Terry Pruitt's Blog

The Doctrine of the Trinity

2012-01-17T08:15:00.002-05:00

There is but one God. There are three persons of the Holy Trinity who are equal in power and glory. They are one in substance but distinguished in their works. These three make up the one God-head. Though the word "trinity" does not appear in the Bible text, the teaching regarding the Trinity is contained therein. (Matthew 3:16,17; John 3:17; 5:18; 16:7)

A STUDY OF THE LOCATION OF SHEBA IN 1 KINGS 10 AND 1 CHRONICLES 9

2011-12-17T18:12:00.008-05:00

I would like to thank Dr. Todd Beall for giving corrections to this paper. Errors are mine alone.

Introduction

The Queen of Sheba is never named in the Bible. Though her country is named as Sheba, we do not know its geographic location definitively. Three major views of where Sheba is located are: in the northern Arabian Peninsula called Wadi Es-Seba; southern Arabian Peninsula in what is now Yemen; and in Ethiopia.[1] While there are many, some fanciful, proposals for Sheba's location, this paper will confine its discussion to southern Arabian Peninsula and Ethiopia. Justification for this approach is that in the NT Jesus calls this queen the "Queen of the South." (Matt 12:42, Luke 11:31) This gives a cardinal direction from the land of Israel: south. The idiom used by Jesus suggests a lengthy distance from which the Queen came. The idiom use support an argument to preclude the northern Arabian Peninsula view.[2] This paper will examine the two primary texts concerning the Queen of Sheba, 1 Kgs 10 and 2 Chr 9, for clues as to the location of the Queen's home country. Also by way of method, this paper will look at other Biblical texts, extra-biblical texts, cultural features, and archeological evidence relevant to identifying the geographic location of Sheba. The evidence points to Sheba being located in what is now Yemen east of Sana'a, but quite possibly certain elements of cultural heritage of Sheba may have been transferred to what is now Ethiopia.

1 Kings 10 and 2 Chronicles 9 and Other Passages

The two passages in 1 Kgs 10 and 2 Chr 9 speak of the laudable attributes of Solomon. The first is his wisdom which is recognized internationally by the Queen of Sheba and unnamed parties from other nations (1 Kgs 10: 24; 2 Chr 9: 22, 23). The second laudable attribute was building of wealth from international relations through gifts, tribute, and trade (1 Kgs 9:28; 10:10-12, 14-22, 25-29; 2 Chr 8:18; 9:9-11, 13-21, 24-28). These glories are summarized by the inspired writer, who says: "Thus King Solomon excelled all the kings of the earth in riches and in wisdom" (2 Chr 9:22 ESV).

The explicit motivation for the Queen of Sheba to visit Solomon was to learn of his wisdom, but the text also suggests that international trade related to the royal visit. Solomon sent out men on ships that acquired gold, apparently from some sort of international trade (1 Kgs 9:26-28; 2 Chr 8:17,18). The Queen of Sheba brought gold and spices in abundance to give as gifts Solomon (1 Kgs 10: 2, 10; 2 Chr 9: 1, 9). Solomon also gave to the Queen of Sheba whatever she desired (1 Kgs 10: 13; 2 Chr 9: 12).[3] Strictly speaking the Scriptures says that the goods which were transferred were gifts. Werner Keller says that the Queen of Sheba's expedition was to secure access to trade routes. Keller believes that her purpose was ensure that the ascending position of Israel in the international trade scene did not negatively affect her country's trade.[4] As this paper examines 1 Kgs 10 and 2 Chr 9 for clues regarding the location of Sheba it would be compelling to find a land which is involved in international trade of spices, precious gems and gold, had a high regard for wisdom, records a female monarch, and was called Sheba.

Other passages in the Bible discuss Sheba as an area occupied by the descendents of a patriarch called Sheba. Gen 10:7 places Sheba, along with his brother Dedan, as the grandson of Cush and the son of Raamah. The Gen 10:7 reference groups Sheba with Egypt, Cush, and Put, all descendents of Ham. The Allen Ross places the location of these descendent tribes on both sides of the Red Sea, on both the Arabian western coast and in Africa in the areas of southern Egypt, Sudan, and northern Ethiopia.[5] However in Genesis 10:28 a different Sheba is a distant descendent of Shem. This Semitic Sheba lived, along with the other sons of Joktan, in the territory from Mesha extending toward Sephar. Unger's Bible Dictionary places Mesha as a place in Arabia Petraea, on the east side of the Dead Sea and south toward the Arabian Peninsula.[6] Unger's places Sephar on the southwest corner of the Arabian Peninsula, on the western part of modern Yemen. The modern name for the site is called Zhafar (ظفار) and is located over sixty miles south of the Yemen capital Sana'a.[7] Genesis 25:3 is a third place where a patriarch is named Sheba, this time the grandson of Abraham and his concubine Keturah. Strangely, Sheba is once again paired with a brother Dedan. Scholars who hold to a late, Babylonian exile period for the composition of the Pentateuch would hold that these are three different traditions that explain the origin of the nation of Sheba. However, it is also possible that the pairing of the names Sheba and Dedan fit together in the ancient world, so that it was common to give brothers or twins these two names. Some have called names that seem to fit together for twins, twin names. The practice of pairing certain names by sound or other cultural features is common in the American culture.[8] The name Sheba in Hebrewשְׁבָ֖א has the same vowels as Dedanדְּדָ֑ן producing assonance.[9] This second set of brothers called Sheba and Dedan, grandsons of Abraham, the Bible Knowledge Commentary places along the western coast of the Arabian Peninsula.[10] All three Genesis references of the three Shebas suggest the Red Sea region is the location of Sheba. The Gen 10:7 leave the option open for either side of the Red Sea, while Gen 10: 28 and Gen 25:3 points to Arabia. More particularly, Gen 10:28 points to the southern Arabian Peninsula as the best location for Sheba.

The book of Job 1:15 mentions the Sabeans שְׁבָא֙ plundering Job's livestock. The Hebrew word is the same, though the English form of Sabea does seem different. Job 6:9 talks about the traveling merchants from Sheba. Job seems to re-enforce the idea that international trade was important to the inhabitants of Sheba via caravans, but also at least some of the time the people of Sheba took to raiding other nations.

Psalm 72 mentions Sheba twice. In Ps 72:10 the kings of Seba and Sheba are discussed. The spelling of Seba and Sheba are easy to distinguish in the Hebrew text though they sound very much the same (שְׁבָ֥א וּ֜סְבָ֗א ). Interestingly, the translators of the LXX chose to use the word Ἀράβων (Arabia) to designate the location of Sheba and used the word Σαβα for Seba. This would suggest that the land of Sheba is on the Arabian Peninsula in the eye of the LXX translator of Ps 72. The HarpersCollins Concise Atlas of the Bible places Seba on the west side of the Red Sea in what is now Sudan, while it places Sheba on the east side of the Red Sea in what is now the Southern Arabian Peninsula.[11] Ps 72:10 suggests that the king from Sheba brought gifts to Solomon. Perhaps Ps 71:10 use of the male form of the word for royalty is to represent both genders, or perhaps the Queen was an emissary for both her and her husband. The poetic language of the passage is probably best understood to mean that the male gender is representing the kingdoms of the two sides of the Red Sea. Ps 72: 15 seems to indicate that Sheba is a source of gold.

Isaiah 60:6 tells of camels coming from several nations including Sheba. It also indicates that camels will bring both gold and frankincense. The scholar seeking to properly locate Sheba should be looking for a land that has these three items: camels, frankincense, and gold. The mention of the camel is in agreement with the Queen of Sheba bringing a camel train with her in 1 Kgs 10:2 and 2 Chr 9:1. Joseph P. Free says that camels had come into use just prior to the time of the Queen of Sheba. The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser (circ. 827 B.C.) shows a camel with a saddle and rider.[12] Keller says that camels changed how trade from the Arabian Peninsula was carried out. Prior to circa 1000 B.C. donkeys had to travel a circuitous route from watering hole to watering hole. Camels could take a more direct route, saving time due to their ability travel greater distances with less watering stops.[13] Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman state that the trading relationship with southern Arabia to be an important trading relationship.[14] Though camels' range of habitation includes both locations, Southern Arabian Peninsula and Ethiopia, the trading caravans coming to and from southern Arabia are more famous.

Jeremiah 6:20 indicates that frankincense was exported from the land of Sheba. The ancient trade of frankincense came from cities and regions in both what is present day Yemen and Oman. The trade of frankincense went historically east by ship to various ports. However, the trade heading west went via camel train over land.[15] Frankincense can be and is grown in Africa today.[16] Though both sides of the Red Sea are able to grow frankincense, the trade of this aromatic resin is better known from the southern Arabian Peninsula.

Ezekiel 27: 22, 23 characterize Sheba as a trading partner who dealt in all kinds of spices, all kinds of precious stones and gold. Later in Ez 38:13 Sheba is listed among other nations who would accuse Gog and Magog of plundering them. The best information from Ezekiel is that the land of Sheba traded in spices, precious stones, and gold. This characterization points slightly toward Southern Arabian Peninsula being the location of Sheba.

Extra-Biblical Text

The Greek geographer Strabo (64/63 BC – ca. AD 24) places Sabea in the southern Arabian Peninsula. He calls their capital city Mariaba (Marib). He says that there are four principle tribes of southern Arabia; by the Minaeans, on the side towards the Red Sea, whose largest city is Carna or Carnana; next to these, by the Sabaeans (sic), whose metropolis is Mariaba; third, by Cattabanians, whose territory extends down to the straits and the passage across the Arabian Gulf, and whose royal seat is called Tamna; and, farthest toward the east, the Chatramotitae, whose city is Sabata.[17]

Further he quotes Eratosthenes describing the products of the land of Sabea as being myrrh, frankincense, and balsam. He confirms an abundance of gold and silver in the land. He discusses close the Sabean economic relationship with Ethiopia and how the Sabeans sail across Red Sea to obtain spices from the Ethiopia. Strabo describes Sabean trading relationship with Syria and Mesopotamia.[18]

The Jewish historian Josephus places the kingdom of Sheba as being in Egypt and Ethiopia.[19] Keller says that when the Romans came to Palestine they found a balsam plantation near Jericho. Josephus said that the balsam seeds were a gift to Solomon from the Queen of Sheba. The seeds were then cultivated so that balsam became a product of Judah and Israel (Ez 27:17).[20] While he says Sheba is in Ethiopia, his explanation of the balsam plantation points more to Arabia.

The Qur'an contains a surah (chapter) which mentions directly the story of the Queen of Sheba. In surah 27:22-44 there is a discussion of the Queen and Solomon, however, the story deviates from the Biblical account in many ways. The emphasis is primary about conversion to the true religion. This section does not support a specific location for Sheba; however, the Arabic word Saba (سَبَإٍ) is used in another surah called by Saba (Sheba) (سَبَإٍ). The surah called سَبَإٍ (Saba) describes Allah's judgment on the people of Saba (Sheba) who had enjoyed agricultural production from a dam they used to store seasonal rains. Allah causes the dam to fail and disaster comes on the region. This location is known by historians and archeologists as the Marib Dam in Yemen.[21]

The Ethiopians claim to have their own extra-biblical story of Sheba called The Kebra Nagast. The Kebra Nagast text clearly identifies Queen as being from Ethiopia. The Kebra Nagast also says that she had a son fathered by Solomon. This son, named BAYNA-LEḤKEM, came to his father Solomon. He showed himself by his looks and a ring to be the son of Solomon. It says that custom of Ethiopia was to be ruled by a virgin queen until the son of Solomon.[22] Today Ethiopians count that the royal family of Haile Selassie I to be a descendent of this union.[23] By Ethiopian tradition the city of Axum is the home of the Queen of Sheba and the Ark of the Covenant resides in Axum. A monastery in Lake Tana claims to have artifacts from the Temple from Jerusalem. They believe that Solomon gave these items as gifts to his son.[24] These traditions show present-day cultural artifacts that attempt to connect the Queen of Sheba with Ethiopian history. However, the weakness of these claims is that it seems difficult to understand how Solomon would give items from the Temple in Jerusalem to his son in Ethiopia. The Scripture says that Solomon loved many foreign women but it does not say that he had a liaison with the Queen of Sheba (1 Kings 11:1).[25] Lastly, there seems to be no linguistic connection between Axum and the name Sheba.

Archeological Evidence

The Marib area of Yemen has been hostile to archaeological digs. A pioneering work was done in 1950 by Wendell Phillips and W.F. Albright in Marib. They wrote a book called Qataban and Sheba. However, their work did not directly expose ruins of a civilization from the time of Solomon but a later civilization. An assassination plot against the archaeological team cut the work short as they fled for safety.[26] Rather than revealing directly the kingdom of the Queen of Sheba, archeology has been able to establish a connection between ancient Israel and the Sabea and its capital city Marib. André Lemaire discusses in his 2010 article an inscription made on bronze from circa 600 B.C. that has been discovered which show a trading relationship with the "towns of Judea". The words "towns of Judea" is written in the Sabean language. Besides this find from Yemen, he also notes evidence of Sabean (south Arabian) writing on several artifacts found in modern Israel.[27]

Conclusion

The location of Sheba cannot be proven beyond a shadow of doubt. However the most plausible answer is shown to be Sabea kingdom with its capital city of Marib. The name Sabea fits better linguistically to be Sheba than the Ethiopian city of Axum. The trade of frankincense, other spices, precious stones and gold fit better with Saba on the southwest Arabian Peninsula than Ethiopia. Camel trains from the southern Arabian Peninsula are well known, but camels are native to Ethiopia as well. The camel train better fits with Arabia. Though Josephus and The Kebra Nagast clearly state that Sheba is Ethiopia, the evidence from LXX, the Qur'an, and Strabo give strong evidence for southern Arabia. The Kebra Nagast connects a female leader with Ethiopia, but this fact does not preclude the nation in the southern Arabian Peninsula from having a ruling matriarch. No evidence points to either Ethiopia or the southern Arabian Peninsula having a culture that particularly values wisdom. Of course it may be that seeking wisdom was peculiar to the Queen and not her culture. Alternatively, perhaps evidence of a culture valuing wisdom a great deal is yet to be revealed. Historically there was a close association between the two shores of the southern end of the Red Sea. Before Arabic became the language in Sabea after the rise of Islam, there was a linguistic affinity between Sabea and Ethiopia. In some periods of history kingdoms stretched to include land on both sides of the Red Sea. Jewish communities reside in both regions and share many pre-Talmudic features.[28] Ethiopia historically shared cultural tradition with Yemen. The evidence shows that Sheba was in the southern Arabian Peninsula, in what is modern day Yemen.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] D. A. Hubbard, "Queen of Sheba," The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 9.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Though the word חָפֵץ is used in some places, for instance Gen 34:19, to denote romantic attraction, the phrases "whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon" clarifies that the things given were of economic value vice sexual pleasure.

[4] Werner Keller, The Bible as History (New York: William Morrow, 1969) 211.

[5] Allen Ross "Genesis" The Bible Knowledge Commentary (2 vols.; ed John F. Wolvoord and Roy B. Zuck; Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 1983) 1:43.

[6],Merrill F. Unger, "Mesha", The New Unger's Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody, 1988) 837.

[7] Ibid., "Sephar", 1159.

[8] "Popular Names for Twins in 2011" [cited 28 October 2011] http://www.ssa.gov/oact/babynames/twins.html October 29, 2011.

[9] In my own family, my brother and I share a common sounding middle name in order to pair us as brothers though we have three years separating us by age. He is Alva Glen while I am Terry Lynn. I have uncles named Max and Rex.

[10] Ross, "Genesis," 1:68.

[11] James B. Pritchard ed., The HarpersCollins Concise Atlas of the Bible (London: HarpersCollins, 1991) 59.

[12] Joseph P. Free, Archaeology and Bible History (Wheaton: Van Kampen, 1950) 170.

[13] Keller, Bible as History, 209.

[14] Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, The Bible Unearthed (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2011) 41.

[15] The History of Frankincense [cited 28 October 2011] http://www.mei.edu/SQCC/EducationalResources/TheHistoryofFrankincense.aspx

[16] F. Nigel Hepper "Arabian and African Frankincense Trees" The Journal of Egyptian Archeology 55 (1969), 66-72 [cited 28 October 2011] http://www.jstor.org/pss/3856001

[17] Strabo, Geography, Book XVI, Chapter 4 par. 2 [cited 28 October 2011] http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/16D*.html

[18] Ibid., par. 19.

[19] Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews - Book VIII, Chapter 6 Paragraph 5 Christian Classics Ethereal Library [cited 28 October 2011]

[20] Keller, Bible as History, 214-215.

[21] Marib Dam - The Greatest Dam of Antiquity [cited 28 October 2011] http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&t=h&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=206460401082313666953.00046e8d9402aade394c0&ll=15.400293,45.268736&spn=0.011461,0.029311&z=16

[22] E.A. Wallis Budge tran., The Kebra Nagast (1932) [cited 28 October 2011] http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/kn/kn030.htm

[23] Edith Deen, All the Women of the Bible (New York: Harper & Row, 1955) 123.

[24] Josh Bernstein host, Digging for the Truth: Hunt for the Lost Ark. The History Channel. 2005.

[25] Deen, 123.

[26] Howard F. Vos, Archaeology in Bible Lands (Chicago: Moody, 1977) 377-78.

[27] André Lemaire, "Solomon & Sheba, Inc. New inscription confirms trade relations between 'towns of Judah' and South Arabia" BAR 36:01, Jan/Feb 2010 [cited 28 October 2011] http://www.basarchive.org/bswbSearch.asp?PubID=BSBA&Volume=36&Issue=1&ArticleID=28&UserID=2282&

[28] D. A. Hubbard, 9.

The States and Countries That I Have Visited

2011-08-13T17:54:00.004-04:00

visited 34 states (68%)
Create your own visited map of The United States

visited 11 states (4.88%)
Create your own visited map of The World

Just Four More Classes (Okay may be five really)

2011-08-12T23:22:00.003-04:00

I have just four more classes until I can finish seminary. That sounds like not a lot, but in reality, it is not four consecutive semesters. Timing is a part of landing graduation. I have to hit those four classes as they are offered. Also, I am reviewing my first year of biblical Hebrew so that I am ready for that second year of Hebrew. So I will probably be taking first year, semester two a second time. That means it is really five classes until I'm finished.

Fall 2011 Critical Issues in Biblical Studies
Spring 2012 Retake second semester Hebrew
Summer 2012 unknown
Fall 2013 2nd Year Hebrew
Spring 2013 2nd Year Hebrew
Summer 2013 unknown
Fall 2013 Bibliology and Theism

If I could take Bibliology and Theism in the Summer of 2012 that could move graduation up by six months.

Classes I would like to take if I can get in some electives. Preaching and counseling is what I want to take. I think I could use both.

Lean Into the Storm

2011-07-05T21:33:00.002-04:00

I was privileged to preach the Sunday before last on Matthew 11:1-19. The text talhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifks about how John the Baptist sent messengers to Jesus to ascertain whether he was the "coming one." It seems John was doubting whether Jesus was the Christ. Here is a link to get to the sermon on Sermon Cloud.

Warrior!!

2011-06-17T07:34:00.000-04:00

In The Hours

2011-05-10T22:45:00.003-04:00

In The Hours
Words by Helen L. Parmelee
Music by Kevin Twit http://www.igracemusic.com/hymnbook/lead/inthehours.pdf

This song by Indelible Grace is one that really moves me. I think it moves me because it reminds me of my own story. The words remind me of God's work in my life through the blessing of suffering. A lot of my best days walking with my Lord has actually been days of suffering.

Verse one reminds me of growing up when I felt rejected by others but God was my song.

1. In the hours of pain and sorrow,
When the world brings no relief
When the eye is dim and heavy,
And the heart oppressed with grief
While blessings flee, Savior Lord we trust in Thee!
While blessings flee, Savior Lord we trust in Thee!

Verse two talks about my drifting from the Lord when I was caught up in pride and the sin of self-sufficiency.

2. When the snares of death surround us,
Pride, ambition, love of ease
Mammon with her false allurements,
Words that flatter, smiles that please
Then ere we yield, Savior Lord be Thou our shield
Then ere we yield, Savior Lord be Thou our shield

Verse three talks to me about the season of being adrift in the storms of life when my precious wife got so sick and I was such an angry man.

3. When forsaken in distress,
Poor despised and tempest-tossed
With no anchor here to stay us,
Drifting, sail and rudder lost
Then save us Thou, who trod this earth with weary brow
Then save us Thou, who trod this earth with weary brow

Verse four talks about how Jesus' suffered and I want to share in his sufferings. His story of suffering transcends my earthly story.

4. Thou the hated and forsaken,
Thou the bearer of the cross
Crowned of thorns and mocked and smitten,
Counting earthly gain but loss
When scorned are we, We joy to be the more like Thee
When scorned are we, We joy to be the more like Thee

Finally verse five looks to the time when our heavenly joys will subsume all suffering.

5. Thou the Father¼s best beloved,
Thou the throned and sceptered King
Who but Thee should we adoring,
All our prayers and praises bring?
So blessed are we, Savior Lord in loving Thee
So blessed are we, Savior Lord in loving Thee

Pray for Corrie Going to Ethiopia

2011-04-30T12:05:00.001-04:00

My daughter Corrie is going to Ethiopia for a short term missions trip. Pray for her as she goes to relieve suffering and encourage the spread of the good news of Jesus Christ.

MTW Ethiopia ACT Project from Go Global on Vimeo.

Theology Matters: D. A. Carson on the Intent of the Atonement

2011-03-29T23:32:00.000-04:00

Theology Matters: D. A. Carson on the Intent of the Atonement

Hymns Again

2011-03-19T10:07:00.003-04:00

Recently Christianity Today had some articles on music for the worship service. Notice that if one simply says worship music, it might refer to a contemporary style of music which may or may not be used during a worship service. The article that has given me the most to think about is Pop Goes the Worship. Author T. David Gordon mentions in the interview that music for the worship service should be folk music in the sense the it should be singable by the people, rather than music designed for performance. I grew up singing in a choir, not that I excelled at music, but I learned to love the hymns, though I also like much in the contemporary Christian music. A point that Gordon makes though is that we of sing contemporary Christian music with just words, though it is often more sophisticated and difficult to sing. We sing hymns with notes written out.

Another article about hymns is in on the webzine By Faith Online which discusses Indelible Grace's recent documentary.

The Heart Of The Matter: Another Look At The New Perspective On Paul

2011-02-21T12:19:00.001-05:00

The Heart Of The Matter:
Another Look At The New Perspective On Paul

By Terry L. Pruitt

Table Of Contents

* Introduction
* Method of Study
* Syllogism: The Method Of Systematic Theology
* Description: The Method Of Biblical Theology
* Questions Asked and Answered
* Issues of the New Perspective
* Who Are The Judaizers?
* What Does Paul Mean By Justification?
* Conclusion

Introduction

An anachronism is something or an idea that is placed outside its time. In recent years, re-enactors of medieval history have developed an organization called the Society for Creative Anachronisms. This society purposely creates hand made items and events (i.e. jousts) from another time. At other times people stumble in writing a story and place an anachronism in it unintentionally. Some classical scholars believe that some of the cultural items written in Homer's Odyssey are anachronisms. One history scholar claims to find it difficult to enjoy the mystery books and subsequent television series Brother Cadfael because of the anachronistic use of the scientific methods, especially forensic science, which would have been out of character and world view of a medieval monastery. Examples of unintentional anachronisms abound. At one Bible conference the speaker constantly referred to his trip to Israel, and then made the mistake of calling the Jewish civil government of Jesus' day Israel. His loops of mentioning the days of the kingdom period then backtracking to the patriarchal period then the New Testament period and equating them all to the modern nation-state of Israel probably confused anyone there who lacked a clear understanding of the time-line of biblical history. While he may have made some blunders in his terminology, no heresy was propagated, nor was anyone truly misinformed about history. It is just a blunder in terminology that could use some clarification. One recent issue in Pauline studies claims an anachronism developed during the Reformation that the reformers read into Paul's letters the problems of the church during the Reformation era. That is the issue of justification by faith alone, sola feda . The proponents of this view are not merely correcting terminology; they actually are discounting the theological underpinnings of the Reformation. This school of thought in biblical studies, though not unified in its theological outlook, has become known as the New Pauline Perspective. The New Pauline Perspective is diverse in its theological backgrounds and includes those who are self-professed liberals to those who are evangelicals. There are few, if any, who would be considered staunch conservatives in the camp. Often debate about the issue dissipates into name-calling and accusations that a person defending the New Perspective is a liberal, a heretic or a papist. While the labels may or may not be accurate, this paper will examine the merits and flaws of the New Pauline Perspective based on the exegesis of the principle passages addressing justification in Paul's writings. This paper will attempt to show that Paul wrote on two levels, one addressing the local context of the audience and another addressing transcending and universal issues in the Christian life. Finally, the New Pauline Perspective has done a good job of highlighting some cultural and historical issues in Paul's writings, but they have over simplified that culture resulting in their own reading into the text meaning that were not present for the original readers. While the New Perspective has some interesting insights, it fails as a whole to understand a central teaching of the New Testament, justification.

Method of Study
Syllogism: The Method Of Systematic Theology

Assumptions of the nature of New Testament study are the starting points of the conflict between the New Perspective and those who hold to a traditional Reformed position. The traditional Reformed position recognizes the discipline of systematic theology. Systematic theology rightly understood is a culminating academic discipline that unifies the other means of examining the scripture such as examining chronology, historical background, textual criticism, linguistic study, exegesis and simply outlining a passage. It gives a global, unified view of the message and content of scripture. Systematic theology is a discipline that looks at scripture and using the thought processes of deductive reasoning, puts all scripture in one coherent picture. Deductive reasoning relies on clear definitions and logical syllogisms to build this coherent picture. The Westminster Confession affirms deduction as a means of fully understanding scripture by saying, ”6. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit or traditions of men.”[1] A subtle danger area is that systematic theology makes assessments about the importance of one passage of scripture over another. Because the line of reasoning starts with foundational principles, one must ask what are those foundational principles. When one asks this question, one must then identify the passage of scripture the principle is articulated within. Are the genealogies of Christ more important than the story of the crucifixion or is it the other way around? The origins of the Christ are important, but so is his purpose. The Reformation held that the doctrine of justification is a foundational doctrine for systematic theology.

Description: The Method Of Biblical Theology

The average laymen who act as biblical interpreters would find it hard to place themselves in either role of systematic theologian or biblical theologian. But inevitably as they read and interpret the scripture, they in fact do the work of both a systematic theologian and a biblical theologian. The juxtaposition of the systematic and biblical theologian is somewhat artificial, however, in examining the New Perspective, the academic disciplines emphasized by the various parties involved in the debate make unable to hear what each other are saying. Those who adhere to the New Perspective often are using a biblical theology model for discussion while adherents of the traditional Reformed view by and large are using a systematic theology model. What are the contrasting methods and pictures? Biblical theology as expressed in the later half of the twentieth century, and by the advocates of the New Perspective, is somewhat of a means of stepping back from theological conflicts of the past. Instead of articulating a unified picture of the whole scripture, the biblical theologian attempts to articulate a picture of a particular author, period, genre, or prophet. For instance, the biblical author John continually compares the heavenly realm and the earthly realm in his writings. A biblical theologian will attempt to articulate the school of thought of John and his way of thinking about the heavenly and earthly. Rather than build a coherent, unified picture, many will build a collage that is faithful to the complexity that the biblical text portrays. Rather than focusing on establishing clear definitions, there is an emphasis on description. Rather than ranking passages and looking for foundational passages, there is an emphasis on letting the text speak for its self. The same methods of linguistic study, textual criticism, gathering historical background, and biblical exegesis are used. The main difference between a systematic theologian and a biblical theologian is the scope of picture they attempt to picture. The mere fact that someone would attempt to describe Paul's thinking independent of the whole counsel of scripture becomes a subtle but important issue. The assumption is whether Paul's thinking should be looked at in contrast or in conjunction with other biblical writers. If we contrast Paul with Moses, Isaiah, John, and Peter, we end up with a different picture than if we unify them all.

Questions Asked and Answered

The two approaches to the discussion frame different debates, not just different answers. The issue at question for the New Perspective seems to be more intellectual honesty and that we should not read into a passage theology that is not there. The issue at question for the traditional Reformed position seems to be faithfulness and accuracy in interpretation. Regardless of the approach whether systemizing in a unified way or describing the contents of a passage, the questions raised by the New Perspective must be answered. The New Perspective on Paul questions who were Paul's opponents. According to Sanders, Paul was objecting to Second Temple Judaism. Also under question is the meaning of "justification" as used by Paul. Whether we want to unify the answers under the whole of scripture or merely describe the thoughts of Paul, we must look the language and historical context of the passages to accurately interpret them. Rather than attempt to pick one school or the other, this paper will focus on the grammatical-historical method of examining the passages key to understanding Paul's teaching on justification.
Issues of the New Perspective
Who Are The Judaizers?

