Feelin' fine

The Call? Appendix 2

2010-03-21T21:14:00.000-07:00

Ok, so after a couple of weeks of no post I have some news to report. First, I apologize for the silence. I had finals. Secondly, the direction in which these posts will be written will change from this point.
The news is this. Regretfully I report that I am no longer wondering about ordination. After multiple conversations that were unscheduled and not strategically placed by me; I have become an enquirer in the PCUSA church.
Over the course of three weeks I had some very clear conversations with people that affirmed that taking the step of ordination was the step I should take. My frustration with the church and lack of clear call to a position remains but the notion of ordination is no longer vague to me. Several examples of conversations went like this.
The first is with a major supporter of my ministry. She approached me and said that she loves "The Call" blog. I asked her what I should do. She said with out hesitation, "be a campus minister." I thought this was a weird response to the content to my blog. So asked her a clarifying question, "should I get ordained?" Again she said without hesitation and without much worry, "sure, why not, but you are called to young adults." I thought about this exchange for a while. She clearly wasn't fretting over the issue as I was. So I thought well if a supporter of my ministry, one who knows my skills as well as anyone in the CCO thinks it isn't a big issue then why should I?
Another conversation with in an hour of this one was even more peculiar. A young lady with dreadlocks started a conversation with me. She was dressed very casually and asked some very casual questions about my life. It turned out that she was a PCUSA pastor and started a communal living house in the East End. Though when asking about possibilities of ordination I suggested that my membership with the PCUSA is with a church that currently closed its doors. She went on answering all of my church polity questions. She gave very detailed answers. That helped me see that starting ordination wasn't as tough as I once thought. This conversation almost gave me no excuse not to consider ordination. From a highly unlikely source I had my dogmatic excuses over church polity removed from why I should be at the very least an enquirer.
This does not mean that I feel confidant about being a pastor. Though it has been a major step forward.

The Call? ed 5

2010-02-09T12:31:00.000-08:00

I left Pitt with a very disillusioned view of campus ministry and headed to Ohio State. While there, God blessed me with a very rewarding ministry. I saw fruit of growth with students. I enjoyed the work. Though there was a fly in the ointment that brought me back to my time at Pitt. It took place at a church that I observed from a safe distance. I saw the actions of what went on and I think it affected me deeply.
With an attempt to remain nameless: I saw a close ordained pastor friend of mine almost lose his job. He was in my opinion the epitome of a good, God loving associate pastor of a large suburban parish. I observed his love and kindness on many occasions and in many circumstances that proved to me that what I was witnessing was the true definition of a pastor. Though I also saw the Board of Trustees of his church almost let him go because his mission trips to New Orleans (in which he took 150 people over three trips in the course of a year) come over budget by $2,000. This is a church with 4 full time pastors and a multi-million dollar budget. I saw this church all but sign his papers of termination before the session stepped in and stopped it.
What affected me was the issues that drove their decision. It was hard to see this laboring pastor be treated so poorly. The people making the decision thought they were doing the will of God by letting him go for a well spent 2 grand. This is clearly an issue of poor discipleship though why are the poorly disciple people allowed to make big decisions? This question however is not my problem with call.
The major problem is this. How can we trust a system that would hire and fire someone due to money questions? The statement "we cant afford this pastor" repels me from wanting to be apart of the system that would utter it. I don't ever want to be in that pastors shoe's.
My questions: should that have a weight on why I should be a pastor? Should I see my work as redeeming that system?

The Call? ed 4

2010-01-31T20:48:00.000-08:00

When I left the University of Kentucky I was confident in my call and excited about going back home. I was also excited about being in the CCO. An organization that I felt I could make a serious contribution to immediately. It also encouraged me to work directly out of a church. There was no reason to feel that I wasn't going to be a campus minister for a long time.
That is until I actually started working in the church. I had a real tough time rectifying the gifts God gave me with the particular demands that my supervisors at the church placed on me. The position wasn't getting better and confusion about why I was there set in. I joined seminary and started to see ministry from different angles. I enrolled in seminary part time and took Church History that happened to be taught from an Eastern perspective. The things I was learning in this class was nothing I was experiencing in the church I was working in. The church I was working at recognized the difference of their desire for my position and mine and decided to not renew their contract with me (to explain would require a whole new series of blogs). If I wanted to continue the work I felt called to do I needed to move away to Ohio for there was a position at Ohio State that would be a good fit.
Campus ministry is the only sense of call next to being in seminary I was certain about. I wrestle and sometimes feel guilty if it is something I will be called back into after seminary. I love campus ministry and if you read the first "call" post, I suggested that I wanted to teach in college. This is a direct outpouring of my love of college students and the university.

Here is my dilemma, I have seen good men and women doing great work on campus let go or even worse made financially crippled due to poor church interaction with campus ministry. This might sound shallow but after seminary, how can I take this profession that I excel at seriously if the church as a whole treats it with a low amount of respect?

I have a lot of positive opinions about the answer to this question because I love campus ministry but I pose the question to hear what others think because right now it seems to be a big obstacle for my thinking through campus ministry as a profession.
(p.s.not to say that there are not some churches highly committed to campus ministry, because there are)
-Next blog OSU-

The Call? appendix a

2010-01-25T19:18:00.000-08:00

So since I have been writing this series of blogs on Call I have learned a lot from several sources. First from a close friend named Bob Robinson, (http://vanguardchurch.blogspot.com/). He has revised my blogs with good questions that have made me think.
For example, Bob challenged me to clarify the "lack of joy" I was experiencing while using my gifts. The answer is something similar to what Bob offered in his response to my blog which is an unquietness over using my gifts in campus ministry. I love campus ministry but for some reason feel disillusioned by it.
This goes into another source of teaching. I met with a professor a week and a half ago and after talking with me for twenty minutes he said you seem like something is bothering you. I told him my struggles and he offered several pieces of information that I am still wrestling with. The first is that not knowing God's call means you are vulnerable and naturally unquieted. The second is that the guilt I am experiencing might be me drawing myself to a sense of familiar control; Campus ministry is all I ever knew. Since I am in a season of an absence of control over my call I might be grasping for the familiar to gain a sense of control. Finally, which is something that I knew but needed to hear again which was; Joy is not to be ashamed of, if the joy is in Christ then I should strive for what makes me happy for this is how I am created.
What do you think?
I had one more major conversation but I intend to speak about that later.
I am sorry for preempting the Pitt conversation though I promise I will speak about that next.

The Call? ed 3

2010-01-14T19:55:00.000-08:00

Kentucky, was the most affirming time I ever had in ministry. With story after story, God confirmed my call to be doing ministry at the University of Kentucky. Under almost any general definition of what is good campus ministry, I was experiencing it. I was leading people to Christ. I was discipling students into a strong relationship with Christ. I was having fun and loved my job. Through several circumstances I was called away from the ministry their. I learned several things about myself. One is that I am gifted by God at sharing Christ with others. The other gift is that I am good at helping people grow in their relationship with Christ. Two gifts that I have exhibited in the past eight years over again.
Here is my question. If I am not experiencing joy using my gifts anymore does that mean I should stop doing them (in the setting that I have in the past; of course I know I am always called to do them as part of the Great Commission)? Or should I fight past the lack of joy I may experience and just keep my gifts in the same manner? Can the absence of joy be an indicator of call or lack there of?

My next post will be about Pitt.

The Call? ed 2

2010-01-12T16:47:00.000-08:00

I feel compelled to write about call and specifically my call. The reason I want to write about call is because I feel such an absence of it in my life now. Let me fill you in on what is happening currently in my life regarding call. I had a draw towards teaching in college while working at Ohio State. This draw to teach was a major lure for me to enter into seminary. Though upon coming to Pittsburgh Theological Seminary (PTS) I have discovered there is a steep up hill climb to get into a theological PhD program let alone graduate from one, on top of finding a college with a vacancy in a theological department. These factors have scared me to some degree from thinking that maybe my desire to teach was just that- a desire and not a call. God may have used this desire to get back into seminary for I certainly feel confident that God wants me at PTS.
This sense of a flux in call has caused me to evaluate my gifts and abilities as a way to sense my call. I will go into what I am and might be good at in another post. Though I ask the question; should I try to sense call with evaluating what I am good at?
Next post will be about my time as a minister at Kentucky.
(Edit: Bob Robinson added a good post and I will respond in part with an edit to this post. It must be said that I fully intend to keep persuing a PhD. With the advise of a proff. I was challenged to consider all possible options of how God maybe calling me.)

My Call? ed1

2010-01-10T12:17:00.000-08:00

I have never experienced before such an absence of a sense of call. Let me go back to explain a bit of this. When I was in middle school I knew on some level I wanted to be in law enforcement. I wasn't sure exactly how and in what way this was true. Though I knew I wanted to do it. Of course I had my dreams of being an FBI agent but my desire to do something with law enforcement was less of a dream and more of a deep desire. I went to college and came to know Christ as Lord. This didn't even change my call. In fact it made my call even stronger for I learned how I could bring my faith into such a call. My once strong resolve to do law enforcement is how I was certain that I was no longer called to do it. I lost the desire to do it somewhere around my senior year and after a year of being a probation officer I was not excited by it anymore.
This is what led to my deep desire to do campus ministry for 8 years. I will go into that in another post. Though I must ask, should I have tested my call to do Law Enforcement by the level of my excitement? I have often heard where the cross roads of gifts, abilities and desire meet God's kingdom is where your call lies. Is that a fair statement or is there something more to call? I hope to continue this personal dialogue in this very public (though probably not read) forum.
My next post will be about why I am writing this now.

Out of the cold winter night comes....

2010-01-08T07:57:00.000-08:00

My first blog in over a year.
A lot has happened to me in this time. I am taking an opportunity to share a little of it now. Though I intend to be a little more active as I chronicle my experiences. I am now a student at PTS, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and I hope to discuss in this atmosphere my wrestling with call.
I might throw up a little of my reading reviews or sections of my papers. Though the most profound thing I am wrestling with in my life is God's call on my life. So intend to talk about that here. My thoughts and struggles with wanting to be significant in light of being a servant.

