My Blog

I plan on writing some reviews over the break.

2011-12-21T09:56:00.000-08:00

I'll only name the books as I write the reviews though. I do not want to make claims that I will not meet.

The first is The Moral Vision of the New Testament by Richard Hays. I read it back in 2008, but it has been a long time and I probably did not understand it very well. So I will be reviewing it a chapter at a time.

PQ4R, Lecturing to the Wall, and Becoming an Agent in Your Own Education

2011-12-19T23:31:00.000-08:00

PQ4R: A Technique from Richard Restak’s Think Smart: A Neuroscientist’s Prescription for Improving Your Brain’s Performance, (Riverhead Books, 2009), 108.

Preview – Skim through a chapter of material, noting the headings, vocabulary words, and concepts.

Formulate Questions – Ask questions about the material you have read.

Read – Read the passage looking for answers to the questions you’ve asked.

Reflect – Think about what you’ve read and how to apply it as well as its relationship to the subject at hand and its relationship to other subjects.

Recite – Repeat the material from memory after you’ve learned it. Do this with the text book closed, and only open it to check your accuracy. Put it in the exact language of the text as well as in your own words.

Review – Try to recall and summarize the same points.

Restak’s system is helpful, but it is slightly disorganized. For instance, how can you know what questions to ask about the material until you’ve read it more carefully? I think that Preview, Read, and Formulate Questions should be somehow in the same step.

His method is very similar to the Lecture to the Wall method outlined in “The Overnight Student” by Michael Jones which can be found here. The whole book is wonderful, you should print it out and read it.

Jones recommends doing things this way:

Take a bite – Read a manageable portion of your source material.
Use Your Tongue – Explain what you’ve just read out loud to an imaginary audience. Take note of everything that you cannot explain. You do not understand those things.
Reread – Read your source material again asking yourself consciously, “what does this mean, how can I explain this to an audience, to what does it relate?”
Repeat steps two and three until you have mastered the material.

Jack Carter Quote

2011-11-30T19:36:00.000-08:00

Pastor Jack Carter recently said this,

"Covenant and kingdom are the two rails upon which the church of God travels through history."

Simply awesome.

Jim is Right

2011-11-29T19:14:00.000-08:00

Jim West writes concerning Romans 10:15:

Romans 10:15b is an interesting text and it’s usually translated ‘how beautiful are the feet of those preaching the good news’ or some such.
Here’s the phrase- Ὡς ὡραῖοι οἱ πόδες τῶν εὐαγγελιζομένων τὰ ἀγαθά.
It appears to me, however, that the addition of ἀγαθά at the end of the verse impels translations to be more forceful, since ‘preach good news’ is already contained in ‘εὐαγγελιζομένων’.
Hence I would suggest that Romans 10:15b should be rendered ‘how welcome are the feet of those who preach the good news well’. The advantage of this translation is that it takes the last two words seriously and doesn’t allow them to be swallowed up in εὐαγγελιζομένων.

I agree. The lack of attention given to τὰ ἀγαθά is strange, especially considering that Paul wrote this letter with false teaching in mind.

Stuff to be thankful for

2011-11-26T13:15:00.000-08:00

My friend, mentor, and brother in Christ, Bill Hitt. He went to be with the Lord Tuesday November 15th, 2011.
My awesome wife. She is a daily reminder of the beauty and love of Jesus Christ.
Seminary, where I learned Greek and Hebrew and gained a deeper love of the inspired writ.
Windsor Park Baptist Church. They are a wonderful outpost of God's kingdom and a beautiful instance of the bride of Christ on this earth. The people there are peaceable, loving, and prayerful, but to the enemy they are terrible, as an army with banners.
My family, immediate and extended. They are interesting, eccentric, and helpful. I love them all.
My job. I teach math, bible, and rhetoric at a private school.
My students, I love them more than the actual job.
Science, testing hypotheses is fun.

Wesley's Address to Clergy a review and recommendation

2011-11-23T09:58:00.000-08:00

To read Wesley's own words, click here.

The field of pastoral ministry/care/theology is interesting as it currently stands. To risk significant over-simplification of the issues I will aim to summarize them quickly. The conservative wing is filled with simplistic appropriations of a simplified understanding of Richard Baxter (get people to know right doctrine) and simplistic applications of modern leadership theory to the church (the church needs a pastor who leads!). The more liberal wing is so enamored of a non-exegetical dismissal of the Bible on the grounds of an uncritical use of feminist criticism that most liberal pastoral theologies are intentionally unbiblical. The mainline writers (like Purves) recommend looking back to the classical tradition of pastoral theology, which while being awesome misses the point of the classical tradition: it is radically exegetical. The pastors cited by Purves were all exegetes and theologians, so to imitate their example is not just to learn from their theology or try their methods, but to imitate them in their love of the Bible. In current seminaries, the focus appears to be upon academic achievement or the soft sciences, not necessarily upon exegesis and application of the Scriptures (see http://fredputnam.org/?q=node/54). Youth ministry manuals typically end up being related to contextualizing or church structure (to remove students from church life or to keep them around). Music ministry manuals are usually about music choice, intentions, or some other such thing. Wesley calls all clergy back to knowledge of the Bible, skillful application thereof, as well as a burning zeal for God, his church, and those who yet reject or remain ignorant of the gospel.
            Wesley offers numerous gems of advice in this one address. I recommend it to ministers of all kinds: pastors, assistant pastors, education ministers, youth pastors, seminary professors, music ministers, etc. All of his prescriptions will not be possible for all, but he demonstrates our shortcomings with facility and grace. He writes that the Christian minister must quick minded, studious, affectionate towards God and man, and an exemplar of the content of the gospel message. He recommends that those who seek the Christian ministry train their minds using every available means so that they might defend and explain the gospel for the church that was purchased with the blood of Christ. He writes, “And as to acquired endowments, can he take one step aright, without first a competent share of knowledge a knowledge, First, of his own office; of the high trust in which he stands, the important work to which he is called Is there any hope that a man should discharge his office well, if he knows not what it is that he should acquit himself faithfully of a trust, the very nature whereof he does not understand Nay, if he knows not the work God has given him to do, he cannot finish it.” He then lists the species of knowledge that a preacher should aim to attain, the Bible (in Greek and Hebrew), the Fathers, science, history, rhetoric, logic, and even some geometry to aid in thinking more clearly!
            As to the intentions, Wesley is clear, “ought it not to be singly this, to glorify God, and to save souls from death?” This is the sum total of the life of a Christian elder/overseer (and of any Christian), but the “professional” especially must not live for his name, the size of his congregation, or the sales of his books. He must not live to be right, to do things his own way, but must constantly turn to the teachings of Jesus Christ and make them his daily practice. Wesley wrote to male clergy, but the same is true of female clergy. To my readers who do not think that women should preacher/lead in churches, the fact remains that if they do, they should do so for God’s glory if they believe that they are called.
            Wesley’s thoughts about the specifics of a preacher’s knowledge of the Bible is awesome and unattained by the present author. I here reproduce it in full:

Let us each seriously examine himself. Have I, (1.) Such a knowledge of Scripture, as becomes him who undertakes so to explain it to others, that it may be a light in all their paths? Have I a full and clear view of the analogy of faith, which is the clue to guide me through the whole? Am I acquainted with the several parts of Scripture; with all parts of the Old Testament and the New Upon the mention of any text, do I know the context, and the parallel places? Have I that point at least of a good Divine, the being a good textuary? Do I know the grammatical construction of the four Gospels; of the Acts; of the Epistles; and am I a master of the spiritual sense (as well as the literal) of what I read? Do I understand the scope of each book, and how every part of it tends thereto? Have I skill to draw the natural inferences deducible from each text? Do I know the objections raised to them or from them by Jews, Deists, Papists, Arians, Socinians, and all other sectaries, who more or less corrupt or caponize the word of God? Am I ready to give a satisfactory answer to each of these objections? And have I learned to apply every part of the sacred writings, as the various states of my hearers require?

(2.) Do I understand Greek and Hebrew? Otherwise, how can I undertake, (as every Minister does,) not only to explain books which are written therein, but to defend them against all opponents? Am I not at the mercy of every one who does understand, or even pretends to understand, the original? For which way can I confute his pretence? Do I understand the language of the Old Testament critically at all? Can I read into English one of David's Psalms; or even the first chapter of Genesis? Do I understand the language of the New Testament? Am I a critical master of it? Have I enough of it even to read into English the first chapter of St. Luke? If not, how many years did I spend at school? How many at the University? And what was I doing all those years? Ought not shame to cover my face?

Wesley's address might bring us to turn off the television, get off the facebook, and pick up a grammar. They may lead us away from the blogs and towards the Bible. They may even lead us to pray for instead of complain about members in our churches. If any of these effects occur, then I will be happy.

Leithart, Children, and Baptists

2011-11-10T07:13:00.000-08:00

Peter Leithart has a thoughtful post on the theology of the child.

Though his post is thoughtful, he makes a comment about Baptists that is on the troubling side:

Baptizing infants poses a deep challenge to liberal order: It rejects the notion that the individual child is a self-standing individual, and by placing the child within the church, a public institution with a political history, it disrupts easy public/private divide. By contrast, believer’s baptism looks to be an accommodation to liberal order (though, more precisely, it may be at the roots of liberal order).

He rightly notes (though he does so parenthetically) that the Baptists are not conceding to the liberal order...there wasn't one when they came around. The early Baptists saw themselves as conceding to Christ's right to be king and his demand of fealty over against a baptism that had long been co-opted by the state as a (the) mode of determining citizenship in the city of man. Baptism, according to Jesus, was always a sign of citizenship in God's kingdom. When it is used by the rulers of the present age, particularly when it is used by them as an authorization to disobey Christ by killing other Christians, it becomes a concession of the power of the gospel to the power of the sword. The early Baptists and Anabaptists knew about that too. The violent version of the Anabaptists did the same thing when they used baptism as an excuse to rebel violently. They denied the presence of the kingdom, they failed to love their enemies, and Jesus was right about them, they died by the sword.
The Baptists had no sense of defending pure human autonomy until much later (see Mullins), even then their case must be argued against. The point the early Baptists wanted to make was that the state was not autonomous and neither was the church autonomously able to merge with kingdoms that were fundamentally at odds with Jesus Christ. If anything, they defended God's sovereignty rather than anything approaching classical liberalism. To be baptized as a convert is to admit of an alien grace, to submit to a crucified king, to worship a resurrected Lord, and to receive an act from other citizens of the new kingdom. Nothing about that sounds like rugged individualism.

St. Augustine on Love and Lust

2011-11-09T15:30:00.000-08:00

"...Scripture enjoins nothing but love, and censures nothing but lust, and moulds men's minds accordingly...By love I mean the impulse of one's mind to enjoy God of his own account and to enjoy oneself and one's neighbor on account of God. What unbridled lust does to corrupt a person's own mind and body is called wickedness and what it does to harm another person is called wrongdoing. All sins can be divided into these two kinds, but wickedness comes first. Once it has depleted the mind and as it were, bankrupted it, it rushes on to commit wrongdoing in order to remove the obstacles to wickedness or to find assistance for it. Similar, what love does to benefit itself is self-interest, and what it does to benefit a neighbor is known as kindness. And here self-interest comes first, because nobody can do good to another out of resources which he does not possess. The more the realm of lust is destroyed [through self-interest], the more the realm of love is increased." Augustine, On Christian Doctrine Book III Chapter 10

My instinct here is that many Christians would benefit from appropriate self-interest these days. Time spent learning the teachings of Jesus, spending time in silence instead of watching television, and perhaps exercising to relieve their stress would help them to see the value of actually serving others. As things currently stand, many people (myself included) complain about opportunities to serve other people.

I'm so vain...

2011-11-08T12:36:00.000-08:00

I probably think that this post by Jim West is about me. He called me "a blogger from Texas who doesn't blog anymore." He also posted a picture of me, clearly taken by a Zwinglian.

Thanks Jim, you've made me famous.

Jesus' famous prayer

2011-10-21T22:22:00.000-07:00

Text: ἁγίασον αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ· ὁ λόγος ὁ σὸς ἀλήθειά ἐστι. -John 17:17

Translation: Use the truth to make them holy; your word is the truth.

This is Jesus, praying to his Father. The interesting thing to note is that Jesus does not refer directly to his own words here, but to the word of his Father. He prays that his Father's word will sanctify Jesus' disciples. The amazing thing is that Jesus equates his own words with his Father's word all over John's gospel. “Then Jesus said to them, “When you lift up the Son of an, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing of myself, but I do just as my Father taught me, this is what I speak (John 8:28).” Jesus wants his disciples to be sanctified by their acquaintance with his own words! In the four gospels, aside from the whole Bible, we have the glorious gift of Jesus' own words. Jesus himself prayed that these words would make his people holy. My thought is that those who legitimately desire to experience God's holiness have a guarantee in the words of Jesus. Equally profound is that the writer of the gospel of John says that “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God...and the word became flesh...(John 1:1, 14a).” In other words Jesus himself is the word of the Father, if we would be holy then we should go to Jesus. He taught us God's way for our sakes, he was lifted up for our sakes, he was raised for our sakes, and he awaits patiently for our repentance, evermore himself The Way for our sakes.

Sunday School 1 John and Confessing our Sins

2011-10-08T22:28:00.000-07:00

1 John 1:9-2:2:

Greek

9 ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν, πιστός ἐστιν καὶ δίκαιος ἵνα ἀφῇ ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας. 10 ἐὰν εἴπωμεν ὅτι οὐχ ἡμαρτήκαμεν, ψεύστην ποιοῦμεν αὐτὸν καὶ ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν ἡμῖν. 1 Τεκνία μου, ταῦτα γράφω ὑμῖν ἵνα μὴ ἁμάρτητε. καὶ ἐάν τις ἁμάρτῃ, παράκλητον ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν δίκαιον· 2 καὶ αὐτὸς ἱλασμός ἐστιν περὶ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, οὐ περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων δὲ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου.

English

If any of us should confess our sins, then he who is faithful and just, will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If and of us should say, “We have not sinned,” then we make him a liar and his word is not in us. My children, I am writing this to you so that you will not sin, now if anybody should sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the just; and he is the atonement for our sins, but not merely for out sins, but for those of the whole world.

Notes: The teaching of 1 John poses a stumbling block for many Christians. It encourages Christians to live like Jesus Christ, “walk also as he walked.” There is no way around it, Christians live differently. To the person who wishes to live on the basis of wanton desire, 1 John gives no quarter. But to the legalist, 1 John also allows no comfort. John is quite clear, if somebody confesses their sin to God, with the intention of being cleansed and forgiven, God does just that. Any Christian can know that this is so for them, not because they do everything right, but because Jesus died for them. They can know Jesus died for them, because he died for the whole world. John wants Christians to live like Jesus, but Christians are sinners, so he reminds them that Jesus is their atonement. Christians, according to John, can have assurance of forgiveness by asking for it. They also can have assurance of salvation because they know they needed atonement in the first place! Elsewhere in the letter, which I'll get to, John explains that assurance also comes by believing that Jesus really lived in the flesh and by living a loving life.

I recommend that every Christian memorize this. It appears to be a cure for living like Jesus' teachings do not matter and for legalism.

Student Links

2011-10-07T10:59:00.001-07:00

General MLA Style Information

Footnote and Endnote Information

Worldcat

My Fiance's Blog

2011-09-15T22:00:00.000-07:00

Avery wrote this helpful post about living one's life reflectively. Though she did not quote Socrates, he is right, the unexamined life is not worth living.The prologue to Proverbs puts it differently, and this is closer to what she is getting at, "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and do not rely on your own strength. In all your ways, acknowledge him and he will make your paths straight. Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord, and turn away from evil. It will be a healing for your flesh and a refreshment for your body. (Proverbs 3:5-7)"
Don't be wise in your own eyes, but examine yourself and what you do. This is the substance of repentance, rethink your life on the basis of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Artistotle on Youth

2011-09-14T12:48:00.000-07:00

They would always rather do noble deeds than useful ones: their lives are regulated more by moral feeling than by reasoning; and whereas reasoning leads us to choose what is useful, moral goodness leads us to choose what is noble. They are fonder of their friends, intimates, and companions than older men are, because they like spending their days in the company of others, and have not yet come to value either their friends or anything else by their usefulness to themselves.- Aristotle On Rhetoric Accessed Here.

Teachers should read the whole section on character in this little book. It would help preachers too. Young people gravitate towards certain errors and have certain strengths, the gospel must be applied to both.

Why I am not a dispensationalist

2011-09-14T12:37:00.000-07:00

This post is made for my friend Nick Acker, who requested it on facebook.

The system is often overly complicated. Christianity can be complicated, but the broad theme of the Bible is that Jesus is Lord and that we should obey him. Therein is contained nothing about ages in which obedience to Jesus is irrelevant.
Romans 1:16-18 and 9-11 say that Paul desires both Jews and Gentiles to experience the grace of God by believing the gospel about Jesus Christ.
The book of Revelation, though containing a futurist element, is clearly apocalyptic literature. It reveals who is currently King in hyperbolic language.
Paul's gospel is not different from Jesus' gospel.
"Rightly dividing the word of truth" means rightly interpreting the gospel itself, not rightly discovering the dispensations in the Bible.