In Paul's day, there were advocates that said a new Gentile Christian should be circumcised. Paul argues against this position in Galatians 1-3 and one could say this was the occasion of his writing. Sanders claims that Paul was actually attacking a straw man in his arguments against circumcision since Second Temple Judaism actually did not advocate a gospel of entering the covenant with God through works.
Second Temple Geographic Limits

Sanders claims that under Second Temple Judaism one entered the covenant by grace but remained in the covenant by being faithful to that covenant. [2] While Sanders has a point about the nature of his description of the Second Temple Judaism, there are two assumptions regarding the nature of Paul's opponents. The first assumption is that the religion described as Second Temple Judaism is the same with which Paul is debating in Galatia and in Rome. The Jewish religion in the Roman world was not a homogenous religion in Palestine; let a lone in the Diaspora. Jewish religion, in Asia Minor in particular, had a component that was mystical and magical. The religion practiced near the institutional center often is close to that same institution position. However, the Galatia and Rome are far from the institutional center in Jerusalem. Such variety is not isolated to historical situations.I had first hand experience by growing up in The Cumberland Presbyterian Church that has its institutional center in Memphis, Tennessee. The institution is urban and neo-orthodox (or even liberal). The vast majority of the rural congregations in Missouri, where I grew up, have traditionally been evangelical in outlook. I eventually distanced myself from the denomination because of the differences. Another example, today in the Middle East components of Islam, which are tied to the Islamic Institutions of higher learning (i.e. Al-Azhar University in Cairo), are dubbed to be high Islam while the Islam from more rural areas are dubbed folk Islam by some scholars. The adherents of high Islam view Allah as very philosophical while the adherents of low Islam combine the religion of the Koran with a type of animism that believes in a spiritual world that is mystical and must be dealt with through spells, talismans and incantations.[3] Some archeological evidence point to the Jewish community in Asia Minor being of a more a folk religion than the formal religion as found in Jerusalem. [4] This is especially true of the church at Colossia. While Galatia and Colossia are two different locations within Asia Minor, both are distant from the institutional center of Jewish religion to which both would have connections and distinctions. While Sanders argues that the position of the Jewish community is not that which Paul portrays[5] , it is quite possible that the Judiazers do not hold to the official position held by the leadership in Jerusalem. We don't know the connections and distinctions between the two, but it is likely that the phenomena of disconnection of distant community from the institutional center existed.
Galatian Church Both Jewish and Gentile

Sanders sees Paul's opponents as Jewish, but the Galatian church was a mixture of both Jews and Gentiles. (Galatians 4:8-11) While we do not know the background of the Judiazers for sure in Galatia, we do know that the book of Titus identifies the Judiazers in Crete as Gentile. (Titus 1:10-12) These Gentile converts not only teach circumcision for impure motives, but they also have a fascination with Jewish myths. (Titus 1: 14) Of course many who come from the New Perspective school of thought also doubt the veracity of Paul being the author of the book of Titus. While this is a different debate and centers on the higher criticism of Titus, one cannot deny that the book of Titus, Pauline or Pseudo-Pauline, indicates that the Judiazers in Crete were Gentile. Even if one does not hold that Titus is Pauline, one must answer the question as to why a Pseudo-Pauline document would identify the Judiazers as Gentile.[6] Through out the NT Paul had his adversaries. Some who taught, taught heresy; others simply taught from false motives. (Philippians 1:15-18) Regardless, the competition between preachers was an ugly reality, possibly connected with teaching practices from both Jewish and Roman civilization. The competitive spirit between teachers would naturally cause some to show distinction in their teaching. Esoteric teachings, mystical teachings, myths and complicated ceremonial law seems to be the distinction that some sought to use to build their own following. (1 Timothy 1:3-7, 4:7; 2 Timothy 2:23; Titus 1:14) Some Gentiles, those in Crete, were responsible for teaching on circumcision as requirement for Gentile believers. It is often the case that a new competitor will attempt to out do his opponent at his opponent's own game. Gentiles being the social force to embrace circumcision explains the disconnect between the institutional position of Second Temple Judaism and also the errors Paul sought to correct.
Transcendent Issue – Folly Of Human Works

All Paul's letters have a decidedly earthly occasion. Paul's writings are woven into a fabric of what was the here and now; feasts, leadership development, family relationships, inter-cultural relationships, worship services, or worldview. That is not to say that the way Paul dealt with these issues that were earth bound. The assumption that Paul was merely wrestling with institutional doctrine speaks of only an earthly occasion for the writings and fails to see the revelatory divine occasion for the letter. The nature of revelation as recorded in the scripture shows the God who is sovereign over history and shows his glory in and over history. Just as the events of the Exodus and the Resurrection speak through and over history, so the struggle against the Judiazers was and is a part of God's revelation. In some sense, the Exodus and Resurrection are more foundational in revealing the saving nature of God, but Paul's struggle against the Judiazers is not merely about earthly institutional clashes. If one sees Paul's struggles with Judiazers as a mere earthly power struggle, the writings of Paul are reduced to merely a record of history (or worse as fable). While Second Temple Judaism might have emphasized grace as a means of getting into the covenant community, the error of the Judiazers speaks of a universal problem. While we may speak about grace, it is the human condition to want to justify ourselves using works, regardless of our institutional doctrines. Many conservative Christians today know the doctrines of grace, and yet outward signs of piety still abound as a means of earning merit for the Christian. For instance, the discipline of personal devotions is a great means of grace. For myself, this means of grace became a work. My perceived standing with God became contingent upon my faithfulness as to whether I had participated in my devotions or not. This type of thinking did not originate with my teachers at church, any book or any person, but within my heart's desire to be sufficient and worthy. In other words, institutions were not the cause; my sinful heart was the cause. Likewise, pitting Paul against the institution of Second Temple Judaism fails to see the struggle of each heart to be self-righteous. Some institutions do articulate doctrines which reinforce the hearts desire to earn merit, however there is a tendency of the human heart to seek merit even when the institution articulates doctrines of grace. It is not unusual though for the institutional teaching to be grace and yet at the same time an emphasis on outward signs of piety coming into conflict with the grace being taught. The deceit of the human heart always embraces duplicity and often shows up in our human institutions. While the Reformers had the luxury of opposing an institution which overtly taught works mixed with grace, most of the time, preachers of the gospel must come in conflict with a subtler mixing of works and grace. Paul may have been opposing some institutional teaching, but there is evidence that it was more of an inadvertent mixing of works and grace. In Galatians 1:6-12 Paul takes a considerable amount of time to convince his hearers that the gospel they have embraced is a different gospel from the one he preached. In Galatians 2:12 Paul does not declare an error in Peter's institutional teaching but that fear of man had influenced him to not eat with the Gentiles. This personal issue of the heart was in conflict with the gospel. (Galatians 2:13) While it could be argued that Paul is arguing "against the party of the circumcision”, it seems more likely that Paul is pointing out the destructive subtlety of acquiescing to them. (Galatians 2:15,16) His opposition is not against an overt teaching but against an undetected slipping into a logical inconsistency between teaching and practice. The teaching was the gospel of grace and the practice was separation of Jewish believers from uncircumcised Gentile believers. If Paul was justified in his opposition to this unintentional, subtle mixing of grace and works, surely the Reformers were justified in opposing an overt mixing of grace and works. The transcending issue of human merit deposing the rightful place of grace in the Christians walk makes Paul's writing universal for every age and cultural context. Surely the Reformers addressed their own context with passages from books of Galatians and Romans in regard to justification, but in no age should one dissect the meaning of the passage from the application. In a sense, the Reformers saw the message as a message for themselves, and not one merely limited to the context of Paul and the congregations to which he wrote.
Judaizers

The Judaizers were most likely teachers who were not tightly bound with Second Temple Judaism. These teachers were likely to have been Christians from a Gentile, Jewish proselyte, or a Folk-Jewish background. They quite possibly were not trying to be logically consistent in their teaching but were using an outward sign of piety, circumcision, to build a merit system into Christian practice. While precise identification is not explicit in Galatians or Romans, the human tendency to mix works with grace transcends the 1st century context, the context of the Reformation or our own context. While the historical evidence shows significant disconnections between Second Temple Judaism and the Judaizers, particularly in Galatia, the historical context is less important than the universal, transcendent issue of human depravity.
What Does Paul Mean By Justification?
More Than Consulting The Right Dictionary

The language of the New Testament (NT) is not the technical language of modern science or systematic theology. That is not to say the language used in the NT is imprecise or that it is not theological in content. However, when one looks at the usage of the word "justification" in the books of Romans or Galatians, there is no simple technical definition that comes to us in an authorized glossary of the NT. Frequently theological discourse, both conservative through liberal, falls into the fallacy of quoting definitions from lexicons and Bible dictionaries to find define the terms which are useful for debunking the opposition. (The most well known is those who hold to immersion as the only mode of baptism say baptism means immersion. And there is some truth in their argument, however, is their mode of immersion the type of immersion meant in the NT.)[7] So if there is no magical dictionary to solve these battles, how does one address the issue of word meaning without digressing into vague generalities about lack of precision? The context of the passage, the historical usage, and the ways that ancient translators translated a word help lexographers come to solid definitions in their dictionaries. While a proper treatment of examining the words "justify" and "justification" would have to be exhaustive, this paper will merely touch upon the context and historical usage of these words in biblical times. The words "justify" and "justification" both are translated the same in both in the New International Version (NIV) and King James Version (KJV). Justify appears in Romans 3:30, Galatians 3:8 while justification appears in Romans 4:25, 5:16, & 5:18. These verses are not exclusively the ones that deal with the topic of justification. One must not overlook the dozens of verses that have the words "just”, "righteousness”, "righteous” or "righteousness of God”. But again for the sake of brevity, this paper merely deals with the words "justify" and "justification”.
Justification In The Context Of Galatians 3:8

"The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: "All nations will be blessed through you." Galatians 3:8 (NIV)

N.T. Wright looks at this passage and sees the faith as a means of entry into the covenant community. [8] Obviously, the passage gives reference to Genesis 12:3 where Abraham is called into covenant with God. While one must acknowledge that Paul is saying that the Gentiles have entered into the same covenant as Abraham had with God (Galatians 3:7), but that does not mean that the Reformers were wrong saying that justification meant obtaining a right standing with God. N.T. Wright may be right in pointing out the covenant nature of justification, but in saying that faith is a badge into the covenant community puts the primary relationship between the person with faith and the community of faith. Paul was not oblivious to the relationship between believers, but the primary relationship is between the believer and God. He even starts out Galatians by saying he is not merely repeating what men have taught him. As an apostle, his responsibility and message comes from God (Galatians 1:1). In fact, by his example, he would have the Gentile believers not seek the approval of men (Galatians 1:10). He did not want to be without the accountability of the leaders of the community (Galatians 2:2), but they were a check against self-deception, not the primary entities to which he had a relationship. While there is a comparison of Jewish and Gentile in Galatians 2:11-16, the question is never community membership, but "works of the Law”. The "works of the Law" is a phrase that has been a topic of debate as to its meaning, and therefore colors the meaning of "justify" as used by Paul. Martin Abegg points out one of the few usages of this term in ancient Jewish literature as being in the Miqsat Ma'ase Ha-Torah –MMT from the Dead Sea Scrolls. [9] In the MMT, the phrase "works of the Law” means obtaining ceremonial righteousness through the ceremonial law. Paul is not explicit in his letter to the Galatians that "works of the Law" means fulfilling the ceremonial law but is alluded to through issue of circumcision (Galatians 2:7-12, 5:6, 5:11, 6:15) and Jewish ceremonial cleanness practiced during meals (Galatians 2:11). The phrase "works of the Law" gives way to simply the "law" (Galatians 3:15-24). The transition is from addressing their particular context to a more universal context. Transcending of particular cultural mix (Jewish and Gentile for the Galatians), period of history (1st Century), and geographic area (Asia Minor) is particularly important in aspect of interpreting the letter to the Galatians or any other scripture. Community membership is dealt with as an issue that is seen as a distracter (Galatians 3:26-29) from the transcending and primary issue: one's status before God. The issue of the law is also dealt with as a transcending issue because of the human predisposition, due to the sin nature, to gravitate to a merit system which is in contrast with God's answer. God's answer is the work of Christ on the cross (Galatians 2:20). The right standing with God is what determines community membership, not the ability to fulfill the ceremonial law or other law. N.T. Wright and other proponents of the New Perspective may have some relevant points to make, however, reading the modern emphasis on religious tolerance into Galatians actually obscures the passage. In fact, the New Perspective accuses the Reformers of reading their own context into the works of Paul, the New Perspective has read the context of the Post-modern world into the 1st Century document. The word "justify”, as in Galatians, is linked with faith because faith is how one receives justification. Faith is contrasted with "works of the law" (KJV) or the alternate translation of "observing the law" (NIV). The primary issue again is one's standing with God in contrast to one's standing to a particular community. That right standing with God comes through the gift of faith.
The Context of Justify and Justification In The Letter To The Romans

"since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith." Romans 3:30 (NIV)

"He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.” Romans 4:25 (NIV)

"Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.” Romans 5:16 (NIV)

"Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.” Romans 5:18 (NIV)

The New Perspective believes that "community boundaries" are the main issue that Paul is addressing in Romans 4 and 5. While it is indeed true that differences between Jew and Gentile are a major theme, Paul works to show a level playing field between Jew and Gentile, both stand sinful before God (Romans 3:23). In fact much the first three chapters of Romans is dedicated to describing this universal need for salvation due to human depravity. The starting point for both Jew and Gentile is just that, showing their need, not the answer to that need. A lot of discussions about tolerance during our current generation points toward a level playing field as the answer. Recognizing that both Paul and our post-modern discussion on equality have similar themes, it is easy to see how Paul's set-up and question are over-interpreted as his main theme. The need of mankind is expressed as a universal need, (Romans 3:23) and the answer to that need is justification based on grace, the atoning work of Jesus Christ (Romans 2:24). Clearly the atonement is meant to show God's justice. He is just in punishing sin (Romans 3:25-26). Starting in chapter four, Paul points out how Abraham was justified by faith, not by works. We can safely connect the solution of faith to the problem of sin. Some of the New Perspective see the problem as a lack of unity in the church. Again we must determine whether Paul is addressing a universal issue, like sin and atonement or if he is addressing a local contextual issue. Since Paul has a limited knowledge of the Roman believers having never been to Rome, and in other letters when Paul is addressing local contextual issues, he is explicit. He does have some knowledge of the Roman church through news and through his prayers. The arguments in chapter four are proposed more as a means of examining an issue rather than addressing someone's personal question. All of Paul's other letters are written after he had ministered in the church. Certainly when Paul "What shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?” (Romans 3:1) Paul is not directly addressing someone else's teaching but is looking to Abraham as the beginning of Abrahamic covenant. He looks at the foundation in order to deal with a universal principle. This justification is clearly seen in terms of the sin problem (Romans 3:5) and not a lack of unity. The blessing of God's solution is also in terms of the sin problem, not in terms of a "community boundary [10] ”. Paul re-addresses a universal issue again, this time though it is the blessing that comes through faith. Instead of universally applying the blessing of faith on both Jew and Gentile, he now applies it to both circumcised and uncircumcised. There is at least one reason he choose this new category. He argues from Abraham's uncircumcised state. Abraham received the covenant blessing while uncircumcised. In Romans 4:13-15, Paul is arguing not against Jewish or Gentile discrimination, rather that the law is not the means of the covenant. The law brings transgression and wrath (Romans 4:14,15). The contrast is between the law and faith. Faith is the example that is portrayed in the life of Abraham (Romans 4:18-25). The ideas of righteousness and justification are tightly linked in Romans 4:24,25. The concept of righteousness is clearly something that we do not possess and yet God "will credit" (Romans 4:24) us as having it. Jesus is delivered for our sin (Romans 4:25). If Jesus' work on the cross brings us into righteousness from Romans 4:25 clearly teaches that justification is in relation to sin, not a "community boundary”. Right standing before God is primary; right standing with the community of faith is incidental. Romans 5:1 addresses this primary relationship by saying that we have "peace with God" vice the "wrath” (Romans 4:15) brought by the law. Since we have peace with God, we should not misinterpret that this will cease all suffering. Rather, we transcend suffering, it becomes an aid in our growth of character (Romans 5:2-5). Paul returns to the concept of right standing before God by saying we were powerless to restore the relationship and in fact we were enemies of God. At that time God reconciled us to himself (Romans 5:6-11). Of course, building a community is a part of God's plan, but we come together in the "one man, Jesus Christ" (Romans 5:17). Adam's trespass (of the law) is contrasted with Christ's grace. This state of grace is described in terms that contrast it with the law. By saying it is the "provision of grace" it shows that he grace is the work and plan of God. By saying it is the "gift of righteousness” it shows that it is not righteousness inherent in man himself. The overwhelming theme is the nature of justification.
Conclusion

While the Reformers may have failed to be explicit about the differences between their own context and that of Paul, the universal principles discussed in Paul's letter did address both situations. When Paul addresses issues with a complex contextual background, he describes the problem and addresses it fairly directly. But on the issue of justification by faith and not by the law, he transcends the immediate context by talking about how we obtain a right standing with God by the work of Christ on the cross. The work of Christ on the cross is realized in our lives through the gift of faith. The New Perspective On Paul, while being difficult to tie down in a formative stance, their general contention is that the Reformers misread Paul and have caused much of the church after them to misread Paul, too. The idea that Second Temple Judaism was the competitor that Paul faced misreads the audience of Galatia and Rome. His audience was far from Jerusalem, and besides that, he was not battling an institution but a tendency of the human heart.

Bibliography

Abegg, Martin. "Paul, ‘Works Of The Law' And MMT" Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 1994, Volume 20 Number 6, Page 52-55, 82.

Berkhof, Louis, Systematic Theology, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.: Grand Rapids, MI, 1996

Hamilton, Edward, The "Righteousness" of Romans and Galatians, and the Gospel of Christ, March 2004, .

Kelly, Douglas F. Dr., The New Perspective on Paul and Justification New Approaches of Biblical Theology to Justification, 4 March 2004, .

Larkin, William, New Testament Survey: Acts – Revelation Study Guide, 1997, Columbia International University: Columbia, SC.

Lusk, Richard, A Short Note On N.T. Wright And His Reformed Critics, 2002, .

Matteson, Mark, Confronting Legalism or Exclusivism?
Reconsidering Key Pauline Passages, 4 March 2004, .

McGrath, Alister E., Justification By Faith, Zondervan Publishing House Academic and Professional Books: Grand Rapids, MI, 1988.

Musk, Bill, The Unseen Face Of Islam: Sharing The Gospel With Ordinary Muslims, 1989, MARC Publications: Great Britain

Venema, Cornelius P., Introducing the "New Perspective On Paul”, September 2002, .

---, The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of E P Sanders (Part One), September 2002, < http://basketoffigs.nstemp.org/NewPerspectives/Venema02.htm >.

---, The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of E P Sanders (Part Two), September 2002, .

---, The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of James D. G. Dunn , December 2002, .

---, The "New Perspective On Paul" The Contributions of N.T. Wright, 2003, .

---, The "New Perspective On Paul" The Contributions of N.T. Wright (2), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the "New Perspective On Paul”: Scripture, Confessions, and Historical Reconstruction, 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: Questions Regarding Sanders' View of Second Temple Judaism, 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: Questions Regarding Sanders' View of Second Temple Judaism (2), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: Questions Regarding Sanders' View of Second Temple Judaism (3): Is there a distinction between Old Testament and Second Temple Judaism?, September 2002, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: What Does Paul Mean By "Works of the Law?” (1), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: What Does Paul Mean By "Works of the Law?” (2), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: What Does Paul Mean By "Works of the Law?” (3) "Works" and "Works Of The Law" In Romans, 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: What Does Paul Mean By "Works of the Law?” (5) "Works Of The Law" Human Inability and Boasting, 2003, .

---, ., Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: (6) Did Paul Oppose "Legalism" or "Boasting" In Human Strength, 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul (6) "The ‘Righteousness of God' and the Believer's ‘Justification (Part 1), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul (6) "The ‘Righteousness of God' and the Believer's ‘Justification (Part 2), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul (6) "The ‘Righteousness of God' and the Believer's ‘Justification (Part 3), 2003, .

[1] Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 1, Paragraph 6

[2] Venema, Cornelius P., The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of E P Sanders (Part Two), September 2002, .

[3] Musk, Bill, The Unseen Face Of Islam: Sharing The Gospel With Ordinary Muslims, (MARC Publications: Great Britain, 1989) 197-205.

[4] Larkin, William, New Testament Survey: Acts – Revelation Study Guide, (Columbia International University: Columbia, SC, 1997) 92-93.

[5] Venema, Cornelius P., The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of James D. G. Dunn , December 2002, >

[6] Just to clarify, I hold that Titus as truly Pauline in its authorship.

[7] Pruitt, Terry L. Frequently Asked Questions About Baptism, August 2002,

[8] Venema, Cornelius P., The "New Perspective On Paul" The Contributions of N.T. Wright, 2003, .

[9] Abegg, Martin. "Paul, ‘Works Of The Law' AndMMT" Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 1994, Volume 20 Number 6, Page 52

[10] Hamilton, Edward, The "Righteousness" of Romans and Galatians, and the Gospel of Christ, March 2004, .

Royal Wood - Do You Recall ft. Royal Wood

2011-01-29T08:32:00.001-05:00

Cool video.

Hat Tip: Noelle

Okay, what is this thing about?

2011-01-27T20:14:00.001-05:00

3 Minutes from Ross Ching on Vimeo.

Calling

2011-01-16T22:11:00.002-05:00

I had a dream last night regarding my calling. It has been an ongoing tension most of my adult life. Here are single sentences that summarize times of my walk.

1982 - I am called by God and I am invincible.
1985 - I am called by God and I have a hope for future ministry.
1990 - I am called by God but I am not able to fulfill it now.
1992 - I have a call but how can I fulfill it?
1995 - I have a call and I will prepare for it.
2005 - I am cursed with a call that I am not able to fulfill.
2011 - I am called by God.

Bifrost Arts inspires some reflections on music and worship

2010-12-24T22:57:00.003-05:00

I did a Sunday School class this summer on worship using John Frame's book called "Worship in Spirit and in Truth". It was a good class but in the end, I felt like I was just starting. My musical training is that I learned to read music by playing the saxophone in a school band. I later learned to sing music in a church choir. My music is really tied to the notes on the page and I really miss it, but I am not really sure how to reconnect with my music. I do find myself singing more for meaning in church these days, but I am still on a quest for more of God in worship which includes music but also prayer, Scripture reading, preaching and the sacraments. I just want more of God. Tomorrow is a day of worship.

Bifrost Arts from josh franer on Vimeo.

SMS [Shine] - David Crowder Band

2010-12-04T13:47:00.006-05:00

Shine -

2010-12-04T13:47:00.001-05:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8cAU475dQo

Tim Keller on WHAT’S SO GREAT ABOUT THE PCA

2010-12-04T10:24:00.005-05:00

I'm working on my paper on preaching sin in a postmodern age. I ran across this article by Tim Keller on the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). His main point seems to be that the PCA is pluralistic. Really. Not pluralistic in the sense of there being no truth but in the sense that the Reformed tradition brings the emphasis from a lot of different perspectives. A paragraph that caught my attention:

The best systematic theologies (here I’m thinking particularly of Herman Bavinck’s) are conscious of how the doctrinalist, pietist, and culturalist impulses all grow out of the same basic Reformed theological soil. The richness of Reformed theology inevitably inspires vigorous evangelism and sound doctrine; subjective spiritual experience and the ‘great objectivities’ of the sacraments; building the church and serving in society; creative cultural engagement and rootedness in historic tradition. In actual practice, however, these emphases are very difficult to combine in a local church and even more difficult to maintain together in a denomination. The proponents of each kind ministry tend to grate on each other and mistrust each other. And yet Presbyterianism continually produces them all.

--WHAT’S SO GREAT ABOUT THE PCA by Tim Keller

You need to follow the link to get the whole thing. It is a pretty amazing analysis of not just the PCA but recent Reformed church history in the USA. One of the things that warmed my heart was to find out that the beginning of the PCA there was an organization that funded revival preaching in the PCA congregations. This sort of touches back to my roots of Presbyterianism.

Source of image: http://www.valpo.edu/geomet/geo/courses/geo200/religion.html

Can You Legislate Morality?

2010-09-18T23:56:00.002-04:00

The following is a partial thread on a discussion on the question, "Can you legislate morality?" My original position stated that we can't help but legislate morality. That is explained further in my response to Steve W.

Personally think that the law is, from a pragmatic stance, more effective at encouraging good behavior than prohibiting poor choices. The bad moral choices, I've found, tend to be dissuaded by community opinion, not by law--more people refrained from drunkenness because their neighbors disapprove than because of prohibition, for example. I do agree that the law always has a moral component to it, but on the whole, I'm an advocate of shame (public opinion) rather than punishment as a restraint on human evil. -- Steve W.

Steve,

As I look at your post, I appreciate your nuanced thoughts, and I do agree with the idea that shame can bring a restraint on individuals in a society. I'm posting my response in my blogspot account since it is so lengthy. Also, I have wanted for some time to write on this issue so my response is as much to my daughter and the issue at large as it is to you.

However, it is a tragedy that our society has taken its queue on the interaction between morality and law from a caricature of the history of alcohol prohibition. The failure of prohibition is sort of told like one of Aesop's Fables, the moral of the story is that "you can't legislate morality." The phrase seems to me to have multiple meanings as people weave it through debates and discussion. It seems to be used because it serves multiple masters and can sort be difficult to rebuttal against.

I think a common way I hear the phrase interpreted is that "one cannot instill a sense of morals by simply passing a law." Of course passing a law without a social context will not educate the public. In that sense, there is a truth, but not one that is complete in the sense that in making laws we do several things. In a free and democratic society, one would hope that a good deal of deliberation is done while pushing for the passing of a law. Though this process at its worst cases is a far cry from this idealization, it is also a hope that through deliberation that our society can learn and grow. The deliberation should identify what is just and what is not just. The deliberation should bring an eventual consensus that one would hope brings a higher appreciation of right and wrong. Positive examples of this type of community growth of conscience happened in England by an extended debate regarding the need to end slavery. William Wilberforce and others presented the issue before parliament and eventually there was a change of opinion as well as the law. These are rare and glorious events in history when consensus is reached for a good and right cause by a society. Today, if anyone mentions that slavery exists somewhere in the world, we are all appalled. Law does not do change public opinion by itself but can be a component of change in the society. Of course mothers and fathers teaching morality is the primary way morals are to be taught with the help of other social institution such as the schools and church. However, in all societies there are evil mindsets, evil cultural practices, and evil institutions. Often a mother and father teaching the child are ill equipped teach against these components of a culture and possibly they are a part of the culture that passes on the evil mindset, cultural practice or support the evil institution. Simply passing a law on an issue may not convince a society as to the moral issues germane to the passing of a law, but the deliberation regarding that law may be a formidable force in swaying the conscience. The deliberation is key. A law professor I was listening to once said, "Law embodies our highest ideals."

The second usage of the phrase "you can't legislate morality" that I hear in conversation is that we should not attempt to make laws on moral issues but simply stick to laws regarding pragmatic issues. Having said that, I would critic this idea that one should leave moral issues out of legislation by saying that this really not a proposal to leave morality out but a certain type of morality. While I disagree with the position, it is a common approach to understand right and wrong from a functional or utilitarian ethic. Some people who seem to profess a utilitarian or functional view of ethics would say "you can't legislate morality" to mean that you can't legislate morality from some source such as divine revelation. This seems to be an attempt to replace morality from divine revelation with a sense of public right and wrong from secular sources. For instance such thinking I have heard proposed, if we regulate prostitution to limit the public health risks, why not allow it? If the law require health checkups for the prostitutes and condoms to be used, could not the risks be minimized for spreading disease? The proposal also said we should legalize prostitution and tax it to provide another source of revenue for the state. (I am not saying all ethicists who follow a utilitarian model wish to legalize prostitution.) The debate in such a proposal is not one of right and wrong but of how do we minimize undesirable results from our actions. Of course a utilitarian ethicist could cite other pragmatic risks to society from prostitution and make a stronger case against prostitution than those who follow a natural law or teleological approach to ethics since the utilitarian model of ethics can make a stronger appeal to statistical studies. So when I say "we can't help but legislate morality," I'm saying that even if we attempt to drop the morals of Christianity or other religions from the public debate, we are still picking up utilitarian or some other model of ethical teaching. Just because we drop the word morality from our vocabulary when discussing a law does not mean we are capable of decision making without a sense of what is right and wrong. Inherently we have a sense of justice and rightness that we desire to be a part of our laws.

I will return to the often cited pseudo-parable of prohibition. Prohibition is a well established national mistake. The solution to the disgrace of the mistake is "don't let religious people get involved in law making." The solution is to allow religious people to practice as they wish, but never again shall they impose a religious view on the rest of society through law. I would say this sort of thinking leads to several unintended consequences. The first being that those who do not hold to secular belief system may find themselves as second class citizens in the democratic process. I do not think any one wishes that to happen, but if the rules of a debate say that only certain people or types of arguments will be heard, it does have a lot effect on the debate. This can lead to a lot of frustration by those who have lost their voice in society. The second unintended outcome is that our society's ability to reach a consensus on complex issues is greatly hampered.

