A.J. Jacobs’ year of living biblically | Video on TED.com
This is an incredibly interesting look at looking at what the Bible says and how we interpret it. Definitely not a Christian point of view, but a very insightful look. Its almost 18min, but definitely worth it. His book sounds really interesting as well: My Year of Living Biblically. Watch it if you have a chance.
[From A.J. Jacobs' year of living biblically | Video on TED.com]
“My Year of Living Biblically” is a very good book. It’s funny, interesting, and is partially what inspired me to start reading a book a week. I decided I should do something slightly strange like AJ Jacobs. Anyway, I definitely recommend this book.
http://www.fourbooksamonth.wordpress.com
Phil Sharp
November 28, 2008 at 3:41 am
My favorite part of the video is toward the end when he says you have to pick and choose because there is no way you can do it all. How true that is. It’s too bad he didn’t or was unable to follow that thought to its next logical conclusion.
Pete vdH
Pete vdH
November 28, 2008 at 10:14 pm
hey luke, what do you mean by “definitely not a Christian point of view” ? While Jacobs is obviously not a Christian or Jew, I don’t think that I theologically disagreed with that much / any of what he said.
micah
November 29, 2008 at 11:41 pm
and Pete vdH (who i assume is luke’s dad? [howdy! i'm luke's roommate btw): what would "follow[ing] that thought to its next logical conclusion” arrive at?
micah
November 29, 2008 at 11:46 pm
I suppose I meant not a Christian’s pov, seeing as how he is not a Christian. singular possessive mighta been better.
plukevdh
November 29, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Hi Micah,
By next logical conclusion I mean that God the creator requires of man to be holy and perfect if he desires to enter into a relationship that results in an eternal relationship with God and not eternally separated from God in Hell. God spelled out what was required of man to do that in the Old Testament. But as A.J. pointed out, there was no way to do that then and there is still no way to do it today. The next logical conclusion then is that either God would have to change the requirement or provide another way or we are all doomed to Hell. God does not change but he did provide another way while not changing the requirement. Through Christ, God provided a substitute for us. “He who knew no sin became sin for us in Christ Jesus”. All those laws and requirements were fulfilled for us through the perfect God/Man Jesus Christ. Now that doesn’t mean that there is universal salvation for all men. But for those who accept the gift God offers, place faith in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ to meet the need that God requires, repent of sins and failure to meet God’s standard, then there is forgiveness, mercy and grace extended and that man is no longer under the wrath of God but now under the protection and care of God for all eternity. A beautiful, unexpected, but fully just plan designed from the beginning of time to glorify God Himself. I don’t think A.J. in his research bothered to read much of the new testament and unfortunately didn’t go to Christians who would help him make the connection of the prophetic image of the Old Testament and see the beauty of the provision and fulfillment of the prophecy in the New Testament.
I’ll let Luke take a shot at where A.J. is off theologically but he is not even off page 1 in my understanding. If you’d like a book to read to get a bigger picture of the whole plan of God as revealed in the Bible, I can recommend one to you. Email me separately if you would like. kyvdh@juno.com
Luke, hope you don’t mind me using your blog to respond.
Pete vdH
November 30, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Hey Pete (can I call you that?), thanks for responding. The reason why I asked was because to get from A.J.’s statement of not being able to do everything (and I agree with him here that many OT laws are simply unethical and should not be followed then or now) to your particular Christian theology involves many assumptions (e.g., the validity of substituationary atonement, God’s judgement) that are not part of the common logic that one can reasonably expect others to follow. And so I don’t think we can be too hard on our friend A.J. for not making the logical leap you wanted when this is a leap that only makes sense if viewed through the lenses of a particular — and already in place — Christian theology.
micah
November 30, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Arguably though, that theology is presented to him, more or less in the NT. Pretty clearly too. So I think my Dad’s point is valid that he must not have spent much time there if he failed to make that conclusion… I think all the things my Dad listed are spoken of in the Bible. AJ was looking just for laws/rules to follow, not looking for a story. I think that’s why he missed it.
plukevdh
December 4, 2008 at 2:12 pm
i saw an interview with this guy on c-span (i know i am a total dork) and i remember him saying that “sometimes behavior changes and the heart follows, its not always a heart change that is followed by action.” some of the things that a.j. committed to during his year of living biblically he has continued. i thought that was pretty cool. we are not always changed from the inside out, but sometimes from the outside in.
derek
December 4, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Hey Micah, just wanted to follow-up with a couple of commments to your last post. Luke said kind of what I was going to say but just a small twist on your comment about “viewed through the lenses of a particular Christian theology”. While one could certainly come to the Bible with a certain set of lenses (I think that is what A.J. and many others do) and then interpret what it says with those lenses on, my view is that the Bible is a book that you go to for getting lenses that will really allow you to see what is real and what is truth. But you won’t get that understanding by doing an academic study of it. It requires the Spirit of God to work in your life to be able to see. It is a book like none other because it claims within itself to be the very words of God. I would even go so far to say that the Bible is God. Not in the sense that we should bow down and worship the book on our nightstand but in the sense that it is the representation of God to us. As far as being hard on A.J. I’m not being hard on him. Without the Spirit to open his eyes, he cannot see. In fact in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians he talks about the Bible being foolishness to those who are perishing (non-Christian). It’s a shame those “Christian leaders” A.J. spoke to did not help him make that connection. I imagine there are some who have contacted him to try to show him.
