I have always liked to study the Bible. I love God’s Word. It is all the things it says about itself - a lamp to guide my way, true spiritual food for my soul, the very Word of God, the wisdom of God, and so forth.
I have also enjoyed the study of theology, hence the interest in the Westminster Confession of Faith. As I said in another place, the WCF makes for good study. Much of what it teaches is what the Church has always taught. I do not have an advanced degree in theology, but I do have a BTH. The focus of the school where I studied was Biblical theology, so most of our time was spent learning to read and explain the text of Scripture. During my course of study, I, in effect, wrote a commentary on the whole Bible. Each one of us did.
Our profs. then would bring in other great Bible teachers and theologians to expand our understanding of the text. We were introduced to many great Protestant theologians and teachers that way, as well as selected passages and quotes from the Church Fathers.
During my course I also had 3 years of Greek study. So, even though I did not study in seminary, I do have a fairly strong background in Biblical studies. In fact, so much of what I have read in the WCF is very much like what I was taught where I studied, though it was not a Reformed school.
So, why didn’t I stick with my WCF study and continue to blog about it? Well, I began to read more from the early Church fathers. So, to make a long story a bit shorter, I will say that after awhile I realized that the Catholic Church still taught what the early Church Fathers taught.
Yes, there are liberal influences in parts of the Church, but the foundation is still there. There are some extremes as well. I will not deny that. However, the basic dogmas of our faith - and now I say “our” instead of “their” - can be traced back to the Apostles and the ones who were trained by them as per 1 Timothy 2.
In a way, I fell in love with the saints of God who so carefully defined and defended orthodoxy. St. John Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Anselm, St. Athanasius, and I finally came to St. Thomas Aquinas. St. Thomas was the one who convinced me that I needed to come back Home to the Church.
In fact, I came to understand that the split should never have happened in the first place. Sure, it would be easy to blame the pope at the time of the Reformation and the state of the Church then. It was a mess. It would be easy to blame the Reformers for being so impatient and such hot heads - and they were. It is more likely that both and all share in the blame.
That happened a long time ago now. What was God calling me to in the year 2014 and into 2015 and beyond? His call to come Home was clear, and I ran as fast as I could to get here. Or should I say swam as fast as I could, crossing the Tiber as they say.
See, as far as the Church goes, I was already a part of her, but not in full communion. My baptism was in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. The Church accepted my baptism as true Christian baptism. I had been part of the separated brethren. Now I am in full communion and loving it.
There is more to the story, of course, and maybe I will share more. So, I have nothing but love and gratitude for those who shared Christ with me along the way - as I wrote before. I must follow God’s call, and I did so with a heart full of joy!
What does everyone else need to do? I can’t answer that for you.
Thursday, April 23, 2015
Saturday, April 11, 2015
Why Catholicism - 3
II. Looking for the feminine
A. How is femininity viewed within Protestantism?
1. Egalitarian option
The Egalitarian position within Protestantism offers women the idea that men and women are equal. In general, no gender specific roles are acknowledged. All activity should be based on an individual's abilities and really nothing more.
That is all fine and dandy to a certain point, but for me, it did not answer my most basic questions about why I am female and not male. The most glaring example of egalitarian inability to give satisfying answers to the most basic questions about sexuality has to do with breast feeding.
In conversation with egalitarians at one point I tried to get them to at least admit that women because they were women were more suited to breast feeding. Men could not breast feed a baby. Some were not so sure that breast feeding could be limited to women only.
As far as I'm concerned, the egalitarian position fails at the most basic level of explaining why men are men and women are women. Their tendency to reduce all sexual differences to a matter of plumbing was not at all satisfying.
Even Christian egalitarians tend to fall into the same kinds of errors as their secular counterparts. The most obvious error being a denial of human nature. Men and women are not interchangeable, and the breast feeding example is one of the most obvious reasons as to why men cannot be substituted for women nor women for men.
There are many other natural examples of this dilemma for egalitarian feminists. Yes, in many ways men and women can both do the same kinds of things. For example, a woman can pound nails and a man can wash dishes. There may be slight differences, but both can get the job done.
However, when it comes to really important activities like bearing children and breast feeding, there really is no comparison. A man cannot naturally do either of those. It takes a woman.
