Posted on by Abe Austin · 2 Comments

The Richness of Scriptural Symbolism- Barabbas

Earlier in this study I noted that every good symbol has constant reenactments following it. Every symbol that connects with the human core is seen again and again and again.

Today I want to illustrate that symbols are not only deep, but they can also be broad. Some of them not only have multiple meanings over time, but also multiple meanings in the very first moment. I will illustrate that today with the example of Barabbas.

The Story of Barabbas)

Barabbas was a prisoner in Israel at the time of Jesus. He had quite the list of offenses. From John 18:40 we hear that he was a robber, and from Mark 15:7 we learn that he was also a seditionist and a murderer. It is most likely that he was condemned to death, waiting for his execution to be carried out when fate intervened to set him free.

His turn of fortune came as a result of Pilate seeking to spare Jesus, who he could sense was innocent of any crime. It was the Passover, when it was customary for one prisoner to be released, so Pilate tried to save Jesus by stacking his freedom against that of deplorable Barabbas. If the Israelites really wanted to condemn Jesus, they would have to instead free a person who might literally kill them! Shockingly, that is exactly the choice that they made, and Pilate had to release the murderer. Jesus, of course, did go on to be killed that very same day.

Two Symbols of Barabbas)

The freeing of Barabbas is a powerful symbol, one with two immediate meanings. First of all, the release of Barabbas is symbolic of the mission of Jesus Christ and its effect upon all mankind. We are each of us Barabbas, sinners worthy of death, set free because Jesus was condemned instead. As the prophet Isaiah foretold, “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.”

Thus, there is a bright and hopeful symbol in the release of Barabbas, but there is also a dark foreshadowing in it as well. For just as much as it stands for the liberation of all sinners, it also stood for the impending decimation of the Israelite people.

Within just forty years of Israel choosing Barabbas over Jesus, the entire nation would be devastated, with an estimated hundreds of thousands of Jews being slaughtered, maybe more, and the survivors scattered to the winds. But wasn’t this what they had chosen? They had had the literal Prince of Peace and a man of violence before them, and they had selected the man of violence! Hear their words as recorded in Luke 23:18, “And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas.” In other words, ‘release unto us the killer’ …and that was just what they received.

Split Symbolism)

Barabbas’s release isn’t just a symbol with two different interpretations, it is a symbol with polar opposite interpretations! One of restored life, and one of consignment to death. It may seem remarkable that it can have both of these connotations at the same time, but it turns out that this is actually fairly regular in the scriptures. The cross is simultaneously a symbol of man’s greatest cruelty and God’s greatest love. The serpent is used as a symbol of the Devil in the Garden of Eden, and of Christ when Moses raised the healing bronze serpent on a stick. The rainbow both stands as a reminder of God flooding the world, and His promise that He won’t do so again.

I believe that part of the reason for polar opposite symbols is because many of the deepest spiritual notions are two-sided in profound ways. Is justice a principle of punishment for the wicked, or of exoneration for the innocent? Does God’s glory purify us or condemn us? Is the work of man creation or destruction? The answer to all of these is both. Good symbols recognize that there are a good side and bad side to our reality, and they manage to represent both at the same time.

Posted on by Abe Austin

The Richness of Scriptural Symbolism- The Natural Order

I have shared about the symbol at the core of Jacob receiving Esau’s blessing and I have shared about another symbol at the core of the Good Samaritan. Both of these examples show how good symbols reflect real life and today’s story is yet another example of that, but also of another principle that I wish to illustrate.

David’s Sin)

The story of David in the Old Testament is at times triumphant and at times tragic. Everything turns upon one pivotal moment, where he betrays his own conscience and destroys an innocent man. The story begins, of course, with him seeing Bathsheba bathing from the roof of his palace, then bringing her to him and committing adultery. When she became pregnant from the encounter he tried to obfuscate the parentage of the child, and when that failed, he ordered her husband to be placed at the forefront of a battle where he would likely be killed, which was exactly what happened.

