”

It should not be lost on us that each year our churches see attendance increase sharply on Easter. Pew Research reports that Google searches for “Church” spike nearly 25% during the week of Easter, only to usually be followed by returns to normal attendance just one week later. While this can largely be attributed to the rampant nominalism we see spreading through western Christianity, I think we as pastors need to own a share of this.

Those of us who stand on a stage or behind a pulpit have not forced the people listening to us on Resurrection Sunday to reckon with the reality of the resurrection, and what it means for them. We have instead settled for a quaint reminder that the story of humanity will one day have a nice ending, but ultimately, the Gospel might not have anything else for its hearers that day.

We then proceed to our egg hunts and family dinners, having not been made to look at the Gospel as it truly is: an earth-shattering story and moment in time we yearly pause to contemplate and celebrate. This moment 2,000 years ago, gives me the answer to the question that wonderful, questioning student asked.

The resurrection of Jesus causes it all to make sense and makes Jesus special and unique in our world of wanderers and wonderers.

The Resurrection

Tim Keller has said, “If Jesus rose from the dead, then you have to accept all that he said; if he didn’t rise from the dead, then why worry about any of what he said? The issue on which everything hangs is not whether or not you like his teaching but whether or not he rose from the dead.” Keller’s assessment stands true, but it seems that somewhere along the way, pastors and communicators of the resurrection message have lost the ability to convey to their hearers the significance of this event, or perhaps we are just complicating it too much.

The Significance of the Resurrection

At the heart of any explanation of Jesus should be an explanation of the significance of the resurrection and why one absolutely must decide what they think of it. On the one hand, many Christians will likely jump out of their seat, agreeing to the significance of the resurrection, yet might not quite understand what it accomplished in the first place. On the other hand, the non-Christian might scoff at a quote like Keller’s, which might seem to them to reek with arrogance at the notion that it is in the death and ensuing events of one man that all our answers in life might be found.

It is to both of these crowds that the Gospel speaks, though, and there is no shortage of answers and encouragement to satisfy the most earnest believer wanting to understand the crux of their belief to the most antagonistic skeptic who simply cannot get away from the noise surrounding this resurrection of Jesus that seems to be talked about so much every spring.

The Historical Reliability of the Resurrection

First, we must attempt to tackle the historical reliability of the resurrection account. While the average churchgoer has little to no need of functional knowledge of manuscript analysis or Greek vocabulary, they might need to be able to answer the question of why we should even believe Christ was resurrected in the first place and why it deserves any more attention than the fairytales we read to our children at night. Even if the question only comes from their own minds late at night lying in bed, the question is sure to come up at some point.

To bring us back to that room in South Carolina, why should anyone believe that there is anything that sets Jesus apart from the hundreds of other apocalyptic messiahs who wandered through Israel trying to woo crowds? Was Jesus just more charismatic than them?

Navigating the Topic: the “Minimal Facts” Approach

One of the simplest approaches to navigate the topic of the historicity of the resurrection is what is often called the “Minimal Facts” argument that Dr. Gary Habermas has popularized. In its various forms, it proposes that from simple and mostly agreed upon facts from history, we can deduce that it is likely that Jesus rose from the dead, or at least that his resurrection is a fathomable conclusion to come to, given what we know. Some of these facts are:

• It is agreed upon that Jesus of Nazareth did, in fact, exist. While there is a school of thought that becomes popular with pop-skeptics from time to time (that Jesus did not actually exist), the most antagonistic of non-Christian scholars scoff at this notion themselves. We can be as sure as anything else we know from the annals of history that Jesus did, in fact, exist.

• John Dominic Crossan, a hugely influential non-Christian scholar, wrote in his book, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.” Crossan suggests here that the crucifixion of Jesus is an inarguable fact of history. It is actually one of the most attested to events in ancient history, as many non-Christian sources in antiquity have addressed, as well as being included in all four Gospel accounts.

• Jesus’ empty tomb is a logical conclusion, given the surrounding events. It was Jewish custom to bury the dead within a specific timeframe, and the Gospels give a record of Joseph of Arimathea offering his family tomb to house the body of Jesus. It would have followed that in the event of claims of resurrection from Jesus’ followers, that his body would have been produced.