Besides, in egalitarianism itself, there is no good explanation of why men are attracted to certain activities and women to other kinds. The whole cultural relativism line of argumentation breaks down under closer examination. Men like to do guy things and women like to do girl things. It's our nature and it is getting harder and harder to deny that. In spite of truly bizarre, egalitarian social experimentation, men are still men and women are still women. Just ask any mom who has raised children of both genders. There are huge differences, and those differences start to manifest themselves at birth.
Egalitarians still cannot explain why the Disney Princesses are so popular, nor why little boys love Thomas the Tank Engine.
Also, just because a woman can do many things that men can do, and vice versa, doesn't mean that the best use of a woman's time and energy is the same as a man's. So, for me, egalitarianism did not answer any of my important concerns about sexuality and gender identity.
2. Complementarian option
So, for me as a Protestant, the main other options was complementarianism. That is, men and women complement one another. Both men and women have God-ordained, gender-specific roles within the church and the home. In those areas, men lead and women follow. I like that arrangement, and no, I am definitely not a doormat.
However, I did not find a coherent philosophy and theology of motherhood as I examined the complementation position. There were very few articles written about motherhood, and many of them made motherhood itself out to be kind of a curse, a punishment that women must learn to deal with.
I wrote about that here when I did a kind of analysis of John Piper's sermons on motherhood. You can read that here if you like. He especially messes up the concept of "saved through child bearing" as do most males who try to preach on the subject. They have no clue about how a mother feels about being a mother. No clue at all. Don't they know any mothers that they could ask about what motherhood means to them?
I tell ya'...
3. Christian Patriarchy
I then spent quite a bit of time studying the Christian Patriarchy Movement. I have to say that I like a lot of what is written from that point of view. The women representing that movement are some of the strongest, most noble, and best Christian women I know. They are amazing women.
Even so, it was not for me. I couldn't really find theological flaws in it at the time. Egalitarians hate the "partrios" and spend a lot of time bashing them, but that was not the same as really refuting the theological or practical positions of the Patriarchalists.
However, there was something not quite right about it. Again, it was the lack of any coherent philosophy and theology of womanhood, motherhood, and matriarchy that finally helped me see the problems. It was all about males.
4. So, in Protestantism, my options boiled down to 1.) egalitarian feminism, which is all about women struggling to free themselves from male oppression. 2.) complementarianism, which is all about resisting the feminists' onslaught 3.) Christian patriarchy, which is all about establishing male rule in society, the home, and the church.
I never felt entirely comfortable with any of the 3. I most closely identified with #2, Complementarianism, and called myself a complementarian for a long time.
The idea of being Catholic didn't even cross my mind until much, much later. Sure, it was okay for Catholics to be Catholic, I guess. We are free. However, it was not something I was interested in.
A. How is femininity viewed within Protestantism?
1. Egalitarian option
The Egalitarian position within Protestantism offers women the idea that men and women are equal. In general, no gender specific roles are acknowledged. All activity should be based on an individual's abilities and really nothing more.
That is all fine and dandy to a certain point, but for me, it did not answer my most basic questions about why I am female and not male. The most glaring example of egalitarian inability to give satisfying answers to the most basic questions about sexuality has to do with breast feeding.
In conversation with egalitarians at one point I tried to get them to at least admit that women because they were women were more suited to breast feeding. Men could not breast feed a baby. Some were not so sure that breast feeding could be limited to women only.
As far as I'm concerned, the egalitarian position fails at the most basic level of explaining why men are men and women are women. Their tendency to reduce all sexual differences to a matter of plumbing was not at all satisfying.
Even Christian egalitarians tend to fall into the same kinds of errors as their secular counterparts. The most obvious error being a denial of human nature. Men and women are not interchangeable, and the breast feeding example is one of the most obvious reasons as to why men cannot be substituted for women nor women for men.
There are many other natural examples of this dilemma for egalitarian feminists. Yes, in many ways men and women can both do the same kinds of things. For example, a woman can pound nails and a man can wash dishes. There may be slight differences, but both can get the job done.
However, when it comes to really important activities like bearing children and breast feeding, there really is no comparison. A man cannot naturally do either of those. It takes a woman.