But what David did in secret was fully known to God, and the Lord sent His prophet, Nathan, to tell him a symbolic story. In 2 Samuel 12:1-4 we read that story:

There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor. The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds: But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter.

And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man’s lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.

The story is, of course, a symbol for David. He is the rich man that had everything yet took from the poor man who had so very little. Not only this, but it is a symbol for all injustices in which the rich have further extended themselves by crushing those beneath them. This type of injustice is, unfortunately, fundamental to the human condition, and Nathan condenses it expertly into this one, short story.

The End of the Symbol)

Because Nathan’s story is so direct and so fundamental, it is only natural to feel a powerful emotional reaction to it. David certainly did, and the account in 2 Samuel records that response:

And David’s anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die!

Obviously, David had not realized that he, himself, was the subject of the story. His was the own head that he was proclaiming death upon!

This dramatic example illustrates one of the other hallmarks of good symbols: they make plain to us the natural order and summon from us the correct resolution to any unnatural situation.

The fact is, each one of us is imbued at birth with basic morals and truths. Deep at our core, we understand justice even before we can put words to the notion. It is ingrained in us, and a good symbol can help us cut through all of the bias and distraction, seeing plainly what the natural order is, how it has been twisted, and what must be done to set it right.

If David had known that he was the real subject of the story, he may well have squirmed and tried to justify his actions. But since he was absorbed in the fundamental violation of the natural order described in the story, he could not help but exclaim the harsh penalty that was necessary to set things right. By recognizing the answer to the fundamental, he had also found the answer to the specific. Such is the power of a truly good symbol.

Posted on by Abe Austin

The Richness of Scriptural Symbolism- A Modern Reenactment

My last post was about Jacob and Esau, and how they unwittingly reenacted something deep and eternal and fundamental to the destiny of us all. The hope of us all on judgment day was manifested in their little family drama. They were expressing a symbol of something that didn’t even know lived within them. In my last post I also promised that I had another example of this, a personal one, and today I will share that with you.

Passing on the Way)

This story takes place when I was twenty, serving as a missionary in the country of Guyana. My companion and I spent each day under the blistering Caribbean sun, meeting people on the street, sharing messages in homes, and helping run the affairs of the local branch. Our days were always very full, and one morning we were zipping along the streets on our bicycles, hurrying to our next appointment.

“Hello, Brother Ravi!” we waved as we zoomed past a member of the local congregation. He smiled and called out “good morning,” to us, then went back to slowly pulling himself along the road by his toes. Brother Ravi, you see, was in a wheelchair, too weak in the legs to stand, and too weak in the arms to push the wheels, so he was left to dangle his feet onto the dirt and gravel road, grip with his toes, and inch his way forward at a snail’s pace.

My companion and I turned down two more streets before suddenly we stopped and looked at one another.

“What are we doing?!” I said.

“Why didn’t we help him?!” he responded.

We immediately turned around and raced back to help Brother Ravi get home. As we approached, however, we found that someone else had already stepped in to do it. It was a man who looked extremely ragged. His hair was unkempt, his clothes were full of holes, and his legs wouldn’t bend at the knees. By putting his weight on the handles of the wheelchair, he barely managed to keep his balance, awkwardly shuffling down the street with Brother Ravi. Both the stranger and Brother Ravi were in good spirits, though, happily chatting to one another, with Brother Ravi giving directions to his home. It was clear from their conversation that this was their first meeting, the man was a stranger who stepped in simply because he saw a need.

Even though we were younger and more fit, it didn’t seem right for us to take over this stranger’s kind act of service. With a sense of guilt, my companion and I turned our bikes and continued on our way.

A Story from Long Ago)

It was only when reflecting on this experience that I realized we had reenacted a story that I’d already heard many times before. Brother Ravi, the stranger, and us two missionaries had all unwittingly taken part in the story of the Good Samaritan. Brother Ravi was the man in need on the side of the road, the stranger was obviously the Good Samaritan who went out of his way to help another, and my companion and I had played the unfortunate part of the priest and the Levite, two men specifically called to help those in need, but who had instead hurried on their way. We had abandoned our rightful duty, and it had fallen to another to fill that gap.