Thoughts about being Christ Centered

2011-09-05T13:02:00.000-07:00

The phrase, "Christ-centered" is thrown around a lot.

I have been thinking about what it might mean.

I could not tell you what it means to others, but here's my crack at it. Because it sounds like a catch phrase for people who like Derek Webb's old stuff (me) rather than a concrete, Biblical, practicable notion.

The more I've studied the New Testament and first century history, the more I've grown to see a specific connection between the four gospels and the rest of the New Testament. The authors knew, revered, and applied the teachings of Jesus Christ to the recipients of their letters. This colors everything that follows.

Being Christ-centered means seeing Jesus as a knowledgeable guy.

It means seeing Jesus as God's good-will toward humanity, bringing peace with God, in his life, death, resurrection, and present reign.

It means walking in step with God's Spirit, who according to John 14:16, was sent "to teach you all things and to remind you of everything I [Jesus] said to you." Basically being Christ centered means obeying the teachings of Jesus Christ, this leads to a nine flavored fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. And Christians develop these traits because all who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

It means worshiping God through Jesus, but since Jesus himself defined worship as what happens in spirit and in truth in contradistinction to the adultery of the woman at the well, at any point in time (John 4), then he must mean obedience to himself. So, God is worshiped through Jesus when his priestly kingdom (the people who follow him) do what he says and tell others of what he himself (Jesus) did (1 Peter 2:1-12).

It means calling God, "Father" because Jesus said to.

It means seeing other Christians as brothers and sisters and not sparing partners for hobby-horse disagreements.

It means following Jesus' example in self-denial.

It means reading the Bible the way Jesus said to, "The greatest command is love the Lord your God...and your neighbor as yourself."

It means believing Jesus when he includes enemies in his definition of neighbor.

It means all of this and more, but it cannot mean less.

Sunday School Romans 1:1-5.

2011-09-05T12:42:00.000-07:00

Romans 1:1-17 Sunday School Notes:

Romans 1:1-5:

Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which was foretold by the his prophets in the holy writings. The gospel is about his son, born of the line of David according to the flesh, declared God's son in power, according to the Spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord. Through him we have received good-will and apostleship for bringing about the obedience of faith in all the nations for the sake of his name. (Geoff Translation)

Paul has a gospel.

Paul's gospel is God's gospel.

Paul's gospel is his announcement that Jesus Christ is Lord. That he lived his earthly life as King David's heir and that he lives today a resurrected life as the Lord of history.

Paul's gospel is very similar to what we see in the four gospels.

Read Mark 1:1-17 and 16:1-8

Jesus was foretold in the Old Testament. Jesus lived as the Messiah (the Christ). Jesus preached God's kingdom and lived as the acting king of this kingdom. Jesus is currently Lord because after his crucifixion he was raised from the dead. Jesus calls people to trust in himself and he trains people for moral transformation (the obedience of faith). Jesus commissions people to preach his same gospel.

Paul was set apart for God's gospel just like all disciples of Jesus Christ: to make more disciples. To train them to obey Jesus Christ (Matthew 28:16-20). Paul calls this the obedience of faith.

Paul believes that the gospel message marks a radical shift in human history. The Jesus event is a move from the present evil age, into the new creation. Jesus' resurrection and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, for Paul, are the evidence of this fact (Romans 8:14-30).

Paul has a dream. An ambition that consumes his life: “the obedience of faith in all the nations.”

Jesus has a dream: disciples from all nations.

Another way to put it: the moral transformation of individuals so that they can live in a society marked by God's goodness.

What is your dream?

Can it fit into Paul's dream? Jesus' dream?

More on Willitts' on McKnight

2011-09-05T07:47:00.000-07:00

In a third post Willitts' makes this observation:

[McKnight]...contends that evangelicals today are really “soterians” (“salvationists”) instead of truly evangelicals. He means by this that most have equated the word “gospel” with “salvation”. But the two words, says Scot, are different. His argument is that biblically the concept of “gospel” is a much wider than simply the issue of personal salvation, although it surely includes it. This confusion, according to Scot, has led to what he calls a “salvation culture”- “a culture that focuses on and measures people on the basis of whether they can witness to an experience of personal salvation” (30). The problem with a salvation culture is in its obsession with securing decisions for Christ, it creates the problem of getting the decided to be a disciple.

and then he asks this question:

Do you agree with Scot’s view that the terms and concepts of “salvation” and “gospel” are not identical? Do you agree with the implication he draws from the distinction? Are you a “soterian” or an “evangelical”?

Yes and No.

No first. The word are not identical, but one is geared toward the other. The gospel, says Paul, is the announcement about God's Son, who lived as the Davidic king in his fleshly life, and is resurrected from the dead by the Holy Spirit and reigns as Lord, Jesus Christ (Romans 1:1-4). But Paul was commissioned to preach this gospel for the purpose of all nations exhibiting the obedience of faith (Romans 1:5). This sounds like the great commission. Paul later says that the gospel is God's power for salvation, because in it, God's righteous (read: good) character is revealed in it. The character is revealed, says Paul, by faithfulness [of Christ] for the sake of faith (Romans 1:16-17). The gospel is the story of Jesus Christ and it is told for the sake of faith. So though the terms are not identical, the gospel is as much for human salvation as it is anything. But, the salvation is deliverance from the present evil time and it does so by saving individuals from guilt and giving them God's Spirit in preparation for a future resurrection from the dead.

Yes.
The gospel is not identical with salvation in the commonly understood sense. The gospel is never preached, even one time, in the New Testament as "now you can go to heaven when you die." Most people mean "go to heaven when you die" when they say the word 'salvation.' So, I agree with McKnight, salvation is not the gospel. Jesus actually equates eternal life with following him, not with the result of a particular or claim somebody makes about themselves. This is evident in John's gospel as well as the synoptics. What must I do to receive eternal life, "Follow me." Or, "This is eternal life, that they might know you, the only true God and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."

The King Jesus Gospel, my thoughts on Joel Willitt's thought on Scot McKnight's Book before I've read it.

2011-09-05T07:29:00.000-07:00

Joel Willitts is reading Scot McKnight's new book, "The King Jesus Gospel."

He makes this observation:

Here’s the central issue Scot is tackling in the book, and its one that has been a perennial discussion since at least the time that I’ve been an adult Christian: Evangelism as a call to decision versus evangelism as a call to a life of discipleship. The former has led to the problem of having “The Decided” in our pews who are yet “The Discipled”. According to Scot, this problem has been created by our “Plan of Salvation” gospel theology. While in no way downplaying the need for a decisive action as a first step, Scot argues that the biblical gospel must be defined such that the end goal is not only or singularly “personal salvation” from sin, but salvation from sin so to participate in God’s epic story of world rescue.

He then asks this question, "Does Scot's concern resonate with you?"

Yes.

It absolutely does.

I detect at least three flaws in "decision evangelicalism."

A depersonalized view of Jesus Christ. Since he died for me, I just sing songs about him and that's about it. He is my atonement but not necessarily my Lord or my teacher in the mundane practicalities of my life.
A self-centered view of God's kingdom. God's kingdom is where I go when I die. Since I am going there when I die, I do not have to live (not in rebellion but as a logical consequence) as a citizen of this holy, loving, and just society now. This is sad because in a world ripped by war, anybody who preaches about God's kingdom is beautiful all the way to their feet.
A view of the Christian life that focuses too much on "my relationship with God (this is a consequence paradoxically held with the first)." This concept, rightly defined is central to the gospel, but typically it means that God loves me no matter what, period. For instance, "I am a friend of God, he calls me friend." But Jesus defines a friend as "somebody who obeys my [Jesus'] commands." This consequence minimizes the atonement because feelings trump grace and so pains of conscience become the norm of the Christian life. But it also minimizes obedience because it fails to emphasize the Kingship of the one who calls us friend.

Wright on Romans

2011-08-17T11:14:00.000-07:00

This video is great. Hat tip to Joel Watts.

The Task and Hope of Every Bible Reader

2011-08-16T08:43:00.000-07:00

νόει ὃ λέγω· δώσει γάρ σοι ὁ Κύριος σύνεσιν ἐν πᾶσι. (2 Timothy 2:7)

Think about what I am saying, for the Lord will grant you understanding in everything. (2 Timothy 2:7)

Notes: The Bible itself demands a thoughtful reading. The attitude of "the Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it" is explicitly condemned within the Bible. A more biblical approach would be, "The Bible says it, it deserves my best efforts, and God will help me." The context here for Paul is also one of preserving the traditions of his preaching and Jesus' teaching. So, if we think hard about what the Bible says for the purpose of obeying Jesus Christ, God will grant you understanding.

What is the centrality of your message?

2011-08-16T08:20:00.000-07:00

Craig Benno at Unsettled Christianity asks, "what is the centrality of your message?"

The center piece Christian preaching must be, Jesus Christ and him crucified.
Trusting in the God who raised him from the dead is what effects justification in the hearers of such preaching.
So, Jesus must be the center. It is preaching about Jesus bringing God's kingdom and his demands of discipleship that brings moral transformation in Christians, which is the practical antecedent of eschatological transformation (1 John 3:2-3).

Jesus and the promise of forgiveness must be central, but his demands to live free from sin must be included or it is no longer preaching about Jesus. Sin must be preached as defeated by Jesus, as forgiven by God, and as behaviors which are explicitly excluded from the citizenship in God's kingdom.

Quote of the Day

2011-08-06T21:02:00.000-07:00

The most important truth about the Devil is this: Jesus Christ has conquered him. - Emil Brunner, The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption, 145.

Quote of the Day

2011-08-05T19:22:00.000-07:00

Christ's Passion wrought our salvation, properly speaking, by removing evils; but the Resurrection did so as the beginning and exemplar of all good things. - Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologica Part III, Question 53, Article 1, Reply to Objection 3.

Aquinas is like Barth, his works are long, but filled with gems on every page.

The Added Dimension of Discomfort

2011-07-25T11:45:00.000-07:00

Lately, when I work out I have been doing my leg work, stretching, and cool off outside in the heat. I still do the upper body exercises inside for no other reason than the fear of dropping a weight on my face when I'm sweating. But the point is that I know by how much I can lift on squats for a single rep (a bit over 300 pounds), but when doing rep work I can only lift slightly more than 200 pounds for any more than 20 repetitions.

I've been doing this because my squat rack only fits outside, but the consequence is that my mid level (which is hopefully above a normal person's upper level strength) is being conditioned to operate in intense heat and humidity. This means that what has become a weekly norm for me might be brutally uncomfortable to others.

The added, though not unreasonable or dangerous, discomfort gives me an edge in many situations. I think this applies in most life circumstances. We are creatures of habit and once our habits become leisurely they typically stay that way. I recommend adding a dimension of discomfort to your life that will give you an edge in some way. For instance, skip some dessert or avoid spending money on that useless item. The satisfied, but not full stomach will not prevent you from thought or activity. The budget space will give you a margin for service Jesus Christ by caring for somebody in need.

This is what discipline means, add a dimension of discomfort to your life so that you will have the freedom to do some other good. This is true in all things, including spiritual disciplines. As Paul said, "I pummel my body, making it my slave. (1 Corinthians 9:27)" This dimension of Christian discipline is for a purpose, Paul says that he might preach the gospel free of charge and win all the more. It is no aimless, destructive asceticism, but an asceticism for Christlike character. The person who daily denies themselves small pleasures will have no problem denying themselves some big pleasure for the good of their neighbor. But the person who waits until the big showy times to help others falls into the trap of the Pharisee, they do it for acclaim, not out of character and it leads to spiritual injury. Not much different from the man who never exercises and then tries to help somebody move a heavy object.

Karl Barth on Capitalism

2011-07-19T23:38:00.000-07:00

Finally, what are we to think of work which, while it is intrinsically neither useful nor harmful, presents so unworthy an aspect just because it is directed neither to good nor evil, nor indeed to man at all, but past him to a purely illusory yet dynamic and, in its conjunction of the two, almost unequivocally demonic process which consists in the amassing and multiplying of possessions expressed in financial calculations (or miscalculations), i.e., the "capital" which in the hands of the relatively few, who pull all the strings, may equally well, in a way wholly out with the control of the vast majority and therefore quite arbitrarily or accidentally, be a source of salvation or perdition for whole nations or generations. - Karl Barth Church Dogmatics Book 3 Volume 4 (T&T Clark, 1961),531-532.

Here Barth essentially calls the present system of capitalism, in which we currently live, a demonic power. He does not mean that free enterprise is evil, but that putting people to work, not to offer services, but to create money is evil. We've all seen the results of this process in Western Civilization today. When people exist for the sake of money, when money loses its value, the few with the resources can leave the many to perish. This is why investing in imaginary funds rather than the production of actual goods and services is a serious moral problem. This is why the Old Testament taught against interest, because it turns currency into a commodity rather than an implicit trade agreement.

Really?

2011-07-18T13:05:00.000-07:00

Jamin Hubner made this statement in his review of W.L. Craig's book the only wise God.

As it has been pointed out endlessly by Calvinist apologists, human consciousness, the heart of man, is absolutely untouchable to God in Arminian and Molinist theology. God cannot and will not disturb the heart of any human being. He cannot disrupt their consciousness. - Jamin Hubner

I prefer to stay out of these discussions, but this statement simply appears not to be the case. I have not read Craig or Moreland's work on this particular subject, but I personally have not read any Arminian say that God is not allowed to effect human thoughts or the human will.

For instance, Arminius himself says this under the heading of Free Will in his complete works:

But in his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable, of and by himself, either to think, to will, or to do that which is really good; but it is necessary for him to be regenerated and renewed in his intellect, affections or will, and in all his powers, by God in Christ through the Holy Spirit, that he may be qualified rightly to understand, esteem, consider, will, and perform whatever is truly good. When he is made a partaker of this regeneration or renovation, I consider that, since he is delivered from sin, he is capable of thinking, willing and doing that which is good, but yet not without the continued aids of Divine Grace.

And he simply holds that thought in tension with this one, seen under Divine Grace in the same volume:

In this manner, I ascribe to grace the commencement, the continuance and the consummation of all good, and to such an extent do I carry its influence, that a man, though already regenerate, can neither conceive, will, nor do any good at all, nor resist any evil temptation, without this preventing and exciting, this following and co-operating grace. From this statement it will clearly appear, that I by no means do injustice to grace, by attributing, as it is reported of me, too much to man’s free-will. For the whole controversy reduces itself to the solution of this question, "is the grace of God a certain irresistible force?" That is, the controversy does not relate to those actions or operations which may be ascribed to grace, (for I acknowledge and inculcate as many of these actions or operations as any man ever did,) but it relates solely to the mode of operation, whether it be irresistible or not. With respect to which, I believe, according to the scriptures, that many persons resist the Holy Spirit and reject the grace that is offered.

Now, I suppose one could make the inference that this ultimately entails the doctrine that God does not alter people's thoughts or will, but Arminius did not explicitly state this as an actual belief to which he ascribed. Which tells me that an Arminian theologian (Arminius) believed that God's grace does alter human thoughts, but that in a mysterious way, some people resist God's grace. Both of these are clear teachings in Scripture, but you can ask my friends I'm very Calvinistic.
I suppose puts me more on Carson's side in the debate. Relationally speaking, human beings can resist God's grace. But that in no way puts God out of ultimate control of the universe. I still want to define God's sovereignty in more historical rather than merely meticulous terms. God exercises his control in history as he binds the strong man and wrests his creation from the power of Satan, that is what we see in Revelation as well as the gospels. But this in no way detracts from God's ultimate control of the situation nor does it ultimately thwart or render moot his purposes.
Anyhow, Arminians do believe that God can alter thoughts. Calvinists do believe that humans make choices. I think everybody needs to strive to be as Biblical as possible here.

Jim is right, Christians can affirm this.

2011-07-18T09:39:00.000-07:00

Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem; Creatorem coeli et terrae.
Et in Jesum Christum, Filium ejus unicum, Dominum nostrum; qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria virgine; passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus; descendit ad inferna; tertia die resurrexit a mortuis; ascendit ad coelos; sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis; inde venturus (est) judicare vivos et mortuos.
Credo in Spiritum Sanctum; sanctam ecclesiam catholicam; sanctorum communionem; remissionem peccatorum; carnis resurrectionem; vitam aeternam. Amen.

Review and Reflection: The Great Divorce

2011-07-16T22:59:00.000-07:00

C.S. Lewis. The Great Divorce. (Harper Collins,1973)

I've read this book a few times in my life, I rarely read fiction more than once, but some books are worth a revisit. The great divorce is one of them. I read it when I was eighteen years old in one sitting. I could not go to sleep until the book was finished. It was deeply frightening then, though immensely entertaining. Lewis' insight into humanity was profound. He was evidently deeply influenced by the puritans and the catholic spiritual writers in terms of cases of conscience. He was able to discern how Biblical commands such as familial love and human goods such as pleasure in eating could become absurd caricatures and idolatrous little lies.