Oh by the way no one has guessed in over 2 years the basis for the name of my blog so the name will stay. The answer is found in the first 20 second clip of the Simpsons spoof on the Shining.

the Jesus Creed, Section 5 (2 of 2)

2008-11-12T22:22:00.000-08:00

The next 2 chapters deal with the Mount of Transfiguration and the Lords Supper. In both stories Jesus made the Jesus Creed known; in his resemblance before his disciples without the affect of the Fall and his retelling of the Passover with himself as the lamb. When Jesus was transfigured before them James, John and Peter had seen Jesus in true fellowship and worship with the father and in doing so they saw what it meant to be a true follower of God. The Lords Supper table is the place where the Jesus Creed is laid out before them in a language that is familiar to their cultural background. Both invitations to the mount and to the table are necessary ways for Christ followers to invite others to experience the love of Christ. It is the grace of the Lords table, and the transformation of the relationship with the Trinity.

The final two chapters of the book discuss the crucifixion and the resurrection. The cross, embodied in Jesus, makes him the model of righteous suffering, the model for moral standardization, the model for true submission. Jesus at the cross besides the atonement was the model of true life for all followers of God. The resurrection is the promise that the Fall will not win. The resurrection shows that there is life after tragedy. We are people of the Jesus Creed and we offer this to others. A life modeled after Jesus of immense sacrifice leading to the destruction of the Fall.

The Jesus Creed, Section 5 (1 of 2)

2008-11-10T22:20:00.000-08:00

The final section of the Jesus Creed, McKnight discusses the way in which Jesus is the model for our lives. The first chapter points to baptism. Jesus’ baptism marked for us the beginning of Jesus ministry and ultimately the direct work of the Holy Spirit in our lives. McKnight revisits the story of John the Baptist. John was calling for perfect repentance. This repentance recognizes 2 things; we don’t love God perfectly; and we submit to God who does love us perfectly. This is what Jesus does, he identifies with God’s people to the point of taking part in their penitence, living their life and dying their death. So that God’s people will be a part of God’s restoration and be raised in Jesus resurrection. Jesus from the point of baptism commits to giving the Spirit to His people. Ultimately in we are so fallen our repentance is so dredged in sin that we need Jesus to even repent for us. The words of Jesus “Forgive them for they know not what they do,” reveal to all of God’s creation that Jesus is saying this to the Father for more than just his immediate accusers.

McKnight in his next chapter talks about Jesus going out into the wilderness. The Jesus Creed of loving the Father and your neighbor is God’s intent in the wilderness of seclusion. Jesus went out to the desert to experience the same temptations that the Israelites experienced in the Exodus, this made Jesus capable to come into the Promised Land as an obedient Israelite. McKnight also points to another significance of the wilderness story. We are also called to follow Jesus to the wilderness, where we find trials and suffering only to come out prepared to be called obedient.

Please Vote!!!!

2008-11-04T11:10:00.000-08:00

"To all received him, to those who believe in his name, to those who vote Republican/Democrat, He gave the right to be called children of God"

-John 1:12 (Today's Common Miss-conception Translation)

As you follow Christ to the Poll's remember your identity is wrapped in Christ alone.

Mike Metzger has a good perspective on how to keep perspective.

A link on perspective

the Jesus Creed, Section 4 (3 of 3)

2008-10-31T12:46:00.000-07:00

McKnight moves on in the next chapter to discuss restoration. The goal is a restored follower of Jesus. Though the process is messy. It takes in some sense a rebuke. Peter denied that death was not necessary for Jesus; Peter was rebuked for it. Death is absolutely required for restoration. For us to listen to some micro-level restoration of a part of lives we must listen for Jesus rebuke that calls us to death. McKnight highlights the next step from rebuke is naturally repentance. Repentance as mentioned earlier in the book reveals to us our position in God’s kingdom. Finally a restoration predicated on God’s forgiveness is the root of God subversive plan for the fall.

Forgiveness is the root of the next chapter. In forgiveness from God then offering it to others, do we find that the Jesus Creed begin to take root in our lives. McKnight rehashes several examples of forgiveness to drive his point home.

The final chapter of the section discusses mission. I am glad that McKnight infuses mission and evangelism in this section. He makes the need for evangelism to happen as a personal task, as well as making it a need to know Jesus and the Creed better. Often evangelism is seen as an event that is exciting to partake in but never seen as necessary to your own spiritual walk. McKnight easily makes the case that to understand both parts of the Jesus Creed you must love others enough to make the creed known to them.

The Jesus Creed, Section 4 (2 of 3)

2008-10-29T12:45:00.000-07:00

The next chapter takes the preceding chapters theme and runs with it. Abiding in Jesus is McKnight’s plea to have the reader of the chapter dive into allowing God to transform you. I was most excited to see the importance of daily reading of the word. As a minister I completely agree that the constant reading of the Word must be a transformative act in every believers life. On top of that McKnight highlights other ways to engage the relationship with Jesus. I would offer that his devotional companion to this book offers a better cross section to this type of discussion. He highlights certain disciplines and ways to engage your relationship with Jesus. He talks about prayer and practicing God’s presence.

The next chapter deals with surrender and I offer that this is also one of the better chapters of the book. The surrender that McKnight discusses is that of the physically, mentally, and personally as it pertains to the manner in which Jesus surrendered. Surrender is to give up ones will to that of the Fathers. The difference must be made here. Surrender is different in that God may cause you to surrender a way of thinking or living or doing for His glory. Submission/ abiding is adhering to the law of the Lord. Surrender maybe a liberty that is manifesting in to sin or a liberty that is causing a block of your growth in the Lord. Surrender of the mind constitutes learning. Surrendering means to have no pretense in which you are surrendering to the Lord. Finally surrendering physically is to surrender what you a false model of who you should be physically while taking care of God’s temple.

The Jesus Creed, Section 4 (1 of 3)

2008-10-27T12:42:00.000-07:00

The next section of the Jesus Creed speaks from a perspective of personal interaction with the Jesus Creed. McKnight goes forward in the first chapter of the section to describe the importance of belief. The goal of any disciple is not perfection but relationship. According to McKnight, this requires us to believe Jesus. Believe his grace, believe his promises, and believe everything he says. Let me add something here. The definition of belief that is implied by McKnight is not a belief that seems to be predicated on faith. Like flying on an airplane, you believe going on to the plane that you will be safe, but when the first bump occurs your belief turns into a faltering faith. McKnight recognizes that our belief must be simply that when God says something you believe it without any doubt.

The sidetrack I must add comes when I first learned the difference between this faith and belief. As a boy, I was watching the movie Sudden Death with my father. The scene occurs when the main character says to his son to stay in his seat no matter what happens. The movie continues and the son is saved because he stayed put. He didn’t move and the main character was there to save his son. My dad looked at me and asked would you have stayed seated? I told him yes to deflect questioning but after further thought I realized I wouldn’t have. I would have run with everyone else in the movie. I wouldn’t have believed my father that he would be back. I was not calling my dad a liar but I doubted his ability to do what he said he would do. This is the belief that I didn’t exude as a child in my father that I must take very seriously when I believe my heavenly Father. When He says I don’t need something I don’t. When he says I must do something I must do it. McKnight dances the line between faith and belief as a form of discipline. We don’t have a relationship with a theology or a doctrine but a God in Christ who predicates his relationship on believing Him. In doing so McKnight offers up the best chapter of the book.

The Jesus Creed, Section 3 (1 of 1)

2008-10-24T20:08:00.000-07:00

The next section of the Jesus Creed is how the Church needs to be a society of the Jesus Creed. This section seems to run a bit together so I intend to summarize the section completely.

McKnight starts describing the importance of society in transforming the world to reflect the Jesus Creed. Jesus came to not transform the individual but to transform the community. The community’s task is to transform the world. McKnight discusses how that is so according to the resurrection. The power to overcome the fall is found in the submission to and the devotion of ones life to follow Jesus. According to McKnight fellowship is the way to sustain the society that upholds transformation through the Jesus Creed.

The next several chapters discuss a similar theme of allowing the Jesus Creed to permeate creation. McKnight discusses the importance of imparting the Jesus Creed to others. Your actions and words must reflect the Jesus Creed in forms of justice and restoration to a world who need to hear it. Though the Creed must manifest joy as well as perspective in the kingdom coming.

It seems like McKnight does a good job of just rehashing strong doctrines of the faith in perspective of the community.

I have been fishing

2008-10-19T20:11:00.000-07:00

I was away because I was called to the river. I went on my second fly fishing trip. This time the trip was totally focused on fishing. My last trip was to Yellowstone. It is hard to be in Yellowstone and just fishing. You are fishing within some of God's most appealing creation. This trip was to Central Pennsylvania. A beautiful place to be in mid-October but a very common place to me. Since I was plainly focused on fishing because of that I have to admit that I am now addicted to fly fishing. I may have to go to a 12 step program. Seriously, I can honestly say that besides following sports, fly-fishing is something I truly enjoy. I easily sense God's presence in fly fishing. This trip was very detoxifying and helped me gain perspective. I praise God for the opportunity to enjoy his creation in this manner.

The Jesus Creed, Section 2 (part 3 of 3)

2008-10-10T12:15:00.000-07:00

McKnight moves from Peter to John. John as a son of Zebedee “son of thunder” marked his presence in Jesus ministry on Earth. John would be smug and arrogant by asking to be at Jesus right hand. He would be brash and impulsive by asking for Jesus to strike unbelievers dead with fire from heaven. McKnight highlights the transformation John went through from someone who calls curses to someone who writes a Gospel about love. The transformation is predicated upon first he was loved then from there he is able to love. Maybe that is why in his Gospel he uses the word beloved. He is trying to show his credentials of why he is able teach about love.

The final section in the chapter, McKnight discusses women and the role the Jesus Creed played in their life. McKnight points to the position of distance women were relegated to and the attention Jesus gave. The woman at the well and the woman caught in the act of adultery were extended an unusual amount of compassion and grace. Jesus was living the Jesus Creed out in from them. The acts of restoration brought in the Jesus Creed brought a cycle of compassion in these women and our very lives today.

The Jesus Creed, Section 2 (part 2 of 3)

2008-10-08T12:01:00.000-07:00

Mary is the next narrative McKnight tackles. The key to the chapter is the focus of vocation. We as God’s creation are to be the full manifestation of God’s creation. Living a life and being who God called us to be. In Mary we see a woman who was that. She took the mandate to be Jesus mother as best as she could be. The strength of this chapter comes in trying to understand Mary in context of having to be a mother. Mary was a mother that was raising and teaching Jesus to be the savior of the world. Mary lived a fulfilled call in her life and as people who live out the Jesus creed we must do the same.