Though I am no expert regarding prohibition, I would say that lessons learned from that failed national experiment are more nuanced than simply, "you can't legislate morality." I would propose that we could begin to write a more comprehensive list of lessons learned from prohibition. Here are a list of lessons learned that I would propose and maybe you can think of others.

1. Be careful as you propose solutions to a problem.

It seems that alcoholism was a serious problem before prohibition. The solution seemed simple to those who did not drink. Just get rid of it. Of course it was wrong to drink all ones pay check so that our dependents went hungry. Of course it was wrong to get drunk and come home and physically abuse one's family members. These injustices cause wives and children to suffer. Understanding the problem may not lead one to a successful solution, wisdom is needed. By the way, not all domestic abuse can be blamed on alcohol. Perhaps domestic abuse would have been a better issue to think about. I could be that society did not allow the issue to be brought up. I understand there is a lot of shame in these sorts of situations and the drink was easier to blame than discuss the issue.

2. Be sure you gain consensus before you ask for big changes.

While certain circles saw alcohol consumption as the problem, it seems that other circles did not agree. I suspect that it was difficult for families where wine or beer was a part of the normal diet to accept prohibition. If everyone in your family drinks a glass of wine with their meal with little problems, why all the effort to completely prohibit it? I suspect that Catholic immigrants to America found the Protestant who insisted on complete abstinence from alcohol to be non-sense.

3. As Christians involved in public debate about law, be sure one has correctly interpreted the Bible.

The Bible never forbids drinking alcohol, but does say Proverbs 20:1 "Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise". Even though a good portion of people in the pews would support the church's teaching against consumption of alcohol, I think many would have said that they can't see the prohibition against consuming alcohol in the Scripture.

4. Do not count on having influence or power forever; leave a legacy that will be cherished.

I'm not sure of the attitude of those who pushed for prohibition, but their legacy is not appreciated in this regard. Consensus is an important tool for long term good.

I would be open to hearing other opinions or your own list of lessons learned from the US prohibition era that could replace the "moral of the story" that "you can't legislate morality."

O For a Thousand Tongues To Sing by Charlies Wesley

2010-08-21T15:32:00.002-04:00

O for a thousand tongues to sing
My great Redeemer’s praise,
The glories of my God and King,
The triumphs of His grace!

Terry's Comments: Our capacity to praise God does not equal his glory. I'm not sure if Wesley is saying he desires 1,000 different languages or 1,000 organs of speech to praise God. Either way, the human capacity to praise God is only giving partial glory to the wondrous God.

My gracious Master and my God,
Assist me to proclaim,
To spread through all the earth abroad
The honors of Thy Name.

Terry's Comments: Since God's glory is so great, we actually need divine assistance to do that proclamation justice. It is not just enough to praise God in the USA or England, every nation of the earth just needs to praise God.

Jesus! the Name that charms our fears,
That bids our sorrows cease;
’Tis music in the sinner’s ears,
’Tis life, and health, and peace.

Terry's Comments: The name of Jesus brings wholeness to our broken soul.

He breaks the power of canceled sin,
He sets the prisoner free;
His blood can make the foulest clean,
His blood availed for me.

Terry's Comments: The name of Jesus brings release and cleansing to our sinful soul.

He speaks, and, listening to His voice,
New life the dead receive,
The mournful, broken hearts rejoice,
The humble poor believe.

Terry's Comments: The voice of Jesus revives us.

Hear Him, ye deaf; His praise, ye dumb,
Your loosened tongues employ;
Ye blind, behold your Savior come,
And leap, ye lame, for joy.

Terry's Comments: The voice of Jesus heals our infirmities.

Glory to God, and praise and love
Be ever, ever given,
By saints below and saints above,
The church in earth and heaven.

Terry's Comments: God is worthy of glory that transcends our time and our earthly state. If we went to a different dimension, he would still be worthy of our praise.

Pursue Love

2010-07-25T15:37:00.002-04:00

I was afforded the opportunity to preach this morning. My church was a blessing to me. The sermon was on 1 Corinthians 13, the love chapter. The sermon can be heard on Sermon Cloud. Follow the link.

The Odes Project

2010-07-18T09:04:00.002-04:00

I am going through a iTunes university course on Worship from Liberty University. One of the lecturers mention the "The Odes Project". It is an interesting look at ancient Christian hymns.
Below is an embedded video of Ode 13, there are 42 in all. (Disclaimer: I wish the fellow who did this wonderful reading had not said "the word of the Lord.")

A Mentor

2010-06-24T21:45:00.002-04:00

Talking to a friend, we were discussing mentorship and training. I'm on my second internship for ministry that is formal. I have been mentored a number of times in less formal settings and in other formal settings. I see a lot of mentorships fail to meet the development goals. Often they get side tracked. Often people are recruited to be a mentor, but they don't know what to do. They know what a teacher does, but what does a mentor do? So they try to teach and often what they teach are procedures to do a job. In that way people mistake On the Job Training (OJT) for mentoring someone. OJT involves doing tasks that are supervised. A good OJT method is "I do, we do, you do." What that means is that first someone watches the trainer do the task. They talk about it. There is healthy discussion about the task. Then the trainer and the trainee do it together. Lastly the trainer watches the trainee do it. This is good OJT. OJT is training. Mentoring on the other hand assumes that the person already has competencies and he needs to think through the issues with someone else. Again a good discussion about issues, but the mentor talks less about a formal set of procedures and more about topics brought up by the one who is being mentored. A good mentor also is able to point out blind spots for the one being mentored. Mentoring is encouraging.

Link to Seminary Scholarship

2010-06-04T07:32:00.000-04:00

Going to Seminary is expensive. On top of that, finding a scholarship can be really difficult. That's why I was so excited to find this Seminary Scholarship website today. Not only are they giving away a $1,000.00 scholarship and a digital theological library, all I had to do to apply was watch a short video and answer a few questions! It took less than 15 minutes. What is best of all is that if you're in seminary and apply for the Seminary Scholarship, and put my name as the person who referred you, if you win the scholarship, so do I! We could both get a $1,000.00 scholarship and digital theological library. So, do us both a favor and go apply for the Seminary Scholarship today.

Ye Ol' Garden

2010-05-28T16:19:00.008-04:00

May 28th and we have been eating from our garden a few weeks. It has not been unusual for me to plant the garden after May. Because one does not harvest before he plants, I have never had May crops before. Spring gardening has been fun and I hope I never go back to planting in June. The blackberry (not BlackBerry) hedge is blooming.

We have been eating the lettuce and trying to give it away. We have made a couple salads for church.

My wife like broccoli but I have never been successful at growing it. Maybe it was the late planting cycles. They seem to like the cool spring.

We have peaches starting to form. Our peaches are usually best in a pie and not great slicing peaches. I'm looking forward to cinnamon peach cobbler.

Only in Saudi Arabia

2010-05-15T10:31:00.004-04:00

Disclaimer: Please don't say I encouraged you in any way to try this.

When I was in Saudi by in the early 90's the roads were slick. Months of super hot weather with no rain, combined with cars that did not have the best emissions standards made for slick residue build up. This video shows the normal surface, but watch out if it rains. The oil build up makes for a crazy slick surface, at least for the first few minutes of the rain.

Oh yeah, I advise you turn down the sound so as to not get annoying wind noises.

Hat Tip: Michael Totten

Thoughts on Love Inspired by 1 Cor 13

2010-04-17T08:57:00.003-04:00

Love is valuing someone from the heart. It is recognizing what is special in the other person. Philia love is valuing a friend. Eros is valuing someone with whom you have a romantic relationship or desire to have a romantic relationship. Agape love is valuing someone but there is no apparent benefit to loving the other person, you just see why he or she is special, nifty, and cool.

When people talk about unconditional love I think what they mean is love without transactional benefit. Friendship often involves mutual benefit. Romance often assumes mutual benefit. Love that comes from our heavenly Father did not look for a benefit. He sent his One and Only Son into the world when we were his enemies.

Love is not merely being polite to someone. It certainly isn't being mean either, but polite is just shy of love. Love goes beyond just treating someone fairly. Love is not merely not being at war with someone. Apathy does not communicate love, it may communicate hate. Love means that you recognize something in the person that makes you pay attention what is going on with that person. Everyone is a mixed bag of both good and bad; love means you really appreciate the good in that person.

Comments welcome...

Human Interest Story - 100 Year Old Dr.

2010-03-17T20:17:00.001-04:00

Integration of Truth and Emotion

2010-03-13T10:20:00.005-05:00

Listening to a speaker this past Thursday at a worship service, I noticed a strange dichotomy articulated. It was the concept that emotions are unreliable and that the Word of God is reliable. The man took the Scripture as factual but saw emotions as unreliable. I would define emotions as responses to one's value judgments. Those value judgments may be misguided or be an accurate assessment of the facts. Certainly one's emotions may be manipulated by others or ourselves. Emotions may also be influenced by one's health and environmental factors. Interactions with others influence one's emotions also. When the Scripture commands one to "love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might", it includes the emotions. An emotionless response to the Word of God would mean that one would fail to embrace the
value judgments discussed therein. Worship is meant to engage the whole person. That does not mean one should engage the emotions without the mind or will. People make use of emotional energy to improve performance at tasks related to sports, performing arts, and persuasion. It is not unusual for those who desire to harness the emotional energy to do so without regard for truth. Coaches and teachers commonly speak in hyperbole to engage the emotions to bring focus and energy to the student's performance. In certain circles of Christianity there has been an engagement of the emotional nature of believers without a strong connection to mental aspect of Christianity. The reaction to that appears to be the total disengagement of the emotions. A response more in line with the greatest commandment is for one to engage the mind and the emotions along with the will, conscience, and body. Just because a well meaning coach on the football team could engage the emotions with light content about the game does not mean that all emotional appeals are free of substantive contributions to the mental aspects of the person. Football has rules and roles that allow for that sort of emotional appeals, but worship is incomplete without both mental and emotional engagement.

Distraction for the Weekend

2010-02-27T12:00:00.001-05:00

Winter Olympics 2010

2010-02-21T08:23:00.001-05:00

We got our first TV as a family in 1996, that is right Barb and I did not have a TV for the first thirteen years of our marriage. Funny thing, the Olympics has become an almost exclusively iPhone event for me. I have the Olympics App; "yes, they have an app for that". I check on that medals via that app and I get Lindsey Vonn's Tweets and FB. Still, the TV part of the Olympics is not grabbing me. I blame it on the DVR and on demand programming. I'm recording the events, but I am not going back to watch them. A component of the TV programming that is a bit slow is that it is necessary to build a profile of the athlete for the public so that we really know who we are cheering for. I think more of the human interest thing might be added into the web and more events saved for video. Just an idea. By the way, here are the medal counts. Go team USA!

View the vancouver2010.com medals' table

Great Video from John Piper

2010-02-16T07:54:00.001-05:00

I really liked the Sock Monkey

2010-02-09T08:42:00.004-05:00

My favorite Super Bowl commercial was the sock monkey.

I also liked Betty White. Made me ask, why are those guys playing so rough with Betty White?

Then everyone liked this Google commercial including me.

What was your favorite?

Seven Does Follow Six

2010-01-23T17:11:00.002-05:00

This morning I was studying Isaiah 7, reading about the prophet asking the unbelieving king to find faith and if he lacked faith that God was willing to give him a miraculous sign. For years I have listened to message that I must pull myself up by my own boot straps, that it all depended upon me for success. If I failed, it would be because I did not try hard enough, I did not work enough, that I was a failure. Indeed, I should work hard. Certainly, I should not give a half effort. Surely, I must try, try again. However, I heard the ancient prophet say to Ahaz, and also whisper to me, "If you are not firm in faith, you will not be firm at all.’” As someone else paraphrased it, "Trust or bust." Ahaz was thinking that he was a clever politician, that he knew what to do. His solution to threats from his northern neighbors was to seek refuge in one of the superpowers of the day. He did not trust so in the end, he was busted. The kingdom was not ripped from his family, but the family and kingdom were ripped from their land. His heirs would be sojourners to the east. His progeny would serve as appointed governors at a foreign king's pleasure. While there were other contributing factors, a lack of faith on Ahaz' part brought the nation of Judah one step closer to exile.

I often find myself lacking faith. I often find myself seeking to solve my problems through my own human effort. God used the words in Isaiah 6 to call me to his service, "Here am I, send me." I do trust his call, not necessarily in my ability to good enough for his call. I, like the prophet, need cleansing from the Lord. Being cleansed, I am ready to serve at his pleasure, whether great or small. Seeing how Isaiah receives his call, he is told that his message would not be believed. That is exactly what happens in Isaiah 7. Ahaz remains in unbelief. The prophet's message of faith was rejected. Chapter seven follows on the heels of chapter six.

Is the NIV being discontinued?

2010-01-11T08:09:00.004-05:00

I'm not sure.

What I mean by that is that the issue is not cut and dry. It depends what you consider the essence of the NIV to be.

Some helpful links come from the NIV Bible Update website and Zondervan's blog.

These sites explain how they are updating the NIV version of the Bible.

I believe the question comes down to whether the updates will cause the same issues to resurface that the TNIV brought. I am in a wait and see attitude.

Westminster Confession on One God.

2010-01-05T08:23:00.000-05:00

1. There is but one only1 living and true God,2 who is infinite in being and perfection,3 a most pure spirit,4 invisible,5 without body, parts,6 or passions;7 immutable,8 immense,9 eternal,10 incomprehensible,11 almighty,12 most wise,13 most holy,14 most free,15 most absolute,16 working all things according to the counsel of His own immutable and most righteous will,17 for His own glory;18 most loving,19 gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin,20 the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him;21 and withal, most just, and terrible in His judgments;22 hating all sin,23 and who will by no means clear the guilty.24

See also: WLC 7 | WSC 4

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Deut. 6:4; 1 Cor. 8:4,6.

2 1 Thess. 1:9; Jer. 10:10.

3 Job 11:7,8,9; Job 26:14.

4 John 4:24.

5 1 Tim. 1:17.

6 Deut. 4:15,16; John 4:24; Luke 24:39.

7 Acts 14:11,15.

8 James 1:17; Mal. 3:6.

9 1 Kings 8:27; Jer. 23:23,24.

10 Ps. 90:2;1 Tim. 1:17.

11 Ps. 145:3.

12 Gen. 17:1; Rev. 4:8.

13 Rom. 16:27.

14 Isa. 6:3; Rev. 4:8.

15 Ps. 15:3.

16 Exod. 3:14.

17 Eph. 1:11.

18 Prov. 16:4; Rom. 11:36.

19 1 John 4:8,16.

20 Exod. 34:6,7.

21 Heb. 11:6.

22 Neh. 9:32,33.

23 Ps. 5:5,6.

24 Nah. 1:2,3; Exod. 34:7.

Strange Punishment in Genesis 4: Mercy Given to the First Murderer

2010-01-03T23:36:00.002-05:00

Cain spoke to Abel his brother. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him. Then the LORD said to Cain, "Where is Abel your brother?"
He said, "I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?"
And the LORD said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand. When you work the ground, it shall no longer yield to you its strength. You shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth."
Cain said to the LORD, "My punishment is greater than I can bear. Behold, you have driven me today away from the ground, and from your face I shall be hidden. I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me."
Then the LORD said to him, "Not so! If anyone kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold."
And the LORD put a mark on Cain, lest any who found him should attack him. Then Cain went away from the presence of the LORD and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden.
(Genesis 4:8-16 ESV)

No, horticulture is not sinful in and of itself. The Word of God does tell us what ever is not of faith is sin. (Romans 14:23) Cain has placed his trust in his own abilities above God's provision. He wanted to call the shots. He was a tiller of the earth and expected that to be his means of coming before God. God did not allow it and rejected his sacrifice. To say how he achieved this would be conjecture but it seemed apparent to Cain. When Cain took vengeance on his brother for having his sacrifice be accepted, God took his source of pride and self-sufficiency from him. This was a mercy towards Cain. Able's sacrifice was not acceptable because his skills were better or because he practiced animal husbandry, but because he offered the sacrifice by faith. Able was faithful to God's command and displayed his faith by obeying. (Hebrews 11:4) If we say we have faith, a component of that faith is that we must not simply do our own will and call it faith. This is essentially what Cain did. He wanted the favor of God. It can be deduced that he expected at least on a certain level that God would accept his sacrifice. The problem is that he did not act in faith. He did not believe God's instructions for an offering. We do not have God's instructions spelled out, but it was given prior to the sacrifice. Cain wanted to do his own thing and have God bless it. This is often the practice of the Christian, including this writer. Obedience does not equate to righteousness, but true faith is followed by obedience.
Later on the punishment for murder is later established to be execution. (Genesis 9:6) Possibly God did not establish capital punishment from the start because the problem had not arisen yet. This line of thinking is plausible, but not proven by any Scripture known to this writer. We do see that Cain is given another punishment without prior warning, so that casts doubt on the theory that God would not give a punishment without a warning. A more likely answer is that God is merciful to Cain which as the Scripture tells us is a call to repentance. (Romans 2:4) Cain did not get what he deserved but he received mercy.

New Year with the Daily Audio Bible

2010-01-02T11:56:00.004-05:00

I make goals for the year, as you may know, I don't really prefer to do resolutions for the New Year. As a part of spiritual growth work out plan, I have made it a goal to listen to the Daily Audio Bible. It is not my intention to listen to it everyday. I think that would be too lofty of a goal since I am going to be reading the Bible for myself too. So if I can get some DAB in two or three times a week, I think that would be great. I encourage you to consider checking out this resource.

Five Reason the DAB is Cool!
1. Brian reads from the heart.
2. You get a new version of the English Bible each week.
3. Hearing it read gives you a different perspective from reading it from the page.
4. It is prayerfully pursued.
5. It really is about being a part of the Christian family.

You can get to DAB via their website, iTunes, and many other ways. Check them out.

Frequently Asked Questions About Baptism

2009-12-23T23:34:00.005-05:00

Frequently Asked Questions About Baptism

Salvation Is The Gift Of God

Q: Do you have to be baptized to be saved?

A: The question is not simply about baptism, but the scriptural teaching regarding ceremonial righteousness. Christians might think of this question in terms of baptism, but more broadly it is a question about ceremonial righteousness. The scripture has a lot of teaching about ceremonial righteousness that must be applied to both Old Testament ceremonies and to New Testament ceremonies. Is a New Testament ceremonial washing more able to save than an Old Testament ceremonial washing? Absolutely not. A male in the Old Testament was considered unclean until he was circumcised. The Old Testament had numerous ceremonies and while the New Testament introduces just a few. Just because the New Testament has fewer ceremonies, one must not treat them as if they are something other than ceremonies. Jewish Christians of the first century would have keep the Old Testament ceremonial law while at the same time adopting the New Testament ceremonies of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Occasionally, someone insists that baptism is necessary for salvation. An underlying assumption behind that idea is that ceremonial righteousness can save you. The scripture commands Christians to be baptized and to baptize should be taken seriously.

Not A Trivial Issue

God takes ceremonies seriously in both the Old and New Testaments. In the Old Testament, the ceremony that defined the covenant people was circumcision. Abraham was called to be the father of many nations.
"You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner those who are not your offspring." (Genesis 17:11,12)

The command to Abraham to circumcise is direct and extensive in scope. Years later when Moses failed to circumcise his sons; he almost incurred the judgment of God (Exodus 4:24-26). Some would discount the severity to the fact that it took place in the Old Testament. However those who abused the Lord's Table (1 Corinthians 11:27-32) and those who lied about their giving to the church (Acts 5:1-11) also incurred judgment in the New Testament. We should not assume that God takes ceremonies less seriously in the New Testament, on the contrary there is a consistency from Old to New Testament in regard to God's judgment. Are we suggesting from this seriousness that any of the ceremonies of baptism, giving, receiving the Lord's Supper or circumcision have saving merit? Absolutely not!

No Saving Merit

While God demanded obedience from the Children of Israel in circumcising their boys, it is clear that circumcision does not save. Galatians 3:1-25 makes it clear that keeping law of circumcision did nothing to save Galatians Christians. Specifically, the law that Galatians were erroneously told to follow was the law of circumcision. The book of Galatians is a refutation against possibility of attaining righteousness through the law of circumcision. When Paul talks about the 'foolish Galatians' being 'bewitched', he could be talking about anyone who turns from the grace of God back to the law (Gal. 3:1). Modern day attempts to create a New Testament equivalent to the Old Testament law are shrouded in the context that the New Testament has replaced the Old. When in reality, the law is law regardless of Old or New Testament and is not the grace of God (3:2). It is still a form of human effort (3:3). Paul's question whether one receives the Spirit by observing the law or by believing implies clearly that we cannot be regenerated by acts of the law (3:5). That would include such New Testament ceremonies as baptism. Abraham is lifted up as having faith and his ancient example shows the road to receiving the Spirit and righteousness (3:6-9). Paul introduces the concept that to be under the law is to be under a curse. This curse is mitigated by the work of Christ on the cross (3:10-14). Paul goes on to show that in the Old Testament, the righteousness of God did not come by the law, but by a covenant, or a promise. He contrasts the law with the promise to show that faith in God's work is the source of righteousness (3:15-18). Then he tells how the law was not intended to be a means of salvation but the law was intended to show our sinfulness and bring us to the promise and faith (3:19-25). Clearly, the New Testament was not meant to replace works of the law in the Old Testament with better works of law.

Works Promise Control But Fail To Deliver

Human nature makes us want to depend on our own efforts, and create a new law because we are more comfortable with a merit system. Depending on the promises of God takes all the focus off us and makes us look to God. Whether this merit system is based on baptism, reading the Bible, praying or attending church, it still is a merit system of law. By the way, we should be doing these things, but they are not the source of Christ's righteousness but the source of self-righteousness. If the grace is not our true source of righteousness then our good practices are counted as if we had not done them as seen in Jeremiah 9:25,26.
"The days are coming," declares the Lord, "when I will punish all who are circumcised only in the flesh. Egypt, Judah, Edom, Ammon, Moab, and all who live in the desert in distant places. For all these nations are really uncircumcised, and even the whole house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart." (Jeremiah 9:25,26)

As you can see, whether we are in the Old Testament or New, the ceremony is worthless unless you have the regenerating work of the Spirit. If a person has not been through the transforming work of regeneration, then they are not righteous, even if he or she has kept the ceremonial law. In other words, salvation is the free gift of God, not by works of the law, not even a law extrapolated from the New Testament.
"For it is by grace are you saved through faith - and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast." (Ephesians 2:8,9)

Mode

Q: Baptists and other Christians often insist that the right way to be baptized is to be immersed. It seems Presbyterians allow for sprinkling, pouring or immersion. Why don't we all just follow the Baptist mode to make it more simple?

A: It is true that Baptists insist much more strongly on a particular mode. We could take the approach that since we allow immersion and others insist on immersion, why not immerse too. Imagine three friends are going out to a restaurant, one doesn't care where they go, one just doesn't want Italian food and the third insists on hamburgers. All three friends in this situation will probably be eating hamburgers before the evening is done. While this is not a bad way to decide on a restaurant for the evening, it is not biblical to hold to a teaching simply because someone is being forceful in their opinions. There is no verse in the Bible which prescribes a specific mode of baptism.

Q: Doesn't the word baptism mean to immerse?

A: The word baptism is a transliteration of the greek word baptizo. Our word does come from this word which meant to wash by dipping in water but is an over simplification to merely say it means to immerse. The word used several times in the New Testament to mean wash, as in to wash dishes or wash ceremonially . (Mark 7:4 Luke 11:39 Hebrews 9:10)

Mark 7:4 When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles. )

Luke 11:38 But the Pharisee, noticing that Jesus did not first wash before the meal, was surprised.

Hebrews 9:10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings--external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

While it is clear that this type of washing is a dipping in water, we must not add to the Biblical text by making the word baptism say more than the Biblical writers meant it to say. You see people wash their dishes and have little arguments how they do it. As long as the dish is clean, you are satisfied. When we look at the earliest artistic renditions of baptism from the second century, they clearly show someone standing in water and water being affused on the head. The earliest written instruction on "how" to baptize is written in the Didache which prescribes immersion as the proper way to perform the ceremony. The act of baptism was a ceremonial washing. Those in the early church saw or participated in ceremonial washings performed by both Jewish and pagan religions. Likewise, they bathed. We should not think of baptism as a special method of washing, but rather having a special meaning. The immersion practiced in today's churches does not look like those recorded in the graphic arts of the second and third centuries. In all probability baptism was practiced in the early church in a variety of modes depending on how various people bathed or had seen ceremonial washings being done.

Covenant Baptism verses Believer's Baptism

Q: Why would you baptize a child?

A: When God called Abraham, he also called his family to faith. God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the God of the father, his son and grandson. (Genesis 12:2 Exodus 3:6) God works in families, so much so, that in the Old Testament, the men in that covenant community received a sign to show that they were called of God, circumcision. (Genesis 17:10-15) Though some who received the sign did not believe God, he stilled wanted this to be the mark of the covenant between Abraham's descendants and God. (Romans 4:9-11) Only those who believed, as did Abraham, were the true son's of Abraham. Circumcision of itself did not save. Even though circumcision does not save anyone, it was very important in the Old Testament covenant. It was so important that God indicated that Moses would suffer death unless his son became circumcised. (Exodus 4:24-27) Since the New Testament times the sign of the covenant is baptism. (Colossians 2:11) And the covenant has been given us and our children. (Acts 2:39) God considers our children of the covenant to be holy. (1 Corinthians 7:14) Parents are to train and instruct their children in the Lord. (Ephesians 6:4) This is far cry different than raising our children to make their own choices. That is not to say that they don't have choices but the Lord tells us he is our only real choice. (Exodus 20:3)

Model of Ministry

2009-12-10T02:02:00.001-05:00

Ever notice that ministry is one of those jobs that has many competing models for what the core duties are? It seems even people otherwise unconcerned with church feel they have a pretty good idea what the pastor's work week should look like. In one of my classes we were asked to talk about somebody who had mentored us. I thought about a retired pastor in my home church in Missouri, Brother Fike. He gave me a fairly simple model of ministry. Preach the Word and care for the flock. The more I read and hear other models I think I keep coming back to this simple model. Some of the other models have been propsed to me and sometimes led me off the path of shepherding those under my care.

Other Models

Pastor as CEO - This one is appealing since you get to have the dignity of a leader in the business community. You get to read all those leadership books and attend those seminars that business leaders do. Also, people in your congregation know how to relate to the role. Unfortunately, though all people in ministry must exercise leadership, it is really not that kind of leadership. Innovation is often just window dressings in ministry. Leadership in ministry is more about helping people to grow in faith rather that building a healthy enterprise. Yes, of course they are not mutually exclusive but focusing on the CEO model can be a real distraction from shepherding God's flock.

Pastor as Counselor - All pastors are counselors. It comes with sinply being with people, mourning with the flock in their sorrows and applying the Word to both individuals and the group. Pastors have done this since the begining of the church. Modern pastor sometime take the role of counselor from the secular playbook. When that happens that preaching of the Word takes a backseat to counseling sessions.

Pastor as Cerimonial Leader - No doubt wedding, funerals, and innvocations community events are a part of the job. These can be great times of meeting people but they can also be a distraction from true ministry of the Word and prayer.

Pastor as Lawyer - I have actually seen some lay people get caught up in this too. It seems that there are a number of people who enjoy mastering church polity and showing other they know more about church procedures. It is a neseccity to govern the church with fairness. Over emphasis on church polity probably shows there are other areas that need examining.

Pastor as Shepherd - This is my model I got from Brother Fike. Feed the sheep by preaching the Word. Care for the sheep by personally spending time with each one.

Worship

2009-12-02T19:16:00.001-05:00

"The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoying Him forever". - The Westminster Confession

"The chief end of man is to glorify God by enjoying Him forever". - John Piper

"Where feelings for God are dead, worship is dead". - John Piper

We worship our work, work at our play, and play at our worship.

"Public worship will not excuse us from secret worship." - Matthew Henry

Worship: To exalted God.

"God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him". - John Piper

"You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve" - Matthew 4:10

Worship is being preoccupied with the worth of God.

"The essence of idolatry is the entertainment of thoughts about God that are not worthy of Him". - A.W. Tozer

New iPhone

2009-11-30T00:09:00.001-05:00

I got a new iPhone yesterday and now I m trying an app to write on Blogger. Already I can tell that iPhone is terribly better than my BlackBerry. I am saying that and I loved my BlackBerry. The keyboard size is the only issue that I seem to have with it.