• Jesus was said to have appeared before hundreds of witnesses in his resurrected form. Perhaps most interestingly, his first appearance was to women in the garden, and he utilized their testimony to gather his remaining disciples. In 1st century Jewish culture, the testimony of women was of little use. If this story had been fabricated, this detail would not have been included as emphasizing the women’s experience in the garden was no way to convince a male-dominated world that the Gospel took place in. Along with these women, the other apostles testified to seeing Jesus: Luke records Paul’s conversion experience on the road to Damascus after seeing the resurrected Jesus. Paul later wrote in his letter to the Corinthians that around 500 people had seen Jesus in his resurrected form. After these, many people witnessed something reported by various sources to be a resurrected Jesus. Many of these people radically changed the direction of their lives to then go and be witnesses to this resurrected Jesus all over the known world. The legends abound of Thomas in India, Peter upside down on a cross in Rome, and John being thrown in a vat of boiling oil. The reliability of these stories varies, but the reason for their believability is centered on the notion that what they witnessed in the events of Easter shook the foundation of their lives and caused them to absolutely change the entire world.

These historical claims are not without objection, and some apologists and theologians have addressed them in greater depth elsewhere. The point though is that the resurrection and what is staked to it in Christian thought is not a fabled notion; it is something that can be believed in confidently without fear of being exposed as a wishful thinking fraud.

Keller’s suggestion then that all that really matters is the resurrection becomes more important to investigate for the nominal churchgoer who stumbles into a seat for their annual visit to church. Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 15 that without the resurrection we are essentially wasting our time as Christians becomes more provocative for the skeptic who might tune into a church Livestream out of boredom on Easter Sunday.

Why Does the Resurrection Matter?

The question of historicity having been addressed, the next out of these hearers mouth’s might be something along the lines of, “Why does it matter anyway?”

N.T. Wright, when addressing the necessity of a true understanding of the Gospel and therefore the resurrection with it, said, “We will never understand the gospel unless we see it as a great narrative, the narrative which finds its way through the dark night of the soul in the long years of Israel’s desolation and then bursts out with new life on Easter morning.”

This gospel that many of us will preach on Easter morning should lead its hearers to an understanding of the world around them that does not simply stop at the notion of going to heaven but instead draws them to a deeper understanding of God’s plan for them now, which is to bring about a new creation.

God’s desire in the Gospel narrative is to redeem the whole of us, not simply the spiritual parts of us, and this is reflective of what he will do at the end of days when he fashions a new heaven and new earth. It is in the resurrection of Jesus that we see this plan take shape, and it is this first resurrection that gives us the guarantee that what God has desired, he has also designed. It also validates in the person of Jesus the things he did during his ministry here and the things he said.

The man lowered through the roof by his friends (who was healed after receiving forgiveness of sins) can trust his sins truly are forgiven because of the resurrection. The hearers of Jesus’ momentous sermon on the mount can trust that Jesus’ radical teachings (that we should love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us) are worthy of following because he rose from the dead victoriously over our sin.

The Whole Purpose of Jesus Becoming Man

The validation of Jesus by God in the resurrection stands as both the period and exclamation point of history that we must build our city on a hill upon. C.S. Lewis remarked that the whole purpose of Jesus becoming man was, “To turn creatures into sons: not simply to produce better men of the old kind but to produce a new kind of man. It is not like teaching a horse to jump better and better but like turning a horse into a winged creature.”

This new kind of human would not be possible by simply following the moral teachings of a rabbi on a hillside or receiving the forgiveness of sins from a faith healer in Galilee. Instead, it is accomplished by submitting to the lordship of the God of all gods who now walks in a new kind of victory over death that the world had never laid eyes on before.

No, Jesus was not simply a failed apocalyptic preacher. He was not simply a healer, or a teacher, or a prophet. He was God who took on flesh to dwell among us, who had that flesh ripped apart by the very sin and brokenness he came to redeem. Who was crushed and bruised by the world and humanity he created. And he rose from the dead. All this because while you and I cannot bear the burden of simply our own sin without being crushed under its weight, the sin of all humanity cannot keep the Son of God dead.