McKnight in the next chapter discusses the longevity of conversion as it is seen in the story of Peter. The question is asked, when is Peter converted? Was it when he called Jesus Lord in Mark 8, or was it when Peter denied him three times and asked for forgiveness, or was it when Peter was forced to go to the gentiles in Acts? McKnight suggests it was all three. Just like Peter we come to an ever-increasing understanding of who Jesus is. McKnight suggests that Peter’s conversion is a continuing succession of going public with “Jesus is Lord.” First it is by his word then it is by his action. This is the mystery of following God; he softens the heart of the listener and then changes the action to reflect the Jesus Creed.

The Jesus Creed, Section 2 (part 1 of 3)

2008-10-06T12:12:00.000-07:00

The next section of “The Jesus Creed” describes the Creed in light of several narratives found in the New Testament. McKnight starts with John the Baptist. The main theme to McKnight is new beginnings. Though for John the Baptist new beginnings came with repentance. A new message from God came on the back of the Prophetic message of John. This message was not justice or a call to commitment. It was a call to repentance, which is engrained in telling the truth. Telling the truth to God about who you are and where you stand in position to Him. The Jesus Creed is telling the truth about; our spirituality; our possessions and our power. John was calling us to repent and prepare for the coming of the Lord that will declare the Jesus Creed as the key to God’s love.

The Next narrative McKnight talks about is the story of Joseph. Joseph was a faithful Jew, though his earthly reputation is to be challenged. McKnight does a rehashing of the feelings that maybe attached to Joseph’s struggle with Mary’s pregnancy outside of wedlock. The tension Joseph experiences is paralleled to the tension Christians have claiming the plan of God in light of earthly and cultural opposition. Joseph lives out the Jesus Creed by loving God, God’s plan, and Mary enough to forsake his cultural pressure.

the Jesus Creed, Section 1 (part 3 of 3)

2008-10-03T12:01:00.000-07:00

McKnight moves forward to discuss the Creed as a fellowship table. Discussing the concept of fellowship in the New Testament, McKnight reveals that before Jesus the table was a closed event in the lives of so many. The Rabbi’s and teachers saw the place of fellowship to be a place of privilege. Though in Jesus life the table was a 8great place of welcome. If you consider the critique of Jesus, Pharisees were calling Jesus’ piety into question. Though to Jesus being in the presence of “sinners” was a place of comfort and necessity to living out the Jesus Creed. This is the necessity for us today. The biggest example McKnight gives is the Service projects produced by Willow Creek Church.

McKnight moves on and describes the Creed as Sacred Love. McKnight uses Hosea to suggest that God wants to be seen as an intimate lover. One who can get angry and has a passion for the one He loves. McKnight suggests that Jesus was the full manifestation of the glimpse given by Hosea. This sacred love is seen to transform everything about us, and fully described by Jesus in his creed on how to respond. McKnight offers a quick definition of true worship. It is 1. To have a proper and right understanding of our position as sinners in view of God. 2. To understand how faithful God is in light of our position. 3. A recognition of how good God opens the floodgates of love to us in spite of our position.

McKnight finishes the chapter by discussing the “creed for others.” When questioned about who is my neighbor Jesus gives the story of the Good Samaritan. By using the same “love” for neighbor as for God, Jesus is suggesting that we must have the same fervor to love others as we do to love God. Often the message of loving others is overlooked and relegated to a different and separate love than the one we are accustomed to in loving Jesus. Though McKnight makes no distinction. How we work those loves out and the consequences of each acts of love may be different, the need to do it remains.

the Jesus Creed, Section 1 (part 2 of 3)

2008-10-01T12:01:00.000-07:00

To McKnight the Jesus Creed was thought of as a very local connection to Jesus. Jesus was a neighbor in this passage. Not the only neighbor but one of the neighbors. If you love God you must love man and there is no separation. The incarnation gives the Jesus Creed a new focus. The incarnation is to set the tone for our ability to love our neighbor. To the listener then and now Jesus is our Neighbor. This adds a different flavor to passages such as the Good Samaritan. We begin to see Jesus not only as the Good Samaritan but also as the man who was attacked.

McKnight moves away from describing the Creed to drawing out the implications. McKnight tries to see the Jesus Creed involved in the foundation of Jesus’ teaching. He uses the creed as a way to see the Lord’s Prayer. McKnight sees that through praying the Lord’s Prayer and understanding of the Jesus Creed we start to see the true intention of the Father. Which is to have his creation truly cry out Abba to him. Through the Lord’s prayer we pray “our Father.” We also pray for protection and we give honor. In doing so we pray the Jesus Creed. Praying to Love God through giving him the honor that is due to him. We pray also the love of our neighbors by asking for what, we as His creation, need.

In the movement from prayer as a way to respond to the creed, McKnight draws us to God’s response as a true Abba. Our response to the Creed puts us in the right position and attitude to respond to His real and true love that He actively offers. Drawing from the prodigal son story in Luke 15, McKnight shows how the father in the story is the response the true Father in heaven will have to anyone who draws to the Jesus Creed. The Creed is a promise from God that He loves us as a true Abba Father.

The Jesus Creed, Section 1 (part 1 of 3)

2008-09-29T12:01:00.000-07:00

The next book I am reviewing is “The Jesus Creed” by Scot McKnight. I intend to review it by sections. The book’s intention was to see “the Jesus Creed” from different perspectives. The first section contains a description of the Jesus Creed. I will address in the next series of posts the first section.

When Jesus says the greatest commandments in Mark 13 and Luke 9 we see Jesus recalls a strong statement in Israel’s story. In America as a people group its like saying the pledge of allegiance.

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America; to the republic for which it stands; one nation, under God; indivisible with liberty and justice for all.”

For McKnight Jesus adding “to love your neighbor as yourself.” Is to add another statement on to the end of the pledge of allegiance. The Israelites knew the creed mentioned from Deut 6 but not with the added part about loving your neighbor. To the immediate listener of Jesus this was revolutionary. The Deut 6 passage was called the Shema, the part Jesus added was found in Leviticus 19:18, McKnight calls both of these statements together, “The Jesus Creed.”

My New Review... The Jesus Creed by Scot McKnight

2008-09-23T09:38:00.001-07:00

The next book I reviewed was “The Jesus Creed,” by Scot McKnight. This is my first, I hope of many reviews for High Calling Blogs. I was given this book and its companion to read, you can check my blog and others like it on that site.

In the Jesus Creed, McKnight has a strong view of the simple axiom said by Jesus, to love God and to love your neighbor. McKnight centers the whole focus of the book on how the 2 greatest commandments (the Jesus Creed) play a part of Jesus life and teachings. It seems that McKnight’s goal was to explain the importance of the Jesus Creed in different stories and perspectives of the Bible. He starts off the book by discussing the Creed and its implications through some of Jesus parables Teachings. He draws connections from love, prayer, fellowship and our view of the Father to the Jesus Creed. McKnight does some simple studies in the first section like making sense of the Lords Prayer as it pertains to the Creed.

The next section of chapters deals with how the Jesus Creed affected particular characters in the New Testament. For example McKnight show’s how the Creed transformed John from someone arrogant enough to ask to be at Jesus’ right hand, to the author of some of the most love based literature in the Bible. The next section describes how the Creed must influence and define the society of Christians. McKnight discusses the role of love of God and others in the Church and its context. In the next section McKnight moves away from the corporate view of the Creed and moves to the individual. He talks about disciplines that help you grow in light of the Creed. The final section discusses the different phases of Jesus life. Starting with the Baptism in the Jordan, then being in the wilderness, then the Transfiguration, being at the Lord’s Supper, at the cross and finally the Resurrection. McKnight interplays all these phases into the creed.

The final section as a compilation should have been the whole book. The book’s strength came from his description of the themes and messages of Jesus. The books weakest point came with a lack of direction. The book as whole seemed aimless and sometimes forced. I enjoyed everything I read yet sometimes missed the focus of what each chapter was leading to. McKnight in his writing is a great theologian and a clear communicator. He does a great job of making the reader see the importance of what he is saying. Though that simply sums up the book, each chapter as an individual sermon. Like I mentioned earlier I found myself wanting to hear a lot more of McKnight’s thoughts and perspectives on the story of Jesus and leave the need to tack the Jesus Creed on at the end.

In “40 Days of Living the Jesus Creed” the devotional that accompanies the book is more of value to the reader. Since it is very practical and generally a condensed version of the book. I would say the devotional would rank with Rick Warren’s “The Purpose Driven Life” in its ability to inspire and encourage. I would also rank it with “The Purpose Driven Life” as the book is only as good as the reader is willing to do what the book prescribes. The reader will not walk away from “The Jesus Creed” and its devotional “40 Days of Living the Jesus Creed” with a new found insight. The reader must follow what McKnight asks and live it. However this is often what is the problem with books like this, they offer the reader a transforming message and way to respond, the reader just consumes the message and leaves the response in the book.

I would definitely give the Jesus Creed to someone coming out of an unhealthy fundamentalist background or someone who is new to the faith. It is worth the read yet I would say that this is not Scott McKnight’s best works but it is a very good read.

Stay tuned for my complete break down of each chapter.

Final Review of Reading the Bible with the Dead

2008-09-17T18:35:00.000-07:00

John L Thompson’s book, “Reading the Bible with the Dead” is a great resource among resources. It is hard to be as extensive as this endeavor tries. It covers many authors and draws from a multitude of scholarship. It is hard to imagine how much work went into this book. Though the critique of this book would be the same for any book that attempt the same endeavor. You are getting Thompsons perspective about the commentators and your casual reader takes Thompson at his word. I don’t suggest Thompson intentionally skews the material, I suggest a more serious reading of these subjects require an approach to the original source. This is one of the positives of Thompson’s book; half of the book is a list of material to draw this information from. There is a 100-page bibliography in the back of the book.

I would suggest this book as a cliff notes to past thought on the issues discussed in the book. It is not that interesting if you are looking for a definitive commentary about the material talked about. Thompson does comment from time to time about his perspective on the issues discussed, though often the material is left for you to contemplate and think about. Thompson’s own commentary on the subjects sometimes is real helpful and other times raise more questions or worse doesn’t answer the original question fully. Thompson tries to give good answers to the feminist critiques of some of the passages discussed; I would suggest that he falls short at answering them. Fortunately the book doesn’t revolve around his answering of the questions; it revolves around how the past answered these questions. It is an addition to any book collection and covers a lot of material in one relatively small book. Thompson’s scholarship and writing style was fun to read and I refer this book to anyone interested in a good introduction to how the past commentators read scripture. You don’t need a church history class to understand the book. All you need is a general curiosity of exegesis and a willingness to read differing viewpoints.

Art and Protest

2008-09-04T11:48:00.000-07:00

How unfortunate.