Top 10 Observations on Worship

2009-11-29T21:23:00.003-05:00

Worship is simply recognizing how awesome God is. He is wonderful. When we sit in a public worship service, we are taking time to recognize how awesome God is. When the Scripture tells us to love the Lord with all our heart, mind, soul and strength, it means that we recognize just how awesome God is with all our being. I hear from time to time that love is a decision. Well, it might be true that one might see the worth of someone and say, "I'm making a decision to recognize how neat that person really is." Usually though true love actually recognizes the worth of the person for the person for himself and a complex decision cycle simply is not needed. Some people are a struggle to love, because their value is clouded by sin. Regardless, they are valuable. Worship is a special recognition that God is worthy of all our honor, and praise, and loyalty. To worship him is to love him.

The Christian church often performs worship services without love being a huge component. My own church this morning I missed a lot of the worship service since I was in the infant nursery. We did not have our usual ones there so I spent some time thinking about worship. As the readers of this blog know I like to visit different worship services and make comparisons. Being somewhat distanced from my own worship service got me thinking about worship more in general. Here is my Top 10 Observations on Worship:

10. Worship is not one big commercial for church programs. It is really sad to see the sermon and other portions of the service to be extended announcements and pumping the crowd for participation in the small groups, latest conference, or other program. The message from such a service is that programs are God's kingdom on earth.

9. Worship is not an amateur music talent show. We can all safely assume that there is no one who desires for the music during the worship service to be lousy. However, the worship service is not the time to show off one's skills as a performer. When somebody does share a musical gift during the worship by leading congregational singing, singing a message in music, the people of God should rejoice at the use of these wonderful talents that have been given from above.

8. Worship is not merely a sermon. It is not difficult to find a church that approaches the worship service as merely a time for the pastor to let loose on the best teaching that he has. God does desire for his preachers to preach. To mistake that as the long and short of the worship service is to miss the point that we are there to observe the worth of the Lord, not the eloquence of the preacher. Prayer, confession, giving, and many other elements of worship make a well rounded worship service.

7. The style of the worship service is not nearly as important as experiencing the glory of God.

6. While public worship by its nature is a common, uniting experience, one should not be focused on group dynamics as much as one should be focused on God. It is easy to use worship time to build a rapport with the group and recognize those who serve well. The corporate gathering must not be the purpose of the gathering. We gather to worship God himself.

5. Worship is not about visual arts, such as banners, candles, video feeds, Power Point slides or architecture; worship is about God. The talents that the body of Christ has for interior design, architecture, creating engaging visual media, and other visual materials to aid in creating a worship service is not worship in and of itself. These are worthy gifts for the body of Christ to have, but are a means to an end. Recently I received a free sample of a magazine which specializes in planning worship. It seemed that the liturgical decorations were equated with worship.

4. Worship is not about creativity in planning a program. Much like point number 5, some people see that selecting the music, selecting the readings and creating the perfect order of worship as being worship. All churches have a order of worship. It is either formal or informal. It is either ornate or simple. An order of worship is inescapable. Those gifted to serve the body by designing the order of worship are a blessing. It is not synonymous with worship.

3. Worship leadership is not synonymous with music leadership. In days gone by, pastors conducted worship services and musicians assisted them. Today, the musicians have the reins. Many months ago I visited a congregation in Canberra Australia. The pastor took responsibility for the worship service. He conducted worship. It was wonderful to worship God in this fashion. Music was very important in the service, but God was more important.

2. Worship in spirit and in truth implies whole person engagement in worship.

1. Worship is about loving God.

Self Examination and Repentance In Different Stages of Life

2009-10-31T08:09:00.004-04:00

One of the spiritual disciplines is self-examination. This discipline designed to promote spiritual growth by making one aware of his or her sins, confess those sins, and repent of those sins. Making the Christian aware of sin is difficult because we have blind spots. The Christian may not see certain sins due to a hardening of the heart. Another reason one might find sins difficult to observe is that the Christian has properly repented of the sins of his youth and grown to feel that sinning for the most part except for small sins was mostly indicative of those sins of his or her youth. As a child or a youth one commonly has a different set of temptations than an adult. The adult Christian who has moved beyond childhood temptations or youth temptations may feel that there is relatively little wrong in his life. The secret though is that at the new maturity level, there is a new set of temptations.

Having recently gone through a season of my life that was marked by religious pride and self-sufficiency, I now see that my sin was invisible to me. Pride often does that. One thing that bothers me is to see how long it took me to get there and how long it took me to get out of the pattern. I spent years building more and more self-sufficiency and it has taken years to get out of it. I may not be scot-free, but for the most part, I am in a new season of life. It will have it's own set of temptations of which I must be aware.

Funny Puzzle

2009-10-16T10:26:00.003-04:00

My daughter recently repeated the riddle of the twins who one only spoke the truth and the other would only speak lies.

Then I stumbled upon this on the web.

The Heart Of The Matter: Another Look At The New Perspective On Paul

2009-10-09T19:13:00.002-04:00

Reposting this from my website.

By Terry L. Pruitt

Introduction

An anachronism is something or an idea that is placed outside its time. In recent years, re-enactors of medieval history have developed an organization called the Society for Creative Anachronisms. This society purposely creates hand made items and events (i.e. jousts) from another time. At other times people stumble in writing a story and place an anachronism in it unintentionally. Some classical scholars believe that some of the cultural items written in Homer's Odyssey are anachronisms. One history scholar claims to find it difficult to enjoy the mystery books and subsequent television series Brother Cadfael because of the anachronistic use of the scientific methods, especially forensic science, which would have been out of character and world view of a medieval monastery. Examples of unintentional anachronisms abound. At one Bible conference the speaker constantly referred to his trip to Israel, and then made the mistake of calling the Jewish civil government of Jesus' day Israel. His loops of mentioning the days of the kingdom period then backtracking to the patriarchal period then the New Testament period and equating them all to the modern nation-state of Israel probably confused anyone there who lacked a clear understanding of the time-line of biblical history. While he may have made some blunders in his terminology, no heresy was propagated, nor was anyone truly misinformed about history. It is just a blunder in terminology that could use some clarification. One recent issue in Pauline studies claims an anachronism developed during the Reformation that the reformers read into Paul's letters the problems of the church during the Reformation era. That is the issue of justification by faith alone, sola feda . The proponents of this view are not merely correcting terminology; they actually are discounting the theological underpinnings of the Reformation. This school of thought in biblical studies, though not unified in its theological outlook, has become known as the New Pauline Perspective. The New Pauline Perspective is diverse in its theological backgrounds and includes those who are self-professed liberals to those who are evangelicals. There are few, if any, who would be considered staunch conservatives in the camp. Often debate about the issue dissipates into name-calling and accusations that a person defending the New Perspective is a liberal, a heretic or a papist. While the labels may or may not be accurate, this paper will examine the merits and flaws of the New Pauline Perspective based on the exegesis of the principle passages addressing justification in Paul's writings. This paper will attempt to show that Paul wrote on two levels, one addressing the local context of the audience and another addressing transcending and universal issues in the Christian life. Finally, the New Pauline Perspective has done a good job of highlighting some cultural and historical issues in Paul's writings, but they have over simplified that culture resulting in their own reading into the text meaning that were not present for the original readers. While the New Perspective has some interesting insights, it fails as a whole to understand a central teaching of the New Testament, justification.

Method of Study
Syllogism: The Method Of Systematic Theology

Assumptions of the nature of New Testament study are the starting points of the conflict between the New Perspective and those who hold to a traditional Reformed position. The traditional Reformed position recognizes the discipline of systematic theology. Systematic theology rightly understood is a culminating academic discipline that unifies the other means of examining the scripture such as examining chronology, historical background, textual criticism, linguistic study, exegesis and simply outlining a passage. It gives a global, unified view of the message and content of scripture. Systematic theology is a discipline that looks at scripture and using the thought processes of deductive reasoning, puts all scripture in one coherent picture. Deductive reasoning relies on clear definitions and logical syllogisms to build this coherent picture. The Westminster Confession affirms deduction as a means of fully understanding scripture by saying, ”6. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit or traditions of men.”[1] A subtle danger area is that systematic theology makes assessments about the importance of one passage of scripture over another. Because the line of reasoning starts with foundational principles, one must ask what are those foundational principles. When one asks this question, one must then identify the passage of scripture the principle is articulated within. Are the genealogies of Christ more important than the story of the crucifixion or is it the other way around? The origins of the Christ are important, but so is his purpose. The Reformation held that the doctrine of justification is a foundational doctrine for systematic theology.

Description: The Method Of Biblical Theology

The average laymen who act as biblical interpreters would find it hard to place themselves in either role of systematic theologian or biblical theologian. But inevitably as they read and interpret the scripture, they in fact do the work of both a systematic theologian and a biblical theologian. The juxtaposition of the systematic and biblical theologian is somewhat artificial, however, in examining the New Perspective, the academic disciplines emphasized by the various parties involved in the debate make unable to hear what each other are saying. Those who adhere to the New Perspective often are using a biblical theology model for discussion while adherents of the traditional Reformed view by and large are using a systematic theology model. What are the contrasting methods and pictures? Biblical theology as expressed in the later half of the twentieth century, and by the advocates of the New Perspective, is somewhat of a means of stepping back from theological conflicts of the past. Instead of articulating a unified picture of the whole scripture, the biblical theologian attempts to articulate a picture of a particular author, period, genre, or prophet. For instance, the biblical author John continually compares the heavenly realm and the earthly realm in his writings. A biblical theologian will attempt to articulate the school of thought of John and his way of thinking about the heavenly and earthly. Rather than build a coherent, unified picture, many will build a collage that is faithful to the complexity that the biblical text portrays. Rather than focusing on establishing clear definitions, there is an emphasis on description. Rather than ranking passages and looking for foundational passages, there is an emphasis on letting the text speak for its self. The same methods of linguistic study, textual criticism, gathering historical background, and biblical exegesis are used. The main difference between a systematic theologian and a biblical theologian is the scope of picture they attempt to picture. The mere fact that someone would attempt to describe Paul's thinking independent of the whole counsel of scripture becomes a subtle but important issue. The assumption is whether Paul's thinking should be looked at in contrast or in conjunction with other biblical writers. If we contrast Paul with Moses, Isaiah, John, and Peter, we end up with a different picture than if we unify them all.

Questions Asked and Answered

The two approaches to the discussion frame different debates, not just different answers. The issue at question for the New Perspective seems to be more intellectual honesty and that we should not read into a passage theology that is not there. The issue at question for the traditional Reformed position seems to be faithfulness and accuracy in interpretation. Regardless of the approach whether systemizing in a unified way or describing the contents of a passage, the questions raised by the New Perspective must be answered. The New Perspective on Paul questions who were Paul's opponents. According to Sanders, Paul was objecting to Second Temple Judaism. Also under question is the meaning of "justification" as used by Paul. Whether we want to unify the answers under the whole of scripture or merely describe the thoughts of Paul, we must look the language and historical context of the passages to accurately interpret them. Rather than attempt to pick one school or the other, this paper will focus on the grammatical-historical method of examining the passages key to understanding Paul's teaching on justification.

Issues of the New Perspective
Who Are The Judaizers?

In Paul's day, there were advocates that said a new Gentile Christian should be circumcised. Paul argues against this position in Galatians 1-3 and one could say this was the occasion of his writing. Sanders claims that Paul was actually attacking a straw man in his arguments against circumcision since Second Temple Judaism actually did not advocate a gospel of entering the covenant with God through works.

Second Temple Geographic Limits

Sanders claims that under Second Temple Judaism one entered the covenant by grace but remained in the covenant by being faithful to that covenant. [2] While Sanders has a point about the nature of his description of the Second Temple Judaism, there are two assumptions regarding the nature of Paul's opponents. The first assumption is that the religion described as Second Temple Judaism is the same with which Paul is debating in Galatia and in Rome. The Jewish religion in the Roman world was not a homogenous religion in Palestine; let a lone in the Diaspora. Jewish religion, in Asia Minor in particular, had a component that was mystical and magical. The religion practiced near the institutional center often is close to that same institution position. However, the Galatia and Rome are far from the institutional center in Jerusalem. Such variety is not isolated to historical situations.I had first hand experience by growing up in The Cumberland Presbyterian Church that has its institutional center in Memphis, Tennessee. The institution is urban and neo-orthodox (or even liberal). The vast majority of the rural congregations in Missouri, where I grew up, have traditionally been evangelical in outlook. I eventually distanced myself from the denomination because of the differences. Another example, today in the Middle East components of Islam, which are tied to the Islamic Institutions of higher learning (i.e. Al-Azhar University in Cairo), are dubbed to be high Islam while the Islam from more rural areas are dubbed folk Islam by some scholars. The adherents of high Islam view Allah as very philosophical while the adherents of low Islam combine the religion of the Koran with a type of animism that believes in a spiritual world that is mystical and must be dealt with through spells, talismans and incantations.[3] Some archeological evidence point to the Jewish community in Asia Minor being of a more a folk religion than the formal religion as found in Jerusalem. [4] This is especially true of the church at Colossia. While Galatia and Colossia are two different locations within Asia Minor, both are distant from the institutional center of Jewish religion to which both would have connections and distinctions. While Sanders argues that the position of the Jewish community is not that which Paul portrays[5] , it is quite possible that the Judiazers do not hold to the official position held by the leadership in Jerusalem. We don't know the connections and distinctions between the two, but it is likely that the phenomena of disconnection of distant community from the institutional center existed.

Galatian Church Both Jewish and Gentile

Sanders sees Paul's opponents as Jewish, but the Galatian church was a mixture of both Jews and Gentiles. (Galatians 4:8-11) While we do not know the background of the Judiazers for sure in Galatia, we do know that the book of Titus identifies the Judiazers in Crete as Gentile. (Titus 1:10-12) These Gentile converts not only teach circumcision for impure motives, but they also have a fascination with Jewish myths. (Titus 1: 14) Of course many who come from the New Perspective school of thought also doubt the veracity of Paul being the author of the book of Titus. While this is a different debate and centers on the higher criticism of Titus, one cannot deny that the book of Titus, Pauline or Pseudo-Pauline, indicates that the Judiazers in Crete were Gentile. Even if one does not hold that Titus is Pauline, one must answer the question as to why a Pseudo-Pauline document would identify the Judiazers as Gentile.[6] Through out the NT Paul had his adversaries. Some who taught, taught heresy; others simply taught from false motives. (Philippians 1:15-18) Regardless, the competition between preachers was an ugly reality, possibly connected with teaching practices from both Jewish and Roman civilization. The competitive spirit between teachers would naturally cause some to show distinction in their teaching. Esoteric teachings, mystical teachings, myths and complicated ceremonial law seems to be the distinction that some sought to use to build their own following. (1 Timothy 1:3-7, 4:7; 2 Timothy 2:23; Titus 1:14) Some Gentiles, those in Crete, were responsible for teaching on circumcision as requirement for Gentile believers. It is often the case that a new competitor will attempt to out do his opponent at his opponent's own game. Gentiles being the social force to embrace circumcision explains the disconnect between the institutional position of Second Temple Judaism and also the errors Paul sought to correct.

Transcendent Issue – Folly Of Human Works

All Paul's letters have a decidedly earthly occasion. Paul's writings are woven into a fabric of what was the here and now; feasts, leadership development, family relationships, inter-cultural relationships, worship services, or worldview. That is not to say that the way Paul dealt with these issues that were earth bound. The assumption that Paul was merely wrestling with institutional doctrine speaks of only an earthly occasion for the writings and fails to see the revelatory divine occasion for the letter. The nature of revelation as recorded in the scripture shows the God who is sovereign over history and shows his glory in and over history. Just as the events of the Exodus and the Resurrection speak through and over history, so the struggle against the Judiazers was and is a part of God's revelation. In some sense, the Exodus and Resurrection are more foundational in revealing the saving nature of God, but Paul's struggle against the Judiazers is not merely about earthly institutional clashes. If one sees Paul's struggles with Judiazers as a mere earthly power struggle, the writings of Paul are reduced to merely a record of history (or worse as fable). While Second Temple Judaism might have emphasized grace as a means of getting into the covenant community, the error of the Judiazers speaks of a universal problem. While we may speak about grace, it is the human condition to want to justify ourselves using works, regardless of our institutional doctrines. Many conservative Christians today know the doctrines of grace, and yet outward signs of piety still abound as a means of earning merit for the Christian. For instance, the discipline of personal devotions is a great means of grace. For myself, this means of grace became a work. My perceived standing with God became contingent upon my faithfulness as to whether I had participated in my devotions or not. This type of thinking did not originate with my teachers at church, any book or any person, but within my heart's desire to be sufficient and worthy. In other words, institutions were not the cause; my sinful heart was the cause. Likewise, pitting Paul against the institution of Second Temple Judaism fails to see the struggle of each heart to be self-righteous. Some institutions do articulate doctrines which reinforce the hearts desire to earn merit, however there is a tendency of the human heart to seek merit even when the institution articulates doctrines of grace. It is not unusual though for the institutional teaching to be grace and yet at the same time an emphasis on outward signs of piety coming into conflict with the grace being taught. The deceit of the human heart always embraces duplicity and often shows up in our human institutions. While the Reformers had the luxury of opposing an institution which overtly taught works mixed with grace, most of the time, preachers of the gospel must come in conflict with a subtler mixing of works and grace. Paul may have been opposing some institutional teaching, but there is evidence that it was more of an inadvertent mixing of works and grace. In Galatians 1:6-12 Paul takes a considerable amount of time to convince his hearers that the gospel they have embraced is a different gospel from the one he preached. In Galatians 2:12 Paul does not declare an error in Peter's institutional teaching but that fear of man had influenced him to not eat with the Gentiles. This personal issue of the heart was in conflict with the gospel. (Galatians 2:13) While it could be argued that Paul is arguing "against the party of the circumcision”, it seems more likely that Paul is pointing out the destructive subtlety of acquiescing to them. (Galatians 2:15,16) His opposition is not against an overt teaching but against an undetected slipping into a logical inconsistency between teaching and practice. The teaching was the gospel of grace and the practice was separation of Jewish believers from uncircumcised Gentile believers. If Paul was justified in his opposition to this unintentional, subtle mixing of grace and works, surely the Reformers were justified in opposing an overt mixing of grace and works. The transcending issue of human merit deposing the rightful place of grace in the Christians walk makes Paul's writing universal for every age and cultural context. Surely the Reformers addressed their own context with passages from books of Galatians and Romans in regard to justification, but in no age should one dissect the meaning of the passage from the application. In a sense, the Reformers saw the message as a message for themselves, and not one merely limited to the context of Paul and the congregations to which he wrote.

Judaizers

The Judaizers were most likely teachers who were not tightly bound with Second Temple Judaism. These teachers were likely to have been Christians from a Gentile, Jewish proselyte, or a Folk-Jewish background. They quite possibly were not trying to be logically consistent in their teaching but were using an outward sign of piety, circumcision, to build a merit system into Christian practice. While precise identification is not explicit in Galatians or Romans, the human tendency to mix works with grace transcends the 1st century context, the context of the Reformation or our own context. While the historical evidence shows significant disconnections between Second Temple Judaism and the Judaizers, particularly in Galatia, the historical context is less important than the universal, transcendent issue of human depravity.

What Does Paul Mean By Justification?
More Than Consulting The Right Dictionary

The language of the New Testament (NT) is not the technical language of modern science or systematic theology. That is not to say the language used in the NT is imprecise or that it is not theological in content. However, when one looks at the usage of the word "justification" in the books of Romans or Galatians, there is no simple technical definition that comes to us in an authorized glossary of the NT. Frequently theological discourse, both conservative through liberal, falls into the fallacy of quoting definitions from lexicons and Bible dictionaries to find define the terms which are useful for debunking the opposition. (The most well known is those who hold to immersion as the only mode of baptism say baptism means immersion. And there is some truth in their argument, however, is their mode of immersion the type of immersion meant in the NT.)[7] So if there is no magical dictionary to solve these battles, how does one address the issue of word meaning without digressing into vague generalities about lack of precision? The context of the passage, the historical usage, and the ways that ancient translators translated a word help lexographers come to solid definitions in their dictionaries. While a proper treatment of examining the words "justify" and "justification" would have to be exhaustive, this paper will merely touch upon the context and historical usage of these words in biblical times. The words "justify" and "justification" both are translated the same in both in the New International Version (NIV) and King James Version (KJV). Justify appears in Romans 3:30, Galatians 3:8 while justification appears in Romans 4:25, 5:16, & 5:18. These verses are not exclusively the ones that deal with the topic of justification. One must not overlook the dozens of verses that have the words "just”, "righteousness”, "righteous” or "righteousness of God”. But again for the sake of brevity, this paper merely deals with the words "justify" and "justification”.

Justification In The Context Of Galatians 3:8

"The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: "All nations will be blessed through you." Galatians 3:8 (NIV)

N.T. Wright looks at this passage and sees the faith as a means of entry into the covenant community. [8] Obviously, the passage gives reference to Genesis 12:3 where Abraham is called into covenant with God. While one must acknowledge that Paul is saying that the Gentiles have entered into the same covenant as Abraham had with God (Galatians 3:7), but that does not mean that the Reformers were wrong saying that justification meant obtaining a right standing with God. N.T. Wright may be right in pointing out the covenant nature of justification, but in saying that faith is a badge into the covenant community puts the primary relationship between the person with faith and the community of faith. Paul was not oblivious to the relationship between believers, but the primary relationship is between the believer and God. He even starts out Galatians by saying he is not merely repeating what men have taught him. As an apostle, his responsibility and message comes from God (Galatians 1:1). In fact, by his example, he would have the Gentile believers not seek the approval of men (Galatians 1:10). He did not want to be without the accountability of the leaders of the community (Galatians 2:2), but they were a check against self-deception, not the primary entities to which he had a relationship. While there is a comparison of Jewish and Gentile in Galatians 2:11-16, the question is never community membership, but "works of the Law”. The "works of the Law" is a phrase that has been a topic of debate as to its meaning, and therefore colors the meaning of "justify" as used by Paul. Martin Abegg points out one of the few usages of this term in ancient Jewish literature as being in the Miqsat Ma'ase Ha-Torah –MMT from the Dead Sea Scrolls. [9] In the MMT, the phrase "works of the Law” means obtaining ceremonial righteousness through the ceremonial law. Paul is not explicit in his letter to the Galatians that "works of the Law" means fulfilling the ceremonial law but is alluded to through issue of circumcision (Galatians 2:7-12, 5:6, 5:11, 6:15) and Jewish ceremonial cleanness practiced during meals (Galatians 2:11). The phrase "works of the Law" gives way to simply the "law" (Galatians 3:15-24). The transition is from addressing their particular context to a more universal context. Transcending of particular cultural mix (Jewish and Gentile for the Galatians), period of history (1st Century), and geographic area (Asia Minor) is particularly important in aspect of interpreting the letter to the Galatians or any other scripture. Community membership is dealt with as an issue that is seen as a distracter (Galatians 3:26-29) from the transcending and primary issue: one's status before God. The issue of the law is also dealt with as a transcending issue because of the human predisposition, due to the sin nature, to gravitate to a merit system which is in contrast with God's answer. God's answer is the work of Christ on the cross (Galatians 2:20). The right standing with God is what determines community membership, not the ability to fulfill the ceremonial law or other law. N.T. Wright and other proponents of the New Perspective may have some relevant points to make, however, reading the modern emphasis on religious tolerance into Galatians actually obscures the passage. In fact, the New Perspective accuses the Reformers of reading their own context into the works of Paul, the New Perspective has read the context of the Post-modern world into the 1st Century document. The word "justify”, as in Galatians, is linked with faith because faith is how one receives justification. Faith is contrasted with "works of the law" (KJV) or the alternate translation of "observing the law" (NIV). The primary issue again is one's standing with God in contrast to one's standing to a particular community. That right standing with God comes through the gift of faith.

The Context of Justify and Justification In The Letter To The Romans

"since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith." Romans 3:30 (NIV)

"He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.” Romans 4:25 (NIV)

"Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.” Romans 5:16 (NIV)

"Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.” Romans 5:18 (NIV)

The New Perspective believes that "community boundaries" are the main issue that Paul is addressing in Romans 4 and 5. While it is indeed true that differences between Jew and Gentile are a major theme, Paul works to show a level playing field between Jew and Gentile, both stand sinful before God (Romans 3:23). In fact much the first three chapters of Romans is dedicated to describing this universal need for salvation due to human depravity. The starting point for both Jew and Gentile is just that, showing their need, not the answer to that need. A lot of discussions about tolerance during our current generation points toward a level playing field as the answer. Recognizing that both Paul and our post-modern discussion on equality have similar themes, it is easy to see how Paul's set-up and question are over-interpreted as his main theme. The need of mankind is expressed as a universal need, (Romans 3:23) and the answer to that need is justification based on grace, the atoning work of Jesus Christ (Romans 2:24). Clearly the atonement is meant to show God's justice. He is just in punishing sin (Romans 3:25-26). Starting in chapter four, Paul points out how Abraham was justified by faith, not by works. We can safely connect the solution of faith to the problem of sin. Some of the New Perspective see the problem as a lack of unity in the church. Again we must determine whether Paul is addressing a universal issue, like sin and atonement or if he is addressing a local contextual issue. Since Paul has a limited knowledge of the Roman believers having never been to Rome, and in other letters when Paul is addressing local contextual issues, he is explicit. He does have some knowledge of the Roman church through news and through his prayers. The arguments in chapter four are proposed more as a means of examining an issue rather than addressing someone's personal question. All of Paul's other letters are written after he had ministered in the church. Certainly when Paul "What shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?” (Romans 3:1) Paul is not directly addressing someone else's teaching but is looking to Abraham as the beginning of Abrahamic covenant. He looks at the foundation in order to deal with a universal principle. This justification is clearly seen in terms of the sin problem (Romans 3:5) and not a lack of unity. The blessing of God's solution is also in terms of the sin problem, not in terms of a "community boundary [10] ”. Paul re-addresses a universal issue again, this time though it is the blessing that comes through faith. Instead of universally applying the blessing of faith on both Jew and Gentile, he now applies it to both circumcised and uncircumcised. There is at least one reason he choose this new category. He argues from Abraham's uncircumcised state. Abraham received the covenant blessing while uncircumcised. In Romans 4:13-15, Paul is arguing not against Jewish or Gentile discrimination, rather that the law is not the means of the covenant. The law brings transgression and wrath (Romans 4:14,15). The contrast is between the law and faith. Faith is the example that is portrayed in the life of Abraham (Romans 4:18-25). The ideas of righteousness and justification are tightly linked in Romans 4:24,25. The concept of righteousness is clearly something that we do not possess and yet God "will credit" (Romans 4:24) us as having it. Jesus is delivered for our sin (Romans 4:25). If Jesus' work on the cross brings us into righteousness from Romans 4:25 clearly teaches that justification is in relation to sin, not a "community boundary”. Right standing before God is primary; right standing with the community of faith is incidental. Romans 5:1 addresses this primary relationship by saying that we have "peace with God" vice the "wrath” (Romans 4:15) brought by the law. Since we have peace with God, we should not misinterpret that this will cease all suffering. Rather, we transcend suffering, it becomes an aid in our growth of character (Romans 5:2-5). Paul returns to the concept of right standing before God by saying we were powerless to restore the relationship and in fact we were enemies of God. At that time God reconciled us to himself (Romans 5:6-11). Of course, building a community is a part of God's plan, but we come together in the "one man, Jesus Christ" (Romans 5:17). Adam's trespass (of the law) is contrasted with Christ's grace. This state of grace is described in terms that contrast it with the law. By saying it is the "provision of grace" it shows that he grace is the work and plan of God. By saying it is the "gift of righteousness” it shows that it is not righteousness inherent in man himself. The overwhelming theme is the nature of justification.
Conclusion

While the Reformers may have failed to be explicit about the differences between their own context and that of Paul, the universal principles discussed in Paul's letter did address both situations. When Paul addresses issues with a complex contextual background, he describes the problem and addresses it fairly directly. But on the issue of justification by faith and not by the law, he transcends the immediate context by talking about how we obtain a right standing with God by the work of Christ on the cross. The work of Christ on the cross is realized in our lives through the gift of faith. The New Perspective On Paul, while being difficult to tie down in a formative stance, their general contention is that the Reformers misread Paul and have caused much of the church after them to misread Paul, too. The idea that Second Temple Judaism was the competitor that Paul faced misreads the audience of Galatia and Rome. His audience was far from Jerusalem, and besides that, he was not battling an institution but a tendency of the human heart.

Bibliography

Abegg, Martin. "Paul, ‘Works Of The Law' And MMT" Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 1994, Volume 20 Number 6, Page 52-55, 82.

Berkhof, Louis, Systematic Theology, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.: Grand Rapids, MI, 1996

Hamilton, Edward, The "Righteousness" of Romans and Galatians, and the Gospel of Christ, March 2004, .

Kelly, Douglas F. Dr., The New Perspective on Paul and Justification New Approaches of Biblical Theology to Justification, 4 March 2004, .

Larkin, William, New Testament Survey: Acts – Revelation Study Guide, 1997, Columbia International University: Columbia, SC.

Lusk, Richard, A Short Note On N.T. Wright And His Reformed Critics, 2002, .

Matteson, Mark, Confronting Legalism or Exclusivism?
Reconsidering Key Pauline Passages, 4 March 2004, .