There is much that I have learned from that experience, but for now let us consider how the story of the Good Samaritan is full of symbols that manifest themselves in our lives, even without us realizing it at the time. As it turns out, humanity is full of examples of those who should help falling short, leaving strangers to take over the responsibility instead. I won’t go into the details on all of these, but you can see these themes among The Kindertransport, The Righteous Among Nations, and The White Helmets. These were all volunteers who stepped in to help when official aid was lacking or absent.

An important lesson from these symbols having so many applications is that we should never read these stories and say, “This is the one thing that that story is supposed to represent.” Because if it is a truly good symbol, it hasn’t finished representing all that it is meant to represent. There is no one, single, interpretation. Was Jesus’s story meant to symbolize the state of ancient Israel at the time? Yes. Was it also meant to represent me and my companion passing by Brother Ravi? Yes. And a thousand other instances of this pattern as well. It is a story that has played out through the past and will surely play out again in the future.

Posted on by Abe Austin

The Richness of Scriptural Symbolism- Constant Reenacting

In my last post I mentioned that good symbols connect to the very core of the human experience. They identify something that is fundamental to our race, which means they keep showing up in the lives of countless individuals. This means that they will be reenacted by people who have no idea that that is what they are doing. Today I will give a scriptural example of this, and in my next post one that is more personal.

Receiving the Father’s Blessing)

The last time I studied the story of Jacob obtaining Esau’s blessing, I noticed a symbol in it that I had never seen before. In the Genesis account, Jacob dresses in the clothes of his brother Esau, prepares meat in the same manner as Esau, and presents himself under the name of Esau in order to receive the blessing that his father has for his elder brother. In this moment, it doesn’t appear that anyone involved in the charade saw it as anything more than an isolated family drama, but it was actually a sign of something bigger than them all.

Jacob’s presentation in the guise of his elder brother reflects how each of us hope to be presented to the Lord on judgment day. Obviously, we won’t actually be fooling God, but by laying down our own lives and taking up Christ’s, we hope to be introduced under the name, appearance, and deeds of Jesus, our elder brother. He, alone, is worthy of God’s blessing, but because we can be adopted under his name, we can receive his blessing as though we were him.

As I said, I do not think that Jacob, Esau, Isaac, and Rebekah had this in mind when they performed their little drama, but that symbol comes from the very roots of the human soul. It is baked into us, and it is not surprising that it rises to the surface now and again in our lives.

As we look for good symbols to guide our lives, we should take special note of patterns that emerge seemingly at random, but which echo things of a more eternal nature. We should consider if what we see in our typical day is, in fact, a new bud on a plant whose roots extend far, far below.

Posted on by Abe Austin

The Richness of Scriptural Symbolism- Eternal Wisdom

The Perpetual Relevance of Symbols)

The Bible is a library of many different things, including historical accounts, legal instructions, moral teachings, prophetic sayings, psalms, letters, and gospel testimony. One of its defining features is its rich symbolism, which people continue to find new interpretations and new meanings for even today.

Some of the text in the Bible is, at a minimum, over 3000 years old. It is a rare thing to have words from that long ago that still resonate and have meaning to us today. Such an accomplishment demonstrates a profound understanding of the human condition, for it is only by identifying and representing something that is fundamental to humanity itself that these symbols can be consistent through all changes of culture and context. A symbol that is tied to the very core of the human soul will re-manifest itself perpetually, keeping its importance forever new.

They say that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. But history is but a record of how people reacted to their fundamental human nature, and since fundamental human nature persists, history will repeat itself again and again, whether we have studied it or not. Every great setback that we will face in the future has already been observed, and the way that each of those setbacks will be overcome is also already knowable. When the old evils return, it is the timeless symbols of ancient scripture that will guide us back to the light.