The great divorce is a fictional tale of a bus ride from Hell into Heaven and the struggles of people who do not want to be there though their family members beckon them. Particularly gripping was the story of a woman who is so self-absorbed in the raising of her son that she never actually loved him, but merely used him for her own ends and thereby forfeited her ability to receive grace from others as well as love God for his own sake (chapter 11). This exchange really shows the absurdity of what often passes as love:

“You wouldn't talk like that if you were a mother.”
“You mean, if I were only a mother. But there is no such thing as being only a mother. You exist as Michael's mother only because you first exist as God's creature. That relation is older and closer. No, listen, Pam! He also loves. He also has suffered. He also has waited a long time.”
“If He loved me, He'd let me see my boy. If He loved me, why did He take Michael away from me? I wasn't going to say anything about that. But it's pretty hard to forgive, you know.”
“But He had to take Michael away. Partly for Michael's sake...”
“I'm sure I did my best to make Michael happy. I gave up my whole life...”

Because it is a fictional tale, I'll leave the rest of the story, but it suffices to say, she make motherhood absolute in her life, not God. Her self shrank to the point of being unable to enjoy anything but her own little self as its will was accomplished. If anything is made ultimate in the life of anybody, that thing becomes an idol because God did not make things to bear the weight of worship. Only he can do so. I highly recommend this book, it is a frightening examination of our deepest desires and extremely good fiction.

High Christology or Not?

2011-07-16T11:52:00.000-07:00

Mark's Christology is an incredibly interesting topic, and Mr. Watts links to another post and it's sequel wherein somebody will be examining it. Mark's Christology is interesting because in the minds of many it is the first gospel and thereby represents, supposedly the most primitive Christology and the closest we can get to Jesus' self understanding. (But, Matthew really is first and letters written before Mark have a much "higher" Christology.)

Mark's gospel, in my estimation, has a high Christology (whatever that actually means), and in many ways it is more evident than the other synoptic gospels.

If I were to define "high Christology" I would say that it is a Christology which claims that Jesus is not merely a human agent. A high Christology would be one which states or presupposes that Jesus, though human, somehow preexisted with God. J.D. Kirk defines it on his blog similarly.

Low Christology, simply defined says that Jesus is God's agent, but is simply human.

I have two thoughts. Here's one, it is more theological. If high Christology is true, but was known after the resurrection, then it must be understood on the basis of Jesus' earthly life. This means that Jesus' life interprets what it means for him to be God. And then his "merely human" life can be understood as the epitome of divine life.

The second thought is on Mark's gospel, which as I stated, I estimate to teach a clear high Christology.

The gospel's prologue starts with a definitive statement that Jesus' action is a divine action, not that he is God, but that his activity is tied up with God's activity. Then throughout the gospel, the demons knew who Jesus was and identified him regularly as "the Holy One of Israel" and "the son of God." Now, these titles could very well mean something like, "God's king on earth," and they do. But Mark's literary artistry is often overlooked. Outside of Mark himself, only demons pending exorcism and pagans who see Jesus on the cross recognize him as God's Son. This is crucial, literally. People hearing the gospel read would have believed in the resurrection already, so these hints at Jesus' identity would be meant for the audiences' benefit. But what benefit? Every time Jesus is identified as God's Son, the Holy One, or the Messiah in the gospel, he confronts demonic powers ( Mk 8:33).

There is also the incident of the rich young ruler, wherein Mark's Jesus teaches that fidelity to himself is instrumental for seeking life in the age to come over against the Torah. Jesus is not merely announcing God's kingdom, his is establishing it in God's stead.

Mix that with Jesus' confrontation at the temple (Mark 11) wherein he seems to enact God's judgement from Jeremiah 7, and you have a picture of Jesus being recognized by spiritual powers as well as Mark's audience as God's agent of justice in the world. But in Jesus' references to the Hebrew Bible it the Lord who will enact justice by confronting the powers and the Satan. Then at the end of the gospel, Jesus is on the cross, he shouts the cry of dereliction and the soldier notes that Jesus is the Son of God (Mk 15:39). God's confrontation with the powers happened when Jesus died. Of course, the exorcism after Jesus was identified in this passage was to come at the resurrection. The consequence is that Jesus, though not explicitly stated to preexist, is implicitly ascribed God's power and prerogatives in defeating demonic forces.

The consequent to this is that Jesus' acting in direct consort with God leads to an implicit, although clear, high Christology, and an explicit low Christology of divine agency.

*What I did not touch on was that Mark's gospel definitely intends the auditor to see Jesus as the Lord throughout. If early Christians considered "Jesus is Lord" to be a confession of faith, then this shared understanding may lead one to think that the high Christology of Mark is actually explicit. Mark wanted people to see Jesus throughout the gospel as the Lord whose name they called upon and whose way John prepared.

Kierkegaard on people who Christians deride for actually following Jesus

2011-07-15T11:09:00.000-07:00

When, then, in this Christian world a man will in some measure strive to accomplish the duty of being in love's debt to each other, he will also be carried out into the utmost difficulty and get the world's opposition to contend with. Alas, the world things so little or never of God; that is the reason the world absolutely must misunderstand every life whose most essential and constant thought is thought of God, the thought of where, divinely understoof, the danger is and what the demand on a man is! Therefore the Christian world will say of the real Christian: "He lays himself wide open; even when it is quite clear that he is the injured one, it almost seems that he is the one who seeks forgiveness." In him the world will Christianly (for the world is indeed Christian) detech the lack of that essential - Christian heart-heartedness, which busily asserts its rights, affirms itself, repays evil with evil or at least with the proud consciousness of doing good. The world does not at all discern that such a person has an entirely different criterion for his life and that he whole thing is thereby quite easily explained; whereas it certainly remains absolutely meaningless when explained by means of the world's criterion. But since the world essentially does not know and does not want to know that this criterion (the God-relationship) exists, it cannot explain such a person's behaviour except as eccentricity - for that this is Christlikeness can naturally never occur to the world, which as Christian of course knows best what Christianity is. It is eccentric of a person not to be self-interested; it is eccentric of him not to retort; it is eccentric and silly of him to forgive his enemies and almost be fearful of not doing enough for his enemies; it is eccentric always to be in the wrong position, never where there is the appearance of being courageous, magnanimous, disinterested- this is eccentric and affected and half-idiotic, in short, something to laugh at a little, inasmuch as one himself, by being the world, is certain as a Christian of possessing truth and blessedness both here and yonder. Soren Kierkegaard Works of Love (Harper, 1962),193- 194

Kierkegaard basically notices a fundamental flaw in commonly understood versions of Christianity, even today. People assume they and their practices are Christian and thereby mistreat others and as a result misunderstand real Christlike behavior to be incorrect. I have literally heard Christians question the value of feeding the poor, I have heard Christians say that loving your enemies is impossible, I have heard Christians say that hating your enemies is actually good, I have heard Christians question most of the commands of Jesus on the basis of "Christianity."

I got linked on Jim Wests's Blog

2011-07-13T14:46:00.001-07:00

I'm kinda thundery.

Tonight's Bible Study

2011-07-13T14:42:00.000-07:00

Tonight's Bible study is on 1 John 1:9:

ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν, πιστός ἐστιν καὶ δίκαιος ἵνα ἀφῇ ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας.

If regularly confess our sins, then he, who is faithful and just, will forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all injustice.

Study Notes: God is 100% against sin. The atonement happened because sin is utterly destructive, but God loves people who deserve the same destruction they have wrought upon his creation. God is so loving, that even people who have received grace upon grace from him can continually receive his forgiveness merely by asking. This is a great comfort to me, because I really am very good at sinning. For all my talk of discipleship, I'm a great sinner. It is so serious a matter, but right here, in God's inspired writ, is a statement that speaks for people such as myself. The comfort is very real to me because I see in the teachings of Jesus a simultaneous love for sinners and a complete no tolerance policy for back sliding. But then, in the book of the New Testament that is the most harsh on sinners, I find this passage. What wondrous love is this?

Confession of sin to God is the process by which we can experientially come to know that we are forgiven and counted righteous and by which God cleanses us to become effectively righteous over time.

Translation Notes: HT to Mike Aubrey for giving an evidence table to the habitual use of the imperfective aspect, I always just assumed it without actually checking the evidence.

Jesus, Evil, Social Programs, N.T. Wright, and Joel Watts

2011-07-12T11:30:00.000-07:00

J.L. Watts writes concerning N.T. Wright's desire to connect the cross to the problem of evil:

Excellent. Agreed. Cheers. But, in this, he goes on, and I quote, “(T)he evangelists are reflecting a train of thought and prayer and vocation which was Jesus’ own train of thought.” I get the part that we cannot simply believe that Jesus had no clue as to what He was doing, leaving the creation of the mythos to the Gospel writers. But, my focus is, is the idea that the Gospel (telling/writing) is a vocation in of itself and was a means to confront evil so that the Gospel is still Jesus working a social justice concern through the salvic moment of the Cross which allowed the Evangelists to speak of Jesus, in the present, still working.
Thoughts? - J.L. Watts

Yes, but no.

The gospel writers also believed that Jesus was personally present with them. So, sure Jesus is definitely the one working through them in the sense that his words and thoughts are the impetus behind the work of the gospel proclaimers/writers. But, Jesus is not merely contained in the church, according to the gospel authors at least. The doctrine of the resurrection and ascension were crucial to their understanding of God's work in this stage of history.
For instance, a major theme in Matthew's gospel is that disciples are with Jesus to become like Jesus (summarized here: Matthew 10:24-25). Yet, Matthew tells us that Jesus commands his disciples to enlist more disciples after the resurrection (28:16-20). The major assumption is that Jesus is way ahead of them in this work, somehow making way for this to happen. Matthew's narrative assumes that Jesus is the one who goes before the disciples in all of his commands, enabling them to do as he says. So, Matthew assumes that Jesus is personally active in preparing the way for the disciples to do their work. Interestingly enough, Matthew, John, and Luke all include the explicit saying that disciples will be like Jesus and in each gospel is the command to work in the world beyond Israel. This likely means that the authors believed that Jesus himself was working in the world beyond Israel.
My instinct is to say that they got these ideas from Jesus himself. Sure, Jesus works through the church and in that sense his work continues, but he is not bound exclusively to the church, he just promises to work through them.

Principles from the life of a great friend

2011-07-11T21:48:00.000-07:00

My friend Glen Melin went to be with the Lord two weeks ago.

I wrote down some lessons I learned from him about the pastorate, particularly the preaching part.

You always start with God, who is perfectly holy, just, and most importantly revealed to be the Triune God of love in Jesus Christ.
You remember that the Bible is a progressive revelation, but always preach Jesus Christ.
You pay meticulous attention to the Scripture and if you do not know the original languages, learn them. (He finished his fourth semester of Greek in the Spring)
The Bible is made up of literary works, so pay attention to the genre and history of the books.
Preach both aspects of God's gospel. Forgiveness for the penalty of sin and freedom from the power of sin.
Do not make a ministry that caters to young, hip, flaky people, but to all peoples and stick with them, that's how needs are met.
Preach the process of sanctification in a simple fashion so people understand it, but do not fail to preach the content of the scripture when it does not fit your simplified process.
Always pray for God's people.
Respect, tenderness, and compassion really are virtues, not quaint ideas.

Young preachers and their favorite guys

2011-07-11T15:51:00.000-07:00

Well, Mark, you've done it again (ht to Joel Watts). He asked in a facebook post for people to tell stories of effeminate worship leader experiences they had had.

Mark Driscoll has managed to say one of those weird things that people say which makes the gospel look ridiculous. I love Mark Driscoll. He is made in God's image. He believes in the authority of God expressed in scripture. He has accurately assessed that our culture suffers from money-olatry as well as laziness. He preaches that Jesus (crucified, resurrected, and reigning) is the way to God, that God is love, and that Jesus is taking applications for discipleship.

But I also think that remarks like this betray an unusual hermeneutic. Mark seems to have as a starting point that masculinity (read: male dominance) is the proper mode of expressing Christlike behavior from the pulpit. The major problem I see with this is that Jesus never went into much detail about how awesome it was to be a man. In fact, being a human at all was so much trouble that expressing God's character got him strung up on a cross. Due to his desire to express meekness and love his enemies, Jesus never had time to talk about the virtues of male anatomy or to express his disdain that some men did not act like King Leonidas. Instead, he preached that some men might forgo marriage and live as eunuchs to further his kingdom. The meekness of living in a socially unacceptable manner (which Jesus chose for himself) was central to his message. Not everybody can take this responsibility, but for those who could, Jesus said that it was a gift from God.

The point of this rant is layered. Many young preacher types have their "guys." We all love our Francis Chan, Mark Driscoll, John Piper, Matt Chandler, Dave Platt, Jim West (people who love him only preach from Romans 1:18-2:17), Dallas Willard, Dave Black, James White, or who but none of these folks are absolute. The only absolute revelation of God is that one made in Jesus Christ. Enjoy reading favorite authors, but realize that they can be wrong. Driscoll loves being a man more than anything, this appears in his preaching. John Piper loves Jonathan Edwards, and his exegesis often takes an Edwardsian turn in places where it seems that Edwards was mistaken. That's okay, they're human. Turn instead to the words of Scripture in the original languages, then commentaries, then prayer, then your guys. Too many preachers get their sermons from other preachers (Bil Cornelius does this, I know a preacher in the valley who told me he basically read from a John MacArthur book and called it his sermons for a while). This is boring and often times a bit lazy.

The aspect of the rant is to say that pastors simply need to be Jesus oriented rather than provocative. Jesus provokes enough as is. Plenty of worship leaders write songs that do not exalt the God and Father of Jesus Christ. Why bother pointing out somebodies failure to match a standard of manliness when they might be writing songs that confuse the church? Jesus breaks every standard we try to make for God. He talked about hell, he forgave the most rotten people, he demanded change, he turned the other cheek, he turned over tables, he accepted terrorists and aristocrats, and turned away people locked into acceptable practices, he took a massive beating without making a rude remark, and he finally got crucified. Jesus is provocative. More than that, he is Lord. He is the criteria for Christian preaching, not masculinity, not femininity.

So, to summarize my rant:
I commend gospel preachers/preaching, including that of Driscoll.
Masculinity is not the uniting theme of Scripture nor the criterion for gospel preaching/singing.
Preachers: preach the text not your new "it" book from a mega church pastor.
Jesus is the criterion for Christian preaching. Jesus and Jesus alone.

Geza Vermes the Synoptic Gospels and John

2011-07-09T11:46:00.000-07:00

Vermes is a scholar from whom I and most New Testament scholars owe a tremendous debt, but an indomitable work ethic and voluminous learning to not exempt anybody from errors, for instance Vermes writes:

The main problem facing a sympathetic, yet religiously detached, historian who confronts the New Testament results from the fact that the pocket book which contains the specifically Christian Scriptures offers two substantially different pictures of Jesus. All their subsequent theological colouring about Messianism and redemption notwithstanding, the Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, the Synoptic Gospels, still allow a genuine glimpse of a first-century AD Jewish holy man, portrayed as a preacher, healer and exorcist, delivering special moral exhortations concerning the impending arrival of the 'kingdom of God.' By contrast, the Fourth Gospel, that of John, and the letters of Paul sketch an increasingly other-worldly saviour figure, the paramount centre of all the religious speculation of the primitive church. When one sketch is super-imposed on the other, it becomes clear that they have hardly anything in common. Geza Vermes. Jesus in His Jewish Context (SCM Press, 2003), 126-127

Vermes, desiring to be sympathetic to Jesus himself and as he states in the previous paragraph, to show the tragedy of his life, separates him from a self-identification that Vermes thinks to be false. Because Vermes wants Jesus to be a hero for the human race, Jewish or not, he separates him from the claim to be Messiah. For Vermes, all such theologizing was mythological and had very little to do with Jesus' own claims.

The error of this is that all four gospels include their historical kernels about Jesus' historical life in the context of a story which assumes, states, and intends to demonstrate that Jesus was the Messiah. The events themselves are inseparable from the assumption throughout each gospel that Jesus is, indeed, the Messiah. If one wanted to consistently carve all of the Messianism from the gospels to get at their history, there would literally be nothing left.
To say roughly the same thing, but in a different key, the events would not have been written down had not Jesus' early followers had the idea that Jesus was the Messiah. A careful reading of the source material, as well as of early Christian history, demonstrates that, whether right or wrong, Jesus claimed to be more than a mere holy-man, but to be in some way, God's agent in history, the Messiah. The gospel writers were not inventors, they were devotees.

Jim, I totally agree

2011-07-09T09:15:00.000-07:00

Jim West's post on rejoicing when others suffer reminds me of some important issues.