Besides, in egalitarianism itself, there is no good explanation of why men are attracted to certain activities and women to other kinds. The whole cultural relativism line of argumentation breaks down under closer examination. Men like to do guy things and women like to do girl things. It's our nature and it is getting harder and harder to deny that. In spite of truly bizarre, egalitarian social experimentation, men are still men and women are still women. Just ask any mom who has raised children of both genders. There are huge differences, and those differences start to manifest themselves at birth.
Egalitarians still cannot explain why the Disney Princesses are so popular, nor why little boys love Thomas the Tank Engine.
Also, just because a woman can do many things that men can do, and vice versa, doesn't mean that the best use of a woman's time and energy is the same as a man's. So, for me, egalitarianism did not answer any of my important concerns about sexuality and gender identity.
2. Complementarian option
So, for me as a Protestant, the main other options was complementarianism. That is, men and women complement one another. Both men and women have God-ordained, gender-specific roles within the church and the home. In those areas, men lead and women follow. I like that arrangement, and no, I am definitely not a doormat.
However, I did not find a coherent philosophy and theology of motherhood as I examined the complementation position. There were very few articles written about motherhood, and many of them made motherhood itself out to be kind of a curse, a punishment that women must learn to deal with.
I wrote about that here when I did a kind of analysis of John Piper's sermons on motherhood. You can read that here if you like. He especially messes up the concept of "saved through child bearing" as do most males who try to preach on the subject. They have no clue about how a mother feels about being a mother. No clue at all. Don't they know any mothers that they could ask about what motherhood means to them?
I tell ya'...
3. Christian Patriarchy
I then spent quite a bit of time studying the Christian Patriarchy Movement. I have to say that I like a lot of what is written from that point of view. The women representing that movement are some of the strongest, most noble, and best Christian women I know. They are amazing women.
Even so, it was not for me. I couldn't really find theological flaws in it at the time. Egalitarians hate the "partrios" and spend a lot of time bashing them, but that was not the same as really refuting the theological or practical positions of the Patriarchalists.
However, there was something not quite right about it. Again, it was the lack of any coherent philosophy and theology of womanhood, motherhood, and matriarchy that finally helped me see the problems. It was all about males.
4. So, in Protestantism, my options boiled down to 1.) egalitarian feminism, which is all about women struggling to free themselves from male oppression. 2.) complementarianism, which is all about resisting the feminists' onslaught 3.) Christian patriarchy, which is all about establishing male rule in society, the home, and the church.
I never felt entirely comfortable with any of the 3. I most closely identified with #2, Complementarianism, and called myself a complementarian for a long time.
The idea of being Catholic didn't even cross my mind until much, much later. Sure, it was okay for Catholics to be Catholic, I guess. We are free. However, it was not something I was interested in.
Thursday, April 9, 2015
Why Catholic? - 2
So, it was the realization that I had no mother that awakened in me a desire to know more about the Catholic Church.
You see, in Protestantism the church is generally thought of as an "it." We talk about the church in the neuter gender almost all the time. If we talk about the Bride of Christ, we may use feminine pronouns, but in general conversation, we talk about the church as a thing, an it. However, in the Bible, the Church is described with feminine imagery.
Think of the New Birth in Christ. In that birth we see the work of the Church in preaching the Gospel, baptizing and teaching believers. It is through this work of the Church that new birth comes by the power of the Holy Spirit working in and through her. Again, how can we miss the feminine imagery here?
Thus Church is our Mother. No, she is not the author of our salvation. Christ is, but we are born into the Church, Christ's body.
She is also called His bride. (See 2 Corinthians 11:2; Ephesians 5:24;25-27; Revelation 19:7-9; 21:1-2). The feminine imagery here is hard to miss, yet most Protestants don't give this strong imagery a second thought, and continue to call Christ's Bride an "it."
Also, the Church has strong feminine images, especially that of Mary. She is indeed our mother, as Jesus spoke from the cross to John. I won't go farther than that, since there are many resources out there which explain this much better than I ever could. Marian theology is new to me, but the veneration of Mary as Christ's mother and ours is a very ancient tradition. The early Church held her in high honor.
In Protestantism, Mary is practically ignored or even demonized. Well, we don't think we are demonizing her, but we really do not know what to do with Mary. I wrote about that in several posts here. In these posts I was kind of thinking out loud, trying to work out in my mind what I was beginning to see as far as the Catholic Church goes. There are a number of incomplete ideas or even mistaken concepts, so please check out what the Church officially teaches about the Church as our Mother.