Now for Derek. Derek, while it’s nice to have change to being a better person whether from the inside out or outside in, the change he has experienced is what the apostle Paul would refer to as righteousnesses that are like filthy rags (worthless). While they are nice and make a person “better”, in God’s economy they are of no value. It’s like trying to live out that law that A.J. found could not be lived out well enough to meet the perfect standard of God. He needs a change from the outside in and the inside out at the same time. That would be God acting on his heart to remove his heart of stone and replace it with a heart of flesh. Then through the sanctifying work of the Spirit of God he would be changed from the inside out. Then the works that he does are due to God’s effort and then God get’s the glory instead of A.J. (or you or me).
Amazing. And all because God sent His only Son to die for us and do what we could never do. Yes, that’s substitutionary atonement as God laid it out for us in the Bible.
Well, thanks for letting me step in here and dialogue with you. I’ll probably let Luke have his blog back. Thanks Luke for giving me permission.
Pete vdH
Pete vdH
December 4, 2008 at 10:10 pm
mr vdH,
thanks for your response! in my comment, i was not trying to say that a.j.’s change in living is somehow going to get him into heaven or something like that. i was just saying that i wish some christians understood this principle that a.j. learned during his year. i am saying that the Spirit does not always need to “move” us before we act. sometimes we need to act, and then through our actions the Spirit moves. if we wait until our pride is no longer and issue before we serve others, we will never serve. but perhaps when one starts serving they will then be humbled. this is not always the case, but i just get so sick of christians that wait until God “moves” them in such a way that they have a concern for certain things. if some middle class white guy is never “moved” to care for the injustice that happens in other countries, he will never do anything. but if he visits some third world country and experiences first hand what is happening, there is a much better chance of God “moving” that person to a concern for those people. the Spirit does not have to initiate everything. we have a responsibility to obey, whether we feel led to or not. and this in no way takes the glory away from God. someone that does nothing because he is waiting for some radical act of the Spirit is less glorifying to God than someone that makes a decision to do the right thing without feeling some kind of change “in their heart.”
hopefully that clarifies what i found so insightful about a.j.’s comments.
i also want to say that i am not sure that i understand your interpretation of the passage regarding filthy rags. the passage does not seem to be some sort of statement that says everything an unbeliever does is worthless in God’s economy. the passage is simply saying that the good works of an unbeliever are so far from making him righteous in God’s eyes that they are as filthy rags. they are no where near good enough because each person is still so sinful, but that does not mean their actions are entirely not good. the actions of unbelievers can still be of great value in God’s economy, they just cannot be close to great enough to attain salvation.
sorry this is becoming so long, but i also want to talk about the bible being God. i know that you do not mean this in the sense that the bible should become our object of worship, but this is still a very dangerous comment to make. i agree that the bible is the representation of God to us, in that it is the means through we which we can attain an understanding of him that would otherwise be impossible. but, i also think it is still very important that we not worship just the representation of God. we need to worship God in his entirety, which no book can contain. the worship of any representation of God is to worship something less than God himself. God is so much bigger than the bible, and we need to be careful not to confuse the two. God is not simply comprised of his words or his actions, so we cannot worship either of those things. we can learn about God through his words and his actions and grow in our understandig of him, but we must insist on only worshipping God himself. and i am sure that in your comments you did not mean that your desire is to limit God in any way or to replace him with the bible. i am just amking these comments because i think it is better to avoid any sort of statements that go along the line of “the bible is God.”
i appreciate this discussion, and i am sure that it is a surprise to luke that this particular post is getting the attention it is
i am sorry for taking over your blog! i too should let you have it back.
mr. vdH, thanks for your posts and the thoughts that you have shared. i feel extremely honored to interact with you. i want you to know that luke has been a great encouragement to me, and i would like to thank you for raising such a fine young man! i can see where he gets such a strong appreciation for the theological and spiritual.
derek
December 5, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Derek,
Just a quick response.
I agree completely with your first paragraph. While my own life does not always reflect that belief, I agree we cannot wait until everything is in order to take action. Good example is Josh 3:13-17.
On the second paragraph about good deeds, you are right and my response needed clarification. I did mean works are not good enough to attain salvation. It appeared to me that A.J. was implying his good works would make him more deserving of good standing with God. Thanks for helping to clarify my comments.
With regard to the Bible being God. I agree my comments are a bit strong and truthfully I have not fully thought them out. I know that I often treat the authority and power of the Bible too lightly. Read more in my blog if you like but I understand what you have said and don’t disagree.
http://kyvdh9.blogspot.com/2008/10/gods-law-and-god-same.html
Thanks for your thoughts.
Pete vdH
Pete vdH
December 5, 2008 at 10:45 pm