One, that numerical church growth is only biblical when its sister condition is met, Christians must be growing. Note the teaching of Scripture on the matter:

Some time ago you heard about this hope through the word of truth, the gospel that has come to you. Just as it is bearing fruit and spreading all over the world, so it has been doing among you from the day you heard it and came to know the grace of God in truth. You learned about this gospel from Epaphras, our dear fellow servant, who is a faithful minister of the Messiah on your behalf. He has told us about your love in the Spirit. For this reason, since the day we heard about this, we have not stopped praying for you and asking that you may be filled with the full knowledge of God's will with respect to all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so that you might live in a manner worthy of the Lord and be fully pleasing to him as you bear fruit while doing all kinds of good things and growing in the full knowledge of God. (Colossians 1:5a-10)

Secondly, it reminds me that the message of Jesus Christ, and him crucified must be the same message that is preached in our churches as well as practiced. Jim says that "the secret to real Kingdom Growth is death to self." He is absolutely correct, just as the cross of Jesus Christ is God's guarantee of our forgiveness, so also taking up our own cross is the only way to live as citizens of heaven now.

In the Spirit of what Dr. West is getting at, if you want to go to heaven, go now by taking up your cross and following the crucified Lord, his kingdom is here. If you want your church to grow, believe the gospel and start dying to evil desires yourself. And if you want the church growth to translate to people actually going to heaven, tell them, "go now, Jesus brought the kingdom to earth, follow him today."

Meeting Physical Needs or Sharing the Gospel?

2011-06-30T09:45:00.000-07:00

Alan Knox got me thinking about false dilemmas. Although, John Piper and Art Sido helped.

Should we meet physical needs or share the gospel.

Yes!

You must do both.

There is often a tension in Christian thought concerning whether or not the church should be focused on sharing the gospel or doing works of mercy in the world. Should the church worry about people's souls or people's bellies. Few evangelicals will outright say that social work is more important, but in practice they may act as such. Many evangelicals will say that evangelizing is the controlling purpose of the church, to the point that issues of justice and mercy either take a back seat or do not matter. Some will say that it is pointless to help somebody have enough food if you do not share the gospel with them. Others will even say that pastors should not help the poor if it distracts them from their sermon preparation time (people really say this). I once heard it argued that since Jesus says, "the poor are always with you," that means that evangelism is more important that caring for the poor.

My thought is simple: Jesus wants us to do and teach others how to do everything he commanded us to do.

Jesus commanded meeting physical needs. Jesus commanded evangelism. For the Christian they are both commands of Jesus that are to be followed. It is that simple. People need food. People need the gospel. Jesus is not stupid, he knows this, and he says to do both. That is enough. In many ways, sharing the gospel, feeding the hungry, and getting over your anger problem are just as important to Jesus. Sure, he thinks some things are more important than others, but nevertheless, the question is this, "do you care enough about what Jesus said to revising your affairs in such a way that you start to actually do those kinds of things?"

Understanding Fat Loss

2011-06-25T22:47:00.000-07:00

Read what Doug McGuff says about fat loss through caloric restriction and "cardio" vs fat loss through caloric restriction and resistance training. It is an analogy, but an incredibly helpful one for people who do not care to read research journals.

In the first senario, there is a budget deficit, and no department has any unusual demands. Layoffs can occur in all departments. So, the board lays off some fat, some muscle, some bone, and connective tissue, as well as some nervous tissue. The corporation becomes a smaller version of its former self.
In the second scenario, there is also a budget deficit, but a large demand has been placed on the muscle department; indeed, more muscle has to be hired on. This necessitates a large layoff in the fat department. Furthermore, no cutbacks can be made in the bone and connective tissue departments, because their support is needed for the muscle department, which is not useful unless is is attached to strong bones by strong connective tissue. The recourse is that more fat has to be cashiered. No nervous tissue can be spared either, because the new muscle is useless unless it is innervated by new nervous tissue. This imposes even more cutbacks in the fat department. With these adjustments, the corporation takes on a notable shape change. Under this scenario, all of the body's weight loss has been shunted exclusively toward fat loss. You have added a modest amount of shape-improving muscle and jettisoned a large amount of shape ruining fat.

Doug McGuff and John Little. Body by Science. (McGraw Hill, 2009), 186

Review: Renovation of the Church

2011-06-20T15:16:00.000-07:00

Kent Carlson and Mike Lueken. Renovation of the Church: What Happens When A Seeker Church Discovers Spiritual Formation. (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2011)

Renovation of the Church (RoC) is a book, that in many ways, is not unique. It is a book written by folks who are essentially mega-church pastors about how they did something special in their local church. RoC is a book that is unique in many ways because of what the pastors did and what they admitted at the end of the book. What the book is essentially about is that a church(in mega-church parlance that means groups of elders, pastors, and staff) that was trying, very intentionally and specifically, to be a seeker-sensitive mega-church type church discovered the gospel of the kingdom of God and changed their focus to making disciples. The book is meant simply to state their journey, what they learned, what God changed in them as individuals, and what mistakes they made in hopes that others might learn the importance of Jesus' commission to make disciples of all nations. For instance, here is their purpose statement,

“We write not as theorists, but as practitioners. We are telling this story, not as historians, but as “evangelists.” We write about good news, wonderful news. We write to inspire. To challenge. Perhaps even to incite a rebellion. We dream of another way of being the church. We dare to hope this dream captures others as well.” (RoC, 15)

The book, despite some of what I perceive as significant flaws, seems able to do just what the authors set out to do with it. I'll start with the good, then go to the ugly, and then move on to the great.

The Good

The book is filled with good. First, the style is pleasant and in ways gripping. I found myself regularly wanting to know what would happen next in their stories. I got a real sense that the authors cared about the gospel, that they loved the Lord, and that they loved God's people. As pastors, in the church system in which they were, they really cared about working for people's well being. The honest of the authors was also refreshing, the last chapter mentions their mistakes, particularly in terms of being impatient with people who did not understand why the church leadership wanted to change direction (RoC, 165). Their willingness to mention this really helped me come away loving the book rather than being challenged by it, but ultimately displeased. The attitude of the authors towards people who were concerned with the changes happening in their church was jarring at times (more on that in The Ugly).

Another good piece is the section written to help ambitious pastors, it is a wonderful few paragraphs about how to encourage a pastor and about how pastors often chase after the numbers game in churches due to insecurity about their calling or significance. The idea is that encouraging leaders for fulfilling their calling to make disciples and preach the gospel will be more beneficial to the mission of the church than will be criticizing them for low numbers, etc. The other recommendations to ambitious pastors are also helpful. The segment in this chapter about emphasizing the purpose of the church makes an oft missed point: the church is for making disciples, not primarily getting people to “make decisions” or getting people forgiven, but training them to be disciples, which definitely includes teaching them the kind of repentance that the New Testament says leads to forgiveness, it also involves teaching people how to evangelize (RoC, 74-87).

The Ugly

Because the book is written by a couple of mega-church pastors, there are places that indicate that they used their mega-church pastor authority too much. For instance, they mention that there are two ways to transition a church to focusing on what the New Testament says the church is for: through small groups of people interested in the gospel influencing others over time. The second is using centralized leadership to change the church from the top. They chose the second (RoC, 49). This lead to many instances of their leadership being seen as opportunities to shut down concerned or confused congregants rather than to serve them. They did mention this in the chapter on mistakes (RoC, 163-164).

The Great

The book, more than any other of it's type, seems to speak to contemporary pastors plainly about what the purpose of the church is. I mentioned this above, but the church is not about getting people to heaven, getting more people to attend, solving social problems, or having moving services. The church is a community that is meant to train people to be students of the living Lord, Jesus Christ. He takes care of the heaven, the attendance, and even through his disciples, the social issues.

The authors focus with exciting depth on the problem of human depravity and how Jesus deals with it in the lives of his people. The capacity for self-deception is dealt with very well, particularly in terms of how we want freedom from sin, but we still want to sin (RoC, 125). The authors see this as a problem of human identity, we do not realize that having sin is actually contrary to our nature.

The chapter on worship includes some very helpful insights, reminiscent of John Piper in key ways, for instance, the fact that worship is primarily about God, what he does, and what he says. Worship is not even about how we happen to feel at the time, sincerity in worship is not what matters, God is, and church service worship is most honoring to God when the same focus on God is carried into our lives all day long. Otherwise, no matter how authentic we feel or how great our experience is, our worship is a sham. And in fact, when the focus is on our experience, our authentic praise, how much we get into it, we lose our focus on God and his work. It is neither style, excitement, nor sincerity that ultimately matter, but God, God revealed in Christ Jesus.

The Finale

All in all the book is a great book. Many pastors could benefit from reading it in the present ministry situation in western Christianity. It probably will not be great ten years from now, but for now it is great. In many ways it is similar to radical, except it never tries to offer a formula.

Reformed Internet Culture is Exhausting

2011-06-20T13:50:00.000-07:00

I was reading some of Challies' blog and got into the comments and suddenly remembered why I stopped reading things like that. They are typically mean spirited. They are also made by people who probably do not know what they are actually talking about. The constant accusation of scripture twisting always confuses me too, because well, I'll get to that. Which explains why some of the comments had bizarre contents, like criticizing Rick Warren for not using the word sanctification to explain spiritual growth in a sermon series. The rationale for the critique was that God's Spirit used that word.*

But, the fact is that the Holy Spirit did not use that word, except maybe in one place. This leads me to believe that a lot of people who claim to understand the intricacies of the Bible in terms of it's specific language, probably do not know Greek or Hebrew. I say this because even in that one place, he used a Greek word, not the English word we use, with all of its associations. Sanctification only in later times became a heading for increasing in personal holiness, but typically the term talks about a one off event by which God commends a person to himself when they trust in Jesus Christ. In fact, in 1 Corinthians, sanctification is the ground for Christian living, not the process. For more information on this exact issue, I would refer the reader to a Greek Grammar, Lexicon, and Syntax book. Dave Black, Dan Wallace, and BADG are a good place to start. Also, check out Vern Poythress' book Symphonic Theology, especially pages 74-79.

The place where the author of Hebrews uses sanctification to speak of the process of the Christian life is actually disputable. He says that the recipients of the letter are to "εἰρήνην διώκετε μετὰ πάντων, καὶ τὸν ἁγιασμόν, οὗ χωρὶς οὐδεὶς ὄψεται τὸν κύριον (Hebrews 12:14)." If you look at the noun for holiness, it very well could just mean "seek the state of being a holy person." Which I suppose could mean that it is some kind of process called "holiness/sanctification," but more than likely it is just a state of life wherein one is at peace with all others...which is what the verse says to seek before it says to seek holiness.

I wrote this, not because I doubt these commenters are Christians or because I like or dislike Rick Warren, Tim Challies, or John Piper. Though, John Piper will always be one of my favorite authors, though I disagree with him on many issues. His dissertation showed me that one need not fear historical examinations of the Jesus tradition (and that I need to know German). I wrote it because Reformed Internet culture is so strange and unlike anything I want to be that I had to stop reading the comments.

The worst part about this subculture and many of the real-life members of it that I've encountered is that many of them have their "guys" but they seem to have just found a quote book of their guys. There is almost no nuance, room for context, or particularly indepth knowledge of any particular thinker. And at least some folks like this actually don't even bother with Greek or Hebrew and I think its cause their "guys" read the Bible for them(I met a pastor like this once who loves his reformed guys, but said that he does not need Greek or Hebrew because he has translation committees, I fear that he is a common kind of guy).

The culture is just weird, unpleasant, and frankly unbiblical in many ways, particularly the dismissal of every command to pursue peace in the New Testament for following the example of Jesus or Paul lambasting false teachers as though apostolic example (something we are not) some how trumps God's commands to his people (which we are). Paul deals with this specifically in the life of the church in Ephesus when they are facing false teachers:

"24 δοῦλον δὲ κυρίου οὐ δεῖ μάχεσθαι, ἀλλὰ ἤπιον εἶναι πρὸς πάντας, διδακτικόν, ἀνεξίκακον, 25 ἐν πραΰτητι παιδεύοντα τοὺς ἀντιδιατιθεμένους, μήποτε δώῃ αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς μετάνοιαν εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας, 26 καὶ ἀνανήψωσιν ἐκ τῆς τοῦ διαβόλου παγίδος, ἐζωγρημένοι ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ ἐκείνου θέλημα."

Anyhow, I'm pretty Calvinistic in my thinking, but if the gospel comes with a culture (a common Calvinistic trapping), then that culture must fit the teachings of Jesus on how to treat other people. The Great Commission says so..."teach them to obey everything I commanded you." But if Calvinistic Internet culture does not mirror, model, or even demonstrate knowledge of the teachings of Jesus, then it is difficult to even categorize it as gospel centered. Again, not that members of said culture are not Christians, but the culture has evidently gone astray by the criteria Jesus himself gave to his mission. Also, see John 8:31-32, Jesus says that his teachings lead to freedom from sin and that his disciples continue in his words, so any culture, despite it containing justified Christians, will be deficient if Jesus' teachings about what to do and what to be like are ignored.

I hope that whatever good in reformed sub-culture remains and that continued attention to the teachings of Jesus as well as of the best representatives of that culture continue to lead to positive gospel presentation around the world. Folks like Richard Baxter, J.C. Ryle, Ralph Venning, Jonathan Edwards, Thomas Watson, John Bunyan, and yes, John Calvin have much to say to the church today about obedience, God's grace, and how to navigate life through the long process of transformation from one degree of glory to the next (discipleship).

*The same comments section had people saying that they question John Piper's agenda for recommending (he really just quotes them...never recommends them) Dallas Willard and Richard Foster. Dallas Willard is a guy who has wrongly been accused of universalism by folks who've found a quote from a book that was lifted from context. And Foster is an odd ball, but one of his favorite authors is John Calvin, so he's already read more reformed literature than most of the sermon addicts on the Internet.

Making Disciples

2011-06-16T12:04:00.000-07:00

I read this post about why churches do not make disciples. It Alan Knox asked for ideas to improve the situation. I then wrote what you see here.

Firstly, I think we need to see what it is, in Jesus' context and in Jesus' teaching that makes a disciple. The word is fraught with religious associations today. Dallas Willard prefers apprentice, I typically use student.

Jesus himself defines a disciple as somebody who will be like his teacher and as somebody who continues in his teaching. Dallas Willard combines them to say, "a disciple is somebody who is with somebody else, learning to be like them." That is biblical.

So, if we define disciple, then we have to become disciples as well as aim to make some. That means learning from Jesus, because Jesus said to, "learn of me for I am meek." So we learn from Jesus about God the Father, about the kingdom of God, about the defeat of the kingdom of Satan, about what true goodness is, about the Holy Spirit, about Jesus himself, etc. This process is called repentance, or changing your mind. Paul talks about it too, he says that mind changing is the key to transformation under the gospel in Romans 12:1-2. This cannot be done without specific attention to the good news that Jesus preached, that was preached about him, and the specific teachings of Jesus in the gospels and their meaning for today. It will involve being wrong, messing up, failing to live up, receiving grace and comfort from Jesus, as well as surprising results as people say, "oh, Jesus said that...better do it." That's what people who have the Holy Spirit do.

This cannot happen by accident, but it must be intentional. We must intend to follow Jesus. We must intend to teach others how to follow Jesus. Without human intention there is no discipleship. I think the myth of the “accidental disciple” came from a faulty version of Calvinism poorly appropriated and misapplied and perhaps from a bit of the “waiting on God” version of sanctification which is a breed of fatalism and Pentecostalism. The idea is that God will deal with our sins and our understanding in due time. But Jesus never gives a hint of that, he tells us to follow him and he calls the shots and forgives us when we fail and transforms us as his truth gets worked into our minds, our wills, and finally our daily habits.

So we've gotta be disciples and then we've gotta make them, probably largely within the church today, but on the outside too, that's the mandate, but the problem is that the church is no longer a body of disciples, which makes it a great mission field. Incidentally, Paul thought the same way, he was still making disciples of the Corinthian church and nothing was particularly holy about those saints, except that they called Jesus Lord.

I would then explain that convert, in the New Testament (Romans 15:6) is a word describing somebody who went through a personal change through their experience of repentance and acceptance into God's kingdom. Converts are not merely people who do some religious thing, but they are people who decide to follow Jesus...no matter how badly they stink at it of course.

I think that part of the mystique that comes with the phrase “making disciples” is the use of the great commission by missionary organizations to focus on the all nations portion of the commission, which causes people to think that making disciples is not the normative criteria for what makes the church. Wherever somebody happens to be at the time is a nation, so if they travel across cultures or not, they are still on mission for God, they are still called to make and be disciples.

One other thing that must be dealt with is the idea that disciples are perfect or perhaps a different breed of extra special Christians, when in reality everybody who calls Jesus Lord is supposed to also call him teacher. Disciples are students and they mess up, they get embarrassed, they sin, and that's why Jesus died, to save his disciples. So, once the idea that to be a disciple is to be perfect is removed, then I think more people will say, “oh, Jesus calls me to learn of him and he'll deal with perfection, but I'm just supposed to learn of him and call others to do the same.”

These thoughts are disorganized, but these problems must be addressed on the human end for discipleship to happen, or it rarely will.

Dallas Willard on the Bible and Why We Have It

2011-06-16T08:44:00.000-07:00

On its [the bible] human side, I assume that it was produced and preserved by competent human beings who were at least as intelligent and devout as we are today. I assume that they were quite capable of accurately interpreting their own experience and of objectively presenting what they heard and experienced in the language of their historical community, which we today can understand with due diligence.