McGrath, Alister E., Justification By Faith, Zondervan Publishing House Academic and Professional Books: Grand Rapids, MI, 1988.

Musk, Bill, The Unseen Face Of Islam: Sharing The Gospel With Ordinary Muslims, 1989, MARC Publications: Great Britain

Venema, Cornelius P., Introducing the "New Perspective On Paul”, September 2002, .

---, The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of E P Sanders (Part One), September 2002, < http://basketoffigs.nstemp.org/NewPerspectives/Venema02.htm >.

---, The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of E P Sanders (Part Two), September 2002, .

---, The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of James D. G. Dunn , December 2002, .

---, The "New Perspective On Paul" The Contributions of N.T. Wright, 2003, .

---, The "New Perspective On Paul" The Contributions of N.T. Wright (2), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the "New Perspective On Paul”: Scripture, Confessions, and Historical Reconstruction, 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: Questions Regarding Sanders' View of Second Temple Judaism, 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: Questions Regarding Sanders' View of Second Temple Judaism (2), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: Questions Regarding Sanders' View of Second Temple Judaism (3): Is there a distinction between Old Testament and Second Temple Judaism?, September 2002, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: What Does Paul Mean By "Works of the Law?” (1), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: What Does Paul Mean By "Works of the Law?” (2), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: What Does Paul Mean By "Works of the Law?” (3) "Works" and "Works Of The Law" In Romans, 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: What Does Paul Mean By "Works of the Law?” (5) "Works Of The Law" Human Inability and Boasting, 2003, .

---, ., Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul: (6) Did Paul Oppose "Legalism" or "Boasting" In Human Strength, 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul (6) "The ‘Righteousness of God' and the Believer's ‘Justification (Part 1), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul (6) "The ‘Righteousness of God' and the Believer's ‘Justification (Part 2), 2003, .

---, Evaluating the New Perspective on Paul (6) "The ‘Righteousness of God' and the Believer's ‘Justification (Part 3), 2003, .

Footnotes

[1] Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 1, Paragraph 6

[2] Venema, Cornelius P., The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of E P Sanders (Part Two), September 2002, .

[3] Musk, Bill, The Unseen Face Of Islam: Sharing The Gospel With Ordinary Muslims, (MARC Publications: Great Britain, 1989) 197-205.

[4] Larkin, William, New Testament Survey: Acts – Revelation Study Guide, (Columbia International University: Columbia, SC, 1997) 92-93.

[5] Venema, Cornelius P., The "New Perspective On Paul”: The Contributions of James D. G. Dunn , December 2002, >

[6] Just to clarify, I hold that Titus as truly Pauline in its authorship.

[7] Pruitt, Terry L. Frequently Asked Questions About Baptism, August 2002,

[8] Venema, Cornelius P., The "New Perspective On Paul" The Contributions of N.T. Wright, 2003, .

[9] Abegg, Martin. "Paul, ‘Works Of The Law' AndMMT" Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 1994, Volume 20 Number 6, Page 52

[10] Hamilton, Edward, The "Righteousness" of Romans and Galatians, and the Gospel of Christ, March 2004, .

1

A Story About An Emerging Future

2009-10-08T08:21:00.002-04:00

This is a continuation of posting from my website that is going away. Some of the issues addressed in this post are a little dated at this point, but much of it still stands.

A Story About An Emerging Future
July 12, 2004
By Terry L. Pruitt

Introduction: Predicting The Future Of The Church

Futurology is a study of current trends in technology or society and how those trends will play out. Writer's like Alvin and Heidi Toffler in Future Shock and Power Shift take an academic look at the possibilities of what is the logical conclusions to certain trends that currently exist. The trend is usually predicted to continue when it comes to technology and social change. Some futurologists would predict that technology like the bar code and scanner system in grocery stores will expand to be included in you future kitchen so that the grocery list can be automated. You could keep an accurate inventory of your refrigerator and cupboard contents in a object-oriented database which would tie into you budget software, create a grocery list, perhaps order the groceries for pick or delivery and finally create a health index report based on the diet you have eaten the past week, month or year. Or talking about a social trend, the success of Internet dating services has inspired attempt to build other social networks on the Internet. And of course we are talking in this case about the success of the social trend of meeting people on-line, not the technology that creates the social opportunity. When the trend involves the environment or natural resources the analysis is usually pessimistic. Equations are used to show the current or the predicted exponential rate of consumption and the known amount of that particular resource which yields the date that the resource will be depleted. The obvious example of this is our modern dependence on fossil fuels. In general, predictions about technology and social trends tend to be optimistic while predictions about the environment tend to be pessimistic. The most notable exception to this is the Y2K problem that created an artificial resource problem, the lack of a large enough date field. While the equation to describe the similar limits to social trends and technological advancement would be more complex and perhaps defy quantization, these limits are often overlooked. The reason for optimism is not so much the facts and equations but motivation of the speaker to put forth a new idea. In a sense the speaker can speak positively so that his prediction is a self-fulfilling prophecy. There are at least three types of self-fulfilling prophecy, the ancient Greeks thought of self fulfilling prophecy as a prophecy spoken which caused people to react to the prophecy in order to defeat the prophecy. The classic example is the story of Oedipus who is sent away to be killed because of a prophecy that he would kill his father and marry his mother. His parents Laius and Jocasta avoid this great evil their very actions set the stage for the event prophesied. The servant cannot bear to kill the child and gives him to a shepherd. The child is eventually adopted by Polybus. When Oedipus hears another prophecy that he would kill his father he leaves the town so as to avoid the evil of killing Polybus and ends up meeting his biological father, Laius, on the road and kills him. This type of self-fulfilling prophecy is capricious and ironic; the product of fate. There is a type of self-fulfilling prophecy in the scripture where a prophet makes a prediction and the people of God respond to that prophecy. For instance, when Abram was promised the land, it caused generations after him to keep their focus on their possession of that land. The prophecy kept the people of God looking to the divine promise and its fulfillment. The third type of prophecy is the more modern type. A business leader or a social activist can talk about a vision and the shifting of paradigms. They declare that a trend is going to happen and people respond, if they see validity in the claim by adopting the trend. Sometimes people understand their vision and that they are shaping the market place of ideas by their declarations, at other times the person is unaware of the process they are spawning. The Emerging Church was one theme of this year's National Pastors Convention in San Diego, CA. While the ideas of the Emerging Church are as varied as the players, the basic premise is that the post-modern church is re-inventing itself into a new form. The movement declares that its communication style, church structure and theology are quite different from the modern church of the 20th century. However, no one knows whether the Emerging Church will continue to grow. There are limiting factors to which are likely undiscovered about the movement and of course equations by social scientist who study religion are premature at this point. On the other hand, a forum as large as the National Pastors conference is really too big to allow the church to be dismissive of the trend even if the declaration that a new form of the church is emerging smacks of a type of certainty that is usually avoided by the movement as a whole. Certain criticism of modernity has merit, and where the modern church adopted unbiblical positions from the philosophy of modernism, we are to repent of the error. The Emerging Church emphasizes being authentic, organic and genuine, which are all fine qualities, but these all speak about a theology of revelation and sometimes as applied by the movement is in contradiction to that of scripture.

Nature Of The Emerging Church

The Emerging Church defines its self as a new form. An oft used phrase is that they want to unpackage the message of the gospel. The idea is that they want to not have everything boiled down to three points and in an outline form. The means of gaining this desired freshness and genuine proclamation of the gospel is through the use of artistic _expression, digital media, creative gathering times and an understanding of the postmodern mindset.

Artistic Creativity

The artistic _expression comes in the form of film making, theater, music, and visual arts. The idea is that these expressions make the message more accessible. The sermons tend to be story telling. Story telling is sometimes brought to a new height, not just as a communication technique, but an actual theological position. (This will be addressed as a theological issue later in this paper.) The idea is that the Bible is made up of narratives and the three-point sermon is foreign to the thinking in the Bible. In the 1970s, the testimony was a well-developed communication form in the church that re-enforced the preaching; Billy Graham's preaching was re-enforced by the testimony of Terry Bradshaw. Story telling, illustrations, and parables have always been a part of the communication of the church. It would be a false distinction to say that the Emerging Church is the church that appreciates the narrative. The Emerging Church has a set of creative personalities who are expressing the gospel, with the favored form of _expression being the story.

Digitally Savvy

The Emerging Church does not have a corner on the digital media market in the church. The so-called modern church has websites and Power Point slide presentation, but the modern church's websites are more like electronic brochures. The Emerging Church is much more artistically sophisticated, technically proficient, and interactive. By digital media being interactive, the websites have multimedia Flash media presentations and the audience can post comments or questions on the site. The Emerging Church has affection for the cooperative and collaborative organizational styles of the programming and movie industry artists. A flat organization in which the artists are recognized for their merit, not a formal position held.

Creative Gatherings

The Emerging Church will gather in new ways and in new places. A small group may gather at a restaurant for a meal and have a Bible Study right at the table. At other events, the atmosphere attempts to imitate a Starbucks; chic music, soft chairs, trendy decor, and rich coffee. (It is funny that in the 1980s church plants all gave up the steeple type architecture in favor of elementary school lunch rooms because real estate did not matter as much as people.) The Sunday morning worship service may be replaced by a Thursday night gathering. The main event may be a once year conference rather than a weekly gathering.

Addressing The Postmodern Mind

There are basically two approaches to the postmodern mind, one is to recognize it as a force in the culture which is dealt with using the same tools that a missiologist uses to address a foreign culture, the other approach is to embrace much or most of the postmodern philosophy. The first approach looks at the postmodern culture as an opportunity to understand people where they are. Where the postmodern culture is in agreement with the message of scripture, the gospel messenger attempts to contextualize the message, that is, describe and explain the gospel in culturally relevant terms. Where the postmodern culture strays from the truth of scripture, avoid syncretistic teaching. Syncretistic teaching is when one looses the essence of the message of truth by incorporating elements from the culture that are not in agreement with the faith. The first approach to the postmodern culture does not attempt to paint the picture too dim, but sees the challenge and embraces the task at hand; preach the truth of the gospel with language and metaphors which address the hearts of the people. The second approach by the Emerging Church is to actually adopt, for the most part, the postmodern paradigms. While neither those who hold the philosophy of modernism nor those who hold the philosophy of postmodernism can claim theirs is the Biblical point of view, there are some in the Emerging Church which would in essence adopt the postmodern position as the Biblical framework.

Theological Positions Of Postmodernism Lack Examination

Recent History Of Religious Strife In America

In the early half of the 1900s, the church in America had a number of denominations. The ideas of liberal Christianity were in many if not most mainline denominations. Labels to describe those inside and outside the movement developed. The more liberal camp(s) were called modernist, liberal or later neo-orthodox. Those in the more conservative camps are divided into the fundamentalists or evangelicals. At the risk of oversimplification, this paper will NOT attempt to distinguish between all the variants but simple generalize into two segments; liberal and conservative. By conservative I do not mean political conservatives, but those who would attempt to retain the basics of the faith. This new liberal type of Christianity did not attempt to establish new denominations or congregations, but mostly grew within the mainline denominations. The ensuing debate between liberal Christianity with more conservative Christianity was over the basics of the faith and it was the conservatives who instigated the debate by and large. Those who were a part of liberal Christianity were careful to not express their ideas directly to the wrong crowd so as to keep their employment and were content to patiently teach their doctrines from within the church. Its not that they did not teach their doctrines, its that they kept their cards close to their chest so as to be able to play the best hand. Bold moves were made when the risk was low, more moderate positions were expressed when risk was higher. The conservatives were the ones framing the debate and attempting to bring out the issues, often in strident tones that disenfranchised people with a disposition that embraced politeness and civility. The debate was about the basics of the faith; the authority of scripture, the deity of Christ, the existence of hell, and the origins of the human race. The result was that the conservatives by and large left the existing institutions to the liberal competitors and formed their own conservative denominations, conservative seminaries, conservative mission agencies and conservative congregations. While these debates developed over a number of years, conservatives eventually felt forced to draw attention to the issues and act. Few today are debating whether liberal Christianity is right or wrong, for the most part; liberals are kept in their corner and conservatives in theirs. However, in conservative denominations there developed an examination at the beginning of a pastor's ministry to ensure the candidate for ministry adheres to the basics of the faith. Apparently, prior to the liberal versus conservative debate the examination for the ministry focused on an internal sense of call. Both liberal and conservative leaning candidates for ministry could express a sense of call.

In a separate story line, small groups of Christians arose who had no denominational affiliation. These groups were sometimes evangelical and at other times fundamentalists, but they wanted to follow God. Strong leaders who had no accountability to an outside denomination usually led these groups. The idea was to not get sucked into a denomination. In the seventies, any small splinter groups that were controlling or had doctrinal error were labeled a cult. Apologists who specialized in examining a splinter group's teaching and exposing their draconian practices arose to counter the many small sects. By and large the method of countering their teaching was to focus on the basics of the faith like the deity of Christ and the Trinity. (This also was used against larger sects like the Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses who did not stick to the basics of the faith.) In essence there was an unofficial list of those who were a part of some other broad umbrella label and those who were not. There are/were a number of broad umbrella labels used; the evangelical church, orthodox Christianity, or historic Christianity.

Recent Nullification Of The Means of Accountability

The Emerging Church is an outgrowth of a wide variety of churches. If the ministry is the result of splintering, it is often an issue of style or an issue regarding power. But the most of the time, splinter would be an overstatement. A quiet leaving for a different venue is the most common description of the event[1]. Many in the Emerging Church, like the web site Vintage Faith (www.vintagefaith.com) affirm the traditional theology while expressing it through new media, thus the name “Vintage Faith”. They seem to be an intentional church plant with the blessing of their sending church. Again, we are taking into account the wide spectrum of ministries under the heading of Emerging Church. The web site The Ooze (www.theooze.com), established by Spencer Burke, purports to “affirm traditional teachers and new artists”. Spencer seems to be of the quiet leaving type. Others are quite quick to affirm the Apostle's Creed.

In contrast with the previous debate over the basics of the faith in liberal versus conservative brands of Christianity, those in the Emerging Church want to affirm the basics so they can move on and address issues of life. To discuss doctrine is to be too up tight; to share your own story is to be authentic. The Emerging Church as a whole avoids the trap of not affirming the basics of the faith. After a cursory affirmation, they move on to the more important issues of life. To say that the movement has no doctrinal position is exactly what they would like to say, however, doctrine simply means teaching and they do have teachings. Attempting to pin down a unified position of the movement is exactly what they want to avoid. Their attempt seems to be to transcend doctrinal issues with authentic life. While the liberals of the past avoided stating their true beliefs if the environment was not welcoming, the Emerging Church seems to quickly agree with their would be opponents on issues of the authority of the Bible, the deity of Christ, etc.. and move quickly to new, more important issues like a persons person’s struggles with doubt. The mechanisms conservatives developed to counter the liberal infiltration are ineffective in holding individuals from the Emerging Church accountable. By and large it is not an infiltration of existing structures. In fact, the technique of building a separate institutional infrastructure used by the conservative Christian community is also the means for the rise of the Emerging Church. The new congregations, or should I say communities, which are being developed are affirming the basics of the faith, thus avoiding being put on the unofficial list. They are also avoiding accountability and debate. Note: I'm NOT calling the Emerging Church a cult, however it is clear that the plain examination which holds a group accountable to the larger body of Christ is missing. In order to address the issues pertaining to the Emerging Church, one must examine issues that they raise. Just because someone affirms The Apostle's Creed does not mean that his or her other teachings are okay. Throughout the ages of the church, creeds were developed to respond to movements, individuals and teachings. So creeds addressed different issues in different periods of history. While it is good we can agree that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, it is also important to discern what is meant by that statement. On an Evangelism Explosion visit my wife met a couple that had visited our church. The wife was a believer who had just given birth to twins. The husband was an officer in the Coast Guard. The husband expressed and an interest in becoming a Christian. When the team started to clarify the commitment, the wife started to clarify for the team what her husband meant. He believed religion was merely a social institution that aided society in passing down morals. He did not want to actually accept Christ; he wanted to become a Christian so that his wife did not have an “unbelieving spouse”. In other words, he wanted to be nice to his wife and become a Christian for her sake, though he thought the whole issue of accepting Christ was a non-issue. If assent to a belief becomes something other than what everyone understands it to be, clarification must be made. Assent to The Apostle's Creed, or any other Creed, if it is the test of accountability to a larger Christian community, must not be usurped by a different understanding of the nature of truth. In the next few paragraphs we will examine the doctrinal issues surrounding the Emerging Churches understanding of truth and revelation. The issues of style and form that are by and large the identity markers of the movement, we will leave as matters of preference. Where style is merely a matter of artistic form we will leave it alone, but where it is transformed to become an actual part of the theology, we will examine its merits as theology. In other words, regarding the characteristics of showing enthusiasm for the arts, being digitally savvy, and being fond of creative gatherings, we will leave those to a discussion on how to be culturally relevant.

Foundationalism

Part of the Emerging Church has adopting the postmodern mindset by not embracing foundationalism[2] but instead seeking to find meaning in story. In so many words, they abandon the idea that it is useful to build systemic thinking by establishing key foundational facts and definitions and reasoning a whole system of thought. In the postmodern idea, it is against a systemic way of thinking in general; in the Emerging Church it does not embrace systematic theology. Some seem be not against systemic thinking but that they choose to dwell on the story rather than system. One particular strength to their position is that narrative is a part of how God has revealed himself to his people. While Emerging Church adherents like Todd Hunter[3] are cordial with past academic work of systemic theologians, others are not as generous. Rather than claiming that narrative is a good communication technique, effective especially with the postmodern crowd, they talk as though God communicates exclusively in narrative. It is understandable that many people are confused by systemic thinking because they have not had to master this discipline. Other than the exposure to this sort of discipline in high school geometry, most people never have to work through a coherent way of thinking in an entire system. Additionally, systemic thinking is not a discipline that is universal in the academic world; many linguists, writers, and scientists do not focus on reasoning from a few principles and definitions. Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were two scientists who did focus on this type of academic pursuits. It is not uncommon to hear people talk about the great experiments of Einstein. However, his work was usually theoretical which involved spending time creating coherent syllogism about physics. He spent hours writing these out on yellow legal pads at Princeton. Other scientists did the experiments that proved his work empirically. Not all scientists focus on the empirical nor do they all focus on deductive reasoning work like Einstein. So with the study of God, theology, not everyone will focus on systemics, some should focus on systemic thinking while others should spend their talents explaining the simple meaning of the text, pursuing linguistic investigation, textual criticism, archeology, and a host of other things. While there is more to study and thinking than systemic thinking and deductive reasoning, avoiding the discipline all together can have dire consequences. In order to test ideas and think critically, one must be able to see inconsistencies either in yourself or your opponents in a debate. We may embrace a beautiful story like that of Joseph and his brothers, how evil in Joseph's life God used it for good. When the Christian is watching a movie at the theater, he is not compelled to find some application to his own life, especially if the movie is a comedy. One cannot take the same approach with the story of Joseph; it is God's Word. There is nothing about you or me in the story of Joseph. If it is to mean something other than the dry facts, it must be interpreted. One way to do that is to see the whole counsel of scripture and ensure that we are consistent in interpreting a particular passage in light of all others. The Westminster Confession (I;VI) says that, “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture:” The idea of the quote is that not everything revealed in scripture is explicitly so, it might be something that can be logically deduced. However, unlike a geometry book, the scripture does not use definitions and axioms to build an entire system. (Which is one of the points of the Emerging Church.) That is not to say that there are primary principles and that some truths are more relevant than others. Jesus said that there was a greatest commandment. Not all commandments are equal. Not all scripture is equal in importance. God in His Word does not deny himself and does not contradict himself. The Emerging Church's willingness to reject foundationalism may be in part due to the fact that most of the American church has not thought through systematic theology in the first place. Most of American Christianity is actually a-systematic. There is proof texting of pet doctrines, but a lot of doctrinal teaching has not actually developed a robust clarity of definitions and prime axioms of the faith. Instead the emphasis is on what one must do. How is one to behave is primary. So leaving foundations is not a big stretch. While narratives are a big part of God's Word, that does not mean there are not foundational truths in scripture. There are even foundational stories; Adam, Abraham, and Jesus. The discipline of articulating clearly a definition is an important skill for the sake of clarity; clarity in thought as well as clarity in communication. Being able to recognize basic principles in the scripture is basic to reading, studying and interpreting the scripture. While it is possible to read a passage without commenting on it; possible to read it artistically, re-tell the story artistically, it is impossible not to attempt to interpret the passage. The passage selected implies interpretation, tones used to read is a form of interpretation. There is a point to letting the passage of scripture speak for itself by merely reading the passage to a congregation, however, that is very different from saying there no way to state the point of that passage. A preference to be more artistic rather than analytic in preaching the gospel is no sin. However the preaching must retain the authority of the message and also retain its content. But still there is no way to get around the idea that there is actual message to be articulated, that the one idea has precedence over another. The organization of one idea over another and insuring that one has not contradicted oneself is impossible to escape. By assuming that the whole idea of systemic thinking is not foundational to explaining the Christian faith, one has set a foundation of non-foundationalism. The postmodern philosophers attempt to discuss in depth issues and leave behind the trappings of systemic thought. This enables the speaker to deal with complexity and explore issues without giving a final analysis every time. A position or worldview assumed at the beginning of a discussion can limit the discussion. While these are strengths in public discourse and personal exploration of an issue, to dwell too long on the questioning and never coming to the knowledge of the truth is harmful society and the individual. While there is a minority of academically minded scholars who can endlessly discuss issues and be genuine seekers of the truth, the vast majority of society will see the point sooner than later and conclude that it is an insurmountable question for which there is no answer. The postmodern position can not be the mark of the same community that John was talking about in 2 John where he said, “To the chosen lady and her children, whom I love in the truth – and not I only, but also all who know the truth – because of the truth, which lives in us and will be with us forever: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Father's Son, will be with us in truth and love. I has given me great joy to find some of your children walking in truth, just as the Father commanded us.” (2 John 1-4 NIV) In the community that is mentioned in 2 John, the community is built on truth. This is not merely a dry doctrinal document that is merely assented to but instead the people “walk in the truth”. The early Christian community loved the truth, embraced the truth, walked in the truth and built their community on the truth. This does not mean that they were all systematic theologians, but it does mean that truth was agreed upon, that truth was definable. If it was definable, then it was able to put into a system. Deductive reasoning in the classical sense was a Greek discipline. Jesus and the Apostles did not use this type of classic logic, but they did deduced conclusions from principles. Being against foundationalism, especially in an over summarized layman's form of the idea, is not helpful to teaching or understanding the scripture.

Linear Thinking

Chris Seay in Stories of Emergence juxtapositions prepositional thinking and other ways of thinking, like web thinking or circular thinking. He is right in thinking that there are other ways that people thinking about truth. He points out that Ecclesiastes is circular in its line of thinking and he says that Proverbs is web thinking. It is fairly unarguable that there is a level of literary sophistication in those books which is not easily caught in simple one liner summaries and that the techniques of flash back are used. While that has merit, that is not the same thing as saying the book of Proverbs does not have linear thinking. There are topics that flow from proverb to proverb. And perhaps Chris Seay would observe the same flow from proverb to proverb. Perhaps more than any book, Proverbs explains the purpose of the book and builds a foundation of thought, precludes objects and gives motivational statements up front. (Proverbs 1:1-19) Many of the proverbs stand on their own, but they also relate to the surrounding material. For instance in the proverb “Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth,” (Proverbs 10: 4 NIV) it is placed between a proverb about the Lord's provision for the righteous and a proverb about the importance of working during the harvest. No the book of Proverbs in not arranged as a systematic theology, but its arrangement is not arbitrary.

Linear thinking is an aid in expressing clarity of thought. Web and circular thinking are about complex relationships and gaining the interest of an audience. The attribute of complexity is essential in communicating the gospel. People often test truth by seeing if it will hold up to the complexity of real-life. It is sort of like the difference between a laboratory test and testing something by using it in the real world. The second attribute of gaining the interest of the audience, if used as a stand-alone function, amounts to tickling the ears of the audience. Story telling, proverbs, pithy sayings, and other communication techniques are good. But placing the techniques ahead of truth is dangerous. A story can be used to support many different points of view. It all depends upon the details put in or left out. A reason to affirm web thinking and circular thinking is to leave behind one-dimensional Christianity. The goal is noble, however, one reason for shallow, one-dimensional Christianity in America though is the creed that 'truth must always be boiled down to its minimums'. The lowest common denominator is helpful if one is simply looking for a starting point for beginning to cooperate. One-dimensional Christianity is not the result of systemic theology, just the opposite. Perhaps emphasizing circular thinking and web thinking is a reaction to the a-systematic, proof texting approach to doctrine that prevails in the American church rather than actual systematic theology. These simplistic answers do not match the complexity of real life and are a poor way to convince people that the scriptures have answers to life's problems. Chris would not be an advocate of simplistic answers. But his affirmation of the Apostle's Creed[4] alone does seem to be simplistic. Perhaps he is making an effort to minimize flack from the traditional church and maintain connection with it. He actually says almost everything else is up for grabs. Does he mean to say that the inerrancy of scripture is up for grabs? That the Trinity is up for grabs? That the doctrine that God is good is up for grabs? These are fairly basic teaching that he probably would whole-heartedly agree with, however he has clearly stated they are up for grabs. If a person is sincerely exploring the doctrine of the Trinity, that is fine, it is a doctrine most Christians have to work through. But if a pastor has failed to work through this doctrine and his doubts are serious and grave, he may need to take a sabbatical from ministry. Chris Seay probably is not questioning the Trinity, but merely wants to state that he is taking the approach that is exploring truth and feels free to leave loose ends flapping. The Myers-Briggs personality profile describes a personality type who is always exploring and comfortable not necessarily systematizing everything, this is attribute is perceiving. Myers-Briggs contrasts perceiving with judgmental. This almost sounds like an insult if one is thinking of the scripture which say “judge not, let ye be judged”. However, that is not the emphasis, it means that the person has an affinity for being decisive, making judgments so that the matter is settled. My leaning is perceiving however, I have learned to be more decisive. A balance of course is desirable. Open-minded and decisive are the two virtues that are the prize. Flexibility to the point of indecision and rigidity to the point of being a stick in the mud are both to be avoided. Merely being open-minded is a virtue but the scripture warns against “ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (2 Timothy 3:7 KJV) Recognizing the complexity of truth, both natural revelation and special revelation, the faithful student of the Word should not give up on finding simplicity in the scriptures.

Again borrowing from the cognitive sciences, Chris Seay is right, most people do not think linearly strictly. However, when you look at your bank statement, you do not expect the bank to almost get the right amount as your balance. You want access to every penny you own. The process of accounting is not a natural one, it has to be learned. But the discipline of finding the exact amount is not just useful; it is imperative for the survival of the modern economy. When we don't do this, it is called cooking the books, or fudging the books. We all know this is bad. By way of illustration, how do we let the preachers get away with sloppy thinking? Are the things eternal less important than the things temporal? Circular thinking and web thinking are important to explore and comprehend the whole of something. Attempting to preclude accountability by emphasizing web or circular thinking above linear thinking is not helpful to knowing the truth as a community and slows down any discussion. It means that one is not open to the counsel of the brethren. Perhaps this is an intentional power play, but even if it is not, it breaks down community and the communities grasping of the truth.

Meta-narrative

The common way of understanding literature and scripture is to identify the main idea. In the scripture there are overarching ideas that are told and retold. These narratives explain the salvation that comes from the sovereign hand of God. That he helps the weak and helpless. That he is the judge. It is not enough to understand themes of a passage, a chapter, a book, since the Word of God has one author divinely speaking, the reader must find the themes woven through out the entire text. The redemptive-historical method of hermeneutics attempts to ensure the interpreter of scripture takes into account the overarching them themes of redemption when looking at a particular passage.

Some in the Emerging Church have rejected metanarratives in interpreting scripture. According to the Wikipedia, the following is the definition of metanarrative:

A metanarrative is a term used in postmodern discourse to refer to a narrative about narratives. It is a story that determines which other stories are "central" and acceptable, and which are "marginal". Metanarratives are thought to prevent narratives deemed "marginal" from upsetting or subverting the cultural order. Postmodernism, which represents an openness to the authority of "marginal" narratives, has been described as an "incredulity toward metanarratives" (Lyotard 1984).