Now there is a redeemer, a savior, a Lord sitting at the right hand of God the father with flesh and bone like you and me, advocating on our behalf, and we can trust that advocacy is effective.

All because Jesus rose from the dead.

I once was having a discussion with a Jehovah’s Witness missionary, when he uttered these words:

“Jesus never actually said that he was God.”

Despite the fact that, over the years, I have taught so many people that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus is God; his words shook me.

If my meeting with the Jehovah’s Witness missionary had been in person, as it would have been before the Covid pandemic, he would likely have seen me flinch slightly at the statement. As I searched my mind for an adequate response, I found myself swimming in too many. I was not sure if any of them might be able to serve as the “silver bullet” people in my position are sometimes tempted to look for when dealing with apologetic issues. I referenced a few scriptures that I knew made a strong case for Jesus’ divinity, but even as I said them, I knew that in the New World Translation, my new friend likely had in front of him, those verses had been changed.

He deflected my rebuttals with a quick change in the direction of the conversation, likely a well-trained reaction that he had been taught to do in the event someone responds the way I did. As we continued talking, and I looked for any opportunity to ask questions that might lead to the truth of the Gospel, I wondered how this conversation might have gone for a Christian that was not well versed in how to have these types of conversations. How would this conversation have gone for most evangelical pastors who are gifted preachers, teachers, and counselors but who might struggle when asked the difficult questions of our faith?

When it gets down to the crux of the matter, can most pastors explain and defend the foundation of our faith, the triune nature of God? It might be easy to pretend that this is not a necessary facet of Christian leadership, but the simplest conversation with a Jehovah’s Witness, or anyone questioning their faith, will bring about an urgent need to be able to explain this mysterious and controversial teaching that the Church has been confessing almost since the time of Christ.

What is the Trinity?

Most often in evangelical circles you will find the Trinity explained as God being “one in essence, three in persons.” This simple explanation comes from hundreds of years of study going back to the creeds formulated at councils like the one that took place in 325 A.D. in Nicaea. Even before this, we have evidence that Jesus was looked at as divine by some of the earliest leaders of the Church. In 2 Clement (c. 140-160 A.D.) we read, “Brethren, we ought so to think of Jesus Christ as of God, as of the judge of living and dead. And we ought not to belittle our salvation; for when we belittle him, we expect also to receive little.” The words of scripture, as well as the teachings of the early Church fathers led Bishops in 325 A.D. to pen the words of the Nicene Creed which affirm,

“I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made.”

Later in the same creed, these bishops would include the third person of the Trinity when they proclaimed,

“I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.”

The center of the argument rested in the belief that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were “homoousios,” or of the same essence or substance as one another. Yet while they were of the same essence, they were clearly individual in personage. Through these formulations, the Church began to teach that the triune nature of God was not a contradiction, as some would say, but instead a mystery as the two claims of essence and personage do not contradict each other but instead point to the infinite and unexplainable nature of God in His triune form.

New and Old Heresies

This doctrine, and the teaching that followed it, was certainly not popular with everyone, and at times was popular with few Christians at all. Many instead found it easier to believe doctrine that the Church today recognizes as heresy. The most prevalent of these heretical teachings was that of a bishop named Arius. In a letter to Eusebius, Arius wrote, “Before he was begotten or created or ordained or established, he did not exist.” Passages like Proverbs 8:22-31 led Arius and many others to teach that Christ was not preexistent, radically dissenting against the doctrine that would come as a reaction to this teaching at Nicaea.

In response to this growing heresy, a bishop named Athanasius rose as a now towering figure in Church history. A contemporary of Arius, Athanasius spent much of his life warring against Arianism, ultimately becoming the most important voice in making the argument for Christ’s divinity and trinitarianism as a whole. The Athanasian creed, which was named after Athanasius but was likely not written by him, serves as a dividing line between orthodox Christian belief in regard to the person of God in His triune form, and all other ways of thinking:

“And the Catholic Faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.”