On the divine side, I assume that God has been willing and competent to arrange for the Bible, including its record of Jesus, to emerge and be preserved in ways that will secure his purposes for it among human being worldwide. Those who actually believe in God will be untroubled by this. I assume that he did not and would not leave his message to humankind in a form that can only be understood by a handful of late-twentieth-century professional scholars, who cannot even agree among themselves on the theories that they assume to determine what the message is.

The Bible is, after all, God's gift to the world through his Church, not to the scholars. It comes through the life of his people and nourishes that life. Its purpose is practical, not academic. An intelligent, careful, intensive, but straightforward reading-that is, one not governed by faddish theories or by a mindless orthodoxy-is what it requires to direct us into life in God's kingdom. Any other approach to the Bible, I believe conflicts with the picture of God that, all agree, emerges from Jesus and his tradition. To what extent this belief of mine is or is not harmfully

circular I leave the philosophically minded to ponder. Dallas Willard. The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering Our Hidden Life in God. (San Francisco, California: Harper Collins, 1997) xvi-xvii.

The Canon and the Mission of the God in the World

2011-06-16T08:29:00.000-07:00

After a few years of studying the history of the New Testament canon, the spread of the church through the world, the teachings of the Fathers, and of course the New Testament itself, this paragraph from Robert Jenson wonderfully focused all my thoughts about mission, gospel, and apostolicity. One of my favorite paragraphs ever written on the subject. We have the canon because the church needed a litmus test for the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is the tradition by which we judge tradition. Reading it is the experience by which we judge experience. And the gospel on its pages is the gospel we are to preach.

Although the history is complex and its complexities are disputed, the canonical event can for theological purposes be very simply described: becoming aware that the apostles were gone, the community collected and certified documentary relics of the apostolic message. The church did this because she is to bring the same message she brought while the apostles guided her. Not all books in the canon were written or used by apostles. As the church gathered and commended apostolic writings, the criterion of apostolicity was simultaneously material and historical: a document was apostolic from which could be heard the teachings of the apostles. There is nothing viciously circular here; if the church had forgotten the teaching of the apostles, she could not anyway have assembled a canon.^-Robert Jenson. Systematic Theology Volume 1: The Triune God. (Oxford University Press 1999), 27.

Quote of the Day

2011-06-11T15:52:00.000-07:00

The value [evangelism] was propped up because inviting someone to a weekend service became synonymous with personal evangelism. As important as it is to bring a friend to church, it does not replace the slow, hard work of building relationships with the lost, engaging them in spiritual conversations and sharing the good news with them. - Mike Leukin Renovation of the Church IVP, 2011, 133-134

Books on Education

2011-06-08T17:25:00.000-07:00

Brain Rules by John Medina
This book is spectacular for understanding how the brain works, what facilitates learning, and what learning actually is. The book is simply marvelous for helping somebody understand how to learn and how to educate their children or students.

Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin
This spectacular book reviews the evidence behind the lives is top level achievers in various fields of human skill and development. The verdict is that top achievers always work incredibly hard and regularly fail, review their failures, and then change how they do things. The term for this is called deliberate practice, it is performing an action while thinking about how to do it better. An indispensable tool in any form of human growth.

Cultivate by Jeff Meyers
This marvelous book is about one-on-one mentoring with young people. Parents must have this skill. So must teachers. If teachers/parents/pastors cannot develop meaningful, beneficial relationships with the young people in their care, they will not be able to help them improve in any area.

The Seven Laws of Teaching by John Milton Gregory
Read it. Cringe every time you find that you've failed as a teacher. Then get better.

Thoughts on Education by John Locke
I couldn't put it down. Locke even includes a section on how to teach Bible to students. He was a great thinker, there is much to disagree with and much to learn. His advice on spanking is classic and helpful today. He basically says that except in the most extreme circumstances it is unhelpful, especially when done out of anger.

Teaching the Trivium by Harvey Bluedorn
It might get a bit weird for people unfamiliar with the biblical patriarchy movement, but the information is simply too good. I cannot side with them on Biblical Patriarchy, but the authors are very charitable with their position and never condemn anybody who differs. There is a weird moment in the Hebrew language section about it perhaps being the original language of the human race, I do not think the evidence points to that, but the book is still worth while.

The Disciplined Mind and Multiple Intelligences by Howard Gardener
Both of these books will help many parents avoid the trap of expecting their children to all learn the same way, a vast amount of brain research shows that many people excel initially a some things over others and that different domains of people's brains are active when using the same skill set. What this tells us essentially is that people's strengths and weaknesses need to be played to effectively. The truth sounds obvious, but the way most parents and educators work with children you would think it were a secret.

How to Read a Book by Mortimer Adler
This text should be read by parents and then probably be condensed into a helpful, less wordy summary so that their children can learn to read actively and fruitfully from an early age. Just sayin'.

Quote of the Day

2011-06-06T15:11:00.000-07:00

Is our worship centered on God and his story, or on my devotion and authentic praise? - Kent Carlson

Explicitly teaching “Every Member Ministry.”

2011-06-04T11:05:00.000-07:00

Why does God give gifts to the church? So that every member can serve others in God's mission in the world. Ephesians 4:12 points out that all the gifts of verbal instruction are given so that all Christians can serve other people; growing even into Christ's character. Jesus did not speak much differently in the Sermon on the Mount. After he declared a stunning array of blessings (kingdom of heaven, getting to see God, being God's child, being filled with justice) for a stunning array of unimpressive people (poor in spirit, the depressed, those who lack righteousness, the persecuted), he called them the light of the world. He called them this while they were still not his best students [disciples].

So, when somebody signs up to follow Jesus, he says, in effect, “You are the light of the world. If you live as I say people will see how great God actually is, though they may not ever notice you.” Jesus are Paul share an affinity of teaching here. They both tell the down and outs, right where they are, that God has a plan for making himself known through their lives. Christian teachers need to teach this with the same goal in mind. Each Christian can participate in God's mission for the church. Each Christian must participate in God's mission in the world. Each Christian receives teaching, encouragement, and blessings from other Christians so that they can go be like Jesus at work, at home, in their cars, in foreign countries, on dates, on vacation, and even in church services!

It would seem to me that if we explicitly made the goal of our "church services" to make disciples or to train people to live as the light Jesus said they were, then evangelism and missions would take care of themselves, because each Christian would use their gifts to do the things God wants the whole church to do. There would be no need for expensive programs and costly mail outs because people who intelligently follow Jesus would find creative ways to do good in his name in their towns, over seas, and in their homes.

Things to Click

2011-06-03T10:38:00.000-07:00

Greg Boyd tells us about the heresy of not loving.
Piper finally interviewed Rick Warren.
Jim West is just doing awesome stuff all the time, as usual.
Quintillian's old memory technique is given new life and remains useful here.
The lectures that became the new IVP book about N.T. Wright are available free on the interweb.
Intriguing interview in which Dallas Willard is interviewed by a radio host who lost his faith.

Summer Reading List

2011-06-01T11:59:00.000-07:00

I have a great deal to do this Summer, including potentially life altering decisions, but in terms of my normal personal disciplines I have a few reading assignments/skill improvement exercises I intend to finish by August 1st. This is the list of books I will read unless some disaster prevents it. I will certainly read and review others, but these are the musts. I have too many things to master and am weak in too many areas, it would be disrespectful to those to whom I preach and those whom I teach not to do these things.
The asterisk* means I intend to review the book as well:

Math
Mathematics and the Quest for Knowledge by Morris Kline*
Calculus: An Intuitive and Physical Approach by Meredith Kline
Finish every Khan Academy exercise
Thirteen book of Geometry by Euclid *
Greek
A Discourse Grammar of The Greek New Testament by Steve Runge*
Baylor Handbook on the Greek Text 1-3John and 1 Peter*
The Syntax and Semantics of the Verb in Classical Greek: An introduction by Albert Rijksbaron
New Testament
New Testament and the People of God by N.T. Wright* (I've read it twice, but would like to review it)
Why Four Gospels by David Alan Black*
Inhabiting the Cruciform God by Michael Gorman* (I've written half a review and will re-review it)
New Testament Theology by Kummel
Education/Classical Tradition (I teach math at a classical school)
Symposium by Plato
City of God by St. Augustine*
Progymnastia: Greek Textbooks on Prose Composition and Rhetoric
Classical Rhetoric for Modern Students by Corbett and Conners
Genius in us All: New Insights into Genetics, Talent, and IQ by David Schenk
Think Smart: A Neuroscientist's Prescription for Improving Your Brain's Performance by Richard Restack
Hebrew
Randall Buth's Living Hebrew Program*
Redo Seow's exercises

Further Thoughts About Christian Archy by Dave Black

2011-05-30T16:25:00.000-07:00

I read this book and reviewed it some time back. I still hold a positive view of the book, but would like to note how reading it with a group from my church went.

Everybody liked it a lot. It was roundly appreciated and deemed helpful, though one person did not understand the importance of the concepts in the book. The idea was that all Christian ideas and concepts are so apparent that there can be no room for disagreement amongst them. My thought is that this person will discover over time that such an attitude is misguided. Many other people saw the importance of making Jesus central in the practicalities of life and have started trying to do so, though many of them had already had this idea, Christian Archy helped them to see it.
Where the book caused significant difficultly for the group was that it started out using rather unfamiliar theological language and mentioned a number of authors they were unfamiliar with without explaining who they really were or their significance. I wish the book had gone further in this direction, though it only had so much space due to the constraints of the series.
One other thought about the book would perhaps be a section, or even an html address to specific practical steps that could be taken by an individual and church community to live under Christ's archy. And I stress 'could' because it is Christ who is ultimate, not any list of steps.

Isaac Newton and Practice

2011-05-30T15:39:00.001-07:00

Here is a marvelous paragraph about Newton by one of the most important historians of mathematics:

Except for a strong interest in mechanical contrivances, Newton showed no special promise as a youth. For the negative reason that he showed no interest in farming, his mother sent him to Cambridge, and he entered Trinity College in 1661. Despite several advantages of his study there-such as an opportunity to study the works of Descartes, Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo, and the opportunity to listen to the famous mathematician Isaac Barrow-Newton seemed to profit little. He was even found to be weak in Geometry and at one time almost changed his course of study from natural philosophy [science] to law. Four years of undergraduate study ended as unimpressively as they began. -Morris Kline Mathematics and the Search for Knowledge (New York, New York Oxford University Press, 1985), 107

Many people who are not considered good enough are self critical enough and improve their skills with such boring regularity that they eventually make some break through. This story is not evidence for the principle, but merely an illustration thereof. Many people say they are not good at math or cannot be good at language. Too many seminary students say, "languages are not my thing." The fact is that with long term deliberate practice they can be. Math and physics were not Newton's things, yet he invented the Calculus, created a workable theory of gravitation from incomplete knowledge, and made the way ultimately for space travel, radio, and any application using light waves for communication.
If there is something you need for your calling, never say, "It's not my thing." If it isn't, then you're wrong about your calling.

What I'm Learning in Peru

2011-05-27T16:47:00.000-07:00

I am currently on a short term mission trip in Peru, which is in a real way mostly for the benefit of my crew and myself. It seems that our contribution to the orphanage is minimal, especially my own, I arrived 36 hours later than the others, nevertheless, the trip has been helpful at least to me.
Here are some of my experiences:
I had to dig deep into my old Spanish lessons to speak with my taxi driver. When he discovered that I was a missionary he began to tell me about his experiences in seminary. He knew Greek, Hebrew, Spanish, and the local Quechuan dialect. His Greek and Hebrew were not great, but one of his desires is to see a better Quechuan translation, because the current one is from Spanish and not the originals. His name was Basileias. He tried to teach me Quechuan in Spanish...it was lost on me.
This experience gave me a deeper desire to learn languages more deeply. It was frustrating to barely be able to talk about Jesus with these people.
I also discovered that I am immune to altitude sickness.
I climbed a mountain and saw some Condors at about 10,000 feet after being awake for over 24 hours. It was spectacular.
If anything the Lord has used this trip to remind me to study languages more fervently, especially Greek, Hebrew, and Spanish.

Back with more info.

Good and Beautiful Community Review

2011-05-25T00:49:00.000-07:00

James Bryan Smith. The Good and Beautiful Community: Following the Spirit, Extending Grace, and Demonstrating Love. (Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 2010)

Who?

James Bryan Smith is a professor, active church member, a family man, writer, but most importantly to him an apprentice of Jesus Christ. In his efforts to obey the great commission he has written a series called the Apprentice Series, The Good and the Beautiful Community is the third book in the series. The idea is that these books be used as a part of a curriculum for cultivating Christlikeness in local churches. He actually wrote them to meet the need Dallas Willard saw for such a curriculum. This particular book, as the name states, is about the nature of the Christian community, it answers the question, “what kind of community does Jesus want everybody to experience?” Smith's main influences appear to be Dallas Willard and Richard Foster. This is not a bad thing. The witness of the New Testament concerning the community of Jesus' disciples comes out on every page.

What and How?

The book, is meant to be a part of a forty week discipleship program at a church, designed to help people who are actually interested in being Jesus' students live under the easy yoke of their living Lord. This book intends, once again, to inform Christians to live with a Christian view of the church. Smith does this by starting each chapter with positive and/or negative examples of a particular principle of the Christian life. He then examines the false assumptions, attitudes, and beliefs that naturally lead to the negative examples. Once he demonstrates them to be wanting, he includes a section of correction. He calls this true and false narratives. He will explain the false, then replace it with the true. The true narrative always indicates Smith's careful Biblical exegesis as well as in depth knowledge of the master teachers of the Christian tradition. He finally ends each chapter with a section on soul training, exercises designed to connect the readership with the teachings of Jesus and help them replace their false narratives.

The Negative

The book almost gets off to a bad start because Smith has a tendency to use personal examples and one gets the impression that he is the hero of his stories, but this impression will be proven false if one sticks with the book. Others may not even notice this, I just know that as a teacher using personal examples can get old to students. Smith's focus is not himself, but rather his readership's relationship to the community of their living Lord and Saviour. This is my one negative comment about the book. Here on out we'll be looking at the positive contributions the book makes to our understanding of following Jesus together (as if there were any other way).

The Positive

The first positive is that in the first few chapters Smith deals with two competing and yet equally misguided views of the church. Some say the Christian church exists to inspire personal faith through evangelism and others claim that it exists to change the world through social action. The fact is, which Smith deals with, is that the church exists to glorify God by making disciples of Jesus Christ all throughout the earth. He quotes Dallas Willard's comment that “The true social activist is the person who lives as an apprentice of Jesus Christ in his or her ordinary relationships. The idea is that Jesus' students will act for the best interests of all of those around them. I would add that the true evangelist is the person who lives as a student of Jesus all of their ordinary relationships. But the dichotomy is effectively undone when the purpose of the church is exegetically discerned. If people learn from Jesus to live in such a way that people will see their good works and worship God, then the world will change and those who are trained to live such lives with Jesus will surely be converts.

The next great chapter was chapter four, The Christ Centered Community. In my estimation it is one of the greatest contemporary expressions of Paul's argument in 1 Corinthians and Romans 14. Christians may disagree about favorite teachers, particular religious practices, and even cherished ideas and doctrines, but it is the gospel that Jesus Christ is Lord and God raised him from the dead that unites Christians. Paul calls this doctrine, justification by faith. It is the bulwark of Christian unity, that all who call on Jesus as Lord (notice it does not say “say Lord, Lord to him”) will be saved. The criterion for Christian unity is to be centered upon Jesus Christ and what God has done through him and Jesus will take care of the rest. Heresies may need refuting, bad ideas will need to be treated as such, but brothers and sisters must be loved as such. The example from this chapter of the denomination that insisted upon a particular understanding of the phrase “means of grace” and ousted the author from a spiritual formation conference is telling. We need to fight to understand one another, especially when it comes to terminology. A non-biblical phrase is hardly a reason for schism unless the phrase carries with it a clearly anti-biblical meaning (not-unbiblical, the two are different). A Biblical example of different terminology is that between Paul, John, and James. Or Jesus and the epistolary literature. Paul speaks of justification by trust in Jesus, James speaks of justification by obedience rather than mere intellectual assent. But they appear to mean nearly the same thing, we must have an interactive relationship with the God who raised Jesus from the dead, meeting external criteria does not help.

Chapter five includes a marvelous couple of paragraphs about narcissistic reconciliation that are worth worlds of worth to those who act that way or who feel guilty because of people who regularly confess their sins of secret anger to the people they're angry at. The section is called “the forgiveness ambush.” It is worth the price of the book. Hopefully though, for those to whom the price is prohibitive (14 dollars is a lot to some), the author will make that portion available for free. It is simply too good.

Chapter seven, The Generous Community enlarged my understanding in a key way. Smith tells us that teaching people to be generous with their monies when they are at their spending, energy, and time limits will seem pointless and impossible. To teach generosity the church must first teach frugality. We need to buy what we need so that we can meet the needs of others. Smith's term is margin. Margin is the space created by being frugal and emptying our schedules of baggage so that we have time, money, and energy for others. I would add that it is the development of our talents and job skills so that they can be of more immediate use to others as well. With a margin there is room to give. The false narratives are those of God helping those who help themselves and scarcity. He points out that there is enough if people give and that God helps everybody, including those who help themselves and that those who have and do not help the have-nots will be in trouble. On the whole the chapter and the soul training section at the end are filled with sound advice.