How much of this world is blasphemy, that the church uses its time so heavily to fight this play. What is even more unfortunate is the play was misquoted and taken out of context. What if the play raises good questions that the church can answer; though the church is out front refusing to engage the questions. There is a fear of art that may overtly subvert the Christian church. However there is absolutely no art that exists that doesn't comment about God, His creation and His followers. Comments for the better or for the worse. Francis Schaeffer in his book "The God Who is There," suggests that art changes who you are. You enter one person and exit as another. These picketers would prefer that people would just not enter the art that affects you negatively. Yet I would suggest that these picketers also unassumingly enter daily into art that affects them negatively. If they turn on a TV or look at an advertisement, they are engaging this art without knowing it. If we gain the ability to engage art and sift out lies we become constantly aware of how we are being negatively affected by art.

The most deflating attack to the book "The Da Vinci Code" was how bad the movie was. The bad art detracted followers. As a minister I don't see any influence from the book anymore. Its disappearing influence came at the same time as the movie's release. The failure of the movie dissuaded to stir anyone to believe the lies of the book. We must dialogue with this sort of art and speak into it. Trying to reveal the truth amidst the lies. Protesting does nothing but distance the Christian from speaking into peoples lives. The same people that would believe the misconceptions the play portrays about Jesus. When we distance ourselves from these people we become less affective in communicating the truth of Jesus to people who may be misguided about who he is.

If something is offensive in the world of art; engage it and help separate the lies from the truth; create something better; or just don't see it. Why protest?

Woody Allen V.S. Billy Graham

2008-09-02T11:47:00.000-07:00

Part 2

These videos have proven to me as Christians we have given to much ground. Billy Graham pulled no punches and was charming, with a man that was seen as the intellectual elite. Graham engaged this conversation so forcefully but with great respect. I can’t say that his words would work as easily today. He used terms and had a demeanor that has long since been co-opted by believers who has used them as divisive. If you can get passed, his now cliché form of content, you will see how important it is to engage the cultural elite with the very hard and confronting message of the Gospel.

Woody was truly interested in what Billy had to say. Billy was just as witty and interesting to the crowd as Woody. The Gospel is relevant and like Billy we need to believe that the Gospel is important to everyone, not just fake it.

Thanks to Ben Witherington and his Blog for drawing my attention to these 2 videos.

Women Leadership. Chp's 6 &8 of Reading the Bible with the Dead (pt 5 of 5)

2008-08-29T13:02:00.000-07:00

(Part 5 of 5)

What in the world is 1 Tim 2:15

Women are saved through childbearing. This brought a major re-hashing with the protestant reformation. Ambrosiaster said that this is not the act of delivering children but by the act of bearing children brings “resurrection.” Ambrose said this is Mary. Women and Men are saved through the childbearing of a woman. This literal meaning obviously flew in the face of those women called to be a nun. Zwingli says that the curse of pain during childbirth is their reminder of the fall and the renewal of life in the same act. Luther defined it more as all that defines a woman. Not what completely encompasses a woman, but what signifies her role in the creational order and living it out.

Then the 8^th chapter comes back to women leadership. 1 Cor 14 suggests that women are not allowed to teach. It is Deborah that gives the theologians fits. Thompson describes the attempts to place Deborah under the authority of men, men while maintaining the universal understanding of 1 Cor 14. This prompted again rules for exception. Like I mentioned above it is the emergency that would bring a woman to lead in the church. Vemergili would say that if we deemphasize speaking in tongues we are downgrading the possibility for the spirit to use gifts in women.

Thompson finishes by saying that though Eve may have sinned this doesn’t necessary mean that women are wired to do the same.

Thompson finishes with 6 points. The first is that not all commands are weighed the same. Should we consider one a suggestion or another a command. The second is analogies in narratives are better when they are provided in abundance. Meaning a singular example of women in ministry is not good (Ben Witherington and many others can draw out many women in ministry). Third, the proclamation of the Gospel is far more important that gender hierarchy. Fourth, few ever read Paul’s supporting arguments as ever true. A history of wrestling with the scripture above details our lack comfort with it. Fifth, gender and scripture are complex and unavoidable. Finally, the complexity of history is also not avoidable, this means to claim a historical consensus ignoring the debate through the centuries does a disservice to the role of the church.

Women Leadership. Chp's 6 &8 of Reading the Bible with the Dead (pt 4)

2008-08-28T13:00:00.000-07:00

(part 4 of 5)

I will rap this up in a bit but will move to chapter 8. Was Adam deceived? In the continued pursuit it must be asked is women lesser beings? Thompson first touches on first arrival. Discussing the argument that men are subservient because of their arrival on the scene. Any points derived from this perspective was blown out by saying if men was created before women then wasn’t there creation before men.

Zwingli and several others started to derive truth from observed practical theology. Using things like observations and secular philosophers to suggest that women are inferior. This method to is weak it depends off of observed and applied science giving a higher priority to that then to the word. So lets see what the theologians thought about the word.

Genesis declares that Eve was one of two possibilities. She was either not present when the command was given and has little accountability, not as much as Adam. Paul would affirm this perspective in saying that it wasn’t Eve but Adam that passed it on to all men Romans 5:12. Though it might be that women passed it to Adam and Adam was our last hope. The second perspective lies in the fact that Eve did know in some way. Either Adam told her or God told her. The serpent first deceived Eve then she went and gave the fruit to Adam. The question is why did Adam take it? Some theologians suggest that it is because he had a lapse in judgment. Others would say that he loved her too much to let her take all the blame. Yet, others would say that she lied to him. Though none of these fit fully. Lets go back to Paul.

Women Leadership. Chp's 6 &8 of Reading the Bible with the Dead (pt 3)

2008-08-27T13:00:00.000-07:00

(Part 3 of 5)

This brings us to the hub of the issue. What is the image of God?

Augustine: said it was in our mind or soul.

John of Chrysostom: thought it to be the dominion over creation.

Ambrosiastor: thought that Adam was the full image of God and all men from there image after God.

So what in the world is 1 cor 11:7?

"For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man."

Ambosiastor: thought that the verse “proves” that women are not the image of God.

Augustine: because the image to him pertains to the soul, and are brought together in Christ. He redeemed the soul and brought the image of God fully back to both men and women. Adversely women are the lower in the analogy and men are the upper. Women represent the physical beauty and men represent the intellectual. Though in Christ we can represent both.

Luther: saw image in terms of righteousness.

Calvin: would say that women much more so because God elected to come in the form of a male and not a female.

Women Leadership. Chp's 6 &8 of Reading the Bible with the Dead (pt 2)

2008-08-26T13:00:00.000-07:00

(Part 2 of 5)

Another explanation pertains to emergencies. This concession was made almost far and wide. It deals with the possibility that there maybe no men present to preach the Word. Then it is possible for women to prophecy. This perspective has an undercurrent in almost every theologian’s thought though Vermigili used this bases to describe that men may never step up and though it is not in a women’s intent to teach in such a manner, it maybe necessary.

The Chapter starts to dissolve discussing the issue of head coverings. Whether it was ok for a man to preach with a hat on if it is cold, symbolizes that he is under authority of someone other than God. This is why in a perspective that the women must wear a head covering, for declares she is under the authority of men.

Erasmus: downgraded this by drawing attention to local context. It may have ment then authority but does it now?

Vermigili: draws even farther to suggest that no where in the Old Testament does it say that women are not allowed to speak or does it say they are intended to be submissive. Where he suggested that it was Paul’s personal advice on the matter at hand with in the Corinthian church. Goes on to say that it was going against a Greek culture that consisted with soft men and impudent women. Calvin would take a lighter not on this and say that the matter is not central to salvation. The head covering is not a matter of strict importance.

Women leadership. Chp's 6 &8 of Reading the Bible with the Dead (pt 1 of 5)

2008-08-25T12:43:00.000-07:00

I plan to incorporate chapter 6 and 8 together because they talk about similar things. Chapter 6 talks about 1 Corinthians 11; chapter 8 talks about Paul’s arrangement of women. 1 Corinthians 11 talks about women’s head covering. Chapter 8 uses texts in Genesis and Timothy. I will start with the Chapter 6 but both chapter use similar topology that it would be redundant to not combine them. So I will be jumping between the two.

Thompson starts by describing Bullinger’s view. His view was boldly against public speaking by women. He references 1 Cor 14:34 and 1 Tim 2:12. Saying these two verses prove to Bullinger that Women should not have been speaking in public from the beginning. It was because he saw the “prophesying” as a general preaching of the word.

John of Chrysostom: was more impressed by the women of the New Testament, like Priscilla. He saw these women holding the title of apostle. He rectified the 1 Tim verse by suggesting that Paul never meant women were not allowed to preach publicly. This was a perspective from Origen.

Aquinas: followed suit with John. Yet he stressed that women do receive a divine word from God. In that they are not for priestly ordination. Aquinas protected women’s roll in ministry but not as a priest.

The perspective has been taken up by some Protestants, saying that women can bring a message of the Lord. It can even be in the presence of men though it must be in private. Others suggested that Paul was trying to curtail a permissive practice honoring women of the faith that seem to have anointing.

Another Karl Barth Quote

2008-08-20T10:28:00.000-07:00

“The philosopher is not an apologist; apologetic concern, as Karl Barth (the one living theologian of unquestionable genius) has rightly insisted, is the death of serious theologizing, and I would add, equally of serious work in the philosophy of religion.”

—Donald M. MacKinnon, The Borderlands of Theology: An Inaugural Lecture (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1961), 28.

The quote is courtesy of Ben Myers' blog "Faith and Theology"
http://faith-theology.blogspot.com/

Barth suggests that theology needs no explanation for if it is good it will stand on its own. Though the question remains can the faith of Christianity stand without proof? Barth would say yes.

D-I-V-O-R-C-E, isn't just for Tammy Wynette; the 7th chapter of Reading the Bible with the Dead

2008-08-19T19:26:00.000-07:00

The seventh chapter deals with divorce. Thompson launches into the texts he is going to use. First is the Moses laws in Deut 24:1-4, second is Matt 5:32 and finally 1Cor 7. These verses seem to mention different things in their content. Was Moses wrong or was Jesus just living by an ideal?