For now, I will refer you to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
You see, in Protestantism the church is generally thought of as an "it." We talk about the church in the neuter gender almost all the time. If we talk about the Bride of Christ, we may use feminine pronouns, but in general conversation, we talk about the church as a thing, an it. However, in the Bible, the Church is described with feminine imagery.
Think of the New Birth in Christ. In that birth we see the work of the Church in preaching the Gospel, baptizing and teaching believers. It is through this work of the Church that new birth comes by the power of the Holy Spirit working in and through her. Again, how can we miss the feminine imagery here?
Thus Church is our Mother. No, she is not the author of our salvation. Christ is, but we are born into the Church, Christ's body.
She is also called His bride. (See 2 Corinthians 11:2; Ephesians 5:24;25-27; Revelation 19:7-9; 21:1-2). The feminine imagery here is hard to miss, yet most Protestants don't give this strong imagery a second thought, and continue to call Christ's Bride an "it."
Also, the Church has strong feminine images, especially that of Mary. She is indeed our mother, as Jesus spoke from the cross to John. I won't go farther than that, since there are many resources out there which explain this much better than I ever could. Marian theology is new to me, but the veneration of Mary as Christ's mother and ours is a very ancient tradition. The early Church held her in high honor.
In Protestantism, Mary is practically ignored or even demonized. Well, we don't think we are demonizing her, but we really do not know what to do with Mary. I wrote about that in several posts here. In these posts I was kind of thinking out loud, trying to work out in my mind what I was beginning to see as far as the Catholic Church goes. There are a number of incomplete ideas or even mistaken concepts, so please check out what the Church officially teaches about the Church as our Mother.
For now, I will refer you to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
I. "LORD, LOOK UPON THE FAITH OF YOUR CHURCH"
168 It is the Church that believes first, and so bears, nourishes and sustains my faith. Everywhere, it is the Church that first confesses the Lord: "Throughout the world the holy Church acclaims you", as we sing in the hymn "Te Deum"; with her and in her, we are won over and brought to confess: "I believe", "We believe". It is through the Church that we receive faith and new life in Christ by Baptism. In the Rituale Romanum, the minister of Baptism asks the catechumen: "What do you ask of God's Church?" And the answer is: "Faith." "What does faith offer you?" "Eternal life."54
169 Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: "We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation."55 Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith.
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
Some Explanation about My Conversion - #1 of why I am now a Catholic.
I. Introduction
A. First let me say that there are many Reformed teachers that I admire greatly. They have led the way in things like the exposition of Scripture and preaching. I also admire many Evangelicals who do not self-identify as Protestants or Reformed but who follow in the tradition of great expository preaching and evangelism.
B. Many Pentecostals and Charismatics have also influenced my life and faith. In fact, the first person who showed a love for my soul was a Pentecostal black woman from Canada. She was my kindergarten teacher and was loved and admired by many in our community, giving her love and service to generations of children in our town.
C. As well, I have had the privilege of ministering with some of the finest Christians I have ever known from many different Christian backgrounds. So, I have nothing but gratitude in my heart for those who have loved me and taught me the Gospel through the years. I have been a Christian since the age of 7 or 8, and that was quite a long time ago now.
II. Reason #1 - Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child
A. I will, D.V., write several posts explaining why I joined the Catholic church. These reasons are in no particular order of importance. They are kind of in chronological order I suppose. By that I mean that this reason #1 is maybe the first thing that began to open my eyes to where God was leading me.
B. The beginning was also the end.
1. That is, my mother passed away last May, just a few days after what would have been my parents' 65th anniversary. We lost Dad a few years ago, and now Mom is gone.
2. In many ways, Mom's death was a relief. She had been suffering one major health crisis after another for several months, years really. She lived in constant pain because of her arthritis for one thing, but also had congestive heart failure and circulation problems. She was disappearing in front of us, really.
My daughter and I would say that one day we would go to visit her, and she would have just vanished. No one would be able to find her, she was so tiny. Even so, her spirit was strong as an ox, and her little will as well. She was determined to get better, to recover from her latest ailment. She just ran out of time.