Despite the fervor that theologians like Athanasius and many others have taken in contending against Arianism, it and so many other Christological heresies have survived into the 21st century and have taken root in many pseudo-Christian cults and groups. Most notably in American culture are the Jehovah’s Witnesses who, as my new friend explained to me, believe what John 1:1 says in their New World Translation, “…and the Word was a god.” This war over who Christ is, and by association the entirety of who God is, has been waging since shortly after the words of the New Testament were written and have continued thousands of years later despite the best efforts of men and women who have devoted their lives to the truth that God is one in substance and three in persons.

It is with this in mind that every minister of the Gospel should be able to explain what the Church has historically taught in regard to the nature of God, and defend it to those who would question it because to question the true essence of God is to question God himself.

Defense

“The Church has historically taught that God is ‘One in essence, and three in persons.’ What do you think of that?”

My Jehovah’s Witness friend was silent for a moment before he responded by saying, “The Bible never uses the word “Trinity” and never mentions the substance of what God is. Those statements come from Greek philosophy.”

In beginning to respond to his claim that the Bible never discusses the essence of substance of God, I first do need to affirm that the Bible never uses the term “trinity.” However, this does not indicate that the concept is “unbiblical” as that would be argument from silence. Instead, I and anyone looking to keep these types of conversations grounded in truth, must seek to affirm the Trinity biblically and from an appeal to mystery.

Biblical Defense

An explanation and defense of the Trinity should not exclusively rely on logic and philosophy but instead have the testimony of God’s Word as its cornerstone because while the word in question is not found on the pages of scripture, the concept certainly is. The vast amount of scripture that can and should be used in any discussion on the triune nature of God or the divinity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit is too much to include here. Instead a few key scriptures will be pointed out that should be ever present on the mind of the Christian seeking to further understand the nature of God.

Deuteronomy 6:4:
Here is the famous passage known as the “shema.” Every Israelite would have known this passage well and recited it every day as it importantly distinguishes that, “…The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” Any valid defense of the Trinity must begin with the affirmation that God is in fact essentially one, but any attack on the Trinity will likely begin with this verse as it seems to pick apart the concept from the very beginning of Israel’s understanding of Yahweh.

John 1:1
In any modern translation, other than the New World Translation, this verse begins John’s gospel by claiming that Jesus was not simply a god, but was instead God. The overall tone of John’s Gospel hinges on this divinity as John recounts his years following a messiah that could have only been God, given all the things He said and did.

John 20:28
Here is Thomas’ declaration of Jesus as his Lord and God. Earlier in this chapter, the same Greek word for God is used when Jesus said to Mary, “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” John, within a few paragraphs, used the same word to describe the Father as God and then Jesus as God, with no distinguishing remarks. It cannot be lost on us either that Thomas was a faithful Jew who would likely have rejected any sense of polytheism, yet here we have an account of him proclaiming the resurrected Jesus as God.

Matthew 28:19
In the middle of the Great Commission, Jesus instructs His disciples to baptize new believers in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He makes no distinguishing remarks about the three persons which He would have been sure to do in a 1st century Jewish culture unless He was okay with His hearers inferring equality. It should also be noted that there is a seeming personage applied to the Holy Spirit here.

Acts 20:28
Here, Paul charges the elders at the church in Ephesus to serve the church faithfully. After stating that the Holy Spirit is the one that made them overseers, implying personage to the Spirit, he also charges them to remember that God purchased the church “…with his own blood.” Either Paul is referring directly to Jesus as God, or he is identifying God the Father with the blood of Jesus as if it were His own, therefore, promoting to his hearers the idea that Jesus and the Father were equal. While many who antagonistically claim that the doctrine of the Trinity and divinity of Jesus were constructs that the Church manufactured much later, here we have evidence of trinitarian claims around 57 A.D., when this chapter of Acts seemingly took place.