The Qualities of Good Symbols)

So far, we have identified one hallmark of good symbols: that they represent a core part of the human soul and thus reappear eternally through each generation. With the rest of this study, I want to consider what other hallmarks of good symbols, so that we may know how to separate the perpetually useful from the context dependent.

It will be necessary to provide specific examples of scriptural symbols as a part of this study, and when I do so, I will specifically use ones from the Bible. This will serve a secondary objective of this study, which is to demonstrate the intrinsic value of that book. That being said, this study will by no means be a comprehensive list of all the greatest symbols within the Bible. It remains the responsibility of each of us to find those nuggets for ourselves and to integrate them into our own lives.

Posted on by Abe Austin

A Misunderstanding of Freedom

Two Kinds of Freedom)

At first glance, Genesis Chapter 38 seems like a strange anomaly in the Biblical record. It interrupts the narrative of Joseph right after he is sold into Egypt to tell the sordid tale of Judah’s family. Its plot unfolds like a trashy soap opera, culminating in Judah’s own daughter-in-law seducing him and conceiving twins. Once the chapter ends, we are whisked back to the main story of Joseph, just in time to hear about his experience in Potiphar’s house.

Genesis Chapter 38 only makes sense when it is viewed in the context of that broader narrative involving Joseph. I do not think it is a coincidence that it is placed right after Joseph is cast into slavery, and right before he rejects the advances of Potiphar’s wife and is cast further down into prison. His narrative and Judah’s provide a perfect contrast. On the one hand, Judah is physically free, but a slave to his immorality. On the other hand, Joseph is physically captive, but still the master of his own soul. Thus, the record is presenting two kinds of freedom and two kinds of slavery, and implicitly asking the reader, “which of these is truly free?” The correct answer, of course, is that Joseph is truly free, for though he is a slave an in prison, he is free in his inmost parts, while Judah is not.

Of course, the story is not presenting physical captivity as a good thing, mankind is meant to strive for all layers of freedom, but if a man wishes to be truly free, he must at the very least be the master of his own self. Any man who does not have moral control over his own appetites is fundamentally a slave, no matter the rest of his situation.

A Modern Misfocus)

Today, in our western culture, we have a great commotion of perceived shackles and demands for freedom. On the one hand, the white male is accused of still reaping the benefits of historical slavery and patriarchy, enjoying a higher freedom than women or most other races. On the other hand, we hear of blue-collar workers, predominantly white males, sick of being society’s punching bag for decades, sick of having their strings pulled by society’s elites. And then there are conspiracy theories that even those elites are for the most part powerless, their votes and influence bought and paid for by blackmail and bribery, shadowy corporations directing things from behind the scenes.

Everyone, it seems, isn’t as liberated as they would hope to be, and the majority of public discourse is set on the pursuit of freeing one class or another. It is an obsession that I believe our ancestors would find laughable, given that we are the freest people that the world has ever known. We are fighting over the slimmest margins of injustice, many of which are imagined, and we show no appreciation for the fact that our ancestors gave everything for just a fraction of the liberty that we now enjoy. Without devolving into complete lawless anarchy, we are about as free as it is humanly possible to be.

Or, at least, we are free physically. Spiritually and morally, though? We are a society that is absolutely enslaved to our appetites, to our devices, to our distractions, to our immorality, to our self-justification, to our anger and pride. We are simultaneously one of the freest and most enslaved people the world has ever known; and our focus for liberation is in completely the wrong area.

To Be Truly Free)

Perhaps we are so obsessed with our perceived injustices because our spirit accurately identifies that something is holding us down, but our heavy-lidded eyes can’t see past the physical to realize it is our lack of moral will. We settle on the assumption that it must be a physical shackle simply because we lack the imagination or the courage to consider a spiritual one. We are, therefore, a modern-day Sisyphus, doomed to an eternal effort that never achieves anything.