Thompson first discusses rigorism. This is an early perspective. Mostly every major theologian in the first three centuries found that marriage was un-dissolvable. In light of infidelity Origen says that a separation is fine but no remarrying. In Origen’s eyes, he sees Jesus as criticizing Moses. He goes farther as he reads a spiritual reading into the text. Jesus in Matthew and not in the other Gospels says divorce is null unless it’s in the case of infidelity. A dual reading would see this as a prophecy of Jesus saying to the synagogue, because of infidelity I now intend to marry the church. Origen saw Moses as allowing divorce for a multitude of causes and would suggest that Moses was speaking out of personal insight. Origen also relents and says that it may even be at the mistreatment of the wife that causes her to leave. This in Origen’s eyes is horrible. Origen was the lighter of the early church fathers who could conceive of a separation.

Augustine: saw it more as a sacrament. To Augustine the definition of fornication was not just a physical affair but it was a harboring of another God in your heart. So to Augustine disbelief is a kin to marital infidelity because it is a matter of the heart. He agreed with the dissolubility of a marriage in his commentary on the Sermon on the Mount but made room for separation and possibly divorces in later writings though he counted it as a failure of faith.

Thompson continues in brief on how the Catholic Church saw marriage as sacrament. Essentially it was seen as an institution that spread grace, like that of communion.

Thompson continues into five cases attached to the 16^th century. The first was Erasmus. Erasmus saw Paul’s words on the matter as opinion. When Paul says, “I say, not the Lord” (1Cor 7:12). Erasmus saw this as suggestion from Paul.

Bucer: tried to reevaluate Moses. He tried to reframe the contrast between Moses and Jesus. Never would Christ’s words be subservient, but neither would the importance of God’s command through Moses. He saw Jesus’ words as a sharp shot against men, not women. Women were already under this type of law, to Bucer Christ was leveling the playing field with Matt 5. Bucer with his claims was striking hard at the common conception that infidelity was a normal practice; Bucer gave clarity to Jesus’ words by critiquing his culture.

Bullinger: saw divorce as a literal reading from Jesus words. He saw Paul’s words as affirming Jesus not disagreeing. Paul was enlarging the words of Jesus, giving more room for divorce. This is how he comes down in Augustine’s camp.

Calvin: saw divorce similar to Bullinger, allowing room for remarrying of the innocent party. Though he was little more plane with his reading, he made statements like, “If things go wrong, let us hope that God will help us.” Calvin had little interest in finding reasons for divorce. He saw Jesus’ words as plane and there was very little room out of marriage.

Catharnius: brought a different perspective. It was that of seeing marriage having more factors than infidelity. What about abuse, or threats, or heresy? He made room for divorce in these settings. This is the latitude that Augustine gives in his words about fornication and this is the perspective Catharnius uses.

Thompson ends with three ways to see these texts. The first is, we don’t have to pretend the texts are easy, we shouldn’t just proof text them and walk away. The second is, ideals belong with passion and realism. In light of abuse how can you not see Jesus’ interaction in this? Finally charity and discipline belong in the church. It is hard to expect a world to be held to the same standard, Christians need to model it and rise to a better standard.

I feel like I belong... Now a member of High Calling Blogs

2008-08-19T08:59:00.001-07:00

This past week I became a part of the network called High Calling Blogs. I wanted to be a part of the network because I want people to be made aware of books that matter. I grabbed a passion to read when I first became a Christian. A man who discipled me was an avid reader and instilled in me the importance of learning as a life style. As a campus minister I encounter a lot students who take for granted the intelligence God has give them. They allow information to be handed to them but never pursue learning for their own. This is a reason why I try to give detailed reviews of the books I read, so anyone who reads can see the way I try and learn. Another reason why I blog about these books so intensely is because I want to retain what I learn. If I write what I read I can go back to my thoughts any time I want. This is also why I want to join High Calling Blogs; I would hope people would use my reviews as a resource.

This is why you will see the link on the left under my picture. High Calling Blogs gives a network of blogs that are concerned with keeping perspective and truth involved in conversation with one another. This is the best way to develop truth, which is to keep on talking to one another. At time Christians keep looking for sanctuary; wanting a list of bullet points to hide behind that keeps them from pursuing truth; wanting answers to be given to them without question. Truth is never personal it is either corporate or it is nothing. This is why I blog, which is to help the body discuss and hopefully see God’s face a little bit better as I add to the conversation. I finish with a quote from David Gilmore in his song, talk to me, he says “All we need to do is never stop talking.” The song highlights the hope we have in technology is not to make our lives better, but the hope is to come to a greater awareness of perspective and truth. Christians must be a part of the conversation.

As if the name Gomer wasn't bad enough. Chapter 5 of Reading the Bible with the Dead

2008-08-12T07:44:00.000-07:00

The next Chapter deals with the role of Gomer in the prophetic book of Hosea. There are several critiques that need to be addressed. Does God ordain abuse? Does God affirm harlotry as a way to get messages across? Thompson continues by showing a common feminist critique, that the model Hosea exhibits a very similar example of an abusive husband.

Thompson first moves into the literal historical view. It can be seen as real marriage; real harlotry. Irenaeus saw this as a pre-figuration of Jesus’ marriage with a fornicating people. Augustine picked up this thought and read the text as if Gomer repented, ultimately seeing the woman as the Jews who come to know Jesus as Lord. Jerome would struggle with the Moral law implications attached to this, suggesting that God would not call anyone to do anything morally reprehensible.

The next view is the visionary-metaphorical view: no marriage, allegorical harlotry. A widely popular view among Rabbi’s; suggests that Hosea was asked to go and speak to Israel calling them a harlot not actually having a harlot for a wife.

The next view is the Rhetorical View: Real Marriage, staged or parabolic harlotry. This is the view that Luther and Calvin both rested in. It is the view that seems similar to that of the visionary view, in the sense that it was used parabolic to give a message. Gomer allowed herself to be seen as a harlot for the sake of a tangible lesson. It is a view that answers the questions of Gomer. She is seen as virtuous for sacrificing her name for the ministry.

Another reading adds a two-fold perspective. Hosea can be seen as Christ and Gomer as the Church, Hosea chose to enfold himself with a sinful partner just like that of Christ. In doing so uncovering our deepest darkest sin, not for shame but for causing the creation to be more like God’s created order. The second fold is corporate, as it perceives the church as a sinful lot needing intervention and sanctification. The role of the Christ is to move past its Jewish physical lineage and see it as a marriage to a sinful yet committed group of people with spiritual lineage.

Another stance has emerged and it is the defense of Hosea and his ministry. A common critique throughout this book is which how can a messenger of God deliver a sanctified message while doing such an atrocity? This stance attempts answer that critique by suggesting that Gomer is spoken so little in the text that when she is spoken its not as if she is spoken of highly. Suggesting that Jesus himself spent much time with prostitutes modeling true interaction with “the harlot” and in doing so showed a gracious response to Gomer. Though, Gomer deserves worse for the sin she commits, just like we all do.

A final approach is mentioned. It is the Narrative analogy: God is not a respecter of dignity, including His own. In view of the cross we are humbled to see that God demands for his creation to be brought to a restored relationship with Him. In so much that He is willing to be brought to the lowest. We see that even in the midst of a compassionate God, the abusive Hosea reveals that an abusive relationship will lead anyone to unthinkable indiscretion. The God of this universe will never lead you or I to such an abusive relationship, so our response should never come out of self-respect but self-submission. Gomer may represent Israel but she also represents a person, which God in view of the whole scripture respects and is concerned about. In this light Gomer’s harsh treatment was ultimately for the sake of her faithfulness.

Thompson finishes by addressing three things we must take away from this. The first is that we shouldn’t try to fix either character in this text. We must strive to see that when we fix either character into a certain perspective we do an injustice to a people group. Why must we try to protect either person when God told Hosea to do it and Gomer was a Harlot? The second thing to take from this study is every player in the role of scripture is fallen. Language is limiting; interpreters are sinful; writers are sinful. When you see the Lord as sovereign in the midst of all this you will see the need to submit to him in light of difficult texts. We must distinguish the Bible’s intent from its effect. As a leader or reader we must remove every obstacle that might get in the way of the true understanding of the text. Finally we must read Gomer and Hosea Dialectically. We must not downgrade one side for the other. We must keep in tact the meaning of the text while never losing the unintended affects that make us ask difficult questions. In other words we shouldn’t just say, “Well that’s God’s word deal with it.” We should strive to keep that integrity while come to a greater understanding of how difficult these texts are.

The Problem with the Patriarchs, Chapter 4 of reading the Bible with the dead.

2008-08-04T20:36:00.000-07:00

The fourth chapter of “Reading the Bible with the Dead,” Thompson deals with the chinks in the armor of the Patriarchs. Thompson deals with only a few of the many possible. Abraham and Isaacs lie to the Pharaoh about their marital status; Jacob’s deception of his father; Jacob’s manipulation of Laban’s flock. The trouble arrives at God’s movement among the midst of these men. The New Testament considers them heroes of the faith yet they are mired with very strong mistakes.

Thompson starts by addressing the philosophical reasoning that lying is the lesser of two evils… i.e. in Nazi Germany would you tell where Jews were hiding if asked? Thus we come to Abraham and Isaacs lie. Thompson’s structure of the chapter is a little different then the last three. It deals with the perspective seen and then it adds who held to that particular perspective. The first is the lie as Mission.

Commentators saw the Lie of Abraham as a special hidden word from God to lie. Augustine saw it as a foreshadowing of the “secret spouse” being the bride of Christ. Chrysostom saw it as a way for Abraham to share the new religion. God would lead Abraham and Isaac into all kinds of scrapes and they would do whatever it took to get through the situation. Other commentators saw it as Abraham was using his prophetic gift, knowing that she would never be violated, ultimately getting through the sticky issue unscathed. The next perspective is the Lie as a form of prudence.

Some commentators view the lie a form of Prudence. Seeing that in a distant way Sarah was Abraham’s sister and suggesting that he was not lying. God gave humans the ability to reason and contemplate which Abraham used to facilitate safety for him and Sarah. It was discussed by historians like Josephus and Jerome that the Egyptians would go through a 12 month purification process; making the short term decision to let her go a prudent one. You can also see the purification process in the book of Esther. The next perspective is seen as plane form of sin.

Plane and simple, the lies told by Abraham and Isaac was sin. Commentators suggested that both men did not cast their cares upon the Lord and ultimately sinned.

The next story is that of Jacob stealing his brother’s birthright. Luther saw it as a fulfilling of God’s desire for Jacob. A fulfillment of the prophecy mentioned to Rebekah at birth. Calvin saw the promise not as an excuse. The promise should have guaranteed Jacob’s patience for God to fulfill the promise.