Appeal to Mystery

We turn to Deuteronomy 6 again as my Jehovah’s Witness friend is trying to remind me that, earlier in the conversation, I affirmed with him that God is one. Without saying the word, he was trying to accuse me of stating a contradiction when I continually maintained that God was both one and three. Thoughts raced through my mind, thoughts of watching R.C. Sproul more eloquently explain that the Trinity was in fact not a contradiction because the two claims involved in it are not claiming the same thing.

The law of non-contradiction explained in most undergraduate logic classes explains that “A” cannot both be what it is, and what it is not. Put more simply, there can never be a square circle. There can never be a married bachelor. “A” cannot equal “-A.” So the non-Christian might look at this principle and exclaim, “There it is! The Trinity violates the most basic law of logic!” Yet a simple exploration of the concept shows that it, in fact, does not violate the law of non-contradiction, but instead appeals to something that is absolutely necessary when pondering the workings of an Almighty God — mystery.

When a Christian claims that God is one in essence and that God is three in personage, these are two separate claims about two separate truths regarding God. While it would certainly be contradictory for us to make a similar claim about any human, we are not discussing a human, but instead, an infinite being far beyond our comprehension. Therefore, not only is the Trinity not a contradiction, but it is a mystery — a truth that we cannot understand because we do not have all of the necessary information to do so. I would argue that even if we had all of the information, we still might not understand it because our finite brains might not ever be able to comprehend the infinite magnitude of God. This mystery is not an excuse to avoid answering the question, but instead, is a far more impressive answer than man could come up with on his own.

Appealing to the mysterious nature of the Trinity only makes logical sense given the size of the being in question. Too often, theologians, apologists, and pastors are quick to present to the questioner a God that is perfectly explained and managed, leaving nothing to ponder. I assume that if we could see the god of some of our explanations, it would be a god that few people would write songs about.

When faced with the question of the mysterious, we must lean into the unexplainable nature as a strength and evidence that we are in fact still talking about the infinite and unchangeable Yahweh of the Bible. It would only make sense that if the God of the cosmological argument does in fact exist, that there would be plenty that we could not understand about Him, and therefore not explain. The mystery of God’s triune nature should not be avoided by Christian leaders for fear of not being able to explain it well: It should be a centerpiece of any presentation on it. We worship an ultimately unexplainable God, and followers of Christ should never feel ashamed to highlight that as they attempt to explain and defend doctrines like the Trinity.

One of the greatest defenses of the Christian faith is that not all of it is ultimately defensible by Christians themselves. Charles Spurgeon once compared Gospel truth to a lion making the point that the best way to defend a lion is to let it out of its cage. I fully believe that the best way for Christians to truly convince nonbelievers of the Trinity is to let it out of its cage and appeal to the mystery of it all, instead of pretending it is easily understood or avoiding the conversation entirely.

Conclusion

I have not convinced him that Jesus is God, or of anything close to the Trinity yet, but my Jehovah’s Witness friend will continue to hear arguments for it, and questions pointing toward it, as long as he will continue meeting with me. The ultimate aim is not winning him to an idea, or winning an argument. I have a deep desire for him and others who have been tricked into believing false gospels to be won to the true Gospel, and the only way that will happen is if they hear it.

Christian leaders should be on forefront of addressing these questions, but for too long they have allowed themselves to be intimidated by the world and the critiques it has for our good news. If we truly believe that the news is good though, we will learn to communicate it, explain it, and defend it in whatever way necessary for it to be heard.

Sometimes it is as easy as it was for me: when the world knocks on your door and asks you if you have time to talk. What they do not realize is they are actually asking you if you have time to share your good news, the intricacies of an eternal God in triune form who became man to save us from our self-imposed darkness. Do not allow a fear that you cannot explain or defend your belief keep you from saying yes and joining with the likes of Sproul, Athanasius, those at Nicaea, and ultimately, the Lord and His own disciples, who never cowered away from a difficult conversation when truth was at stake.

