And

Socrates returned from the dead in a metropolis of the United States of America, mysteriously knew English, watched the news, and thought about it. Socrates being astute as he was went to the schools to ask some questions. Ultimately he found things not different as they were in Greece, his reasoning forced people into saying that the gods in the pantheon called, "Senate" were no gods at all and could not determine what is holy or just and neither followed standards that could be called such. He was accused of being an atheist, was put in jail, and drank some hemlock tea from the local organic foods store.

Isaiah experienced the same resuscitation and infusion with English, watched the same news from a different city, prayed, reflected and saw a vision. After the vision he went to the churches to say that the gods people have made in the senate are no gods at all . He also said that if their makers do not cease and desist all worship and vying for the supremacy of their favorite god, that they would become just like the gods they made. They would become vapid and worthless. He was summarily sawn in two as two parties joined forces against this new maverick who would upset the status quo with change.

Paul of Tarsus has a similar experience. He was resusitated at the highest point in the district known as Columbia. He examined the objects of worship and currency, and saw homage made to a trusted god on every picture of an idol. Paul thought, nobody here seems to worship Jesus. He said, "Hey, I can tell from the adoration given these four idols that you are very religious. But I'm here today to talk to you about the unknown God. He is the creator of all men, as your poets say, "all men are created equal." He gives good things that people might worship him. He sent his Son, as another poet of your's asks, "what if god what one of us?" He will judge the world by that Son, whom he raised from the dead."
The hearers said, "what does this have to do with changing this country," others replied, "this 'son' probably can't save us like America can, America saved one of our gods, he said so." While most scoffed, some said, "we will hear more on this." Paul was mostly unsucessful in evangelizing so he got put in prison towards the end of his life and had a sucessful teaching ministry there.

Thursday is for Theology

John Webster makes this proposition:

"A Christian theology of holiness is an exercise in holy reason; it has its context and its content in the revelatory presence of the Holy Trinity which is set forth in Holy Scripture; it is a venture undertaken in prayerful dependance upon the Holy Spirit; it is an exercise in the fellowship of the saints, serving the confession of the holy people of God; it is a work in which holiness is perfected in the fear of God; and its end is the sanctifying of God's holy name." - John Webster Holiness 2003 pps 9-10

Catechizing

"The Country Parson values Catechizing highly: for there being three points of his duty, the one, to infuse a competent knowledge of salvation in every one of his Flock; the other, to multiply, and build up this knowledge to a spirituall Temple; the third, to inflame this knowledge, to presse, and drive it to practice, turning it to reformation of life, by pithy and lively exhortations; Catechizing is the first point, and but by Catechizing, the other cannot be attained. Besides, whereas in Sermons there is a kinde of state, in Catechizing there is an humblenesse very sutable to Christianr egeneration, which exceedingly delights him as by way of exercise upon himself, and by way of preaching to himself, for the advancing of his own mortification; for in preaching to others, he forgets not himself, but is first a sermon to himself, and then to others; growing with the growth of his Parish." - George Herbert The Country Parson chp xxi

Now the question of the hour, can or should urban and suburban parsons so value catechizing, or would its effect not nullified in our day and age?

Days for Stuff

Modern (meaning contemporary) Monday - Some piece of recent literature or culture will be posted on.
Tertullian Tuesdays - I'll write some observation made from reading Tertullian.
World Missions/Pastoral Theology Wednesday - Some post dealing with missions and pastoral theology, though I may go wild and post a summary of a Wesley sermon.
Theology Thursday - Some post dealing with theology will be posted.
Sermon Friday - I will try to post some fruit from my sermon research.
Sources Saturday - I deal with some early document and it's possible bearing on New Testament interpretation.
Sunday

Rocky IV

A remake of Rocky IV should be made. In the second training montage Drago is show knocking out many sparring partners that are roughly the size of Rocky in just one punch. Everybody knows that the technique used in Rocky IV's second montage is that of dynamic contrast, to show Drago's training techniques and their superiority to the spartan lifestyle Rocky has chosen for his training. In the extant montage the contrast to the previous example is Rocky chopping down a tree that is roughly 100 times the size of Drago. I contend that Rocky should be shown punching down the tree.

The problem of the cross

One of the ultimate expressions in today's language of what was happening when Jesus went to the cross is that the sinless son of God was absorbing the powers of evil is such a way as to exhaust them which will ultimately lead to their defeat, starting with Jesus' resurrection and ascension to the Father, the giving to the Spirit to the church, and finally with the new creation: new heavens and new earth.

I believe this, I am a card carrying member of the N.T. Wright club for his making this conception quite clear. But if Christ's cross exhausted the powers of evil, why do things keep getting noticeably worse. Certain evils are so grotesque as to defy and actually conception of their defeat. Even the most fundamentalist, literal definition of hell seems somewhat unacceptable a fate for those who hate God, goodness, and people so much as to prefer such a place to heaven. Here is where annihilationists and universalists have a good argument, it is hard for a being who is love, to claim victory when such hatred remains a reality.(though I think freedom to be hated is a necessary part of God's love) I mean in many senses, sin is certainly a sickness, but more pervasively it is simply rebellion, wilful doing of that which we know is wrong.

So then, is there a way to perhaps hold this view as well as a more Lutheran view that the work of the cross is somehow hidden? Also, is it perhaps better to simply say that the cross and resurrection, even when best understood, are never fully explained and always will, even in the new creation, will defy rationality in such a way as to always be a problem? If the cross is the weakness of God and the foolishness of God, then perhaps it can never be understood.

So, as important as apologetics are, for they are part of gospel proclamation, insofar as they make way for the gospel and do no other, they are excellent, the cross of Jesus can, it seems never be fully understood, and since Christian theology seems to be a testimony and witness to that, our apologetic endeavors should be careful, lest we overstate our case and lead to new believers with anemic theologies of the cross.

Evil has been absorbed, defeated, and turned inside out, and yet this work remains in many ways invisible to us.

Atonement...Theology...in the Bible?

In the Old Testament there is a definite understanding that the Lord uses foreign nations to bring justice to his people for their unfaithfulness, the Lord raises up nations and turns his people over to them. Think Amos 6:14 or hints in the final chapters of Deuteronomy.

Now, when we read the gospels we see Israel under a foreign nation's power. We then see their king, according to the gospel writers, die by the hand of that foreign nation. So Jesus, in a very Old Testament way, faced and absorbed God's wrath by receiving death by the hands of a pagan nation.

This is course begs the question, if Jesus absorbed that wrath, why was Jerusalem destroyed? Well, in the eyes of many of the early Christians...at least their writers...Jesus not only died for sins, but died fulfilling the law and in some sense abolishing the need for a temple and a geographic center for worship. He also died to be raised from the dead and start creation anew. So from a New Testament point of view Jesus death was in a powerful for the sins of Israel because of the sins of the Romans.

I'm starting to think that my atonement theology needs to be more informed by the Old Testament, particularly leviticus and the prophets.

On a side note: I do not know how I could talk about this as a gentile to a Jew. I'd probably have to start with the bare historical notion that this is what the New Testament teaches, then move on it whether or not such teachings are true. This would be the question: did a god raise Jesus from the dead, and was this god the god of the Jews, the Lord of Hosts?

Proverbs

George Herbert collected proverbs from his time period and made a compilation entitled "outlandish proverbs."

I'm beginning to think that modern preachers would do well to do the same. Making associations between common sense and the gospel, either by fulfilling common sense or destroying it is a wonderful way to preach. My few good sermons have involved taking typical wisdom and confronting it with the scriptures. That is all.