While authors like Chuck Colson have attempted to discuss the idea of transcending themes in Western culture and the scripture, he choose to defend his idea by using a term which has been defined by his opponents as metanarrative[5]. It is sort of like trying to use the word propaganda and in the process separating out the connotations associated. Commonly, there is a world of difference between publishing a message and publishing propaganda. The use of the word metanarrative by postmodern philosophers has come to mean that common themes in stories, histories, sermons, songs and other communication forms are a part of the power base of the incumbents to power. The oft-repeated phrase in recent years is that the victors write the history. The author Brian McLaren in an open letter to Mr. Colson explains how the postmodernist defines the Meta-narrative as a tool of propaganda. In his discussion with Chuck Colson about postmodernity, he states that most people who criticize the postmodernity improperly because they don't understand that metanarrative is rightly understood to have a negative connotation. It is the tool of Nazis, Communists, and other totalitarians. If a metanarrative is always a means something negative, not simply an overarching theme, but a subtle mechanism for power, then we must find different words to describe the way we recognize the overarching themes and paradigms of scripture. Of course, a tool is more often than not thought to be neutral, used for evil or good. A torture chamber of course is normally considered a tool exclusively of evil. Is the use of metanarrative merely a tool for evil, corralling the masses into a decision? It seems we cannot separate out those negative connotations for the postmodern. There is such a thing a propaganda. People can be manipulated by messages and media, but simply saying we should not use a metanarrative will not take away this type of evil. Evil people in power are much too smart to let the little trick do them in. But people who are good hearted and naïve can be manipulated into abdicating their power to those who would bully them with such language. Which of course, the discourse on metanarrative is a form of metanarrative which is aimed at deposing the incumbent. This is sophisticated and self-defeating. Since the point of the discussion is to usurp power, even in an egalitarian sense, and in the end gain for the speaker power that was once held by his opponent.

The Christian life is all about power. Not gaining power for self, but submitting to the power of God. Understanding that we are powerless to save ourselves that we are in need of the saving power of Christ on the cross. That we are stewards of responsibility, not rulers with a selfish will. We should not seek to avoid power but seek to use it as a responsible steward. We should seek to use the authority God has given us, whether great or small, for His glory. As mothers and fathers, we should rule our household responsibly seeing that God is the basis of our authority. As citizens we should be responsibly participate in our government. As businessmen and businesswomen, we should seek to be examples of virtues to both our employees and customers. As employees of business or government, we should seek to serve with faithfulness and enthusiasm. As the church, we should seek to know God and make Him known. Whether an athlete, a musician, a gardener, a scholar, or an artist; each Christian must be a good steward of the gifts God has given him. Being a steward means we have authority and we are accountable to the one whom we serve. A balanced approach of holding and submitting to authority is the basic teaching of scripture. The postmodern teaching is that holding power is to be avoided. While on the surface that may seem very egalitarian, in the end it is just another system of power. Those who are smooth about articulating their desire with an egalitarian flare are the power holders. This system of power is a faulty system of checks and balances. Faulty because it does not rightly identify legitimate power, instead it appoints generally speaking, those who have advocated the system and who are making the new set of rules. There is no checks and balances against them.

While it is impossible to summarize the movement as whole, there is a metanarrative of the Emerging Church. That is not to say these are the same ones who competently and truly believe there should be no metanarrative. The Emerging Church does have some basic overarching themes that are repeated. It is a part of their message. It is not that they should not advocate their ideas, but just pointing out that it is almost impossible to feel passionate about justice, righteousness and goodness without developing a metanarrative. One Emerging Church teacher said that there is no metanarrative, just narrative. If by that he means merely that they are trying to avoid the use of strong arming propaganda and manipulation, all churches should avoid that. However if it means that there should be no emphasis on one message over another it would be a practical impossibility. The movement does have a metanarrative of their own. Perhaps since the movement attaches a negative connotation to the word metanarrative, we could say that they have a body of teaching that they advocate. Their common themes in preaching and teaching are as follows:

One story after another speaks of disenfranchisement with the established church, that they could not be themselves. Usually after committing some action which was a little too worldly for the offending institutional church, the Emerging Church leader found he or she had to leave in order to find a genuine walk with God.

Another teaching advocated by the movement is that there is a change in the church. Of course this could be seen as a modern type of self-fulfilling prophecy. They seem to use the same types of organization, change mechanisms as Silicon Valley. There are conscious efforts to capture the same kind of open source collaboration as the GNU Linux software and the free software movement have used[6]. Much of the language of this message of change shows similarity to the business literature that emphasizes paradigm shifts in order to out maneuver the business competition. In the case of the Emerging Church, adapting to cultural change in order to reach this new and very pained generation. It is not surprising to find on the website Emerging Church (www.emergingchurch.org) that largest concentration of Emerging Churches are in California, and in particular, near Silicon Valley.

Many of the authors mention the fact that they watch popular media that might be considered off color or have morally controversial content. The speakers or writers are not actually trying to advocate the messages of that content. Instead they are attempting to say that on their list of do's and don'ts they were not as narrow as most other churches. It was ambiguous as to why, more of a declaration of identity than a well thought out stand. There is some apologetic of the practice of watching MTV and R rated movies that says that it helps when discussing and thinking about issues.

An emphasis on identity of the speaker or writer is mentioned over and over again. In fact, much of the success of the movement may be more because of the issue of identity more than any other. In other words, the movement is tailoring to the style and preferences of the postmodern generation. While any of these issues might be something that members of the movement might disagree about, they are in fact things advocated repeatedly by people at the core of the movement. The focus on demographics and marketing are, strangely enough, disciplines developed by modernist. However, of course companies like Zondervan[7] are tailoring their emergent product line to a generation who are sick of such marketing techniques.

Conclusion

The Emerging Church is a mixed bag of refreshing stories of transformation by God and stories of disenfranchisement by a whole lot of people in the church. There are stories of the Spirit and stories of the flesh. Their dissatisfaction is to be embraced when it is in line with the saying of the reformation: “Always Reforming”. When they have rightly identified one-dimensional messages and seek to transcend them, their message should be applauded. Many are simply looking for respect and love. Sloppy thinking and sloppy messages require a kind hand of accountability. Terms like “new kind of Christian” and Emerging Church will only divide the movement from other parts of the church. Getting too wrapped up in issues of style could crash the positive aspects of the movement. The theological leanings are diverse, but the segment of the movement that embraces postmodern philosophy non-critically will probably cause that part of the movement to error into full-fledged heresy by undermining the doctrines of revelation and inerrancy. The response of the American church should be to not engage the movement as a whole but engage the issues raised by the movement one at a time. To black list the movement as a cult, and it is not, would be destructive because it would over summarize the issues. It would group those walking in error with those who are not. Older brothers and sisters in the faith should be willing the engage the movement. The best possible future is that this movement matures theologically. It would be a future that affirms their dissatisfaction with proof texting and teach glib Bible lessons. That future would be to see the movement learn to exegete the Word with competence.

Bibliography

Colson, Chuck “Chuck Colson's Response” A New Kind Of Christian. July 2004. .

Open Source Theology. June 2004. .

McLaren, Brian. “An Open Letter to Chuck Colson” A New Kind Of Chirstian. July

2004. .

Toffler, Alvin and Heidi. Future Shock. Bantam Books; Reissue edition - September 1, 1984.

---. Power Shift. Bantam Books; Reprint edition -1991.

The Ooze: Conversation For The Journey. June 2004. .

Vintage Faith. June 2004 .

Wayne, David. “Don't have a heart attack but I'm going to say something nice about

Postmodernism?” The Jollyblogger. July 2004 .
---. “A Few More Thoughts on Postmodernism” The Jollyblogger. July 2004 .
---. “Interacting with Postmodernism” The Jollyblogger. July 2004 .

Wikipedia Project. “Metanarrative.” Wikipedia Encyclopedia. July 2004.

.

---. “Emerging Church.” Wikipedia Encyclopedia. July 2004.

.

Yaconelli, Mike. general ed. Stories of Emergence: Moving From Absolute To

Authentic. El Cajon, CA: EmergentYS Books, 2003.

[1]Page 44, Yaconelli, Mike. general ed. Stories of Emergence: Moving From Absolute To

Authentic. El Cajon, CA: EmergentYS Books, 2003.

[2]Page 46 Yaconelli, Mike. general ed. Stories of Emergence: Moving From Absolute To

Authentic. El Cajon, CA: EmergentYS Books, 2003.

[3]page 46 Yaconelli, Mike General ed. Stories of Emergence: Moving From Absolute To Authentic. El Cajon, CA: 2003. Emgergent

[4]Page 77 Yaconelli, Mike. general ed. Stories of Emergence: Moving From Absolute To

Authentic. El Cajon, CA: EmergentYS Books, 2003.

[5] Colson, Chuck. “Chuck Colson's Response” A New Kind Of Christian. July 2004. .

[6] Open Source Theology. July 2004. .

[7]Wayne, David. “Interacting with Postmodernism” The Jollyblogger. July 2004. .

Copywrite by Terry L. Pruitt September 10, 2004

The Christian Canon Was Authoritative From Its Inception By Terry L. Pruitt

2009-10-07T13:03:00.000-04:00

This is a reposting from my website which is going the way of all flesh.

The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown is the main source of information for many in this post-modern generation regarding how the Bible developed. One of it's themes is that those who held power in the church choose the books of the Bible to support their power base. Browns charge against the church, though couched in a work of fiction, is serious. The Bible itself gives strong warnings against such power plays.1 Deuteronomy 4:2 says, "You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you." And the book of Revelation "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book," calls for faithfulness to the book. (Rev 22:18) The list of the books that rightly belong in the Bible is called the canon.2 The canon is not strictly a human product, but God created the canon by his work of inspiration in the biblical writers and the church merely recognized the intrinsic authority of the Bible.

The church received scriptures from the Children of Israel. The early church had to decide whether to recognize the Old Testament (OT). The Apocrypha is Old Testament books which were a part of the fourth century Septuagint and were later officially recognized as a part of the Roman Catholic Bible.3 However, the early church father Jerome who translated the Apocrypha into Latin did not recognize it as scripture. Additionally, the New Testament never quotes from the Apocrypha.4 The earliest list of books to form the OT was given by the Bishop of Sardis, Melito, in A.D. 170.5 Melito's list is what is found in today's Protestant Bibles. Generally, the OT was handed down to the church from the Children of Israel's Hebrew Bible.

The early church did not have a entire body of work presented to it in recognizing the New Testament (NT) canon. It was not until the fourth century that Athanasius wrote a list that contains the NT books of the canon essentially as we see them today.6 While Athanasius listed the books of the canon and helped develop use of the word canon, he did not set the canon.7 The present canon was approved by the third Synod of Carthage in A.D. 397, but again, these men in and of themselves did not set the the canon. There was no authoritative leader nor body of leaders who set the canon. While we could say the canon was established by God, in practical terms the mechanism He used was the use of the writings of scripture by the community of faith. As the early church used the scriptures in public worship, they were recognized as scripture.8 As NT scriptures were authoritatively quoted by the early church leaders, they were taken to be authoritative by the community of faith. Did the early church come to recognize the writings of scripture gradually over time or did the church quickly recognize the nature of the writings from their inception?9 Scholars such as Gamble would not only assume an evolutionary development of the text but also assume a gradual recognition of the text as authoritative. The text would be written for an occasion and gradually the occasional nature of the text would give way to an authoritative inclusion of the text into the canon.10 Without a doubt, the present form of the NT was not seen at the inception of the church and did take time to form. However, the authority of NT scriptures were recognized even during the time they were being written. 2 Peter 3:15 mentions Paul's writings as being "as other scripture". 1 Timothy 5:18 makes two quotes of scripture. One being an OT passage but the other "The laborer deserves his wages" can not be found in the OT. It seems reasonable that Paul is quoting Luke 10:7 since it is word for word the same and he declares it to be scripture.11 The early church fathers quoted and alluded to the NT. Clement, Bishop of Rome in A.D. 95, made use of probably seven of our NT books in his writings. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, who was martyred before A.D. 117, quoted or alluded to six books of our NT. Polycarp, the famous aged martyr, makes use of the language of fifteen of the NT books.12 During the time of the Greek Apologiests, A.D. 120-170, writers such as Irenaeus, Papias, and Justin used authoritatively the books from the NT.13

The writers of the NT scripture, the early church Fathers and the Greek Apologists all recognized the inherent authority of OT and the NT. The prophetic and apostolic authority was not difficult to spot given that some knew the apostles and some had even heard them preach.
End Notes

1 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Granc Rapids, MI: Zondervan 1994, 54,55.

2 Ibid., 54.

3 John Ankerburg and John Weldon, The Apocrypha and the Biblical Canon Part III. Cited 28 September 2005. Online: http://www.johnankerburg.org/Articles/apologetics/AP0504W4.htm.

4 Grudem, Systematic Theology, 57.

5 Ibid., 58.

6 R. Laird Harris, Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan 1957, 201.

7 Alexander Souter, The Text and Canon of the New Testament. London, England: Duckworth 1912, 155.

8 Ibid., 158.

9 Harris, Inspiration, 209-210.

10 Harry Y. Gamble, The New Testament Canon: Its Making and Meaning. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press 1985, 12.

11 Grudem, Systematic Theology, 61.

12 Harris, Inspiration, 203.

13 Ibid., 210-214.
Copywrite 2005 by Terry L. Pruitt Prune Pitts Communications

Commentary on 2 Timothy 2:11-13 By Terry L. Pruitt

2009-10-06T07:50:00.004-04:00

This is a repost to my blog of content from my website. My website is being decommissioned. I will be putting several pages here in the next few days to preserve them as the Geocities pages get nixed.

“This is a faithful saying,
If we have died with Him, we will live with Him,
If we endure, we will reign with Him,
If we disown Him, then He will also disown us,
If we are faithless, then He remains faithful.
For He is not able to deny himself.” --Terry's Own Translation

Paul is writing his young disciple Timothy to encourage him in his ministry and walk with the Lord. As he does, he encourages Timothy to remain faithful to the Lord during trials. Paul gives Timothy several examples which he is to follow in the first half of 2 Timothy chapter two. He first tells Timothy to emulate Paul's ministry by passing on to other faithful men the doctrines Timothy learned from Paul. Timothy is then to emulate a soldier who is able to suffer. The example of the soldier also shows how Timothy is to stay free from the entanglements of this world. The next example is that of an athlete. The athlete is an example of one who competes and wins the prize according to the rules. Then the farmer is an example of who who works hard and reaps the benefits. Paul then transitions to his own example of how he himself is suffering for Christ by being bound in chains like a criminal. Paul's suffering is not without cause. He is suffering so that the elect can obtain salvation in Jesus Christ. Knowing how to suffer is best taught by seeing an example rather than expounding a theory. Paul has given ample examples when we reach verses 11-13 of 2 Timothy chapter two. Paul now transitions to a hymn or Hebraic poem.1 Poetry often touches the emotions in a way that prose can not. There is some question as to whether Paul wrote this hymn or whether he is quoting a hymn known by the churches to whom Paul ministered. Some believe this hymn is a quote from a larger poetic work.2 Though the literary style may suggest that it is a piece of a larger work, however, there is no record of this so-called larger work in any textual evidence, and therefore must be regarded as mere conjecture until such a work can be found. This hymn may or may not be complete in the form recorded by Paul. The poem we have in our Bible though is not lacking in theological content, nor lacking in warning to those who disown the Lord, nor is it lacking in encouragement in the rewards for those who remain faithful to the Lord during suffering.

"A Faithful Saying Is This” 2 Timothy 2:11a

The phrase “This is a faithful saying” is somewhat debated as to whether it refers to the content of 2 Timothy 2 verse 8, verse 10, or to verses 11-13. The most natural way of interpretation is to apply this phrase to verses 11-13 since it is more of a saying.3 A hymn or poem is more naturally referred to as a 'saying' rather than the examples of Christ or Paul his follower.

In this introduction to the hymn it is also appropriate to talk about the usage of the word 'gar'. This is a postpositive which means 'for' but is placed one word after where it would normally in English. This usage of the word 'for' gives reference to something preceding it normally. Fee contends that the usage of the word gar shows the antecedent to which it refers is verses 1-10 and that verses 11-13 summarizes the teaching from the first part of the chapter.4 Guthrie contends that the gar refers to the other parts of the hymn Paul did not quote.5 Many common songs, proverbs and sayings need not be quoted in full to gain the full impact of the cultural dialog that accompanies their usage. One need only quote the first line of “The Star Spangled Banner” to get Americans to swell with national pride. It is possible that Paul and Timothy's cultural context would have given a fuller meaning to the hymn which Paul has included in this letter. However, we do not know if there is more to this hymn. It is entirely possible that Paul composed these couplets for this letter alone. Again this is based on style and structure but is mere conjecture. The most natural way to interpret the usage of the word gar is that it refers to its immediate antecedent. Therefore the best interpretation of the word ' gar' is that it shows that the couplets in this hymn summarize the teachings Paul expounded earlier in this chapter. Which of course is easily supported by the fact that the examples of the soldier enduring hardship, the athlete competing with discipline, the hardworking farmer, and Paul suffering in prison all show one who suffers willingly as a part of his calling. The hymn expounds how Timothy and those he is to disciple should suffering for Christ and endure hardship.

“If we have died with Him, we will live with Him” 2 Timothy 2:11b

This stanza of the hymn is parallel to Romans 6:8 where Paul again says “Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.” (ESV)6 The wording in the two passages is not exactly the same in the original Greek, but close. The passage in Romans 6 discusses the spiritual baptism of the believer. The believer is united with Christ in both His death and His resurrection. While some associate the baptism in Romans 6 with water baptism, this baptism is not a mere ceremony that points to Christ's death and resurrection, but one that unites the believer with the power of the resurrected Lord. The old nature is crucified in this baptism. Therefore the baptism of Romans 6 is spiritual baptism. However those who see the baptism of Romans 6 would unit the two passages differently. To them, due to the parallelism of 2 Timothy 2:11b with Romans 6:8 some would say that this hymn is a baptismal hymn suggesting that the hymn was used during baptism ceremonies. While there is a definite connection between the ideas and language of the two passages, there is no evidence that this passage has a special ceremonial usage. Again this is the work of conjecture that should be avoided lest one add to the meaning of Scripture. However, both passages point to how the Christian is united with the death of Christ. This is done at one's spiritual baptism when the Holy Spirit cleanses one's heart because of the work of Christ on the cross.

Fee sees that the death is not merely pointing to the believer's union with Christ in his death because of our spiritual baptism, but that there is a larger allusion to possibility of that the believer may be martyred.7 The believer is not merely pointed to his union with Christ, but how he may join Christ in being killed by the enemies of Christ. The believer is not merely thinking of dying with Christ metaphorically but is led to think about the possibility of dying for the Savior and then being resurrected with him. Again this is not a metaphorical resurrection but the future glory of living in eternity with Christ. This refers to the believer's eternal dwelling with Christ. Calvin cross references this phrase with Romans 8:29 where Paul says “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son” (ESV). Calvin not only connects the conforming into the image spiritually but also sees that the believer might suffer persecution or martyrdom graciously in the same way that Christ did.8

Being united with Christ's death happens at conversion. The verb used to express 'dying with Him' is aorist which is used to either show simple action or past, completed action. In this case it shows past completed action. While there is a suggestion that we may die physically for Christ in a literal fashion, this merely points to Christ's greater sacrificial act of giving His innocent life for our guilty life. While we may be honored to die for the Savior, His action is complete. We now are living the beginning of the resurrected life as we live by faith. The verb expressing that 'we will live with Him' is in the future tense. There will be a greater fulfillment in glory but we begin that life as soon as we receive Christ by faith.9

“If we endure, we will reign with Him” 2 Timothy 2:12a

This second stanza of the hymn is a parallel passage to Mark 13:13 where Jesus says, “And you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.” (ESV)10 In this passage Jesus talks about how the believers is to be on his guard because he will be persecuted by the counsels, those in the synagogue, the government officials, and even family members will persecute one. This passage points to an eschatological glory that the believer will have especially if he endures the persecution. Another related passage is Romans 12:12 where Paul says “Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer.”11 The context of this passage is one of the believer living in accordance with virtue.

Paul uses the word 'endure' in verse 10 and here in verse 12. In verse 10 Paul refers to his own enduring for the sake that the elect will know the eternal salvation. The idea here is not that the person would just endure persecution but that he would be like Christ. The believer would be like Christ by suffering like Christ. As he shares in the same suffering, persecution and martyrdom, then the believer would share in the future eschatological glory. The first stanza is about conversion, but now this second stanza is about ruling in a royal fashion with Christ in His heavenly kingdom.

“If we disown Him, then He will also disown us” 2 Timothy 2:12b

This third stanza gives a warning to the original recipients, Timothy and those whom he teaches. They dare not apply this passage in some theoretical way to others. It is meant to warn in the same fashion that stanza two was meant to comfort. Both stanzas give reason to endure and not deny the Lord.

The question arises if this applied to Timothy and others in the New Testament church, does this mean that the believer can fall away from Christ? Does this mean that one can loose his or her salvation?12 The temptation when we come to a passage that seems to disprove a doctrine we hold to, is to make passage say something other than what it appears to say for the sake of preserving our doctrine. The other extreme is that we allow opposing ideas be drawn from the Scripture with no attempt to reconcile the teachings, thus making the Scripture appear to be without coherence in its doctrines. We must resist the temptation to run too quick to a solution and the temptation to ignore passages that need to be reconciled. In this passage we error if we try to make the warning of stanza three not apply to Timothy and therefore to you and I. We also error if we allow our interpretation of the the third stanza to create a new way of salvation. If we strictly interpret the third stanza of this hymn to be that we must endure in order to be saved, then we say that to be saved we must endure persecution and possibly martyrdom. Salvation is by grace through faith alone. (Ephesians 2:8)

Hughes attempts to first reconcile the passage with the doctrine of the eternal security of the believer by saying that there are different levels of denying the Lord. There is the level that Peter denied the Lord and later was forgiven and restored. Then there is the level of full blown apostasy. Of course every time we sin, whether it is a sin of commission or a sin of omission we deny the Lord at a certain level. We do not normally think that every time that we commit a sin that we have caused our Lord to eternally to deny us. Though each sin should be taken seriously, our normal daily sins and Peter's sin of denying the Lord during his trial does not and did not cause the Lord to deny them. Hughes explains that the act for which the Lord will deny us is full blown apostasy 1) because Christ denies those who do it, 2) because of the close similarity with Jesus' saying, and 3) because the fourth stanza refers to temporary unfaithfulness.13 While I hold to the doctrine of the eternal security of the believer, the first and second reason stated are merely proving what one postulates. The assumption that there is eternal security for the believer does not prove it. Jesus teaches in Matthew 10:22 by says “you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. (ESV) This comes in the context of Jesus telling his disciples that they would be persecuted in the synagogue, by the government, and even by their own family. There is parallel ideas and phrasing here between Matthew 10:22 and this third stanza of the hymn. But the Matthew 10:22 passage does not explicitly teach the eternal security of the believer. It is best to go to other passages. Philippians 1:6 tells us that God is the one who keeps us until the end. 2 Peter 1:10 tells us make our election and calling sure, and then we know that we can not be plucked out of God's hand.

The classic Reformed position is to explain this doctrine by saying that there are some who go through all the right motions and say all the right words that would indicate that they have saving faith in Christ. However, they have never truly received Christ by faith. While they have been in Church and around church, they have not experienced the transforming work of the Spirit. These who have a profession of faith lack the transforming work of grace, and when persecution and trials come, they do not stick with it. Those who would fall away from the faith and not return are those who never possessed the saving faith in the first place. None of us infallibly knows the heart of man so we cannot assume to know whether someone is has saving faith in an absolute sense. We can only discern whether a person claims to have faith in the Savior and whether their doctrine conforms with that of Scripture. In looking at our own lives each person must judge whether he or she has faith. When we sin grievously against the Lord, we must ask ourselves in self-examination is this because we have not trusted in the Savior? If we have sinned we should take it seriously. We should seriously ask ourselves if we have saving faith and turn to the mercy of the Lord. At the same time, we must not doubt God's forgiveness and mercy when we sin. Nor should we see salvation as being earned by remaining faithful to the Lord till the end. But if someone who feels himself to be a believer sees that he is in sin, such as the apostasy mentioned in this third stanza of disowning the Lord, he should examine himself to see if he truly has faith. He should fall on the mercy of the Lord and seek the grace of God given freely to all who believe. This is the classic Reformed position on Scriptures that urge the Christian to examine whether they have saving faith.14 It is also the classic Reformed position that all who are saved will never fully and finally fall away, God will keep them until the end. This reconciles words of warning such as this third stanza with other Scripture that teach the eternal security of the believer.

In the first two stanzas of the hymn, the apodosis is what 'we' shall have happen to us. In this third stanza the shift is away from 'we' to what 'he' will do. In a literary sense, this helps draw attention and emphasis to the new message of the third stanza. The point of the Lord's denying those who deny him is emphatic.15 Calvin also points out the threat is real. He asks why we would embrace the temporal and be unfaithful to the eternal? Calvin does not accept the excuse that one failed in a moment of weakness.16 In Calvin's days persecution of believers was a reality with the result being death. It may be difficult for those in post-modern America to see this Scripture with same eyes as Calvin. However, we are not guaranteed that our present peace and prosperity will continue.

“If we are faithless, then He remains faithful, For He is not able to deny himself.” 2 Timothy 2:13a

Clearly Paul means to give hope in the fourth line. Our faithlessness is contrasted with the faithfulness of God. This contrast of the fourth stanza's judgment of God with the third stanza brings the reader back to the mercy and grace of God. Both stanzas remain true.

Fee points out three ways to interpret this fourth stanza. The first is God will remain faithful to his own character and met out judgment on those who are faithless. This would be the opposite of how God's faithfulness is used in the New Testament. The common New Testament teaching is that God's faithfulness is meant to comfort. There two ways to interpret the fourth stanza while holding that God's faithfulness is meant as a comfort rather than a warning. The first is that if we have a minor turning away from the Lord, God will not judge us but show mercy. This idea is consistent with the teaching that a believer cannot fully and finally fall away from the Lord. Another way of interpreting this is that God is faithful to body of believers who remain faithful to the Lord. It is discouraging to those who see fellow believers turn from the Lord, sometimes even leaders turn from the Lord. In the end the believer's final trust must be in the Lord who is always faithful and not fallible man. To summarize the two ideas, one is that God's grace will override our unfaithfulness and the other is that God's eschatological salvation will not be diminished by some people's unfaithfulness.17

Paul argues the reason for God remaining faithful is that he is consistent with his own character, “he cannot disown himself”. Remaining faithful because of himself could apply to the concept that God is merciful despite the failings of the believer. God remaining faithful also could mean that he is faithful to his people even during persecution and martyrdom. Both are consistent with the nature of God. Because both are logically possible by looking at the character of God, we must further examine the context of the passage to decide which is true. in the first half of the chapter, all examples Paul uses to explain the faithfulness ability to endure hardship. The emphasis is for the audience to remain faithful. In the second half of the chapter after this hymn, those who are shown to be lacking are those who fail to keep pure doctrine or those filled with strife. It appears Paul has not pointed to anyone who has disowned the Savior, but merely pointed to the idea that his audience should not. To say that those who are faithless are those fellow believers who have disowned the Lord is introduce a new concept and the reference would be some what obscure. Though the strength of this position is that it has less overall logical tension, introducing a new party to the discussion and then never mentioning them again would only serve to confuse. Therefore, Paul is probably saying that when the believer has failings God will remain faithful.

Application

The 21st Century church in America does not normally face significant persecution. Any negative actions toward believers is usually not violent or life threatening. It is still true that the believer has died with Christ and will live with Him. The eschatological hope should not be diminished because of our current state of peace and prosperity. The current postmodern despair appears to be the fruit of prosperity rather than a satisfaction with our current lifestyle and state of affairs. In order to gain a sense of mean and purpose from life, we should suffer patiently for the Savior as we have opportunity. This may mean denying ourselves by giving more than is comfortable for our budget. It also might mean giving more of our time than is comfortable for us. We may suffer by taking responsibility for those who who are weak and helpless. Dying to self and selfishness is not beyond the 21st Century Christian.

While we do not suffer persecution in America, we do suffer being misunderstood and being ostracized. We must not assume that our current low level persecution will continue. It could be that we will be called to suffer in a greater way. As we respond to these light and insignificant trials, we must be prepared for more suffering than we must now endure. As we are faithful in small things, we will be prepared for greater suffering. Additionally, some may be called to go to distant lands where persecution means physical pain or death. Our decision making process as to how we should serve the Lord should not be limited by merely where the mission field is safe.

Summary

This hymn re-enforces and summarizes Paul's message that Timothy and his flock should remain faithful to the Lord while suffering. The passage could cause us to give a second examination of the doctrine of eternal security of the believer, however, it should give us cause to examine our own heart and see if we have true and enduring faith. We should see our light sufferings as a chance to endure for our Lord.

Copyright 2006 by Terry L. Pruitt

Bibliography

John Calvin, Translated by William Pringle, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker Book House, Reprint 1974).

Earle, Ralph, Frank E. Gaebelein General Editor, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Volume 11 (Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan Publishing House, 1978).

Gordon D. Fee New International Biblical Commentary 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (Peabody, MA, Hendrickson Publishers, 1984).

Guthrie, Donald, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries Revised Edition The Pastoral Epistles, (Grand Rapids, MI, Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990) p. 156

Hughes, Kent and Chapell, Brian, Preaching the Word: 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: To Guard The Deposit (Wheaton, IL, Crossway Books, 2000).

Westminster Confession of Faith, The, Chapter XVII, (Atlanta, GA, Committee for Christian Education and Publications of the PCA, Reprint 1990).