The chapter on worship moves in a different direction that one would typically predict. When I think of the word worship, I think of how the New Testament reworks temple worship and the sacrificial system and makes them into the state of existence of people who have access to God by Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:1-10, Romans 12:1-2, John 4). Three excellent examples of this understanding of Christian worship can be seen in the last chapter of Let the Nations Be Glad: Second Edition By John Piper, chapters 8-10 of the Divine Conspiracy by Dallas Willard, and an essay at daveblackonline.com titled enter to serve, leave to worship. Smith takes worship to mean the gathering of believers. In other words, worship is the community's experience with God through the liturgy. Once the difference in terminology is understood, the chapter is superb. He essentially deals with two harmful myths, that worship is for the individual's enjoyment and that worship is something God needs. God does not need worship, he is infinitely glorious, it is God's gift to us that we can worship. And worship is for the transformation of God's people so that they can act as his effective emissaries in the world around them. I hope many people remove these myths from their mental machinery so that worship services can become places of blessing rather than legalistic requirements or well shopped havens for personal pleasure.

The last chapter on writing a rule of life is extremely helpful, especially the principles of maintaining the rule, but making the rule maintainable and actually beneficial and asking the Christian community to help you make one.

Does it measure up?

Well, the aim of the book is to bring people over time into a certain understanding and practice of Christian community in relationship to Jesus. I read it really quickly to see if I would recommend it to others and be willing to read through it with a group. I can say that I would and will. It is very good. Presumably if somebody really takes the content seriously, as with many spiritual formation texts, they will come away with a deeper knowledge of Jesus and habits of heart and mind that connect their lives to him. I whole heartedly recommend it. Note: It has end notes, which I hate, but I cannot even count them against this wonderful volume. It is also tightly bound, clearly intended for multiple readings.

Dallas Willard Lectures

2011-04-24T12:32:00.000-07:00

There are three excellent Dallas Willard Lectures hosted on his website but with broken links. So I have the correct links here:

Discipleship and Your Cross
What is "Flesh"
Gospel and Salvation

Blank Slate Churches

2011-04-17T15:07:00.000-07:00

Eric Carpenter has some helpful thoughts on starting from a blank slate. HT to Dave Black.

I agree that the New Testament needs to be our litmus test, but can we go back to it with a blank slate?

I think that is impossible.

To have a blank slate means having no New Testament, because part of the same process that caused bad traditions to accrue to the church's account was the same process witch necessitated the development of a New Testament in the first place. So, though I think that we need to seriously consider what the Bible actually says on many ideas, we must remember that the New Testament was written to people who were failing to obey its precepts. Then, over centuries, it was compiled to test the preaching and behavior of people who were by that time not even close to the simple organizational structure hinted at in its pages. I'm not trying to justify sin, I'm trying to say that the New Testament is designed by God and the church itself to work in any context! This is great news.
So, what I'm saying is that I agree with Eric Carpenter, regardless of what else is seen in a blank slate church there will be:

"We'd see a gracious God who has called out a people for himself from all nations, tribes, and tongues.

We'd see a sacrificial and risen Lord who has given us an example of loving servitude to follow.

We'd see a live-giving Spirit who empowers us today to do amazing things for him.

We'd see a church focused on glorifying God in all things.

We'd see a simple model of church life.

We'd see all of the church sharing life together, caring for one another, meeting each others' needs, and impacting society for the good.

We'd see a church where everyone ministers, everyone participates, everyone has authority, and all look to Christ as their head.

We'd see a church that struggles with sin issues such as disunity, immorality, and pride.

We'd see a church that gathers in an informal fashion for the edification of the body.

We'd see a church that proclaims the gospel as part of normal life.

I'm sure we'd see many other things as well.

What we wouldn't see is a perfect church. Saints back then struggled with many of the same things that we struggle with today. In fact, most of the epistles were written at least in part to deal with specific problems that were occurring in the churches.

What we can see in scripture is general principles, patterns, and practices of church life. We can see what the apostles approved of and what they didn't. We can see how the church lived life together and how they engaged society."

New Testament Introduction?

2011-04-16T18:06:00.000-07:00

Does anybody know of a high quality, yet non-academic introduction to the New Testament?

I am going to teach a class at my church on the Message of the New Testament and I would love a good intro, if one cannot be found, I may seriously write my own little digest for each class, but that will be pretty difficult, I'm already teaching Koine and Algebra in a professional setting over the Summer.

My thoughts on the Failure of Seminary

2011-04-15T16:10:00.000-07:00

The Failure of Seminary is a wonderful compilation of thoughts and quotes about the failure of evangelical seminaries. I would say that in many ways the comments made are so routinely true as to be frightening. I nevertheless wonder how often the real failure is on the part of the seminarian. How often do seminarians play on facebook in class, fail to learn the biblical languages, fail to practice the spiritual disciplines, fail to learn how to obey Jesus in the work place, fail to evangelize, and fail to learn how to teach through practice. Some of this could be a problem with how seminary works, but too many students in seminary do not actually do what is expected of them.

I certainly have failed my church, my professors, and my Lord in this matter. I certainly hope that we can do better in the future.

Really, Gatto?

2011-04-12T17:54:00.000-07:00

Government schooling is the most radical adventure in history. It kills the family by monopolizing the best times of childhood and by teaching disrespect for home and parents. The whole blueprint of school procedure is Egyptian, not Greek or Roman. It grows from the theological idea that human value is a scarce thing, represented symbolically by the narrow peak of a pyramid.

That idea passed into American history through the Puritans. It found its "scientific" presentation in the bell curve, along which talent supposedly apportions itself by some Iron Law of Biology. It’s a religious notion, School is its church. I offer rituals to keep heresy at bay. I provide documentation to justify the heavenly pyramid. - John Taylor Gatto

I challenge Gatto's notion that the Puritans brought a theological devaluation of human life into American culture. It seems to me that most of the English Puritans, the same kind of Puritans that migrated stateside actually believed that a single human life was worth more than worlds. A common phrase in pastoral exhortation was that evangelism mattered and caring for the poor mattered because the human person was worth more than worlds. Gatto is in many ways right on the mark, but his understanding of religious history is almost alarmist. He also mentions in the same chapter of his book that ministers cannot be sued; this must be a misstatement. One surely could not believe that to be true.

Anyhow, the public school system is messed up, but falsely attributing religious causes will not solve the problem. It simply fosters misunderstanding. Especially the whole Egyptian/Greek contrast. It sounds like a throwback to Nietzsche. It would be wiser to look for real causes, which Gatto does elsewhere, thankfully bolstering his case beyond what this chapter indicates that it will be.

Why Fast?

2011-04-12T13:50:00.000-07:00

The obvious reason is that Jesus simply assumed Christians would do it, "when you fast."

The other reason is from personal experience. Fasting reveals to me how much of a personal failure I am. It is a real reminder of spiritual failure to come to a place that you remove a distraction and then actually do the sinful things your heart desires. Fasting is apparently a removal of spiritual crutches and people who think they can walk without them cannot. It literally teaches you to say, "no" to your worst desires because you no longer suppress them with food. Fasting makes us strong only because it forces us to walk without infantile help. Perhaps it even forces us to rely upon God instead of upon our bellies.

That is all.

Make every available effort to add knowledge to your virtue

2011-04-10T14:33:00.000-07:00

2 Peter 1:5

The Christian life, built on faith in the God who raised Christ Jesus from the dead, simply cannot get on without knowledge. Now, this needs to be qualified. The Christian life is not the life of the book worm, nor of the gnostic. There is little time for seeking every outrageous tidbit of knowable thought stuff in the world. There is also no place for seeking personally aggrandizing private revelations from God, lest we imagine that God loves us for our smarts than for his own glory (which might be a way of saying, "just because that's how he is"). Instead, Christian knowledge is based upon the kind of knowledge that brings us to God in the first place, experiential knowledge of God based on believing the gospel about Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:3-4). 2 Peter uses two Greek words for knowledge, the first is the experiential kind just mentioned. The second is the kind of knowledge that comes from learning, experience, or contemplation, but is not exactly the same. In this passage we are commanded to add the second type of knowledge to our virtue. I would say that this knowledge has various dimensions:

Knowledge of the content of Christian faith beyond the experience of knowing God personally through Jesus Christ. Christian doctrine is a sort of language for speaking about the God we know personally.
Knowledge of Jesus' teachings in the gospels. To have Christian virtue, one must know the teachings of Christ.
Knowledge of your vocation so that you can apply Jesus' teachings in your work place and in your home life.
Accessory knowledge necessary to living life well. This means wisdom like the book of proverbs, life experience, various life skills, etc.

These things come through study, experience, and prayer. That is all there is to it. I recommend that whatever else young Christians read in the Bible, that they spend time in the gospels, memorizing Jesus' words and deeds, and then read and pray through one chapter of proverbs a day.

Make every available effort to add virtue to your faith

2011-04-10T13:59:00.000-07:00

2 Peter 1:5

Virtue is the excellence of a thing. The excellence of a Christian is to live as Jesus has called them to live. What Peter means is that they are to actually try to do what the Jesus in whom they have faith says to do. Faith without virtue is a blind man claiming to see or a prisoner claiming his charges have been remitted. It is an Algebra student who cannot add. Faith leads to virtue or it leads to nothing. Peter is telling them to actuate their faith or risk ending up not being Christians at all. One of the most interesting things about 2 Peter 1:3-11 is how regularly it ends up pointing us back in the direction of the teachings of Jesus in the gospels. Even more striking is that virtue is the quality of living in a Greek city-state, and in the end of this section of teaching, Peter tells his hearers that if a Christian adds virtue to their faith they will be welcomed into God's eternal kingdom. Christians must live as though in the kingdom now, even if they fail regularly at it, otherwise their faith might prove to be the same as crying “Lord, Lord,” but not actually knowing Jesus. Name dropping never works in real life anyway.

But how can we do this? Well, virtue takes practice. Christian virtue also assumes faith. If one has not come to God, counted the costs of Jesus' offer, and said, "I'll follow you anyway," then that is the first step. Then there comes the regular practice to trying to do what Jesus says, obeying his positive teachings in their specifics, like praying regularly in private and being loving to those who say bad things about you, and then obeying his negative teachings in their spirit and specifics. Christian virtue means not only to avoid calling a brother a fool, but asking God to deliver them of irrational and rational anger toward their brother, and then finally not having that kind of anger. Christian virtue is the process of actuating the powers of grace at work in your soul from when you believed the gospel.

Why might you need to examine yourself.

2011-04-09T15:59:00.000-07:00

We argue that when people are incompetent in
the strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they
suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions
and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of
the ability to realize it. Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with
the mistaken impression that they are doing just fine. As Miller
(1993) perceptively observed in the quote that opens this article,
and as Charles Darwin (1871) sagely noted over a century ago,
"ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
(p. 3). - Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own
Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments Justin Kruger and David Dunning

In Matthew 7:13-27 Jesus warns his disciples that if they are not careful to actually follow him, they very well could end up following the wrong path, building their house in the wrong place, or to remove the metaphors, not knowing him on the last day. This is utterly frightening, but the hope is that it is easy to know if you're a disciple of Jesus or not. You can try to follow him and trust him or not. You can think about your thinking, change your thinking, and actively revise what you do trying to follow him or not. You can base your life on his teachings or not. This does not mean that you will not sin. This does not even mean you'll be a super good person any time soon. It simply means that you can know if you follow Jesus or not, and if you do, says he, you'll one day find him blessing your behavior and you'll not even realize what you've done, for the left hand will not know that the right hand has done good. But if you do not examine yourself and seek to correct your life based on Jesus' teachings, then you might haphazardly take the wide road. The funny thing is that the wide road is pretty narrow considering how many provisions Jesus makes for receiving forgiveness from God...like simply confessing and asking. But if we are not examining ourselves we might at the last turn out to be living in the worthless traditions of our fathers at the last (1 Peter 1:18).

Also of note, people who do examine themselves with regularity often see themselves as significantly more flawed than other people warrant necessary. This is why self-critical people often excel at their favorite tasks. They repeat various tasks until they do them right! I wish I had thought of that the first time I learned the Greek Participle.

Why Read the Gospels? An agreement with Dave Black and Mike Bird

2011-04-09T12:46:00.000-07:00

The Great Commission requires, not discussion, but obedience. Jesus demands it -- of Paul, and no less of us today. And Matthew has provided not only for his own community (in Palestine) but for all Christians of all times and places a marvelous tool for carrying out this commission to the ends of the earth.

This, then, is why I think it is so important for us to read and study the Gospels. And I do hope, in this light, that my students and I do not get so distracted by the many marvelous details in the Gospel accounts that we fail to live out the "Good News" that so captivated and transformed the first followers of Jesus.

-Dave Black

As I often tell my students, Paul rocks, but Jesus reigns...The primordial genesis of Christian doctrine took the form of a concerted dialogue with Jesus and the Gospels. As such the Gospels should be foremost in our theology, preaching, and discipleship.

-Mike Bird

The purpose of the Christian gospel is to lead people to God. The message about Jesus exists to get people to God because one day God will be all in all. This means that people must not only be entralled by who God is because of the good news about Jesus, but they must also be liberated from slavery to sin. That was, in my reading, the burden of the writers of the New Testament: to get people who believed the gospel to become entralled with the majesty of God and to convince them to put away evil habits. Jesus once said that this happens through an experience of knowing the truth. Here is the story from John's gospel:

“Then Jesus began speaking to the Jews who had trusted him, 'When you dwell continually in my teaching, you are truly my disciples and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free'” (John 8:31-32)

Freedom here is freedom from sin as can be seen in 8:34-35. The point is this, Jesus says that his disciples are the ones who know the truth and are set free; not merely people who believe things about Jesus, but people who place their lives into his care. They trust him as Savior, Lord, and as such their guide to what is best in life.

If this is the case, then the earliest historical records of what Jesus said and what he was like are the gospels, Christians who desire freedom from sin must look to the gospels to find Jesus' teaching in their clearest expression. But it goes further, when asked by Philip when Jesus would show his disciples God the Father's character Jesus said that he already had! (John 14:1-11) So, to be enthralled with God and freed from sin, one must get to know Jesus Christ.

My thought here is that the person who desires to know God most fully and experience what Jesus himself promised to them must read, hear, reflect upon, and obey the content of the gospels. Preachers should preach from the gospels with regularity. I remember a Dallas Willard comment that two years of constant study of the gospels is a decent time before looking into the rest of scripture. If Jesus is the way to the Father then we should make every effort to know him well.

*Note: this is not to slight the epistles or the rest of the canon, but simply to state that the gospels are the centerpiece of the canon, and I would say that though propositional theology exists not only in the epistles and in the gospels, the point of the gospels and the epistles is that God is most glorified in us when we are most trusting and obedient to Jesus Christ.

G.E. Ladd

2011-04-09T10:27:00.000-07:00

Ladd's A New Testament Theology is a marvelous book. I revisited it when I suddenly remembered a discussion that would help me in a problem I'm having on a paper. The problem is that when I found my copy I could not remember which chapter I cared to reference. Anyhow, it was a great excuse to read a wonderful book.

Why Oswald Chambers Still Matters

2011-03-31T14:28:00.000-07:00

Because he says things like this:

The only noble sense in which we can claim to believe a thing is when we ourselves are living in the inner spirit of the thing.
I have no right to say I believe in God unless I order my life as under his all- Eye.
I have to right to say I believe that Jesus is the Son of God unless in my personal life I yield myself to that Eternal Spirit, free from all self-seeking, which became incarnate in Jesus.
I have no right to say that I believe in forgiveness as an attribute of God if in my own heart I cherish an unforgiving temper. The forgiveness of God is the test by which I myself am judged. (The Complete Works of Oswald Chambers, 385)

I have not posted for a while.

2011-03-31T14:22:00.000-07:00

I've been busy lately.

The Lord recently gave me the responsibility of teaching Math, College Preparedness, and Public Speaking at a Classical Christian School. I had to stop right in the middle of my series on the Lord's Prayer. But I can perhaps pick that back up pretty soon.

Dave Black recently asked me if I like blogging, and I thought to myself, "Yes, of course I do." So that it why I am back to doing this. It is simply good practice for writing.

What I want my students to learn

2011-01-25T05:06:00.000-08:00

Dave Black posted his list of things he wants his students to learn from him. (Monday, Jan 24, 2011 6:58 PM) Here they are:

Knowledge without obedience is downright sinful.
Saving faith is always working faith.
Greek is essential but not the Open Sesame of interpretation.
Don't argue theology with me if you are blind to the lost people all around you who are dying and going to hell.
God is best glorified not when we talk about "Christian hedonism" but when the Body of Christ rallies around a hurting person and serves him or her with the love of Jesus. (Words are cheap.)
Life is a mission trip. Take it! (I stole this one from my colleague Alvin Reid.)