I imagine the disciples could sense something was different that evening. They had shared countless meals together, and often those meals would be the stage in which their rabbi performed. They had seen Him eat with elite dignitaries and social pariahs. They had heard Him forgive the sins of tax collectors and seen Him turn jars of water into wine at a wedding feast. They had witnessed Him turn a small boy’s offering into enough food to feed a hillside of thousands. That evening, when they celebrated the Passover together, it likely seemed different and particularly void of miracles and grandiose teachings. That evening, He told the disciples that one of them who had loyally followed Him for years, and had heard His teachings with his own ears, would betray Him. The tension in the room had to have been amplified by the growing hostility that they experienced from the religious elite, who were tired of hearing about this itinerant rabbi some were whispering might actually be the Messiah, the Son of Man.

In the midst of all this, Jesus reached for bread, unleavened bread that had no yeast because the Israelites’ escape from slavery left no time for bread to rise. Again, this evening, the bread would represent escape and redemption. Jesus held the bread and gave thanks, and then broke the bread so that all could share in it. He told those young men, who were wondering what life-changing message their teacher would share with them, that the bread was His body broken for them. After their meal was finished, He took the cup full of wine, and gave thanks for it. He shared it with His friends, after He told them that this cup was a sign of the new promise He was making with humanity. It was His blood, shed for them. A broken body and shed blood.

An inexplicable feeling of grief likely filled the room as those men, who had left their nets to follow this man, were wondering what would happen next. However, Jesus had left them a wonderful gift that they likely had no appreciation for until the events of the next three days were over.

He had taught them a way to give thanks and to remember.

Over the course of the 2000 years since that fateful evening, Christ’s followers have hotly debated what this meal was really all about. Some have wondered if His real flesh and blood is present in the elements of what we might call the Lord’s Supper. In the ritual of the modern Evangelical Church, we often find a simple loaf of bread and grape juice used for the elements. Despite the disagreements that stem from as far back as the early church fathers, what Christians seem to agree on is that the purpose of the meal can be found on the pages of Scripture itself. We are to give thanks and to remember.

Catholics, and many mainline Protestants, still refer to the meal by its ancient name, the Eucharist. It is a shame that many evangelicals refuse to use the word now, likely due to feelings of ritual that surround it, because the word is an appropriate label. The Greek word eucharisteo literally means to “give thanks.” It is the word used by Matthew and Mark to describe what Jesus did both in the Passover celebration and on the hillside where He multiplied those fish and loaves. It is the word Paul would use all those times he would tell a faithful church that he gave thanks to God for them, and the testimony he had heard about them. It is this word that serves as our reminder that before Christ gave the bread and wine to His disciples, He first gave His Father the small gift of His appreciation for the provision of bread and wine. It is the best translation of our English phrase “thank you.”

We too, when we take the bread in our hands, are to first simply give thanks to God both for the bread and for what it represents. Christ tells us that we are to remember Him when we eat. That includes remembering the events that followed this meal, i.e., the suffering He experienced at the hands of Roman guards, at the feeling of stark loneliness on the cross, at the death of the Son of Man, and at the victorious resurrection that gave us life. Yet we also forget to remember other things. There is the sermon He gave on the mountainside when He told His followers to love their enemies, the moment when He first forgave the sins of the paralyzed man before making him walk again, and the tears He shed with those who were grieving over the death of His friend Lazarus. We are to remember these things too and to give thanks for them.

To “give” thanks is an expectation we likely forget we have for others.

We expect a small wave from the driver of the car we allow to cut in front of us. Some of us struggle to find the right words to express gratitude when we are opening Christmas gifts in front of loved ones. That is because, ultimately, we are simply bad at saying, “thank you.” It is no wonder then that what humanity values so much, yet struggles to perform, would be something God desires to see us exercise and grow in. The habit of gratitude is one that escapes even the most “mature” Christians, yet I challenge you to think of someone who constantly practices it, who is not also the most encouraging Christian you know.

A change of mind is necessary to see this change in a believer’s life. We must realize that there is a reason the Biblical authors so often phrased this charge as to “give” thanks, and not simply to “say” thanks. Our gratitude is itself a gift regardless of how much it pales in comparison to the gift that provoked it. In the case of the parent on Christmas who has given their child something they desperately hoped to receive, that child’s “thank you” is the only thing the child could possibly give back to their parent. We are in the same position with God as He bestows eternal riches and gifts beyond our wildest imaginations. The life of obedience for the Christ follower begins with a simple “thank you” in response to the work of the cross and resurrection.