If we truly cared to be free, the great commotion of our time would be one of spiritual ministry. We would seek to convict the world of its sin as an act of kindness, waking up all to their true taskmaster, and the true liberation from it. We would strive as a community to abandon our shrines of distraction and learn how to rise to a collective moral mastery.

Then, and only then, we would be truly free.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Why Did Peter Deny Jesus?

This Easter season I’ve been thinking about Jesus’s final week, culminating in his crucifixion and resurrection. One point that has stood out to me is Peter’s behavior on the night of Jesus’s arrest. Let us look at two moments from that evening:

  1. When Jesus’s captors arrive in the Garden of Gethsemane, Peter boldly leaps forward and cuts the ear off of one of them. He does this, even though Jesus and the disciples were almost certainly outnumbered and under-armed. It seems that if Jesus had not intervened, Peter’s actions would likely have gotten himself killed.
  2. After Jesus diffused the situation and surrendered to his arrest, Peter followed, waiting in the courtyard of where Jesus was being held. There he was recognized three times as one of Jesus’s followers, and each time denied it. It seems that he did this to preserve his life, to not get himself killed.

So why would Peter shrink from death in the latter case, but charge headlong toward it in the first?

I’ve always assumed that it was because Peter was acting in the heat of the moment in the first case. It may not have even crossed his mind that this could get him killed, he was just overcome with passion and acted without thinking. But during the arrest and the interrogation of Jesus, Peter had time for reality to set in, allowing him to truly feel the weight of the danger he was in, and his growing fear led him to lie.

That could certainly be the case, but as I’ve thought about it, I’ve realized that there could also be another explanation for his differing behaviors.

Another Theory)

Going back to the arrest at the Mount of Olives, what if Peter was actually fully aware that he was putting his life in jeopardy, and he was doing it deliberately? What if he was willing to sacrifice himself to give Jesus and the other disciples a chance to escape? If that were the case, then it must have been a great shock when Jesus instead rebuked him and peacefully submitted to the arrest. Jesus would have crushed the sacrifice he had been trying to make.

Now consider the second instance, where Peter lingered in the courtyard outside of Jesus’s interrogation and denied that he knew Jesus. In this case, there was no heroic rescue to be achieved by telling the truth. The only reason to admit that he was a follower of Jesus would be for the principle of the matter, to show that he would rather die than deny his master. Just because Peter might have been willing to die for some things, but not for others.

If this is the case, then Peter both proved great depth in his commitment, but also discovered even deeper depths that he was not yet ready for. He may have learned that his cause was not actually the same as Jesus’s, and that while he was prepared to die for his cause, he was not yet prepared to die for Jesus’s. He may have learned that it isn’t enough to be willing to give some sacrifice to the Lord, he needed to be willing to give the right sacrifice.

In either case, whether Peter’s initial fire cooled, or whether he was only willing to die for Jesus under certain circumstances, the tradition states that he did grow beyond his failing, that he did eventually die a martyr’s death, not on his own terms, but on the terms that were given him.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Forced to Fit- Part Two

Accepting God as He Is)

Yesterday I shared the observation that our culture raises us with certain preconceptions about what is good and ideal. When we then engage with the idea of God, we find aspects of His revealed character that do not comport with our preconceptions. Either we discard Him, try to make Him fit our own ideals, or sacrifice our own values to embrace His.

If we elect that third option, this will likely see us surrendering to a God that we don’t fully understand or agree with. Based on our unrecognized bias, we might think that God is sexist, or unmerciful, or discriminatory, or antiquated. But if we surrender to Him even so, living according to His word in spite of our uncertainty, in time we will see our secret prejudices for what they are, and be able to let them go.

A Dangerous Justification)

For those that elect the second option, to try and change God, they often justify it by saying that the ancient records of Him were biased by the culture of their time. The irony of this generational snobbery is obvious. If you accuse another person of misrepresenting God according to his bias, how do you know that you are not doing exactly the same?