I have now acquired a job teaching geometry, college prep, pre-algebra, and senior thesis at a small Christian school. I have a list too.

Hard work is worthwhile, you need it to follow Jesus as much as you need it to learn Euclid.
The world has too many masters of video games, but few masters of serving others.
Math is not hard.
Christians should be marked by mercy to outcasts and seeking justice for the down trodden, not for reveling in the status quo.
That God has spoken in many ways in the past, but he his spoken in these last days by his Son.

Note: I have a few posts that need to be edited and posted, but teaching is time consuming. (I'm also taking 12 hours of class. Your prayers are appreciated.)

How to get the most out of a Sermon

2011-01-07T19:14:00.000-08:00

I had some thoughts and wrote them in a word processor. It would take way too long to format them to copy and paste into blogger, so I made a google document.

The idea is that even though sermons are not guaranteed to make us better disciples of Jesus, if they are listened to attentively, they afford us many opportunities. Most churches include sermons of varying quality in the worship service. If Christians start using sermons appropriately, we'll all be one step closer to fulfilling half of the great commission, "teaching them to do everything I commanded you." Then we just need to continue the quest to do so in all nations.

Please enjoy.

I've been sick as a space dog...which is really sick.

2010-12-31T17:23:00.000-08:00

I'll resume posting on the Lord's Prayer as soon as I can, but this past week was supposed to include preparation time for my new job as a math teacher next week. But alas, my illness has been utterly debilitating. I am back to about 60% though.

One more thought. Every hip (mega church/obsessive about being reformed/in your face discontented) pastor wannabe that cites Charles Spurgeon as an historical example of what he is trying to accomplish, take note. You should actually try to imitate the man's example. If you do your own thing and claim Spurgeon's pedigree while really coveting his results, you'll fail to do what he did.

The man read a mountain of books a day.
He prayed often.
He did not quit serving other people even in the face of severe physical trauma.
He himself recommended not trying to accomplish in a year what twenty years of work in one place is meant to accomplish. (like becoming a leader in a church and ousting a bunch of people for not being like you, even though they paid your salary)
He learned Greek and Hebrew.
He met with people regularly...even non-staff members.
He cared about the poor, the drug addicted, and the mistreated.(and did things about it..personally, not through "ministries")
He invested in young men and trained them to fulfill the great commission with the gifts of teaching and pastoring, without enlisting them into his own employment.
He put effort into teaching the entire church where he was preaching how to evangelize (make disciples).

Why I still love John Piper

2010-12-30T06:08:00.001-08:00

Because he really wants people to understand the Bible as an inspired witness to Jesus Christ. See here.

Lord's Prayer Series, First Petition: Whose name anyway?

2010-12-15T08:34:00.000-08:00

Traditional Translation:
Our Father who art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name.

My Translation:

Our Father, right here in the heavens,
Bring honor to your name.

Jesus taught his followers to pray in the middle of his sermon on the mount, in the middle of a portion about avoiding public piety to the detriment of knowing God closely. Jesus will not tolerate any ideas of a God who works magic through incantation. The God he brings up cannot be ignored for the sake of building a reputation for doing things pertaining to him. These were the two fundamental problems of prayer when Jesus spoke these words:

people expected God to make their lives better than the next guys
or somebody expected to be praised by the next guy for his well known piety

Today the fundamental problem of prayer is two fold:

Christians feel like God is distant, angry, or disinterested in them
Christians feel no reverence or respect for God

In this first request from the Lord's prayer we can see that Jesus' disciples have the privilege of addressing God as though his children. Christians can talk to God as though they are his beloved children, with whom he is well pleased, (Matthew 3:16-16) as though he were present in the heavens around them, whether in their closet or in a prison cell. But they are also to pray that God does something special in history and in their lives. Christian are to pray that this Father's name be revered, hallowed, or honored. The thought of God's name in those days was one of personality and reputation. The Father's character and his actual personal presence are to be revered. And Jesus here teaches that all powerful God, waits for his own people to pray before he acts to honor his name.

What does this petition mean? It means that God wants his name to be honored in the behavior and attitudes of people towards him. He wants our highest allegiance in all areas of our lives and will gladly act in consort with our prayers for this very thing. It means praying that God's character, as revealed in Jesus Christ, be recognized for what it is, and that people will live accordingly.

Perhaps as an experiment today we can pray this prayer intending that we live in reverence to God the Father by doing the commands of Jesus. We can also pray that the Father gives us faith in Jesus when he tells us that we can love God like a Father. We can also trust Jesus when he says that his Father loves his people like he loves Jesus.

Poised for Sin

2010-12-13T14:53:00.000-08:00

Thanks be to God for his glorious grace.
We have trained ourselves to be poised for sin.
And even in these last days, even the day of salvation,
God's greatest word to us is in his Son.
He gave his life as a ransom for many.

The Lord's Prayer Introduction

2010-12-13T09:09:00.000-08:00

A common portion of popular piety is the Lord's prayer (the Matthew 6:9-13 version), which Ben Witherington has pointed out should be called, "The Disciples' Prayer." The prayer's popularity actually gives it great potential for leading people into a deeper relationship with their Father, who art in heaven. The reason a piece of popular piety can be helpful for discipleship to the unpopular Jesus is because this piece of piety comes straight from his mouth in a sermon he preached about how to live as citizens of God's kingdom on earth. Jesus intimates to his disciples that a chief part of God's kingdom coming on earth will be the prayers of those people who take part in the Kingdom. God's sovereignty will be expressed through his answered prayers to bring evil under his good and gracious rule. Since most people know this prayer, but we can help them understand the major themes of Jesus' teachings simply by paying careful attention to this prayer.

Most of us are familiar with its content (I left out the doxology, though I think it is meaningful in Christian worship, it does not seem to have been in the earliest texts of Matthew's gospel:

Our Father who art in heaven,

hallowed be thy name.

Thy kingdom come.

Thy will be done

on earth as it is in heaven.

Give us this day our daily bread,

and forgive us our trespasses,

as we forgive those who trespass against us,

and lead us not into temptation,

but deliver us from evil.

I offer this fresh translation:

Our Father, right here in the heavens,

Bring honor to your name.

Bring your kingdom here.

Do your will on the earth,

just like it is done in heaven.

Give us the food we need for the day today

Also forgive us for living as rebels against you,

do so in the same way we give clean slates.

And do not lead us toward tests, instead deliver us from the evil one.

I will hopefully go briefly through each petition of the prayer giving it's context in the gospel of Matthew, the teachings of Jesus, and an application to present day living.

Lord's Prayer Series

2010-12-13T08:37:00.000-08:00

Lord's prayer series:

Introduction
First Petition: Whose name anyway?
Second Petition: Allegiance, Kings, and Kingdoms
Third Petition: Not my will, but your's be done
Fourth Petition: We Have Needs, Man
Fifth Petition: How do we ask for forgiveness?
Sixth Petition: Don't test us, we're too weak!
Seventh Petition: While your at it, keep that devil off my back!

Why Biblical Languages?

2010-12-11T13:12:00.000-08:00

Brian tells us why right here and I agree with him.

Just sayin's all.

Note: God's word is contained in your English Bible, but it is contained more ambiguously in the ambiguous parts and more clearly in the clear parts in your Greek and Hebrew Bible. Greek and Hebrew study can steel your mind against pugilistic fundamentalism while simultaneously strengthening your resolve against a wimpy fear of dogmatism.

Hat Tip to Dave Black

The Next Rep is Always Safer

2010-12-09T22:50:00.000-08:00

In weight training the common wisdom is to do each rep as quickly as possible just to finish the set.

The uncommon wisdom is to train with perfect form and do each rep relatively slowly. If you pick a weight that you could probably only do 10 times, the goal is twelve. You speed up as you go, because as you become weaker, it takes more effort to produce less force. The first reps are deliberately done slowly because the fresh muscles can produce enough force to actually cause very serious injury. As the muscles are warmed up and then exhausted, the last few reps take monumental effort. It is defeating to expend such energy to accomplish something that would normally be easy.

Something happens on those last few reps, and it is not mere pain and frustration. Your nervous system does everything it can to cause your muscles to respond to your effort. And that last rep when you can do nothing more, you discover that you are not injured, your muscles are too weak to hurt anything. In the next 24-72 hours your brain, nervous system, muscles, and metabolism will adapt to make you stronger, more coordinated, and more durable. Everybody who quit on the easy rep to avoid frustration, pain, or embarrassment at failure will be marginally stronger if they do not stay the same strength.

Life is like this. When we quit on the hard parts, we miss out on what the easy parts prepared us to do, but were unable to do themselves. You could even miss out on the tremendous benefits of coming out on the other side. All of that is to say that quitting once something gets hard does not benefit you one bit.

The Participatory Study Method: A book review

2010-12-07T13:25:00.000-08:00

Geoffrey D. Lentz and Henry Neufeld. An Introduction to the Participatory Study Method: Learning and Living Scripture. (Gonzalez, FL: Energion Publications, 2010)

Thanks to Henry Neufeld from Energion for sending me the review copy.

This guide to reading the Bible is designed to fill a void which exists between reading the Bible in an informed and exegetical manner while still reading it for the purpose of spiritual formation. This is a laudable goal and one which I personally have tried to teach in the church, in teaching opportunities in the academy, and to explain to people who do not have faith in the resurrected Lord. The overriding presupposition of the book is that Christians are a part of the Bible story and that they should read the Bible to participate in that story (2). The book essentially points out that reading the Bible is for experiencing God first hand and then living as his children. They show a helpful diagram of how the Bible exists to illuminate one's personal experience of God, rather than exists as the personal relationship between God and humanity.

The book is short, easy to read, and nevertheless thorough. The format for the process of studying the Bible comes from the old “Lectio Divina” method, reading, deep meditation, praying through the text, then finally contemplate or obey the text. Chapter 3 presents an excellent overview of the process of lectio divina applied to the Christian community which includes the exegetical process (11). All of the practical tips given are helpful, for instance there is a list about what items might be helpful to the process which is amazing (20). Chapters 9-17 are excellent and helpful reading for most Christians who might be uninformed about the literary genres contained within the Scripture.

My one complaint about the book is that going back to the section about the Bible illuminating our relationship to God is that one comment could have been teased out a little bit more. The book mentions that “[the bible] is not necessarily God's primary way of speaking with you personally (2).” I think there needs to be a better way of saying this, though it may indeed be true. Perhaps that Jesus is God's primary way of speaking to all peoples, and though we can daily interact with Jesus, the revelation of Jesus is Scripture is the most available means through which people can be guaranteed to hear from God, though God may relate to us more personally through other means.

All in all, I highly recommend this book, particularly to Sunday school teachers without a Bible college education, it is inexpensive and incredibly helpful.

Paul: On How to Think About People with Whom we Disagree

2010-12-05T23:45:00.000-08:00

Paul here, tells the Philippian church how to cope with disagreements, even serious disputes amongst people who believe in the one Lord, Jesus Christ. This whole letter he has challenged the church to think cooperatively, to live with true humility (counting the rights of others above their own), to consider the examples of Paul, his associates, and then Jesus himself in this very matter, and finally he challenged the leadership (female I might add) in the church to get along. He then tells them how to do it. What struck me was what he says in verse 8. Emboldened below. Paul tells them to think highly of one another! How can we treat people with instinctively want to disdain with respect? Consider whatever good things you can about them! A thunderbolt for angry attitudes, the compulsively cranky, and those of us who love to level a good insult. Or course, behind all of this is the bloody mess of Philippians 2:5-11, which should lead all Christians to be very kind to their brothers and sisters for whom this mess happened.

Philippians 4:2-9:

I urge Euodia and I urge Syntchye to have the same mind in the Lord. Yes, and I ask you, true co-laborer, to help these women, who worked together with me in the gospel with Clement and the rest of my posse, whose names are in the book of life.

Rejoice in the Lord always, again I say, rejoice!
Let your gentleness be made known among all men.

The Lord is near. So do not be anxious, but in all things pray and request with thanksgiving, making your requests known to God and God's peace, which passes all comprehension, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is righteous, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is praise worthy, whatever is virtuous, if there is any praise, consider these things. Also, practice these things and the God of peace will be with you: whatever you learned, received, heard, and have seen in me.

Dallas Willard on Reading Scripture for Spiritual Transformation

2010-12-05T22:01:00.000-08:00

How can we read Scripture in such a way as to lead us into Christ's likeness?

Dallas Willard gives an all too sensible tip which involves five steps. I will not quote him verbatim, but here is the reference to where you'll find the information: Dallas Willard. Hearing God: Developing a Conversation Relationship with God. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP, 1999, 161-165

When you come to a passage of the Bible, especially one which indicates a great truth about God's character as revealed in Christ, or about the virtues of life lived in Christ, read thusly

read for information, seeking to discover what the passage means in it's relationship to the book in which it is found, the canon of Scripture, the Kingdom of God, the person of Christ, and your present life situation
read with longing that the passage be so; desire that you really become a child of your Father in heaven as you love people who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who hurt you
read with affirmation, that it must be so that those who learn to love their enemies are demonstrating the character of God the Father
read making invocation to God to make it so, ask the Father that his will be done in your life, that you can have the courage to care for people who mistreat you
read for appropriation, read knowing that the passage must be so because over time and practiced obedience you have experienced it to be so, in loving somebody who curses you, you can experience or have experienced what the Jesus said you would, "you will be a son or daughter of your Father in the heavens.

1 Peter 4:7-8 Prayer and Clear Headedness

2010-11-29T17:12:00.000-08:00

Text:
Πάντων δὲ τὸ τέλος ἤγγικεν. σωφρονήσατε οὖν καὶ νήψατε ⸀εἰς προσευχάς. πρὸ ⸀πάντων τὴν εἰς ἑαυτοὺς ἀγάπην ἐκτενῆ ἔχοντες, ὅτι ἀγάπη ⸀καλύπτει πλῆθος ἁμαρτιῶν·

Translation:
Now the goal of all things has drawn near, therefore think clearly and be sober minded for the sake of your prayers. The most important thing of all is to love each other always, because love covers a multitude of sins.

Notes:
Christians should be clear headed for many reasons. Most are the same reasons that apply to everybody: life requires complex decisions, our appetites and emotions deceive us (we don't need food every time we feel hungry), or our ideas about life can be wrong which makes thinking clearly matter.

Peter gives us more reasons to think clearly:

The goal of all things (the kingdom of God) has drawn near. Peter heard this same verb used by Jesus to announce the arrival of God's kingdom, this appears to mean the same thing. Jesus said, "God's kingdom has drawn near, therefore change your minds (repent) and believe the gospel." So Peter is challenging them to think in terms of the way the world really is.
For the sake of your prayers, one of the chief ways in which God has promised to work in the world is through prayerful interaction with his people, and Peter implies that clear-headedness has a direct positive effect on our prayers. This is crucial, because we regularly attend to prayer so listlessly, with a dull mind, and a lack of forethought. But Peter says that a life of clear-headedness will make prayer more fruitful. This will happen in two ways: clear intelligent praying is what Jesus calls for in Matthew 6:9-13, and disciplined, daily, practical clear-headedness will rub off on our prayers and help us to pray according to God's will.

On the Need for Actually Obeying Jesus Christ

2010-11-28T14:59:00.000-08:00

"We must at some point stop looking for new information or social arrangements or religious experiences that will draw off the evil in the world at large, abolish war, hunger, oppression, and so forth, while letting us continue to be and to live as we have since Adam. This is the illusion of our age, the Holy Grail of modernity, a pleasant dream in the sleep of secularism. The monstrous evils we deplore are in fact the strict causal consequences of the spirit and behavior of "normal" human beings following generally acceptable patterns of life. They are not the results of strange flukes, accidental circumstances, or certain especially mad or bad individuals." - Dallas Willard The Spirit of the Disciplines, 234

Eventually people will hopefully understand that no significant change can happen in the world that is free of personal consequences. If we want war, hunger, violence, and poverty to end, we must accept the consequences for that and become the kind of people who will happily face those consequences. Like the old saying of Christian revivalists: "Revival needs start in your own heart." We must face the consequences of doing good or stop lamenting that it is never done. May Jesus' easy yoke become the pattern for Christians everywhere.

James White and Christian Scholarship

2010-11-27T14:13:00.000-08:00

In any case, I made a commitment then that I would never allow myself that kind of hubris---Christian scholarship is a practice of SERVANTHOOD, period, end of discussion. - James White of Alpha Omega Ministies

I'm fairly Calvinistic in many of my judgments about life. I love Greek and Hebrew. I'm Baptist. I care about evangelism, discipleship, and teaching the Bible. So in all these senses, Dr. White and I are quite similar. I'm am certain that James White and I disagree about a million things, but we are in complete agreement about the above issue. Christian scholarship is for serving other Christians with clarity of expression in teaching the gospel.

Favorite Greek Resources

2010-11-24T14:04:00.000-08:00

Dave Black has posted an essay on his blog chronicling what he considers to be the 10 most helpful books on New Testament Greek. Alan Knox did a post in response to Dave's here.

I now would like to list the most helpful books for me.