The next story is of Laban’s sheep. Luther saw it is another fulfillment of God’s promise. Luther saw that Laban was cheated but though it didn’t lead to Laban’s detriment. As well as the bad treatment Laban was giving Jacob. Calvin is not in complete disagreement, but sees that the act by Jacob was given by God and Calvin’s is in his dream a few verses later.

The next story is that of giving ones daughter over to rape as seen by Lot in Genesis 19. No commentator ever suggests that Lot was asked by God to give over his daughters. Though Ambrose said Lot was risking a lesser evil for a greater evil. Augustine refines this argument and says that Lot did what in his own frantic mind what must not be done. Augustine would say that Lot’s quick insanity had him draw upon what he new would be most definitely not in God’s plan, which is to see angels raped. Luther said that Lot failed horribly and should have fought to his own death to protect them. To Luther he may have been righteous but not because of his acts according to his daughters.

The next story is polygamy among the patriarchs. Augustine saw it is as possibly a special dispensation from God. Not as if this is God’s desire for us but maybe for the Patriarchs. Ambrose suggested a similar idea saying that this was a way that God would help populate the earth. Luther affirmed an Augustine message that God allowed it because it was fulfilling and hasting of the coming Messiah. Meaning David knew his line was blessed and wanted to hurry it along. Commentators like the description of this because it dealt with the text without bridging such behavior for today. Thompson deals with Luther’s contemporaries suggesting that there was black and white approach to the sin of the Patriarchs. Luther dealt with the sins of the Patriarchs without totally deconstructing their moral fiber or their status as heroes of the faith. Thompson goes at length as to why Luther had to deal with issue at length. Luther’s context had monarchs looking for a way to obtain permission to have multiple wives.

There is a final subject and that pertains to just war. Thompson touches on these in brief and goes no farther then saying what commentators thought about Abraham’s War. Though the arguments seem redundant to the topology used on some of these other stories.

Thompson finishes the chapter by saying three things to take from this study. The first is, not all of the Bible is a model for us. The second is, silences in the Bible should be filled with the Bible; i.e… rebuke Abraham for his pologomy with scripture. In light of Luther’s situation; the third is exegesis can be influenced and swayed by political, power, and social pressures.

The Curses in the Psalms, the 3rd Chapter of "Reading the Bible with the Dead"

2008-07-29T15:42:00.001-07:00

The third chapter deals with the curses in the Psalms. Here is a few sections to describe what Thompson will talk about.

Psalms 28: 4-5 “4 Give to them according to their work

and according to the evil of their deeds;

give to them according to the work of their hands;

render them their due reward.

5 Because they do not regard the works of the Lord

or the work of his hands,

he will tear them down and build them up no more.”

Psalms 69:22-28 “22 Let their own table before them become a snare;

and when they are at peace, let it become a trap. [1]

23 Let their eyes be darkened, so that they cannot see,

and make their loins tremble continually.

24 Pour out your indignation upon them,

and let your burning anger overtake them.

25 May their camp be a desolation;

let no one dwell in their tents.

26 For they persecute him whom you have struck down,

and they recount the pain of those you have wounded.

27 Add to them punishment upon punishment;

may they have no acquittal from you. [2]

28 Let them be blotted out of the book of the living;

let them not be enrolled among the righteous.”

Psalms 58: 6-10 “6 O God, break the teeth in their mouths;

tear out the fangs of the young lions, O Lord!

7 Let them vanish like water that runs away;

when he aims his arrows, let them be blunted.

8 Let them be like the snail that dissolves into slime,

like the stillborn child who never sees the sun.

9 Sooner than your pots can feel the heat of thorns,

whether green or ablaze, may he sweep them away!

10 The righteous will rejoice when he sees the vengeance;

he will bathe his feet in the blood of the wicked.”

Psalms 79: 10-13 “10 Why should the nations say,

“Where is their God?”

Let the avenging of the outpoured blood of your servants

be known among the nations before our eyes!

11 Let the groans of the prisoners come before you;

according to your great power, preserve those doomed to die!

12 Return sevenfold into the lap of our neighbors

the taunts with which they have taunted you, O Lord!

13 But we your people, the sheep of your pasture,

will give thanks to you forever;

from generation to generation we will recount your praise.”

Psalms 139: 19-22 “19 Oh that you would slay the wicked, O God!

O men of blood, depart from me!

20 They speak against you with malicious intent;

your enemies take your name in vain! [1]

21 Do I not hate those who hate you, O Lord?

And do I not loathe those who rise up against you?

22 I hate them with complete hatred;

I count them my enemies.”

The main question we must ask the text is this. How do we compare these texts to the revelation of Jesus? How does Jesus quote the Psalms? How are we to see the Psalms curses in light of the Jesus message?

Origen: uses a similar argument to that of his with Hagar mentioned in the first blog about this book. Theses curses are not a rule of law but something that can create virtue. Abraham’s affair with Hagar is not a proof for polygamy but a lesson on virtue. He would see these curses as literal enemies of the people of God. Like ones own evil thoughts that must be overcome.

Athanasius: saw them like that of Origen. He particularized the psalms and gave examples how these might represent a particular enemy.

Jerome: in the same line didn’t see them as enemies to the people of God but as the enemies of Christ. The justice of these enemies will come in full knowledge. The rock that their enemies will be dashed upon is the rock of ages.

Augustine: saw the Psalms spoken through Jesus as both the head of the church and as the body, being the intercessor. He remained in line with Origen and saw them as contemporary enemies but saw them as more of a contemporary spiritual enemy. We are called to fear that which kills the soul: God. We are to see anything that gets in the way of our fear of God as an enemy. Then we hate the enemies that draw our fidelity away from God. This could be seen as the persecutor that is threatening us with our life or the heretic that is threatening us with our understanding of the true God. He is not advocating a physical manifestation of these curses; he believes we must treat them with a murderous rage in our heart, striving to kill that which draws you from God internally.

John of Chrysostom: sees them more as a prophetic text. If these are the words of Jesus then it remains, whom are these words being spoken to? It is those who deserve God’s rage.

Thodoret: Also sees it as God’s punishment but takes it a step farther. It is not for us to be comfortable with the horror we experience when we read this text. We must be driven to draw the world away from such a horrible end. We need to see this end as a conclusion of their life and a distribution of justice thereof, but also not be happy with humanities road in such a direction.

Thomas Aquinas: Brings together the Sermon on the Mount and these curses. It is either a pronouncement of what will follow, divine justice, spiritual denunciation; meaning that when anyone dies to Christ it is a hard and arduous endeavor.

Luther: Puts this into his faith and love ethic. We are seen to have faith in Jesus and ultimately follow him to the very end of the ages. We are also called to love Him and our neighbors. Never are we to mix the faith and love. Faith requires me to trust the father for my own protection. Love requires me to make sure that my neighbors are cared for.

Calvin: saw the curses more as being directed from the office of the Psalmist. The curses that speak of war language are consistent with that of the office of a king. Calvin puts tension between that of Christ and David as the speaker. The office of David is also a representative of Jesus. In doing so he speaks as if it might be a contemporary enemy of Israel, but also a realistic enemy of the kingdom of God. In very Calvin terms, it’s those totally incapable of repentance that the Psalms are talking about. Calvin continues that neighborly love and witness is imperative for the Christian but injustice and sin are eternally doomed.

Brueggemann: (I know he is not dead) said maybe the vengeance is not a message for the Christian, but it is an urgent agenda and will be used on those who deny justice from God’s creation. He also sees the vengeance being that taken out on Judas. He sees that any reading of the curses must be seen through the cross.

C.S. Lewis: Says that Jesus is the target of all these, the ultimate act of divine vengeance is in the cross where God receives the world’s hatred and overcomes it.

There are 4 things we can learn from this. God cares about justice and in doing so the psalms highlight God’s commitment to justice. Any act of vengeance in the psalms is ultimately proper when acted out by a holy God. Only Jesus is fit to lament and curse absolutely; if Jesus is the voice of the curses then it is proper because of his desire for restoration. The curses are not for us to prescribe to our modern context, it is only the work of Jesus that could speak such judgment. We must strive to know these curses; they are never to be overlooked because they embody the nature of God’s inclusion into His word. Finally we must see the curses as verses that are out of our hands and not as directives. It demands our understanding knowing the nature of God but is not rules of our lives that we must fulfill.

If you want to destroy my sweater Jephthah. Chapter 2 of "Reading the Bible with the Dead."

2008-07-28T20:20:00.000-07:00

I don’t normally quote the full text, and if you are like me and an author refers to a text but doesn’t quote it you usually don’t read the reference. However in the second chapter Thompson didn’t quote Judges 11 and I found I was getting confused until I read the scripture again. So here is Judges 11:29-40 ESV version:

11:29 Then the Spirit of the Lord was upon Jephthah, and he passed through Gilead and Manasseh and passed on to Mizpah of Gilead, and from Mizpah of Gilead he passed on to the Ammonites. 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord and said, “If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, 31 then whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites shall be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.” 32 So Jephthah crossed over to the Ammonites to fight against them, and the Lord gave them into his hand. 33 And he struck them from Aroer to the neighborhood of Minnith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel-keramim, with a great blow. So the Ammonites were subdued before the people of Israel.

34 Then Jephthah came to his home at Mizpah. And behold, his daughter came out to meet him with tambourines and with dances. She was his only child; besides her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 And as soon as he saw her, he tore his clothes and said, “Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low, and you have become the cause of great trouble to me. For I have opened my mouth to the Lord, and I cannot take back my vow.” 36 And she said to him, “My father, you have opened your mouth to the Lord; do to me according to what has gone out of your mouth, now that the Lord has avenged you on your enemies, on the Ammonites.” 37 So she said to her father, “Let this thing be done for me: leave me alone two months, that I may go up and down on the mountains and weep for my virginity, I and my companions.” 38 So he said, “Go.” Then he sent her away for two months, and she departed, she and her companions, and wept for her virginity on the mountains. 39 And at the end of two months, she returned to her father, who did with her according to his vow that he had made. She had never known a man, and it became a custom in Israel 40 that the daughters of Israel went year by year to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year.

Three major questions are asked of this text:

1. Was Jephthah’s anointing with the Spirit ultimately what lead to this action? Did God ordain this sacrifice?

2. What did Jephthah expect to greet him? Did he actually expect a sheep to come out of his door? Did he actually expect a human?

3. Was Jephthah influenced by Abraham’s offering of Isaac? Was he expecting God to say something at the right time?

Today’s Feminist theologians have a critique to offer as well?

1. Considering Isaac and Jonathan’s (1Sam 14:24-26) rescue why is it that God seems to save the male children but not the female child?