Footnotes

1Ralph Earle, Frank E. Gaebelein General Editor, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Volume 11 (Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan Publishing House, 1978) p 400.

2Donald Guthrie, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries Revised Edition The Pastoral Epistles, (Grand Rapids, MI, Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990) p. 156

3Gordon D. Fee New International Biblical Commentary 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (Peabody, MA, Hendrickson Publishers, 1984) P. 248-249.

4Ibid. p. 248.

5Guthrie, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, p. 157.

6Guthrie, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, p. 157.

7Fee, New International Biblical Commentary, p. 249.

8John Calvin, Translated by William Pringle, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker Book House, Reprint 1974) p. 217-218.

9Kent Hughes and Bryan Chapell, Preaching the Word: 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: To Guard The Deposit (Wheaton, IL, Crossway Books, 2000) p. 205-206.

10Fee, New International Biblical Commentary, p. 250.

11Ibid., p. 250.

12Just to note, I hold to the doctrine of the eternal security of the believer.

13Hughes, To Guard The Deposit, p. 205.

14The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter XVII, Committee for Christian Education and Publications of the PCA, Atlanta, GA, Reprint 1990, p. 54-56.

15Fee, New International Biblical Commentary, p. 250.

16Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, p. 219.

17Fee, New International Biblical Commentary, p. 251.

The Gift of Tongues

2009-10-05T19:54:00.003-04:00

Repost from my website which is going away.

Tongues: Distinguishing Revelation, Ecstatic Utterances, and a Foreign Language

Introduction

A person receives the Holy Spirit when they place their trust in Christ as savior. The redeeming work of the Holy Spirit logically precedes a person's proclamation of faith. One cannot have true faith with out a transformed nature. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are given to the church for the mutual benefit of the body of Christ, should not create a disorderly worship atmosphere and should not subvert our mental capacities in favor of emotional ecstasy.

Human Experience

Social scientists and linguists have studied the phenomena of speaking in tongues. The modern tongues movement is not actually the speaking of a foreign language, as seen in Acts chapter 2, but an ecstatic utterance. People in almost every religion practice some form of ecstatic utterance and it is a common human experience. I have heard unbelievers practice ecstatic utterances for its entertainment value. Also, jazz music uses a form of ecstatic utterance called scat. These in no way point to the redeeming work of the Holy Spirit. I consider ecstatic utterances NOT to be a form of revelation but a form of human expression. It is a form of human expression that does not carry denotative content. Somewhat akin to non-objective art, like the paintings of Jackson Pollock, which do not carry an image of anything in particular and yet they are human expressions. I do not believe those who practice ecstatic utterances to be more spiritual than the rest of the church.

Corinthian Experience

The tongues, which caused problems in the church at Corinth and Paul addressed in his letter, were probably these ecstatic utterances (1 Corinthians 12-14). The ecstatic utterances practiced by the Corinthian believers may have had roots in religious practices of their former religions. Rather than out law ecstatic utterances, Paul points to the more excellent way; love and intelligent service.

Experiences Of Pain

Paul also addresses the issue of ecstatic utterances in Romans 8:22-23. In this passage he draws a comparison of groans of pain a woman has in childbirth and the inward groaning we experience, as we desire our adoption. Here Paul is not addressing an experience in public worship but expressing a private experience that burdens his heart. The comparison between pains of childbirth and inward groaning in prayer highlights the depth of feeling. It is not intended that we should encourage people to practice this inward groaning. No one has to instruct a woman in childbirth to feel the pain and respond, it comes naturally.

Summary

In summary, it is a common human experience to use exclamations and other forms of speech that do not carry denotative content that I describe as ecstatic utterances. The response of the church should be to not focus on this experience but rather focus on love and intelligent service.

The Bible as "How to Manual" or "Character Sketch"

2009-09-17T18:49:00.003-04:00

Last night I was in seminary class. Someone was giving an informal testimony and said something to the effect, "We need to look in the Bible to find solutions because it is an answer book." Looking at the Bible through the eyes of what I call suffering I find the Bible is not so much an answer book but a book to tell me who God is. He is my answer. That may sound a bit trite but I think it makes a lot of difference.

Reveiw of Celebration of Discipline by Richard Foster

2009-09-12T22:30:00.003-04:00

I re-read Celebration of Discipline by Richard Foster for my Spiritual Formation class at Capital Bible Seminary. The first time I read it I think I was looking for something that was not there. This time I just read it to see what God might want me to change. It was refreshing the second time.

I think Foster's strength in the book is that he translates for the evangelical community the historical writings on the topic of spiritual disciplines. Most people who are reading the book want to hear from God. Foster's membership with the Friends, that values the mystical side of Christianity, helps him to take seriously listening to the voice of God in prayer and meditation. Foster handles the subject with depth and gives an accessible introduction to the historic practices of the disciplines. In other words, people are hungry to hear the voice of God and are looking for reliable answers from someone with sounds experiences that ring true.

Sometimes Foster justified his position well. At other times Foster simply assumed his premise as true without bothering to prove it. Certainly confession of sin is biblical, but Foster did not support from Scripture the practice of public confession of sin. This is not always appropriate. We must be 'as wise as serpents but gentle as doves' when it comes to public confession. I'm not saying that it is always wrong but idealizing it in a book like this may cause some immature believers to confess their sin in a body who will in turn use it against the party making the confession.

He took the standard position that if we hear a subjective prompting of the Lord it must always be in line with the Bible's clear revelation. Certainly God knows the movements of every sparrow. At the same time, I think some small and routine matters may not require a “Word from the Lord”. I would have liked to hear Foster explain when and when not to seek the voice of the Lord on a matter.

Having participated quite a bit in church government, I found the chapter on guidance quite intriguing. For Foster, the discipline of guidance was foremost an issue that the group would handle. So we are really talking about decision making of a congregation or other group. Often we bring processes of decision-making in from the business world and implement them at the church. In other words, we are making decisions via human effort, the flesh. We are sowing in the flesh and wondering why we are not reaping a spiritual harvest. A few months ago a friend of mine explained to me how the board he is on do not make decision except by a unanimous leading of the Spirit.

With the charismatic movement being a strong force at the time of his writing, I wish he would have written more about that movement. It may have been a distraction to his purpose, but he assumes the charismatic gifts to be active and working. That made me somewhat suspect of his other premises. I would have liked to know clearly where he stood.

I would recommend it for sure to the mature Christian who needs to grow closer to the Lord. I would not want to expose someone to his position who is not ready to read critically the passages about the charismatic gifts. I also would be wary of someone who does not have a good grasp on doctrine or exegesis. I believe pastors, elders, deacons and other lay leaders would benefit from studying this book. Anyone who has grown cold in the faith or has taken up daily devotions as a mere heartless duty would benefit developing a listening heart. Foster believes God is still speaking in an illumination sense. Many who have taken up the cause to stand for the finality of God speaking as revelation in the Bible also make our present age one like to that of the deist profess. Foster and other writers like him are a solution to the mindset of placing God far, far away a long time ago.

Crazy Church Review

2009-09-06T19:00:00.003-04:00

This summer I visited two churches but I have decided to not review them as I usually do. The reason is that I have some highly negative thoughts about these two churches. I thought about not saying anything but I do want to address the issues.

The first church I visited this summer was a world famous mega-church. The music was great. The people warm. The worship environment was creative and cool. The problem I had with the worship though was the sermon. The pastor gave a sermon on 2 Kings 5:1-15a. The Scripture reading stopped at a high point with the words of Naaman saying, "“Behold, I know that there is no God in all the earth but in Israel." The reading stopped at this point, half way through the sentence which was great since it emphasized whole point of the passage. I was excited with the prospect of such a great sermon. Then we got a message on baptism. I realize there are only so many texts on baptism, but why take this passage with such a grand theme and make it into something it is not. I blame this sort of exegesis for people coming up with whacky interpretations and then thinking it is okay. Sort of disappointing to go to a world famous church and hear a message that basically is consider evangelical in its theological position but for the most part unrelated to the Bible passage being discussed.

The second church I visited was a good church from what I could tell. The music was good. The projection of words and images was fantastic. The sermon was good. What I found disappointing was that much of the discussion was about the organizational life of the church and not about God. Yes, they did mention God. They preached from the Bible. However, instead of hearing about the transcendent one, I heard about a temporally relevant program, which left me wondering whether I would get something transcendent from that program if I decided to participate. Since I do not live in that community or state, it would not be practical for me to consider that as an option. I would rather hear a creed than a mission statement. I would rather hear timeless truth than hear about an organization.

As I have matured, I have gotten to where I want to meet God during worship. I do not want to be impressed with talent, though I do like to hear talented people speak and sing. I do not want to see a performance, though I do hope those leading are well prepared, perhaps even rehearsed. I do not want be entertained, though I do hope to be engaged in hearing from God himself. When I come to worship, I want to be in the presence of God. I want to hear something that is on his heart, not something that is earthly. I live in the temporal, I thirst for the eternal. I live in the systems of this world, I want to be ruled by the Lord himself.

Hidden Economies

2009-08-16T23:35:00.004-04:00

Ken Myers once described an economy as a set of relationships, all the purchasing actions thought of as a single entity. While I agree with Ken Myers assessment that an economy is a set of relationships, I also see there are different sorts of economies. Subsistence farming, fishing, open source software production, much volunteer work, homemaking and do it yourself (DIY) home repair are generally not measured in our economy. All of these can have a significant economic impact on the persons receiving the benefit. In some ways, when we try to assist the poor, we tend to focus on helping them in the measured economy rather than the unmeasured economy. When we look at why people choose to run a business, we often think of the salary, benefits, and other measured economic benefits. But a person may choose to continue a business because of family tradition or personal power and prestige. I talked with a man recently who purposely did not chose to introduce business processes into his business because he felt like it would distract him from the joy he receives by the intrinsic value he felt he had in simply meeting his client's needs. It was not the monetary value that he was primarily interested in, but it was a necessity for him to make a profit in order to continue his business. The thing money is important in economic life, but I am wondering how one could better use the unmeasured parts of one's economy. Can the poor be better served by improving their measured or unmeasured economic standing?

Link to Article About Mars Hill Audio

2009-08-03T07:31:00.001-04:00

The Well-Informed Generalist

Walter Henegar, Issue Number 24, July 2009

What do eating habits, film noir, reptiles, human cloning, Facebook, economics, and poetry have to do with the Christian life? “Everything,” Ken Myers would argue, and does, thoughtfully and audibly, at least every other month. For Myers—the living library behind the Mars Hill Audio Journal—what the church needs today is not more specialists, whether in theology or philosophy or church growth, but more “well-informed generalists” who are interested in understanding all of culture in order to live more faithfully in God’s world.

Click here to read the rest...

JK Wedding Entrance Dance

2009-08-01T21:01:00.002-04:00

Counseling an Angry Brother

2009-07-25T21:13:00.002-04:00

The Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” --Genesis 4:6,7 (ESV)

Breaking It Down
Cain's sin is iconic in that it is the first sibling rivalry, the first murder, and caused the first exile. He not only hated his brother with jealousy, but his hate gave rise to the shedding of blood. What is an amazing component of the story is that God gave a warning to Cain regarding his temptation to sin. God asked him the question, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen?” The question is a use of parallelism. The first phrase “why are you angry” points to the emotional response in Cain that he feels an injustice has been committed against him. The second part of the question is basically a repetition of the idea with a little extra twist to draw attention to the fact that Cain is not only angry, but he is visibly angry. God is helping Cain be honest with his loss. Cain lost his reputation of righteousness, he lost his sense of acceptance, and felt like there was an injustice. The next strand of advice given by God is the concept that there is reward for righteousness. “If you do well, will you not be accepted?” Cain, apparent from this advice, was questioning if a reward is given to those who do the right thing. It is common to the human experience that one does not always feel there is punishment for sin and reward for doing good. We feel that the events of providence do not bring about justice. Yet God is reassuring Cain that there is justice. This anger and despair of injustice makes Cain a likely prospect for sin personified: “And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door.” The solution to Cain's temptation is simply to do well, to offer his sacrifice in faith instead of in unbelief. His unbelief is not simply the one act of unworthy sacrifice though, since his unbelief is causing him to question the very nature of justice in this life and ultimately question the character of God. Sin personified is crouching like a predator ready to spring onto its victim right by his door, ready over power him the next time he goes out. Lastly, there is a match against authority, either sin or Cain will reign. “Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” While the jealousy against his brother shows Cain desires to not be dominated by anyone, in reality, he is warned against being dominated by sin personified. This allegorical way of speaking of sin helps to draw attention to the fact that sinning means one is under the dominion of sin, but to be in dominion over sin means to follow God's way.

Using The Passage as a Model
God's advice to Cain can be a good model for counseling those who are tempted to sin. Though it is just few short lines, the conversation is helpful in pointing to an honest assessment of loss and viewing earthly desire from a transcendent perspective.

1. What Are You Feeling?
God asked about his angry disposition and demeanor. When counseling someone who is being tempted, it is prudent to ascertain your spiritual friend's story. Sometimes the simple act of telling his story will help to solidify why he is feeling as he does. Ask questions about emotional states. Making observations on body language, tone of voice and demeanor can help the spiritual friend to become self aware of his own feelings, moods and attitudes. Asking your spiritual friend to interpret those indicators show that you are not rash in your assessment, but wise to understand that one may have various emotional indicators for a variety of reasons. Ask questions about your friend.

2. Help Your Friend to Have Faith and Hope
God pointed out his reward for doing well. When counseling we should infuse a proper understanding of faith and hope. We are not talking about the kind of hope that is mentioned merely on a Hallmark greeting card, but the kind that realistically understands the sorts of rewards God gives for faith in his work and character. To infuse this sort of hope one can talk about God's promises in the Bible. One can also look at stories of God's blessing on men and women of faith. Lastly, we can share personal stories of God's faithfulness in our own life. Don't make it sappy but real.

3. Doing the Right Thing Keeps Us From Doing the Wrong Thing
God says that sin can be avoided by simply doing what is right. This is in agreement with Romans 6 where Paul exhorts the readers to offer their bodies not to sin but to righteousness. Our hands are designed to work, so let them do works of righteousness. Our feet are meant to travel, so let them not merely avoid the road to bad places, but let them also carry food to the hungry or go to visit the feeble in the nursing home. But in all this, the good thing must be done in faith, not out of compulsion.

4. Your Heart's Desire Is Often One Reflecting a Heavenly One
God knows that the issue of dominion is a big issue with Cain. However, Cain does not see that the issue of dominion is not between two brothers but between sin and righteousness. Either sin will rule or righteousness. If he gives into his hate, he will be dominated by sin. God actually tells him how his temporal desire is a reflection of a more noble one. We must see in our spiritual friend's evil desire what sort of good he is seeking. We must help him see the noble form of that desire. If he desires power, then power to conquer sin is the sort of power to lust after. G.K. Chesterton is credited with saying that "A man knocking on the door of a brothel is knocking for God." Examining the desire with the spiritual friend and discussing it with a new, godly spin can help to focus the desire toward the noble and righteous way of life.

Conclusion
If we counsel a spiritual friend we should take the time to understand their story and see their story with the eyes of faith. Faith in what God is doing in his life will aid him in living by faith.

Dancing Babies On YouTube

2009-07-18T22:11:00.002-04:00

So I was not predicting that I would put a video that is a tribute to Michael Jackson, but this one is pretty difficult to not post.

Is 1 Corinthian 6:19 a good verse to address the morality of smoking?

2009-07-12T00:23:00.003-04:00

Note: I had to clear up some typos so this is a re-post since some of my sentences said the opposite of my intention.

A common use of the Scripture 1 Corinthians 6:19 is as a smoking cessation verse. In some ways I agree that this can be deduced from the verse as an application, but the primary meaning being who we give ourselves to during sex. The context will show this.

Sexual Immorality
12"Everything is permissible for me"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"—but I will not be mastered by anything. 13"Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"—but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. 15Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh."[b] 17But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit.

18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. 19Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body. 1 Corinthians 6:12-20 (NIV)

As we look at this text we see a primary meaning that sex is a physical union with someone else. This physical union should be holy since we are in spiritual union with God when he placed his Holy Spirit within us believers. Tobacco in and of itself does not make one unholy (Matt. 15:17-20) but does make one unhealthy. It is important to maintain the integrity of the passage that the Christians we teach think of this passage as being primarily about the importance of purity in the sexual relationship and not as a justification for Christian culture's extra-biblical social norms.

Smoking is reckless and foolishly unwise, but not immoral in the same primary sense as false worship, murder, adultery or theft. Smoking is immoral in the sense that it violates the virtues implied by the 10 Commandments. Jesus showed us in the Beatitudes that the 10 Commandments have at their root a moral virtue which is impossible to obtain without the grace of God. These implied virtues of the 10 Commandments must be taught after someone has clearly understood the primary teaching because in learning true morality, the plane sense must be master in the mind and heart before the implied virtues can really shine light on the deeper sins of the heart. Otherwise people can perceive that they can live a good life outside of the power of Christ. We are dependent beings needed God to empower us morally in the same way that his empowers us physically by providing us food, water, clothing, air, and other people. (We would not last 5 minutes without air; we can not last 5 minutes morally without God's power sustaining us.) Having said that, smoking is immoral in that it robs our loved ones of time in earth with them. It is immoral in that it destroys our health, makes us unable to work to provide for ourselves or our family, thus robbing society of our economic contribution. It is immoral in that it robs the kingdom of God of our talents, time and resources. For the married person, smoking is adultery since we are causing our spouse to loose access to our bodies in death. It is immoral in that it makes one a false worshiper when we let some earthly substance control us. Any addiction becomes the desire of our heart when we should be addicted to and enthralled with God.

If you want help someone stop smoking, consider exploring with the person you are counseling smoking cessation what effects smoking has on the three relationships of spiritual, social and self. In each of these, what effects does smoking have? Consider exploring what a vibrant and virtuous relationship with God, others and self looks like? Perhaps ask, in what ways does smoking effect each of those relationships? Since smoking is not breaking any explicit command of Scripture, we must explore how it is not virtuous. Disclaimer: Not everyone will be ready for this. Especially those who are saved by grace but trying to live the Christian life by works. These are Christians who understand that salvation is by grace alone working through faith alone but when it comes to Christian growth, they are trying to grow by works. Growth comes by grace working through faith also.

It is true we are the temple of the holy, immutable, loving, glorious, and ever long suffering God if we are a believer. We should use our body for only holy physical unions. In a secondary sense, we should use our bodies in a way that shows respect for the temple by keeping it healthy.

Union Grove, WI

2009-06-30T19:24:00.003-04:00

Some of my observations from spending a few days in a small town in the Midwest.

1. There is a lot of kids just out and about in free exploration. There is nothing wrong so they don't need to be coraled.

2. There are a lot of small parks in the neighborhoods. The town expects kids to be out and about.

3. There are a lot of people out walking. It is a village. People can walk to the services that they need. (See points one and two)

4. There are A LOT of church and A LOT of bars. There is also a Masonic lodge, but I am not sure whether I should group that with the church or the bar. There is also an American Legion, I think that one gets grouped with the bars.

5. Every one waves.

6. Every one is genuinely friendly. They don't care that they don't know me.

7. Though there are several business properties that are unoccupied there seem to be a lot of healthy businesses. Even though there are only 4,000 people in the village, there is a car dealership.

8. There seems to be no town industry but everything is economically healthy. Perhaps rearing healthy families is the main industry.

9. There seems to be no town industry but there is no clamoring for tourist dollars.

10. There main commodity for sale seems to older homes. The newer ones have already been bought.

11. There seems to be a great cross section of young and old in the population.

12. The weather is nice and cool though we are approaching the 4th of July.

13. The 4th of July is huge here.

14. I see flags every where.

15. The cool weather with enthusiastic patriotism make the 4th of July that is great and authentic.

Thoughts on Reading Wendell Berry

2009-06-26T23:27:00.004-04:00

Ken Myers of Mars Hill Audio often speaks of Wendell Berry. I have begun to read some of the interviews referenced in the Wikipedia article on him. I was surprised the variety of topics addressed by just one man. Of course the interviewer is asking questions he or she perceives is of interest to the reader of that publication. That drives the subject matter and the tone. His assessment of Wal-mart's negative influence on American local economics may be one of the better known ideas I have heard touted often. However, I find more resonance in his thoughts on work. He describes how in days gone by small farmers produced their own food and that production helped people survive in hard times. Economic problems did not cascade into the family meals if the family produced their own food.

I actually saw this in operation as my grandparents and great-grandparents raised their own food, cut their own wood and worked to produce what they also consumed. To a lesser degree this was practiced in my own home growing up. And in a different sort of way in our homeschool family. We desired to give our daughters a Christian education but we could not afford it. So my wife has and is still producing this service, Christian education, that our family is still consuming. This sort of economic activity is not taxed in sales tax or income tax. It is not measured in the health of our economy.

Subsistence farming, producing what one consumes, lacks the prestige of a modern industrial farm. However, in the developing world if one desires to assist the poor organizations such as the Educational Concerns for Hunger Organization (ECHO) see subsistence farming as a means to overcome poverty. It is strange that we would see that as something to do overseas but not here in our own country. I think some of my ideas on this subject may agree with Wendell Berry's.

How to Get Beyond “Thou Shalt Not”: A Lesson on Song of Solomon

2009-05-25T22:51:00.001-04:00

Text: Song of Solomon 1

Main Idea: Romantic love is ideally an enchanting relationship.

Introduction
The Ten Commandments gives us the basics for morality. There is a temptation to see all of life through the Ten Commandments in a way that only emphasizes the negative. This negative starting point has made some people believe that the negative aspect of ethics is all that is required. Our Lord and Savior however taught two things regarding the Commandments, that they are to be interpreted beyond the surface level and that they are summed up in positive acts. He shows the Ten Commandments are to be interpreted beyond the surface level when he says thing like that a man is guilty of murder by simply calling someone else names. (Matthew 5:21-26) He shows they are better summed up by a positive act when he says that the sum of the Law is to love God with all our heart, soul and might and to love our neighbor as ourself. (Matthew 22:34-40) Despite these interpretations, some through the church's history have still interpreted that the best ideas about romantic love is that we should not commit adultery. While it is most definitely true that adultery is to be absolutely avoided, it is also true that many who have avoided this heinous act but lack in the area of cherishing their spouse. The book of Song of Solomon does not focus on the negative but describes a relationship that is enchanting.

Not Utilitarian
Romantic love is not merely a functional, utilitarian part of life. A friend of mine is married to a devout, conservative Christian. He grew up Catholic but does not claim to be particularly devout himself. He was surprised at his the wedding ceremony that his soon to be wife had her grandmother read a section from Song of Solomon. He thought the literature to be somewhat risqué and not sure how this book made its way into the canon of Scripture. This attitude is common among people. They see the church and all that is with it as a kill joy. The authority of the Scripture and the church are seen as having the same effect as a wet blanket. This attitude is re-enforced by those in the church who would see that marriage as more allowed than enjoyed. They would see that romantic love is to be tolerated for reasons of establishing families that can in turn provide for a good environment to raise children and continue the human race. Other than that function, what good is it? Song of Solomon is definitely not a book about utilitarian view of marriage.

Some anthropologist and biologist say that babies are cute so that parents will care for them. In other words, the beauty a parent finds in its child is there so that he feels compassion on the child and the child will be cared for and thus bring about the survival of the human race. Does this type of thinking kill the joy of parenting in your eyes? Why or why not?

The Commandment tells us not to commit adultery. To pursue this as a virtue, one must not only remain faithful to one's spouse but _______________. (Fill in the blank about what one must do positively fulfill the this commandment.)

Captures the Imagination
Romantic love ideally captures the imagination. One of most noticeable things about the book of the Song of Solomon is that there is a lot of imagery in the poetry. This imagery is not the same types of imagery that we see in modern love songs. The imagery is from agriculture, animal husbandry, and common practices of the day. We are less connected with the beauty of nature than those people in ancient Israel. The idea of all of this is that the romantic relationship is supposed to capture the imagination. The writer talks about his love being like a mare among Pharaoh's chariots. A mare is a female horse. Pharaoh's chariots were only pulled by male horses. It was an ancient tactic I'm told for the enemies of Egypt to release mares so as to distract the horses of Egypt. Romantic love is ideally one that drives the couple to distraction.

The Song of Solomon uses many illustrations from nature and agriculture. What would be more appropriate for our society?

How does something capture the imagination?

Applying It To More
Since the 7th Commandment to not commit adultery and the book of the Song of Solomon both relate to the righteous and the flourishing romantic relationship, we can see how they relate. But there are other commandments besides the 7th. All the commandments should also be seen with more than utilitarian eyes. The commandment to not steal is not simply so that society can have a viable economy. Nor does this commandment against theft simply benefit the human race by ensuring that families enough food and clothing for their survival. Respecting someone else's property shows the dignity of the person and in turn shows respect for the one who made that person. It is a component of the sacredness of the other person. We do not keep the Sabbath simply because we need rest. We could get rest by some other method. Keeping the Sabbath is more about remembering the creation, remembering the Exodus and remembering the resurrection of our Lord and Savior. Resting to remember these things is not merely a functional reason. All of these shows a recognition of the sovereignty of God in his providential care of us personally and corporately.

Though modern anthropology looks at laws such as these as being ethics based on functionality, how does the ethic based on wonder apply to the following?

Thou shalt have not other gods before me.
Thou shalt not make any graven image.
Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain.
Thou shalt honor your father and your mother.
Thou shalt not bear false witness.
Thou shalt not covet.

A functional view of ethics sometimes causes one to focus on risk mitigation rather than submitting to the requirements of a Holy God. There is a component of submitting to something or someone in all ethics. What would you suggest that those with a functional view of ethics submit to? (Hint: It is probably what makes them indignant.)

How to Enjoy Life: A Lesson on Ecclesiastes 12

2009-05-17T08:53:00.003-04:00

Text: Ecclesiastes 12

Main Idea: We are to use all that is within us to serve and worship God.

Outline of Ecclesiastes 12
1. Use Your Capacity to Enjoy by Worshiping God (Ecc. 12:1-8)
a. Worship the Creator Before Pleasure Fades (Ecc. 12:1)
b. Pleasure Fades In Old Age (Ecc. 12:2-5)
c. Pleasure Fades Completely at Death (Ecc. 12:6-8)
2. Use Your Capacity for Wisdom by Being Discerning (Ecc. 12:9-12)
3. Use All Your Capacities to Live a Self-Examined Life Before God (Ecc. 12:13-14)

Introduction
As Christians we are often not that different from the world in understanding the meaning of life. The world sees the meaning of life is enjoying relationships, wealth or simply a good day on vacation Christians want to find meaning in life by enjoying Christian pleasure; Christian family life, Christian financial freedom, or an adventure on a missions trip. Sometimes these pleasures are more distinguished by demographic association rather than by something spiritually transcendent from God. Not always, but often we are just choosing a different set of earthly pleasures. Mention of God can be more a sign of proper connections than the fruit of being connected to the eternal God. Even so, this passage connects the worship of God to the fact that our capacities fade with years passing by. In essence, it is a variation in theme, though a significantly different one, on the concept, “Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die.” The distinction is that here it is “worship God in youth since you have the most capacity to do so”. In fact the chapter covers the idea that all our capacities; thought, enjoyment of pleasures, and all the rest should be lived in response to God. Worship and service to God is all we really have to do in life. Amazingly, this is not something we can do of our own strength.

Take Pleasure in the Creator (Ecclesiastes 12:1-8)
God did not make us to be merely minds. You and I are to use our capacity to enjoy by worshiping God. In worshiping God we can not only study his Word, but we have to sense the wonder of who he is. Like coffee or olives, it is an acquired taste. To worship God with all our heart, soul, and might requires one to feed at his table for a while. That is how we acquire the taste. Coffee and many other adult flavors are not wasted on children. The temptation for youth is to think that the acquired taste for the Lord is something for later in life. But like the appreciation for many earthly things, appreciation for the Lord himself if not acquired early in life may never get acquired. If one has spent a lifetime re-enforcing a taste for the worldly, old age will not bring a new appetite for the Lord except the Lord transform the individual.

Is youth really wasted on the wrong people?

As a broad generalization, pain increases as we progress in years. What makes one a bitter old man or a gentle and kind old man?

Be Discerning (Ecclesiastes 12:9-12)
You and I are to use our capacity for wisdom by being discerning. An open mind is like an open window. One needs to keep a screen up to keep the bugs out. If we just shut the window, our mind becomes stuffy and unable to function. If proverbially we open the window of our mind without being discerning, we ending up being led astray by every wind of doctrine. Doctrine simply means teaching. Even people who say we should not be overly concerned about doctrine are actually teaching a doctrine. Being discerning is an important part of our spiritual walk. To know Christ is to know his teachings. That can get off course into cold Pharisaic attitudes, but avoiding doctrine does not prevent one from going astray. Rather, a thoughtful and prayerful examination of teachings is what is required to be a discerning Christian.

What doctrinal concerns are actually in discussions at the popular level?

What doctrinal issues are you learning right now?

What are the keys to good doctrine?