Learn to Read New Testament Greek by David Alan Black - Dave listed Mounce's text first, and while I agree that it is excellent, particularly his master verb chart and how he breaks up the noun declensions, Black's is simpler, has more helpful exercises, and the guide to reading/exegesis in the back is excellent. If I ever teach Greek again I will make it the text book.
New Testament Greek Beyond the Basics by Dan Wallace - When I first received this behemoth in the mail I was afraid. Now I am excited to open it and am regularly enlightened by Wallace's text. He covers the hardest issues in the most useful ways.
Idioms of the Greek New Testament by Stanley Porter - This text is way too expensive, but was very very helpful to me when I was trying to understand how prepositions could mean such a ridiculous amount of things.
Using New Testament Greek in Ministry by David Alan Black - This book helped me to avoid every fallacy mentioned in D.A. Carson's equally valuable book, "Exegetical Fallacies," both of which should be required reading in every American seminary, not in any particular class, but as part of a sort of meta-curriculum.
Biblical Greek and Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament by Maximilian Zerwick - The first book is just awesome for understanding the Koine, and the second one is perfect for quick reading of the GNT, especially, I've found, when you first venture into Luke-Acts or 1 Peter.
Linguistics for Students of New Testament Greek by David Alan Black - I read this book straight through at a monastery where a monk friend invited me to hang out one week when there was a free hermitage. The discovery of discourse analysis rocked my world and awakened me to the fact that in the absence of complete fluency in the Koine, linguistics could come to our aid in interpreting the writings of the apostles!
Exploring New Testament Greek by Peter Kevern and Paula Gooder - I used this text book and hand outs that I made to teach New Testament Greek to home school students. It is interesting, it can be a very surface level overview, but if the paradigms given are memorized, it can also be a fairly comprehensive introduction to the language, it is filled with examples from the GNT and has a great introduction to the verb. It also costs too much money for the fairly flimsy paper-back edition. But, everybody understood the text and learned enough to read through 1 John the second semester.
Discourse Features of New Testament Greek by Stephen Levinsohn - This book is excellent, particularly his discussion of και and δε. It has really shaped my understanding of what it means to translate the Greek Testament for meaning, and then to teach for meaning from the English Bible.

Runners Up: I would like to include Richard Young's Intermediate Grammar and A.T. Robertson's Giant Grammar, but I have not used them quite enough to include them as most influential to me. Also BGAD edition two is very helpful, I'd use edition three, but alas, it is impossible for a student to afford these days. I also recommend Conybeare and Stock's "Grammar of Septuagint Greek."
In terms of software Miklal's flash cards have been immensely helpful. As well as Gramcord and John Dyer's Bible Web App.

New Showbread Album

2010-11-20T16:28:00.000-08:00

Showbread has just released their newest album, and as you click the link to their web page, you'll notice a link to download the album free, from here.

Very few bands are as interesting as Showbread, and perhaps none are as bizarre. I have yet to hear this new album, but I can say that it will be well done, so I recommend it, these guys definitely know how to work.

Also, their mission as a band is to use their resources for the mission of Jesus. They even use the money they raise as a band to go on mission trips...not "ministry trips" where they play shows to make money for themselves, but where they share the gospel and serve others.

Enjoy.

1 Peter 2:1-17: My attempt at a fresh translation

2010-11-20T15:12:00.000-08:00

Therefore, as new born infants, long for spiritual milk by putting away all evil, all deceit, every hypocritical action, every envious behavior, and all slanderous words. Do this so that by such milk you can grow towards salvation; if you really tasted, and you did, that the Lord is kind.

You tasted his kindness by coming to him, a living stone, rejected by men, but chosen by God, precious. And indeed you, are like living stones, being built into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices which are pleasing to God because of Jesus Christ.

Because it says, in writing:

Behold, I am setting in Zion, a corner foundation stone,

chosen, precious, and the one that places his trust upon him

will not ever be put to shame, under any circumstances!

Therefore honor is written to you who believe,

but to those who do not believe:

The stone that the builders rejected;

Is the same stone which became the chief ruler

And a stumbling block and a scandalous rock.

They stumble on the word because they disobey; for which those who disobey were appointed.

You, however, were appointed as a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of God's possession, so that you might proclaim the virtuous deeds of he who called you out of darkness and into his wonderful light:

Those who once were not a people,

Are now God's people,

those who had not received mercy,

But now have received it.

Beloved, I encourage you, as aliens and passers-through, to abstain from bodily passions, the kind which wage war against your very being, so that you will have a good manner of living in the midst of the citizenry. That way, when you are spoken poorly of, as though you do evil; by witnessing your good works, those same people will make much of God in the day of visitation.

Therefore, submit to all kinds of human institutions because of the Lord: whether to Caesar as supreme, or to the governors, as sent by Caesar for vengeance against actual evil doers and to praise those who do good. Do so because God desires this: that by doing good, you silence foolish human ignorance. Do so as free people, but not as though having freedom were a pretext for evil, but as God's slaves. Honor all, love God's family, fear God, honor Caesar.

Discipleship, Grace, and the Gospel

2010-11-18T10:50:00.000-08:00

On Halden's Blog I made a comment that may have helped to open up a very helpful can of worms. It's about the nature of Christian discipleship. Essentially, on how we can give an account of the means of learning to be a disciple of Jesus Christ that is faithful to the gospel of God's action to save us. How can we avoid "programs" that cause or stem from a misunderstanding of the gospel and yet still give place for Christian disciplines?

Tom Wright's book "After You Believe" is helpful in this respect. Halden is a wonderful interpreter of Barth, Bonhoeffer, and a thoughtful theologian in his own right. I cannot wait to read his actual post. I hope this can become a discussion that helps his readers make sense of following Jesus in a way that leaves no room to imagine that the life wherein Jesus is "God with us" can be anything but God's free gift!

What is a disciple of Jesus?

2010-11-17T22:53:00.000-08:00

We need to clear in our heads about what discipleship is. My definition: A disciple is a person who has decided that the most important thing in their life is to learn how to do what Jesus said to do. A disciple is not a person who has things under control, or knows a lot of things. Disciples simply are people who are constantly revising their affairs to carry through on their decision to follow Jesus. - Dallas Willard in his wonderful little article on Evangelism.

Now, for the other important question, who is a disciple of Jesus?

Am I, am you? The offer he makes is great, "Come to me...and I will give you rest," but are we willing to actually come to him the way he prescribed: as his students, as well as his redeemed people? It might be an important question to ask, and not just for neurotic religious folks. The other question might be: what steps am I willing to take to learn from Jesus. Will I actually revise the affairs of my life to do so?

Quote of the Day

2010-11-14T21:00:00.000-08:00

"spiritual formation for the Christian basically refers to the Spirit-driven process of forming the inner world of the human self in such a way that it becomes like the inner being of Christ himself...Christian spiritual formation is focused entirely on Jesus. Its goal is an obedience or conformity to Christ that arises out of an inner transformation accomplished through purposive interaction with the grace of God in Christ." - Dallas Willard Renovation of the Heart pp 22

Great Article

2010-11-11T06:00:00.000-08:00

Wright vs Piper

This article was written by Mike Bird and is positively pleasant to read. I highly recommend it as well as his introduction to Paul, "A Bird's Eye View" and his monograph on "The Saving Righteousness of God."

I read the Saving Righteousness of God shortly after it came out and it has helped me read Romans much more clearly, which is helpful for both following Jesus and preaching. Doubly awesome.

I was/am outrageously sick

2010-11-10T09:19:00.000-08:00

Yesterday I fell unusually ill, my immune system usually protects me from feeling this horrible, but I think it was something chemical that I either ingested or breathed in. Anyhow, as I laid around unable to really read or write much I found myself thinking a lot and discovered that with down time comes one's actual self. This has been written of before, but really thoughts turn to sin, to grudges, to insecurities, etc, but they also turn to God and his grace, his demands, his love and his character. One more reason for the discipline of solitude I suppose, although normally solitude is to be productive and willful, mine was imposed, unproductive, but personally revealing.

I need to keep Edwards' resolution in mind:
"After afflictions, to enquire, What I am the better for them, What good I have got by them, and What I might have got by them?"

Why the incarnation?

2010-11-06T09:42:00.000-07:00

1 John 3:5

and you know that he was revealed to take away sins, and there is no sin in him.

1 John 3:8

the Son of God was revealed for this reason, to destroy the works of the devil.

Thoughts: When I was still a computer science major, I thought these passages both said a great deal about the coming of Jesus into the world and ultimately about the doctrine of atonement, which is an unfortunate misnomer, because atonement is but one piece of how God saves us. That's true, there's no room for favorite models of the atonement whenever everything Jesus came to accomplish for us matters...even if we misunderstand how or why he accomplished it, Jesus Christ is still for us!

The amazing thing is that if we look at these passages in their fuller context, we'll see that John is trying to keep us from sinning, not trying to instruct us in understanding why Jesus came, that's a means to the end of telling God's people to avoid sin. Jesus came to get rid of it, so don't do it. Sin is what devils do, and Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil (sin), so don't do it.

1 John Question

2010-11-06T09:19:00.000-07:00

Why on earth does John use language of "lawless" and "lawlessness" in 1 John chapter 3? He never makes use of the word anywhere else, and does not speak much of the law anywhere, assuming the epistles and the gospel share the same author.

It appears to come out of nowhere, and does not seem to add much force to the argument, but I trust that the book was written by somebody who was rhetorically and communicative-ly competent, so it must have been important to the first auditors, or at least the author thought it would be. The only thing I can think of is that it piles up one more bad thing to associate with sin. Which he does a lot of in the passage:

lawlessness
the opposite of what we will become (so the opposite of Jesus Christ whose moral likeness we will receive)
unrighteousness
the work of the devil
hate
murder
evil
death
not loving
the world, insofar as it consists of systemic evil
and elsewhere in the book, sin is associated with believing in the false gospel of a ghost Jesus who did not have a body and who did not care about deeds done in the body.

Anybody else have any thoughts?

A brief summary of Greek Conditionals

2010-10-30T22:55:00.000-07:00

I will probably try to add more to this, such as examples from the New Testament, examples from other literature, more helps to interpretation, page numbers from grammars (Wallace, Black, Robertson, and a big fat classical grammar I've been using), and maybe a youtube video in the near future.

First Class (Assumed true for argument, whether the speaker thinks actually believes the protasis or not)
1. Protasis
  ει + indicative mood (any tense) [negative ου]
2. Apodosis any mood and any tense
Second Class (assumption of an untruth for the sake of argument)
1. Protasis
  ει + indicative mood (secondary endings only) [negative μη]
2. Apodosis
  αν + indicative mood (secondary endings only)
Third Class
1. Protasis
  εαν + subjunctive mood (any tense) [negative μη]
2. Apodosis
  any mood any tense
Fourth Class
1. Protasis
  ει + optative mood (present or aorist)
2. Apodosis
  αν + optative (present or aorist)

Evening Sermon Thoughts Sunday Oct 31, 2010

2010-10-30T22:27:00.000-07:00

Assumptions of the great commission:

That Jesus' people will be able to teach others how to follow him, this requires that:
1. That Jesus' people have intimate knowledge of his commands.
2. That Jesus' people will take his commands seriously.
3. That Jesus' people will have experience following those commands.
4. That Jesus will be present to aid this process.
Jesus is worthy of being followed:
1. He delivered his people from their sins.
2. He is raised from the dead.
3. He possesses all authority on heaven and on the earth because he defeated the evil one.
Jesus' commands are the Father's will for us and therefore are all good and wonderful:
1. His way involves a cross that becomes a restful, light burden.
2. His way promises eternal life.
3. To be a disciple of Jesus is a deeply desireable thing.
Jesus brings us directly into God's own life:
1. His baptism is a relationship to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
2. His death expiates the sin that separates us from God
3. Jesus gives his followers access to the Holy Spirit of God.
That sharing the gospel and making disciples are not different things:
1. The confidence in Jesus as the one with all authority (Lord and Saviour) starts discipleship as well as justifies sinners.
2. To be a disciple is to be a believer. (Though one really can be saved without having yet grasped how the God uses the gospel to deliver them from sin as well as it's consequences)
3. The gospel was designed to change people not God. (The gospel does not change God from angry to happy, but changes a person's direction in life from being death bound to Godward)
Being a disciple is for everybody
1. It is for all nations.
2. It is for all baptized Christians, not monks, ministers, or particularly holy folk.
3. It is a prerequisite for experiencing God's presence daily. (not for being loved by God, but for experiencing his daily help...Jesus' promise is “I will be with you (disciples) each day.”

2010-10-15T14:08:00.000-07:00

So I've been reading some histories of the ancient church in the east and I've been surprised at what I've read, especially since their existence is completely ignored in all the church history books I've read before.

I found out that the Nestorians not only took the gospel all the way to the pacific Ocean, but that the bishop of Beijing had a larger territory than the Pope in the middle ages and that there may have been more Christians in Asia and India than there were people in Europe!

Anyhow, I found a translation of the only systematized theology text that still exists on the Nestorian side. Here's a link.

Take note: God gets his gospel places and metaphysical Christology is not a substitute for obedience Christology.

Baptism and Grace

2010-10-14T10:53:00.000-07:00

In the normal order of things, the first act of faithful Christian obedience after faith, is to become baptized. Baptists have often been accused of "voluntarism" in regards to church membership and baptism. But what is interesting is that they, insofar as baptists properly understand baptism, need another Christian to perform this act. In other words, the Christian from the very beginning must learn that it is not good to be alone.

This applies to those baptized as infants as well, you received baptism from another before you could even ask. We are not meant to live without assistance from our brother and sister.

Thoughts on the Biblical Languages and Loving the Bible

2010-10-14T10:46:00.000-07:00

The gospels tell us that Jesus thinks that two things are most important from the Law of Moses for his disciples: love God, love neighbor. He never says, "Love the Bible."

But I think that much like being in love and loving so deeply that you wish to marry this person means that you start to love things about them. Not instead of them, but because you love them and to love them better. And so, I see the Bible as a book that we love, just like one may come to love his wife's voice, or a woman her husband's presence. It's not the voice or presence in itself, but it is the one present and the one speaking.

I see loving the Bible the same way. I had the opportunity to substitute teach a Greek lesson to Roman Catholic seminarians today and I prayed to our Father, "Give us a deep love for you, for your word, and for even the grammar we study, so that we might attend more carefully to your words to us." So we learn to love the Bible because through it we come to know and dare I say, love even more, the God whom we love, just as communicating with a lover brings deeper love.

In this sense, young biblical scholars ought to pray for a love of grammar, not just of the Bible or just of God. But that we learn to love the language of the Bible that we might attend ever closer to the one who loves our souls.

Repost: Spurgeon on Seminary

2010-10-10T06:49:00.001-07:00

1. Found a College into which men with an ordinary English education can be admitted without being degraded by comparison with graduates of secular universities.
2. Set before the men no ambition after scholarship for its own sake, but keep them to the one aim off being soul-winners and edifiers of the saints -- therefore do not aim at degrees, etc.
3. Provide for poor men all necessaries -- board, lodging, clothes, books, in fact, all they want.
4. Keep all this at the cheapest rate, that men may not form habits they cannot afterward live up to.
5. Affiliate the College to a large working church. Expect the men to be members, and during the first six months workers in the schools, etc.
6. Keep the period of study short, say two to three years. Never exceed this. Men who cannot do in that time, are no great good for rough work.
7. Give every man the first three or six months as probation, and constantly weed out the idle, vain, inefficient, or devoid of zeal.
8. Keep up the devotional spirit by giving half a day in the week for nothing but prayer. Begin each class with prayer.
9. Make them live in Christian families, and send round a Christianb man constantly to inquire as to habits, domestic, moral, etc.
10. Make it known by your magazines and papers that men can be received and are wanted. See my yearly Almanac.
11. Do not embarrass the President with committees, etc.
12. Sort the men and do not make the studies in each case the same. Some never will learn classics; some will readily.
13. Have frequent sermonizings, discussions, etc., and encourage estempore speach.
14. Let a man who is really a good fellow stay till a place is ready for him; and let him come back, if, in his first church, he does not succeed. Keep him with you another term and let him try again.
15. With poor men keep up a system of traveling libraries to keep them in books and help them to go on educating themselves.
16. Let tutors be brethren to the men, not lords. The more familiar the intercourse the deeper the love and the truer the respect.
17. Call in pastors, missionaries, and successful workers to talk to the men and tell them their experiences.
18. Keep the men to outdoor preaching and encourage them to be winning souls while students.
19. Make the physical sciences a great point; they furnish illustrations, relieve the severity of study, and enlarge the mind. Change of work is recreation.
20. Keep the church praying for them. Interest the church by meetings in which the men speak. Let beginners speak, and then in after months the people will remark their progress, and see the reality of their preparation.
21. Believe in Dr. Francis Wayland's "Principles of the Baptists," and practically carry them out.
22. The Lord, the Holy Spirit direct you, and bless you with his guidance; follow that guidance, and not my recommendations wherin they fail.

Spurgeons recommendations for a Theology School. I think I shall start one of this sort when I grow old if the Lord wills it.