Mom had never been baptized, but my husband was able to give her Christian baptism just a few days before she passed away. She was so happy, like a little child. I had not seen her that delighted in years. She was not an unhappy person, but the pain really was a strain on her.
After she was baptized, she started kind of giggling in delight. No, not an old person's cackle, even though she was 89 years old. It was more like a child's delighted laughter. She couldn't wait to tell people what God had done for her.
We knew, thought, that her time was almost gone as far as this world goes. She was on her way Home.
3. So, I wasn't really in mourning like people might think. Even so, I realized that I was now an orphan. Both of my parents were gone from this earth. Maybe later I'll talk about my mother's alcoholism and how that affected our family when I was growing up. Even though my parents spent over 30 years sober, the effects of those formative years were still felt in many ways.
After Mom's death, the feeling of being a motherless child became overwhelming. Who was my mother now? Who had my mother been in life? Who had mothered me? Those questions and more had to have answers. Who is my mother?
About that time I read an article by a Protestant woman who talked about motherhood, but didn't get to the heart of the matter. Who is my mother, and what is motherhood all about? Yes, that sounds odd. A Catholic woman wrote a beautiful article about the other article. No, it was not a protest or a rebuttal exactly, but it was a kind of answer to my question about who my mother is.
She spoke about the Church and Mary. That was when it hit me that we Protestants did not talk about our churches as mothers. We didn't talk about Mary at all, really. It's like we were afraid of her, afraid of motherhood and femininity, even. Why couldn't we call our churches our mothers?
Yes, there are some Protestants who do use gendered language in reference to church, but it's still not common or understood.
The song Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child* went through my head and became kind of my theme song for several months. Mahalia Jackson's version is, in my opinion, the clearest interpretation of the meaning of that song. Listen to the lament, the grief, the pain in the lyrics. That is how I felt.
I didn't have a mother.
So, this realization about my motherless state was the first step in my conversion.
--------------------------------
* My focus was on the Motherless Child part of this medley. Summertime is a response to the child who feels motherless. She has a mother and a father watching over her, so all is well.
Think of this in spiritual terms. We have a Heavenly Father as children of God, but who is our Mother? Children need their mother.
A. First let me say that there are many Reformed teachers that I admire greatly. They have led the way in things like the exposition of Scripture and preaching. I also admire many Evangelicals who do not self-identify as Protestants or Reformed but who follow in the tradition of great expository preaching and evangelism.
B. Many Pentecostals and Charismatics have also influenced my life and faith. In fact, the first person who showed a love for my soul was a Pentecostal black woman from Canada. She was my kindergarten teacher and was loved and admired by many in our community, giving her love and service to generations of children in our town.
C. As well, I have had the privilege of ministering with some of the finest Christians I have ever known from many different Christian backgrounds. So, I have nothing but gratitude in my heart for those who have loved me and taught me the Gospel through the years. I have been a Christian since the age of 7 or 8, and that was quite a long time ago now.
II. Reason #1 - Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child
A. I will, D.V., write several posts explaining why I joined the Catholic church. These reasons are in no particular order of importance. They are kind of in chronological order I suppose. By that I mean that this reason #1 is maybe the first thing that began to open my eyes to where God was leading me.
B. The beginning was also the end.
1. That is, my mother passed away last May, just a few days after what would have been my parents' 65th anniversary. We lost Dad a few years ago, and now Mom is gone.
2. In many ways, Mom's death was a relief. She had been suffering one major health crisis after another for several months, years really. She lived in constant pain because of her arthritis for one thing, but also had congestive heart failure and circulation problems. She was disappearing in front of us, really.
My daughter and I would say that one day we would go to visit her, and she would have just vanished. No one would be able to find her, she was so tiny. Even so, her spirit was strong as an ox, and her little will as well. She was determined to get better, to recover from her latest ailment. She just ran out of time.
Mom had never been baptized, but my husband was able to give her Christian baptism just a few days before she passed away. She was so happy, like a little child. I had not seen her that delighted in years. She was not an unhappy person, but the pain really was a strain on her.
After she was baptized, she started kind of giggling in delight. No, not an old person's cackle, even though she was 89 years old. It was more like a child's delighted laughter. She couldn't wait to tell people what God had done for her.
We knew, thought, that her time was almost gone as far as this world goes. She was on her way Home.