Live a Life of Self-examination Before the Lord (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14)
You and I are to use all our capacities to live a self-examined life before God. Most people attempt to define the fear of the Lord by what it is not. While that can be important, we must see that living in the fear of the Lord is making decisions and taking up habits that are in line with what God has commanded us. Soldiers prepare for battle out of anticipation of what is ahead. Architects design buildings to withstand the anticipated threats of the environment. Students prepare for tests. Most farmers are preparing for future needs for food. In all these situations, the person is preparing for the future; they fear not being prepared. A wise person is one who understands that every word and deed shall be judged by God. You and I shall be examined thoroughly. Of course this sort of true self-examination will lead us to understand that you and I are in need of God's grace. True self-examination will lead us to see ourselves for who we are, dependent creatures who need God's mercy and grace.

Why is it that people see faults in us that we can not see ourselves?

Why is it that people see simple solutions to our faults?

If a young Christians asked you to help them go down the road of self-examination in order to see a more Christ-like spiritual formation in them, what would you do?

Note: Please let me know if you use this lesson in a small group or Sunday school class. Also please give credit.

How to Understand What We Can Understand About Suffering: A Lesson on Job 38 - 39

2009-05-10T22:14:00.002-04:00

Text: Job 38 - 39

Main Idea: To understand suffering one must understand the wonder of understanding.

Introduction
Beauty is best described rather than defined. When we see a morning sunrise, we can predict with mathematical precision when the sunrise will occur. But a sun rise that is beautiful is better described as awesome, radiant or spectacular. Beauty is not limited to a sunrise; it is in all sorts of things, fish, a family picnicking at the park, rock formations, birds, cattle, volcanoes, clouds, and a host of other things have beauty. The beauty is not simply in the lines and form, but in the associated phenomena. The movement of clouds can have its own way of fascinating the mind and eye. Those things that are not beautiful are in someway not good, they cause pain, they are ugly. Suffering in this world come through the fall, that is the sin of the first pair of humans. When they sinned, they affected not only the human race. Suffering was multiplied on the human race and not only affected them, but the whole of creation. Not only is beauty all around us, so is suffering in the midst of all creation. To understand all of suffering we would necessarily understand all of the world. As we look at God's answer to Job in chapters 38-39 God discusses the wonders of creation the limits of human knowledge. He is pointing Job to the fact that humans have a basic limitation to knowledge of creation so therefore human knowledge of suffering is intrinsically limited. This concept touches on the idea that there are limits to our knowledge and how to adequately organize knowledge when it is incomplete. To understand suffering one must understand the wonder of understanding.

Partial
1. You and I know in part and we prophesy in part, and this is particularly informing on our understanding of suffering. There are some Renaissance men and women out there. They not only are well read, but they do home repairs, make all their own clothes, participate in community theater, and grow vegetables for the poor. Other people are Renaissance men and women, they know how to sail a boat and navigate the sea, they know where all the best places to eat are in New York City, have a fine appreciation for the best in classical music, paint sunsets and teach reading at the local library to immigrants. Though one might be accomplished in multiple fields of achievement, these accomplishments by nature are partial. The man who has mastered sailing the seas probably has not mastered the art of mountain climbing. Those people who are considered the best in sailing and mountain climbing also sometimes show that they have limits of knowledge and skill.

What good things can come from trying to understand suffering?

What bad things can come from trying to understand suffering?

Our modernistic mindset usually looks for naturalistic causes for suffering and not moral causes for suffering. Job and his friends looked at suffering in too narrow of a point of view from the broad topics discussed by God directly. What are some ways we in our culture may limit how we view suffering?

Partial Understanding of Suffering
2. You and I can not master all the knowledge regarding the diverse creation, therefore we can not master how suffering has affected all creation. If we have limits at understanding things that are beautiful and wonderful. We necessarily have limits in understanding suffering also. Suffering is woven into the creation. Some of if we understand, some of it we do not. But simply saying we have a limit of our understanding in general helps us to manage our expectations to understand what causes suffering.

When we study beauty we do not intend to master all knowledge from all times on the topic, we realize we have limitations in resources such as time, books, foundational knowledge from other fields. What are some things that might limit our knowledge and understanding of suffering?

Are explanations ever appropriate when someone is suffering?

Amazed
3. You and I should be amazed at the diverse types of knowledge to be pursed in regard to the creation. We have a whole world to enjoy and in that enjoyment we should praise our Creator, Lord and Savior. Good food should make us praise God. Good friends should make us praise God. The wonders of the natural created order should make us praise God.

What types of suffering are beautiful?

Here is a quote from 1 Corinthians 13 (ESV):

8 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.
13 So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

What are some of the relationships between Job 38 – 39 and 1 Corinthians 13:8-13?

In what ways will knowledge change in heaven as compared to this present life as explained in 1 Corinthians 13:8-13?

Os Goes For It

2009-05-09T00:38:00.003-04:00

I just finished reading an article by Os Guinness reviewing the book by Frank Schaeffer "Crazy for God". Os goes toe to toe with Frank over the book and basically calls him a spoiled brat who never got it. Both are strong personalities. For this one, I am taking Os as the one I'm believing, Francis Schaeffer was a strong personality who loved God and people but was a flesh and blood human with many and asundry flaws. I do not beleive that he was a con man who conned himself.

Happiness Quiz

2009-05-09T00:01:00.003-04:00

I got these questions from the "Happiness Project". They are designed to help one know ones self better.

1. What part of the newspaper do you read first?

I don't know. I read all the paper except for sports and want ads.

2. What are three books you’ve read in the past year?

The Bible, a biography on Jonathan Edwards, and a Greek grammar (Summers).

3. As a child, what did you do in your free time?

I watched way too much Star Trek. I played Army with my brother and my friend Lynn.

4. What’s a goal that has been on your list for a few years?

Finish seminary.

5. What do you actually do with your free time?

I watch TV. I walk. I really like walking. I blog and check my Facebook, Twitter, e-mail and sometimes other people's blogs.

6. What types of activities energize you?

I like talking to people. I like to learn new things.

7. What famous people intrigue you?

Francis Schaeffer, Cameron Townsen and William Carey.

Wendell Berry and My Suburban Commute

2009-04-28T20:21:00.004-04:00

My commute is okay. It means I do not work at home. That is okay. But I sometimes miss the farm life. Work and home are intermingled. I miss the connection with nature. I miss how life on the farm is integrated. It has its ups and downs. I think I miss both. However, on my commute to work I listen to Mars Hill Audio. Ken Myers loves Wendell Berry's writings. Before Ken Myers mentioned his writings, I had never heard of them. So I started searching to see what the constant references to Wendell Berry are all about. I found this poem today called The Mad Farmer Liberation Front. One of the lines in the poem says "Work for nothing". Believe it or not, I did a lot of work for nothing on the farm, but I still enjoyed it. I think I may have worked harder for nothing than I did for something at times.

Love the quick profit, the annual raise,
vacation with pay. Want more
of everything ready-made. Be afraid
to know your neighbors and to die.

Click here to read the rest.

How to Maintain Your Piety in Suffering: A Lesson on Job 2 By Terry L. Pruitt

2009-04-27T05:52:00.003-04:00

Text: Job 2

Main Idea: You and I need to receive both good and evil from the Lord.

Introduction

Probably one of the most prayed for requests in the American church is the request for healing. Some churches are looking for dramatic healing each week. Other feel it is a good thing to do just so one show he is concerned for the other party. It is good because it shows symbolically that one cares. Whether a prayer for healing is offered with skepticism or faith does not negate the fact that some of the most common forms of suffering in America are health related. This sort of suffering shakes us to our core. Unless the Lord returns, chances are most of us we die from an accident or a disease that causes our health to fail. Some people suffer life long illness while others suffer just a little at the end of a long life. Our health will be an issue. Will it cause us to be bitter or will we be someone who flourishes spiritually as the physical man is passing away. I have a great-great-great aunt who never married. She died at the age of 18. She became ill of a lung infection and never recovered. Lill' was her name. One of the things said at her funeral was that she did not complain about her illness. She faced her situation with courage. May we all do the same.

Situation Normal
1. You and I can receive both good and evil from the Lord because we know the righteous sometimes suffer for being righteous. In Job 2:3 we see God call attention to Job's righteousness and that this is the reason that Satan asks to attack Job's health. American Christians do not for the most part suffer for their faith. Some American Christians do suffer martyrdom but this not a common experience for the church. Americans do suffer but not in the same desperate way that people do in the less developed world. When we do suffer we complain and quickly blame God for our troubles or say that he some how does not interfere in such cases. We question why. Philip Jenkins in his book the The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity he says the philosophical “problem of evil” is not a big one in the places where the church is growing the most, Africa and South America. The Christians there expect to suffer for righteousness sake. They actually may live a life of suffering and are experienced in this regard. They actually do expect God to interfere in their suffering by various means. In America where we suffer less relatively we find it more of a philosophical or existential problem. Christians in Africa and South America find it more of a pragmatic issue that they suffer.

Discipline can mean training that corrects, molds, or perfects the mental faculties or moral character. The writer of Hebrews 12:3-11 talks about discipline as coming from the Lord as a sign of the Christian being a son of God. Does the discipline Hebrews 12 mean that God is correcting sin or can this mean mold or perfect? Why or why not?

Some have said that if we do not suffer, we should at least go visit the hospital, nursing home and prison to understand suffering and grow in Christ. Why or why not might this work?

EN GARDE!
2. You and I can receive both good and evil from the Lord by discerning whether a message spoken is true or not. Clearly Job's wife in chapter 2 verse 9 is discouraged and is possibly speaking from frustration or depression. While we may make excuses for her, her discussion with Job is seen as sinful. As human beings, we generally are looking for answers and solutions when we suffer. We may not think through what is being said but we are ready to try many things to relieve suffering. In the movie 'O Brother Where Art Thou' which takes place in the 1930s, a period of national suffering, one of the characters reminds people periodically that “everyone is looking for answers”. The thing about looking for answers, sometimes we are willing to try them on for size just because we are suffering and seek relief. It is good to be open minded, but an open mind is like a good window. Keep a screen up to keep out the bugs. Job's wife has a bad message. She not only is speaking discouraging message, she is advocating sin. Since people sometimes react poorly in suffering we must be on our guard when we suffer to not listen to those who themselves are misguided.

What are the places where the world is “looking for answers?”

The Christian community sometimes looks for answers in places other than the Scripture. Where is that? When is this acceptable and when is it not acceptable?

The Third Commandment
3. You and I can receive both good and evil from the Lord by guarding our lips. Job does not sin with his lips. We can see an emphasis on this idea that man should not curse God in what Satan says in verse 5, in what Job's wife says in verse 9, and then in what Job says in verse 10. There are many summaries of the book of Job that leave out this huge theme Job's resistance to sinning by cursing God. We find cursing God as common place and ordinary. We just regard it that that someone is simply frustrated. The most pious among us might think that someone is sinning by cursing God. Few would find this an issue on the same level as say murder or adultery. But resisting sin by not cursing God is a major theme of the book.

Our mouth can complain and cause everyone to be discouraged. We can also encourage people with our words. Words have power. We definitely want to steer clear of those in the Word of Faith camp which says our words basically control the universe and cause good or bad to happen. This sort of magical view of words is not consistent with what Scripture says about our words, but we can sin with our words. We can talk carelessly and cause other to be discouraged through our words. We can also talk in such a way that we are advocating doctrine without thinking it through. The 10 commandments has a special command about not cursing using God's name or using God's name carelessly. Our society would make little issue of someone breaking this commandment, yet it is a major theme in the book of Job.

What doctrine does Job's wife advocate?

Sometimes words almost do seem magical. We pronounce someone man and wife. This pronouncement is really an official declaration of a larger complex set of relationship of actions. A marriage license has been obtained. A ceremony has been performed. The pronouncement by itself does not make a couple married but we say that it does. Why or why not are these words important? Are they merely tradition?

Beyond conveying an idea, what power do words have?

Some say the opposite of love is apathy. Others would say the opposite of love it hate. What is the opposite of cursing God?

Is it okay to question God when we suffer?

Miss California Speaks

2009-04-22T18:53:00.000-04:00

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b119790_miss_california_defends_controversial.html

A lion, a rooster, a billy-goat and Tommy Franks go to a bar...

2009-04-13T23:21:00.010-04:00

Three things are stately in their tread;
four are stately in their stride:
the lion, which is mightiest among beasts
and does not turn back before any;
the strutting rooster, the he-goat,
and a king whose army is with him.
---Proverbs 30:29-31 (ESV)

Different creatures in nature have different glories. A rooster is a glorious thing to see. He is proud of his feathers and his position. A lion knows he is a beast to be feared. A rooster would be no challenge for a lion though. A he-goat is no challenge for a lion, though he also is proud of his position and strength. When we think of a lion we think of an animal dangerous and to be feared. But in a sense, a general (king) with his troops who are equipped for battle find no match in a lion. This is especially true if we are talking about a modern general with attack helicopters, snipers, artillery, tanks and well trained troops.

We all have our own gifting and glory. The glory may be small or large. One may be a rooster or a lion. Both are noble. One may be a he-goat or a general with his army. Both are a wonderful sight to see. When you and I look at our stations in life, we should be happy with the glory that God has given us, whether small or great.

How to Reduce Your Risks: A Lesson on Proverbs 6

2009-04-05T15:53:00.000-04:00

How to Reduce Your Risks: A Lesson on Proverbs 6
By Terry Pruitt

If you use this lesson in a small group or Sunday School class please let me know.

Texts: Proverbs 6; Rom 13:8; 2Th 3:10; Mat 12:36; Heb 5:14; Heb 9:1

Main Idea: There is a difference between someone who takes naive risk and someone who simply enjoys being evil; both will suffer consequences.

Many people look at morality as simply rules to mitigate risk in our lives. Often these people would see the function of laws and etiquette is to bring order, happiness and prosperity. With this sort of thinking, rules of morality are functional in nature, they are to bring the most good. The authority of “Thou shalt not” becomes the suggestion stating “be careful if you do”. Morality becomes a way of expressing risk management. In this thinking, the exact cause and effect sequence of why are not always known, but the speaker knows that something might happen bad if one breaks the rule. Of course many Christians see the Ten Commandments in the Scripture as God given Laws which are designed to mitigate risk against bad consequences. However, if morality is merely risk management, then the first four commandments of the Ten Commandments dealing with the right worship of God take a back seat since there is no earthly risk seen in this. Bad consequences of breaking laws are cited in Proverbs 6 as reasons against breaking the Law. However, the consequences are not mentioned at all when discussing the Lord's attitude toward those who embrace their lawlessness. While consequences are implied from the surrounding verses, the main idea discussed is that God hates the shameless embracing of evil. It points to an aspect of morality, that there is an inherently authoritarian aspect to morality. God finding an act, a word or an action an abomination is its own punishment in addition to any consequences which we may or may not avoid. God judges perfectly man's actions as morally good or evil. We suffer consequences from naive foolishness and from out right sin, but we should seek the rewards of virtue and God's favor.

1. Taking on financial risk for someone you do not know will likely come to a bad end so get out of it as quickly as possible. (Proverbs 6:1-5)

The first five verses of chapter tell about someone who takes on financial risk for someone else. Today this would the equivalent of co-signing of a loan or investing in a business. This may or may not be a morally wrong action to take. If you or I have money of our own, we are free to spend it as we see fit. It may not be wise to back someone else's debts, but given you or I have the resources, it is not a breaking of the Ten Commandments to do so. The author does not want the student addressed by the book to get taken by those who would misuse good will or naivety of the student. So in this case the concern is to mitigate financial risk.

Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. (Rom 13:8 ESV)

Does this Scripture preclude the Christian from taking or making a loan? Why is this true Scripturally? If so, how does this fit in with the Ten Commandments? If not, when do we know we must literally follow the direction of a passage?

2. Becoming a self-starter in work is a guard against poverty. (Proverbs 6:6-11)

In the last section the person may suffer from being a poor judge the ways of the world. In this section, the lazy bum is not actively breaking the law. His sins are those of omission rather than commission. He should work for his provision. The consequences are in this case more the result of doing the morally wrong thing, but only in breaking the Ten Commandments in their implied virtues, not the explicit commandment.

Ants are famous for being hard workers who have no hierarchical structure governing that work. This self-starting attitude is a necessity for the entrepreneur but is also useful in other stations of life.

Is a lack of hard work a sin or just unwise? When the Scripture says if “someone does not work he should not eat”, in what situations does this apply and not apply?

For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. (2Th 3:10 ESV)

3. An evil person often gives signs of his evil actions through body language and actions but sudden and thorough destruction will overcome him. (Proverbs 6:12-15)

Being a good communicator means invariably means listening to non-verbal communication. We are often left with people's actions, tone, expression, and posture to interpret, that is if we want to communicate effectively. Of course, we have to be careful to not assume we can interpret these signals as if they mean only one thing. Crossed arms in front of someone can mean that some does not want to listen, but it also can mean that a person is physically cold or that he has shoulder injury that feels better in that posture. When people are full of pride, invariably they want to communicate their successes to others. When people are prideful of something evil, they want to communicate that too. They feel it is a success. In reality, glorying in evil often brings swift and non-recoverable destruction. Who has not heard a child incriminate himself? Adults do the same thing but usually on a more sophisticated level. You and I do this also. The passage warns us that we could be incriminating ourselves and implied by what follows incriminating ourselves before God. We feel comfortable confessing a sin if we feel we have mitigated all consequences and know we have gotten away with it.

Listening to ourselves can be a difficult thing to do. People often do not like how they sounds on a tape recorder. Is if fair to judge us by our own words when we don't really know what we say?

I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, (Mat 12:36 ESV)

Hebrews 5:14 tells us a mark of maturity is distinguishing good from evil. How do we learn to distinguish good from evil?

But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil. (Heb 5:14 ESV)

4. The Lord hates those who practice evil. (Proverbs 6:16-19)

Here the worst of sins are listed but we do not see any earthly consequences mentioned. These are not unintentional sins. These are full blown evil attitudes that takes pleasure in evil. Some people have said that the only sins that can be forgiven are the unintentional ones.

but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. (Heb 9:1 ESV)

How would one ensure he has not committed sins intentionally? What would he do if he had committed sins intentionally?

5. The man who commits adultery will not receive mercy from the woman's husband. (Proverbs 6:20-35)

In this passage, the man who commits adultery is both like man who was swindled and also not like that man. Both men seem to be misled. The man who was swindled was misled into something that was merely unwise and did not break a direct commandment. The adulterer actually broke a commandment.

A strange thing in interpreting Proverbs 6: 28 is that people do walk on hot coals in a process people call fire walking. This is practiced in many places and has a long history. Scientist explain the phenomena but they do not always agree. The basic explanations are that the transfer of heat from the wood to the human flesh is not quick. So as long as the walker keep moving at rate of one step per half second he can fire walk with no injury. It is like running one's finger through a candle flame. Do it quickly and you suffer nothing. Just hold it in the flame and you will get burned. The other explanation has to do with a steam barrier being built up between the foot and the coals.

Many people actually have gotten burned by trying to fire walk. A famous case in Australia had KFC employees participating in a confidence exercise at a company retreat were injured.

In reality why fire walking is such a novelty is that if we touch fire long periods of time we do get hurt. We can think we can mitigate risk of moral failure, and sometimes we do, but ultimately it will catch up with us.

Should we as Christians reduce risks of consequences on those who incur those risks by breaking Scriptural commands?

"If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. (Lev 20:10 ESV)

Is the general equity of Lev 20: 10 superseded by John 8? If not, how would we go about making the equity of this Old Testament Law viable in our modern culture? If so, what about other Laws such as murder?

Empty Me

2009-04-01T21:39:00.002-04:00

Simple message but one I want to sing.

Words That Will Preach: An Outline of Hebrews 8:7-9:28

2009-04-01T21:30:00.001-04:00

God declares a new covenant thus making the old covenant with Israel obsolete. 8:7-13
The old covenant had many regulations but did not perfect the conscience of those under it. 9:1-10
Christ truly cleansed those under the new covenant with his own blood. 9:11-14
Christ established the new covenant through his death. 9:15-22
The new, heavenly covenant is superior to the earthly shadows in the first covenant. 9:23--28

Silly Games I Play In My Head

2009-03-28T08:39:00.006-04:00

I grew up hopeful of the future. Some of this was positive, some negative. The good part of my future oriented attitude is that I am a visionary, seeing possibilities and trying to make them happen. The negative aspect of my future oriented disposition is that I miss the here and now, I live in a fantasy world of what is around the bend and the next corner. These may come into fruition, or they may simply be my optimistic take on situations that have little possibility of materializing. (Interestingly, we never live in the here and now since all sensory experience is slightly delayed due to light and sound delays. While practically, we do not think of it that way, we should be alert to the fact that we are constantly rubbing up against the issues of past, present and future thinking.) Focusing on the future makes grumpy when I don't get what I want. It was my hope. Reading recently in the Book of Hebrews I noticed a couple of facts that have made me rethink once again my future orientation.

“The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind,
‘You are a priest forever.’”

Hebrews 7:21 quoting Psalm 110:4 (ESV)

God has for us a hope for me, a future for me, one involving a perfect high priest Jesus. He is immutable. One of the things that makes the future appetizing to me is that there is change from my present state to a better one. Most often I am hoping in a better situation in this present life and not the life to come. My focus is on change while in the end, God's future of hope is built on consistency which exists when there is perfection. Priests in the Old Testament Levitical system had to be replaced since they died. So in a sense, I am looking for something better, but my heart is not set on the perfect one, Jesus. Since he died for me, he loves me with a love that will not cease, he is worthy of all my focus and devotion.

For on the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God.

-- Hebrews 7:18, 19 (ESV)

Christ's priesthood is the bases of my better hope, it is my optimism that is true. My future orientation should focus primarily on that which is perfect and not on that which is temporal.

Doing It Right

2009-03-08T21:05:00.004-04:00

I really like the story of King Saul and King David in the Bible. Saul was a "head and shoulder" kind of leader. He depended on his own smarts and his own strength. He made sacrifices that only the priest should have made. He makes a rash vow. He disobeys the Lord in destroying the enemies of Israel. In the end, he disqualified himself from leadership. A haunting thought that has been my adversary for years is the thought that somehow I have, like Saul, disqualified myself from service to God. I have wanted to do the Christian life the right way. I hoped I was doing it well enough to get God's blessing. This would not have been my official theological position, but it was the hope of my heart to earn God's blessing. My attempts to earn God's blessing though brought more doubts because my many sinful thoughts, sinful motives, and sinful actions. Then the events in my life started pointing to the fact that I was not going to be achieve certain goals. This made me want to strive all the more to attain my goals in holiness and ministry. Eventually this struggle to do it right made me very frustrated and God had to bring me to a point of surrender to his will. Studying Psalm 51 this week, a new insight was brought to me. In Psalm 51:11 David says, "Cast me not away from your presence, and take not your Holy Spirit from me." David probably was remembering the Lord rejecting King Saul. When David prayed this prayer it was for good reason. David had committed adultery and murder. He like Saul deserved to have the Lord reject him as a king. This verse got me thinking, it is not that if I am going to mess up and deserve God's rejection, it is a matter of when and how much. Because I mess up as a father, husband, friend, employee, neighbor, citizen, witness, student, brother, son, home owner, and Christian, God should reject me. Instead of worrying if God is going to reject my work, I should say the same prayer of David, "cast me not away from your presence, and take not your Holy Spirit from me." I am not talking about losing my salvation but the blessing of God on my family, my work, my ministry. I have worried for years about this but see my worry was a blessing to lead me to the deeper issues involved here. Focusing on "doing it right" is to focus on the outward and surface issues. To focus instead on seeking the Lord's blessing is to focus on the deeper issues. In the end, I can't do it right. And that is a blessing since I need the grace of God. I can pray instead of worry.

Reading the ESV Bible

2009-02-24T23:21:00.002-05:00

I just finished reading the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible. It took me over a year since I was obligated to read other versions and reading certain sections for classes I have been taking. I read all of 1 Samuel through Ecclesiastes twice. I have been reading a chapter in Hebrews one at a time as I go through translating it.

One of my first observations is that it is not as smooth in style as the NIV. This is probably because the ESV is much more closely a word for word translation instead of a thought by thought translation. I have used the NIV as my primary translation for over 20 years so the switch my be rough based simply on what I am used to.

While I feel the ESV is a reliable translation, there are passages, I'm not sure they got it right. I feel the same about the NIV, but neither are a bad translation. This issue is much more an observation from a student of the Bible rather than a criticism from a foe of either translation.

One of the biggest benefits of reading the ESV is that it gave me a new translation to read as my goal. I had read the NIV many times. It made it seem more urgent and beneficial to read a new translation.

I feel I am of a friendly disposition with the translators of the ESV. Many of my values in translation is their values. I desire the text to be respected for its word choice.

After reading the ESV, I would like to make it my new translation I read over and over again.

Resting and Results

2009-02-23T18:46:00.003-05:00

Yesterday after church I just hung out. I did nothing but watch TV. Funny thing, I had some weird dreams on issues that had been on my mind quite a bit. I'm guessing that I have been so busy that I just had not been able to process everything going on in my head and heart. God instituted the Sabbath to give us rest. I don't think I have the rest thing down yet, but I want to.

Worship

2009-02-13T23:56:00.003-05:00

Worship, is it a drama? Is it singing a few songs and a lesson we call a sermon? Is worship about connecting with our emotions or with our intellect? Should the service be full of spontaneity or order? Should it be simple or ornate? What is the place of tradition? As I think through these issues I find myself drawn to diverse parts of traditions and innovations. I love to see the Word of God respected by having an Old Testament lesson, an New Testament lesson and a Psalm. If we read it responsively, that sounds good. But I enjoy innovation of bringing in drama teams and slide projection too. The article in Leadership Journal called Richer Blend written by Bob Kauflin tells a similar urge by the author to combine tradition and innovation. He comes from a charismatic church and so his challenge is to take a spontaneous style of worship and put some structure to it. I am not sure I am in the same place but I have gone to those sorts of churches. I believe my current challenge is more on connecting with God in worship. For me the structure is too functional and not enough warmth or engagement of the eternal. While I feel this, I don't know that the fault necessarily falls on others, but on myself. Do I come to worship ill prepared to meet God?

Social Networking and Fun

2009-02-10T07:50:00.001-05:00

Fun Video of a Flashmob in London. I found this one looking for the one the made the news yesterday.

Covenant Theology

2009-02-08T21:07:00.002-05:00

I am studying the Wisdom Literature of the Old Testament. One of the things that strikes me is the difference between the Wisdom Literature and the rest of the Old Testament. The Books of Moses tell us how God established his covenant with Abraham and then the children of Israel under Moses. The History Books tell use how the Children of Israel did at keeping the covenant. Largely that is a story of God's patience and Israel's seeking to become like the nations they were meant to displace. The Prophets were written to tell the children of Israel how God was going to respond. He sent the northern tribes off to Assyria in exile and the southern tribes to Babylon. The Wisdom Literature has less to do with covenants of God than the other sections. One can think of God establishing and responding to his covenant with his people as a the vertical relationship, with man below and God above. The Wisdom Literature has much more focus on the horizontal, earthly relationships. This does not collide with the other sections, but just addresses different part of the revelation from God to man.

Hebrews 3:7-11 Cross Referenced with Numbers 20

2009-02-05T22:59:00.004-05:00

3:1 Therefore, holy brothers, [1] you who share in a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession, 2 who was faithful to him who appointed him, just as Moses also was faithful in all God's [2] house. 3 For Jesus has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses—as much more glory as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. 4 (For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.) 5 Now Moses was faithful in all God's house as a servant, to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, 6 but Christ is faithful over God's house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope. [3]
A Rest for the People of God

7 Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says,

“Today, if you hear his voice,
8 do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion,
on the day of testing in the wilderness,
9 where your fathers put me to the test
and saw my works for forty years.
10 Therefore I was provoked with that generation,
and said, ‘They always go astray in their heart;
they have not known my ways.’
11 As I swore in my wrath,
‘They shall not enter my rest.’”

12 Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. 13 But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.
-Hebrews 3:1-14 (ESV)

The writer of Hebrews 3 is quoting Psalm 95:7b-11

Today, if you hear his voice,
8 do not harden your hearts, as at Meribah,
as on the day at Massah in the wilderness,
9 when your fathers put me to the test
and put me to the proof, though they had seen my work.
10 For forty years I loathed that generation
and said, “They are a people who go astray in their heart,
and they have not known my ways.”
11 Therefore I swore in my wrath,
“They shall not enter my rest.”

This big difference from the quote in Hebrews and the Psalm is that the Hebrews passage has the meaning of the names Meribah and Massah. Though I had read Hebrews 3 several times this week to prepare for class, I did not catch that this Psalm and the book of Hebrews is making reference to Numbers chapter 20. In this story the people quarrel with Moses for bringing them out into the desert. They name the places "rebellion" and "temptation".

There is a big debate on what Hebrews 3 means, but we have a solid example of what it does mean. People are called to trust and worship God but instead they quarrel.