This habit of gratitude leads us to remembering as well. As we face the temptation to shipwreck our faith at every turn, we can remember that on the night in which He was betrayed, Christ took bread and broke it to symbolize His body that would be broken.

In light of this, it is easier for us to abstain from a trivial and temporary temptation that has consequences far surpassing the fleeting pleasure it might give us. Entering an American holiday season, which forces our consumerist muscles to get stronger every year, the cup which Christ gave thanks for, before explaining that His blood would give us all we could ever need, allows us the liberty to remember that we, in fact, do not need all we are told we do. God does not leave us with vague esoteric teachings that we must memorize by rote, but instead gives us bread and wine. As we look upon these all-too-common objects, He asks that we remember Him and all He has done for us.

The Church is to be a called-out-group that is defined by being eucharistic.

That is to say, we are to be both grateful and generous. Paul’s charges to the church at Corinth in his first letter implied that one of the catalysts of their many problems was a sinful view of the Eucharistic meal. It is around the table, remembering Christ, that the Church becomes one body and the Corinthians had horribly missed that. It is not foolish to say that we too have missed the mark on being known as a group defined by the broken body and shed blood of Jesus. How much more flavorful the earth would be if we, the salt, turned our minds more often to that night 2000 years ago? How much more light would our city on a hill give if wanderers were met more often with the ever-present glow of the upper room instead of the wild flashes of our modern strategy and salesmanship? How much easier would it be to persuade the world that our physical bodies were designed and sanctified by God if we regularly bowed our heads and pointed them to how Christ used His?

We can remedy this by first making more time to pause and remember, and to give thanks. Pastors can lead their congregations to the table more frequently and cease allowing the meal to be an addition to a service or a transition between a sermon and an invitation. Parents can bring their children to experience the life-giving story of the time when the disciples thought all might be lost, but Christ knew better, and so He gave them reminders to hold in their hands. Bread and juice can be in the cabinet, waiting to be brought out for a weekly remembrance.

If we desire our generosity to be cheerful and not obligatory, understanding the practice of the Eucharist, of giving thanks, is a fantastic place to start. If we want the center of our daily lives to be the redeeming work of Jesus on the cross and in the resurrection, then choosing to live a life of gratitude and memory is the only place to start. So, take the bread and cup in your hands, say, “thank you,” and then pause to remember.

Augustine radically changed the way the world saw the light and darkness. He boldly proclaimed that darkness was not a quantifiable material or substance but was simply the absence of light. In the absence of light, darkness begins to exist. An easy concept to understand with the physical world, but what of the spiritual world? I have experienced darkness in the brightest white marble room in a Church of Scientology. I have experienced darkness in the presence of Hindu idol worship while in loving conversation with a dear Hindu friend. In the presence of candles all giving off warm light in a Wicca shop, I could best understand what the “absence of light” really was.

Spiritual darkness surrounds us in the world.

And as we enter into Halloween, we might notice things grow less discerning as the world gets even darker. To call Halloween a season of darkness is true both spiritually and physically. With the impending time change, our days are thrown off-kilter by circadian arrhythmia and the sun being in a different place seemingly than it was the day before. During fall, Seasonal Affective Disorder begins to plague those whose mental health acts as a testament to the importance of light in our lives. As natural light becomes more scarce, our bodies sometimes react physically the way our spirit reacts in the absence of light. The often prescribed treatment for SAD is called “light therapy,” in which people sit in the presence of bright, artificial light to bring about hormonal balance.

The spiritual climate begins to grow colder too, as our attention is diverted from the light and consumed with darkness. Studios save their most gruesome horror movies for release in conjunction with the Halloween season. In 2021 we saw the 12th installment of the Halloween movie series. Horror films will make millions of dollars, where it is all but certain people will watch dramatized versions of murder at the hands of a maniacal serial killer.