Another justification might be that the description of God’s standards was appropriate for that time, but there is a precedent for it to be updated now. After all, we do not still perform animal sacrifices or abstain from eating pork, so why couldn’t God update His opinion on certain social constructs today?

However, this argument ignores the fact that all of the aforementioned changes were never instituted by popular vote, only by those who carried divine investiture from God, Himself. Jesus was God incarnate when he approved of his cousin John’s use of baptism, when he corrected the Israelite conception of the sabbath, and when he began the practice of the sacrament. The twelve apostles were divinely appointed by Jesus with his authority, and guided by revelation, when they changed the sabbath to Sunday, opened the gospel to the gentiles, called for an end to animal sacrifice, and approved the eating of previously unclean animals.

It is not the Christian view that we can change any of God’s commands or practices at will. We have not instituted the changes from Mosaic law to Christian values at random, or due to popular preference. Every change that we observe is founded in a heavenly mandate, not in popularity. In contrast, where is the divinely invested steward who declares God’s approval of our modern social ideals? Where is the heavenly vision that roots our “progressivism” in God and not the earth?

Rejection)

This leaves the final possible response to our personal ideals differing from God’s: rejection. We can say, “yes, the God of the Bible is that particular way, and I will never be okay with that, so I will reject Him.” This, at least, is a more honest response than trying to change the divine.

But to the person making this decision I would encourage them to consider the origin of your values. Are they not directly from the society around you? Are they not from the material, fallen world? Ideals based in the world are doomed to the same fate as all the rest of mortality. These ideals will go out of fashion, and those that lived by them will similarly perish and fade. It is the natural endpoint of every worldly path. If you reject the transcendent, transcendence will respect that decision and similarly abandon you. If you wish to have no more reality than materialism and popularity, then you will have no more than them, and you will die with them.

If, on the other hand, you wish to have a hope for life, and renewal, and the transcendent ideal, and ultimate truth, if you wish to belong to those things and be transfigured by them, you should only expect to do so by embracing a message and a perspective that transcends from on high. One that comes from an ancient God, whose long-standing ways you should naturally expect to contradict many of the messages in our modern, constantly changing world. If you reject that God, then you must realize you have rejected your only option for eternal life, and you must accept the nihilistic void in His place.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Forced to Fit- Part One

Prerequisites for the Divine)

We are a culture that approaches God by first establishing a foundation of worldly ideals that we believe in, and then trying to make Him fit them. We reject God or alter Him because He simply doesn’t match our modern presuppositions about what ultimate good is supposed to be.

Some require a God who isn’t patriarchal. Some require a God who doesn’t wage war on His enemies. Some require a God whose sovereignty doesn’t supersede our own authority. Some require a God who can be validated by scientific methods. Some require a God who is socially progressive.

In these cases, feminism or pacifism or individualism or materialism or progressivism are our first God, and for God to be God He must be in alignment with that first ideal, or He must not exist at all. He is forced to fit, or He is discarded.

This is, of course, an inversion of the proper order. When man recognizes that he has a different life philosophy than God he is supposed to change himself to conform with the Almighty, not change the Almighty to conform with him!

A Modern Lens)

Let us note that differences between God’s ideal and our own is inevitable. Even setting aside personal selfishness and flaws, our modern culture has been far removed from the Judeo-Christian ethic for a while now, and we have been immersed in that climate from before we had any understanding at all. Even if we were raised in a traditional, Christian home, it is certain that we have absorbed presuppositions that we are not even aware of, reasons why we feel that we cannot accept God entirely as He has been described to us.

I have never met the person who did not have some baked-in misunderstanding of the Lord, including myself. I have never met the person who did not struggle with some aspect of who God is declared to be. This is a common challenge that we all grapple with in one way or another. Indeed, we could make a case that most of our path of discipleship is simply us coming to terms with God as He is, surrendering our inclination to try and change Him, and choosing to change ourselves instead.

There is a little more that I wish to say on this subject, but I will save it for a second post tomorrow.