2. Why does Jephthah seem to blame the daughter?

3. How can Jephthah end up on the list of Hero’s found in Hebrews 11:32?

I will attempt to show how Thompson sees past theologians answering some of theses questions.

Origen: Suggests that the mystery of why; will remain with God until parusia. The death of the daughter is the death of a martyr. He makes the case that the death leads to victory over Ammonites. All martyrdom seems senseless yet God still uses it. All martyrdom’s reason will be understood with the second coming.

Ambrose: Makes a bolder declaration. He blames both by saying that unlike Abraham, Jephthah waited, contemplating his desire for his child verses his love for God. Unlike Isaac, the daughter didn’t respond with the same resolve to submit to the will of God. Considering the fact that God didn’t make the promise, and the hesitation from both parties; God allowed the death to occur. He shows up in Hebrews because of his ultimate decision to follow God.

Augustine: Makes the case that there is a longer-term lesson to be had. He introduced the possibility that the anointing of the Spirit gave Jephthah a special dispensation to do what he did. If what Jephthah did were sinful, everyone after him would have special understanding not to make such a foolish claim (this makes Saul in 1 sam look even more foolish). Another level Augustine suggests is allegorical meaning. Jephthah’s daughter’s sacrifice was a foreshadowing of Jesus. The acts are not scandalous because they are serving a higher purpose of the narrative of God. Jephthah is Jesus and the daughter is the church. Meaning that our very lives are a sacrifice to faithfulness to God. Which seems contrived at first but in reflection adds flavor to how Christ expects us to submit even our own liberties to Him.

Isodore: saw it in a different light then Augustine. Like Augustine, Jephthah represented Christ, but the daughter represents Christ’s virgin flesh. When Jesus walked to the cross he was sacrificing every desire for faithfulness to God.

Denis: saw the daughter more as Jesus, the suffering servant.

A lot of these exegeses did very little or at least avoided the ethical issues that arose in the text. Reformers attempts to approach such a topic of ethical difficulty led to somewhat of a sidestepping.

Rabbi Kimhi: said that the “devote/sacrifice” was not necessarily seen as a killing but a devotion to God’s work like that of Samuel. Meaning that a suitable sacrifice would be made in any circumstance. Suitable, if it was a sheep with killing it, suitable if it was a human, by offering them to the service of God. The problem is that it presupposes that she wasn’t actually killed for God.

Pellican and Brenz: Both affirm Kimhi’s approach of survivalist. The sacrifice is that she can no longer be married or have children because she now serves the Lord. Brenz goes farther and honors the feminist perspective and says the daughter was autonomous in her decision to honor her father and submit to such a life.

Luther: suggests that Jephthah sinned mortally against his daughter. That the work of his fighting for Israel is why he shows up in the roll call of hero’s in Hebrews. What is even a larger testament to the sinfulness of Jephthah is that he didn’t release his daughter from the vow and took the punishment of being unfaithful to God on his own shoulders. Luther’s approach does not excuse anything and sees Japheth character as a villain of some sorts.

Rodgers: Suggests that Hebrews 11:34 alludes to the daughter “Faith… made strong out of weakness.” She deserves a place in the honor roll, like many of those who have fallen due to faith. He also concludes that we should honor the daughter every year with the celebration explained in the text.

Thompson gives 3 final ways to respond to this story. First he says that it must not be ignored in today’s preaching and teaching. He also suggests that the story must be seen as a warning for us. Jephthah is not a model for how we deal with God, you don’t bargain with God. And finally we must be comfortable with silence. The text creates no soft edges in dealing with itself. In doing so we have gained a lot of understanding of how we can see hard texts by trying to fill in the gaps.

Hagar the Horrible? The first chapter of "Reading the Bible with the Dead."

2008-07-25T15:27:00.000-07:00

The next book is “Reading the Bible with the Dead,” by John Thompson. Thompson starts in his introduction by laying the reason and foundation of the book. He suggests that each study in the book describes in short how the church has interpreted certain texts; mainly texts of the other and oppressed. After a brief introduction where Thompson explains the trajectory of his book he moves into the wonderful story of Hagar.

Thompson first observes what can be seen about Hagar (Genesis 16, 21). He moves toward three foci that show why teaching Hagar is important. The first is God clearly intervened in her life. Twice an angel spoke to her. She is promised descendants. She shouldn’t get the reductionist view of an adulterer that the common view gives her. The second is, Hagar looks very similar to that of African slaves in colonial America. A feministic hermeneutic would focus on the fact that she was treated unjustly, and Abraham is not addressed as a figure that could have brought justice. When we overlook the story we overlook God’s intervention to bring justice to Hagar. The third is to shake cultural paradigms of reading scripture. When we consider the Feminist perspective of the text we read it through the eyes of who the text seems to not privilege. Thompson continues by declaring that the feminist reading of the text is not the first time it has emerged. The questions are deeply addressed throughout church history. Has Paul’s usage of the story restricted us from seeing it as anything more then allegory? Are we quick to blame, instead of see the victim? Was Hagar a disposable factor in the story of God’s heroes?

I will give brief descriptions of how past theologians answered these questions.

Philo: Saw Hagar as a stepping stool to spiritual maturity. Using Paul’s reference of her as the Law was Abraham’s way of trying to force the blessings of God. Though Philo overlooks the importance of God’s interaction in Hagar’s life.

Origen: Saw Hagar in two ways. The first was very similar to that of Philo. She was a virtue developed by Abraham. She helped make Abraham a better follower of God and God blesses Hagar because of it. He also gets in Hagar’s shoes and sees her as the woman at the well. They were led to “living water” in view of the true God, after being abandoned by men.

Didymus: Sees Hagar as the pure heart that God is willing to protect and bless with His presence. Suggesting that she must have been pure of heart if God met with her (Mat 5:8). Her pure heart is identified with the fact that she was faithful to her superior and didn’t act rash.

Ambrose: Saw the perspective through the trappings of the “Synagogue” as well as other heresies; Hagar represented the future subversion of Judaism. Hagar is a pre-figuration of how the Christian church will overthrow the synagogue. This uses Gal 4 heavily, and was a very popular reading in an anti-Semitic Western Europe.

Augustine: took a very similar take on it as Ambrose.

Isidore: Saw Hagar sitting under a “tree” is a pre-figuration of the cross. She became a sign of hope to the gentiles, since God’s chosen people are not just that of Abraham. She was thrown out though protected by God.

Verenable Bede: Saw Hagar as an allegory for repentant Jews who break away from the claim of a physical lineage and attach to God. Repentant Jews who follow Jesus is what Hagar represents to Bede.

Raban Maur: Saw Hagar as the church of the Gentiles. God’s movement went with her same as the followers of Christ.

A perspective came to light in the exegetical process when a Jewish Rabbi better described the Hebrew meaning of the word “play” in Gen 21. The word in Hebrew (don’t have Hebrew text on my keyboard) means the same type of “Play” that was associated to Sodom and Gomorrah as well as the idolatry of the Israelites at the bottom of Mt. Sinai. Which alludes to the possibility that Ishmael was “playing” with Isaac in a sexual manner. This possibility of indiscretion adds new light as to why Abraham acted so forcefully. The next perspectives come from the medieval period.

Jerome: Not a medieval theologian but really took the lead with the perspective that encompasses the medieval perspective. In light of “play” Abraham was acting with grace considering what was common punishment for “play” at the time.

Rashi: Suggests there is no innocent party involved. Hagar followed all the way to sin, Sarah pushed and punished, and Abraham wasn’t gracious. In light of play Ishmael got his punishment and God protected Hagar.

There are several perspective mentioned, some sympathize with Hagar others do not. The reformation has given some of our most Patriarchal understandings as well as some of our best understandings.

Luther: Saw Hagar as a symbol of being launched out into the darkness in the midst of death. God’s intervention shows that God loves all of His creation. He sees Abraham caught in the affects of his own sin and it ultimately causes his faith to grow.

Calvin: Thought that he should not add to what Paul thought about Hagar.

Zwingli: Was the most patriarchal of the three. Suggesting that her defense of Ishmael in light of “Play” leads to her maternal instinct to protect. He thought that she represents nothing new about a mother who is protecting an inhumane son.

Thompson ends by describing four lessons to be learned from Hagar’s story.

1. Hagar is important; she helps undermine false presuppositions of how we might approach the scripture. It is story for anyone who has ever been abandoned or mistreated.

2. Hagar’s story is terrifying; why is God silent to Abraham in this story, which refers to how God can be silent in light of unfathomable atrocities in today’s world.

3. Hagar is more than a symbol; Gal 4 should not upstage other lessons the story can teach us about God.

4. Hagar is connected to us by our own tradition; the Feminist notion was not the first time theologians have sought to consider and have compassion for Hagar, it begs our attention how others have saw the text.

The final review of "The Bible Makes Sense"

2008-07-24T08:36:00.000-07:00

The Final Review of “The Bible Makes Sense” By: Walter Brueggemann. Like many of Brueggemann’s books I found them absolutely stunning in their ability to teach the abstract. Though as the reader I found it hard to know where he was heading until the end of the chapter. It was a 128-page book though I found I had to read it twice to take a lot of substance from it. Brueggemann’s portrait of tension was wonderful in this book. He never gave you seven points of a highly affective Bible Study leader. He gave you tension, with mystery and ambiguity. Define the Kingdome of God? The Kingdom is like; the Kingdom resembles; and the Kingdom seems to be, these are the ambiguities that Brueggemann leaves you with and hopes you will give others. He leaves very little room for an anthropomorphic flagellation of the text. Brueggemann sets that tone early when he describes the paradigms that influence Christians away from truth. He explains this even farther by helping the reader see the scriptures within the whole body of the history of God. He also establishes this by giving an alternative to how we see the structure of the Bible. This usage of the structure was seen through out the book. The bulk of the book affirmed his original idea constructed in the first and second chapters, which is to subvert the common misreading of the Bible.

I found the book quite enjoyable however I found myself constantly not sure of his direction which makes reading difficult. His structure of sentences is not complex; yet you find yourself asking; what? Complexity decreases when you start to slow down your reading. It makes a relatively short book long. I would say the book would add little to your ability if you already were creative with how you see the scripture. Chapter 3 might be of some interest. Though I would suggest this book to those who have found the exegetical/ hermeneutical process difficult or stale. I would also suggest this book if someone wanted to see a good cross-section of how Brueggemann views the Bible. It is an edifying book and fun.