In this season of darkness, even the Church turns its mind toward death. Counteracting the pagan holiday Samhain, which is full of rituals commemorating the dead, the Church historically celebrates All Saints Day to remember the lives of the martyrs and saints that have come before us. It seems that as sighting the sun in the sky becomes rarer during this season, it is natural that humans ponder death and darkness in the absence of light.

So then, what is the Christian to do at this time of year? Are we to retreat to safety in hopeful wishing for the light of spring and Easter? Do we refuse to participate in Halloween, and yet not search out the opportunity to voice the reason that our Gospel has no place for the fascination of death and the demonic?

The Church has often missed its true calling in the face of darkness.

The Biblical contrast of darkness and light is impossible to miss. In Genesis, we read that darkness at one point hovered over the formless void until the fateful moment when God said, “Let there be light.” 1 John says that God is light and that there is no darkness found in Him at all. Jesus taught His disciples that they were to be like a city on a hill whose light could be seen for miles surrounding it. Those lost and wandering should find their way in the darkness because of the light of the Church. If we were able to ask Jesus face to face what to do, He would likely encourage us with some parable that teaches us that darkness stays dark until light goes into it.

A life of following Jesus is a life of following Jesus into the dark. It is the foundation of who Jesus is to His creation. In the introduction to his Gospel, John wrote, “In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.” It is what Jesus does.

He dared to walk into Gerasene, a place marked by spiritual darkness where the demon-possessed man was living among tombs of the dead and healed him. We understand better what He meant in Matthew 5, when He told His disciples about the city on a hill and followed it up by telling them how ridiculous it would be to light a candle and then hide it under a basket.

Imagine being the Son of God and not venturing to the darkest places, dealing with those who have fallen into the abyss of evil found there. What then is the call of the Jesus follower in the face of evil? Well, it certainly is not to stay in Galilee. Rather, it is to cross the sea and enter into the place where all others are afraid to go because they do not serve a God of victory, life and light. Most others have no reason for boldness, but those of us who follow Jesus of Nazareth have every reason to proclaim. To not simply withdraw during seasons of darkness and evil, but to persevere and advance, knowing that the presence of light is not an accident but is something to be fueled and stewarded. The sober-minded and courageous Church shines its light for all to see that the lost and wandering will come in from the darkness to the rest found in its welcoming warmth.

The practical questions still abound, though. “Should I take my kids trick-or-treating? Can I watch horror movies?”

The issue of “celebrating” Halloween is more nuanced than just how your children secure candy or what particular movies you choose to watch. Not that every child’s costume has to be a Biblical figure, but perhaps we haven’t realized just how pervasive horror and evil has become “ok” to observe during Halloween. The more important question to address first is perhaps, “What has my attention?” It seems so easy to dwell on those things around us that evoke feelings of fear and sadness in us during this time. If we are what we consume, what are we during the month of the year when fear is commercialized? If what has our attention is what sets the direction for our life, where is our Christian walk heading when fixated on the demonic? As the days grow shorter and less sunny, reflect on life and ask, “Is this making much of the darkness?” Some families will choose not to celebrate Halloween, replacing it with something like All Saints Day. Some parents will do their best to navigate Halloween while shepherding their children away from the more evil aspects of the culture that surround it. No matter the choice, teach your children why it matters for Christians to live differently than the world around them. To not be “of” the world is not to be the same substance, which should be the natural conclusion for a group of people who the Creator has proclaimed they are made new.

Living differently does not imply that you are superior; instead, it is demonstrating what you believe. In this case, a Christian’s caution regarding evil is not out of arbitrary morality but stems from the belief that there is a spiritual world we should not take lightly. In an attempt to live differently than the world, in seeking to honor God, ask yourself, “What would make much of light?”, and live accordingly.

So as we navigate this season where horror, fear and evil seem to confront us at every turn, we ask ourselves difficult questions about just how much we participate in Halloween. The God we serve looked at His creation and saw it in its darkest times, and He still chose to involve Himself. He was not overcome or overtaken by the sheer evil He found in the darkness, and He never will be. Take courage and follow Him as He ventures into the dark looking for lost sheep, and know that wherever you go in His name, there will be light because you’ll be there.