3. So, I wasn't really in mourning like people might think. Even so, I realized that I was now an orphan. Both of my parents were gone from this earth. Maybe later I'll talk about my mother's alcoholism and how that affected our family when I was growing up. Even though my parents spent over 30 years sober, the effects of those formative years were still felt in many ways.
After Mom's death, the feeling of being a motherless child became overwhelming. Who was my mother now? Who had my mother been in life? Who had mothered me? Those questions and more had to have answers. Who is my mother?
About that time I read an article by a Protestant woman who talked about motherhood, but didn't get to the heart of the matter. Who is my mother, and what is motherhood all about? Yes, that sounds odd. A Catholic woman wrote a beautiful article about the other article. No, it was not a protest or a rebuttal exactly, but it was a kind of answer to my question about who my mother is.
She spoke about the Church and Mary. That was when it hit me that we Protestants did not talk about our churches as mothers. We didn't talk about Mary at all, really. It's like we were afraid of her, afraid of motherhood and femininity, even. Why couldn't we call our churches our mothers?
Yes, there are some Protestants who do use gendered language in reference to church, but it's still not common or understood.
The song Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child* went through my head and became kind of my theme song for several months. Mahalia Jackson's version is, in my opinion, the clearest interpretation of the meaning of that song. Listen to the lament, the grief, the pain in the lyrics. That is how I felt.
So, this realization about my motherless state was the first step in my conversion.
--------------------------------
* My focus was on the Motherless Child part of this medley. Summertime is a response to the child who feels motherless. She has a mother and a father watching over her, so all is well.
Think of this in spiritual terms. We have a Heavenly Father as children of God, but who is our Mother? Children need their mother.
Monday, April 6, 2015
What is Good about Good Friday?
Good Friday:
Some say that Good Friday cannot be good since it is the day that Jesus Christ was killed, crucified. How can it then be called good?
I would answer that it is Good in the same way that the Apostle Paul spoke of all things as working together for good. See Romans 8:28.
Also, it is Good in the way that all of God's Creation was declared to be good. The First Adam was created on the 6th Day of the week. The Last Adam, Jesus Christ, finished His work on the 6th Day of the week, and then rested. Well, I need to work on the wording here, but the idea is that God created all things good and then rested on the 7th Day. Christ's 6th word from the cross was "It is finished." He then committed His spirit into His Father's hands, and rested on the 7th Day in the tomb.
See the connection? So, in a similar way the Friday that Jesus died was good.
Some say that the term Good as in "Good Friday" was a misunderstanding of the word "God". It should be God's Friday instead of Good Friday. However, in other languages, such as Spanish, it is called Holy Friday. It is a day that should be set apart as holy. Doesn't that imply that it is also a good day?
No Christian that I know of calls Good Friday evil or bad. It is holy and good since it is the day that Christ finished His atoning work. It is the day that He became the Lamb of God and took away the sin of the world. Yes, great evil was done on that day, but the greatest good for mankind was accomplished - salvation in Christ.
I can't think of a better name for that day myself.
Some say that Good Friday cannot be good since it is the day that Jesus Christ was killed, crucified. How can it then be called good?
I would answer that it is Good in the same way that the Apostle Paul spoke of all things as working together for good. See Romans 8:28.
Also, it is Good in the way that all of God's Creation was declared to be good. The First Adam was created on the 6th Day of the week. The Last Adam, Jesus Christ, finished His work on the 6th Day of the week, and then rested. Well, I need to work on the wording here, but the idea is that God created all things good and then rested on the 7th Day. Christ's 6th word from the cross was "It is finished." He then committed His spirit into His Father's hands, and rested on the 7th Day in the tomb.
See the connection? So, in a similar way the Friday that Jesus died was good.
Some say that the term Good as in "Good Friday" was a misunderstanding of the word "God". It should be God's Friday instead of Good Friday. However, in other languages, such as Spanish, it is called Holy Friday. It is a day that should be set apart as holy. Doesn't that imply that it is also a good day?
No Christian that I know of calls Good Friday evil or bad. It is holy and good since it is the day that Christ finished His atoning work. It is the day that He became the Lamb of God and took away the sin of the world. Yes, great evil was done on that day, but the greatest good for mankind was accomplished - salvation in Christ.
I can't think of a better name for that day myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)