The Bible Makes Sense By: Walter Brueggemann the 7th 8th 9th and 10thChapters

2008-07-23T16:41:00.000-07:00

In the seventh Chapter of “The Bible Makes Sense,” Brueggemann describes the role of community is life giving. The life God intends is not just a restoration of an individual’s heart but also the restoration of the whole community. Brueggemann says that Christ did not die so we can be committed to un-relatedness. Jesus worked toward a community powered towards life. What is interesting is Brueggemann’s sensitivity to what draws individuals out of the church. This was a common theme drawn out in the Eugene Peterson’s book “Christ Plays In Ten Thousand Places.” It is a subversion of what might split the church, not so much on a macro sense but the petty fights that fracture the local church. Brueggemann says that Jesus declared with the empty tomb that the people who banked on deathly living now have the ability to over come death in the resurrection. Brueggemann references the man among the tombs plagued with demons. Jesus restores him and insists him to be among his community. Jesus was a life giver, seen in the paralytic who was lowered in the presence of Jesus (Mark 2:1-12). Jesus saw the faith of the community centered on the paralytic and said you sins are healed. The faith of the community around him brought the paralytic to the roof of a building to lower him down. Jesus demands us to sing a new song; speak a new language; have afresh picture of self; to value brothers and sisters in new ways; to discern and act upon public issues; to know the Good News of God in ways that matter, all in opposition to the answers the world provides.

Chapter eight talks about the significance of being a Child of God. Brueggemann contrasts “Child of God” with being and Orphan or Slave. Being in a communal covenant walking with the people of God, is defined by God, not the joiner. It is a powerful adoption that redefines our status in life. The power of the slave to child imagery shows in us that we are free from the worldly definitions that define who we are. The world is filled with people who are slaves by establishing their worth from assigned tasks or possessions. They are nameless beings without worth to their masters.

Another imagery is based in Orphans. We were once those without a voice, but now a child of the king. It is the abolishing of faceless degradation of humanity normally found in industry, though inflicted from almost every source. The adoption from the Father restores humanity in its rightful place and order. Humanness means having dignity.

This adoption theme means we have a future. Slaves and orphans have no identity in society. God calls us out of that facelessness not to just have a name but a voice in the kingdom. Therefore we have a vocation, slaves and orphans don’t have a vocation; they are ordered to do what ever it takes to get through to the next day. As Children of God we are tasked to live different lives. It is not live a certain set of rules but having an intimate knowledge of His purposes and desires for the world and living them out. In doing so, we reject much of the history that makes up who we are in the history of God’s people. We also align ourselves with the lowly orphans and slaves crying for a way out. We call out to the public institutions that are enslaving and orphaning the people around us. We are also instructed to take care of the “estate” in which God calls us to live in.

The Ninth Chapter discusses God’s community as it relates to His word. Brueggemann draws our attention to Josiah’s discovery of the scroll that radically changed Israel’s worship (2 Kings 22, 23). It led to repentance and a renewal of God’s people. He also points our attention to Luther and the reformation as a source of similar workings of God’s word as renewal. After Luther, Brueggemann draws our attention to Wesley and the work he did in England, drawing attention to God’s word. He finishes even with Vatican II as a renewal of God’s word. Brueggemann is not mincing words in this chapter. This is spoken to those who downgrade scripture. It hammers through out the chapter that we must and need to read the Bible not just to the church but also to the whole of creation. All of creation must turn to God’s service and praise. The Bible will not let us focus to narrowly on just the church. Brueggemann gets my loudest applause of this whole book when he hammers hard the need for God’s word to answer all of the world’s social ills. He gives a long list of sins that the Bible speaks to, some of them look like consumerism; Individualism; consumption and consumerism; civil strife; racial and sexual strife’s; sexual extravagance; world poverty and hunger; to name a few. He focuses on the point without a tenderfoot that the Bible must NOT be removed from the lives of covenant community.

The Tenth and Final chapter deals with perspective on the Bible. It is final review, saying that the Bible is meant for a resource for faith, communal and personal. The Bible is not just a set of answers but also a set of questions posed to the church. The Bible is a statement of presuppositions, not a set of conclusions. The Bible is meant to be used as partner in which we must dialogue with not just study. The Bible is supposed to be seen as having a central direction and a rich diversity. The Bible is the lens in which all of life must be discerned.

The Bible Makes Sense By: Walter Brueggemann the 4th, 5th and 6th Chapters

2008-07-22T08:51:00.001-07:00

In the fourth chapter of “The Bible Makes Sense,” Brueggemann launches into the cohesiveness of the scripture, which fly’s into the face of our current common reading of the Bible. This chapter centers on how we should view God’s interaction with humanity. He starts by saying:

“God is not like any other. And God’s strangeness is in this. God is with people. God is for people. God’s goodness is not in the great transcendental power nor in the majestic remoteness nor in the demanding toughness but in the readiness to be with and for his people. And this being with and for is not a matter of bribery or deception or intimidation. God simply wills it so. God is not, in a characteristic way, by God’s self, but for others.”

I have found a key thought of Brueggemann’s understanding of God comes from the relationship developed in covenant. We are in covenant with God – Chapter 6 speaks at length about this - and He responds to us as much as we respond to him. Brueggemann continues with discussing the call of his people by declaring them his people at the Exodus. Brueggemann focuses on two themes prevalent in God’s covenant, the first is God is with you, the second is fear not. God saying things like, “I have heard your cry,” which leads Israel to see God’s personal movement in their lives. Not individual but personal. God acts powerfully on behalf of Israel. It is similar to that of the Joseph story, God working personally for the sake of the group. God made a way for Israel’s sons to transcend famine. Four times in Genesis 39 it says, “The Lord was with him.” Declaring that though Joseph was entering trials God’s provision for him and for his brothers was always in God’s mind.

The abiding presence, notion has been exhibited through out the scripture, from the Exodus to Joshua to David to the Temple entry with Solomon. Though Brueggemann draws out another theme. It is the theme of “Fear not.” A theme that goes hand and hand with God is with you. Yet it doesn’t always come with the good times of Israel. From Abraham to the Prophets God told his people to not fear, who was always on the cusp of an act that God wanted them to do. We see this theme of no fear and God with us when it is made incarnate in the person of Jesus?

Our attention must be turned toward the “Great Commission.” He tells us go and make Disciples in light of the fact that He will be with us to the very end of the age. The Apostles knew the extent and call on a disciple- they were one- they personally knew the call Jesus was asking in the Great Commission. The first was to follow Jesus to death; the second was interacting with people who may not be warm to them. These thoughts derived fear, Jesus assured them to go, but I will be with you.

I will end by quoting Brueggemann:

“Such Faithfulness (from God) is a scandal. It violates all our religious conventions, for we prefer a God not so intensely set on us. The scandal is that it seems no to be so, and we do not wish it so, because it destroys the way we would arrange life. It needs to be said that this good news calls our whole way of existence in to question. It questions our reading of public life, for we would like to organize it in ways that violate God’s passion and compassion. It also questions our self-perception. I we are indeed “in God’s Image,” then the central task of our life is covenant making and covenant keeping. It is a promise both rich and heavy for us to say be like God (1 John 3:2). Thus our central human vocation is to be with brothers and sisters and for brothers and sisters. That is who God is. That is who we are called to be, expected to be, promised to be. “

Its this model of being in covenant with God, that we hold up that covenant by loving him and loving others constantly. Its not having fear about being a presence among other who need the presence of God in their life.

Chapter five moves to themes that are more exhibited in God’s actions through out the Bible. The three themes are God is the freedom giver; God is exile ender/ home-bringer; and God is the life bringer. These themes are easily seen by anyone who reads the Bible. Yet how to respond in a manner that embodies these actions is a different story. The key is to see these themes embodied in Jesus’ ministry. The key factor is being attuned to who Jesus is now. The live and active reality of Jesus brought before us, being an ingredient of what He is doing. For His mission will be accomplished with or without our interaction. It’s the need for the church to be a part of this. God will bring about His promises and will develop a world according to His sacred purposes, in which to rule. God’s rule is to bring this world into a divine intent. God will not rest until the divine intent rules over all things. We are reminded that His past promises and the actions of Jesus are not distant and must be lived out in all areas of life, from our vocation to our church, being the ingredient of what He is doing. He frees, He brings home, He gives life, and we are called to do this same work with him. All the while (to steal a NT Wright phrase) putting the world to rights.

Chapter 6 deals with conversion. I alluded to this chapter earlier. To explain Brueggemann’s view of conversion is to understand covenant. In Genesis 15 with God, by Himself, carrying the torch through the elements of the cattle Abraham brought forth. You bring forward yourself as the sacrifice and God will carry out the covenant. Though being in covenant with God means coming forward to God and following his desire. The responding to the covenant looks like that of the calls upon Israel in Exodus 19: 5-6, Deut 6:4-5, Deut 10: 12-13, Deut 30: 19, Josh 24: 14-15. These summonses mean an evacuation of all other allegiances. This conversion is personal and communal. Communal in the fact that God’s message is given to the whole community and held up by the whole community; it is personal in that it is developed in the individual heart of each member of the community. Brueggemann uses the corporate language of Hosea to show the prophetic call of a community; he also uses Joel to reveal the personal affects of the conversion of the heart.

Brueggemann moves towards the complication of a human response to conversion. The prophets reveal; when the exile to Assyria and Babylon draws near; the inability for God’s people to actually respond with repentance without God’s intervention. Brueggemann points to texts in Ezekiel to reveal this thought. 11:19-20 shows that will give them a new heart and put a new spirit in them. 36:26, 18:31, 37:14 says similar things and remind us of the need to be renewed by God. Like a failed organ a transplant must be done to develop repentance.

Brueggemann moves on to the repentance of God. No bare with Walter here. As a covenant partner God will change and react in fresh ways to draw his people to him. Repentance not as turning away from His own sin but a repentance, turning away from a current pattern that is causing the Fall’s triumph over His people. It is a quality of God that makes him different from all other God’s; He is not static or removed from the needs of His people. Brueggemann says: “God’s passion is not in his distant opposition but his compassionate freedom to sustain the relation with the people.” Brueggemann points to two texts to highlight his point; Nineveh’s repentance in Jonah, and God’s relenting in Amos when he prayed to God. It is God’s turning that makes their turning possible. Which makes turning to God in repentance a positive endeavor, not out of shame but of righteousness, being like God.

Brueggemann makes a final list that entails conversion; (a) a call to repent, to enter a new arrangement; (b) the empowerment to repent is found in the good news; and (c) The substance of repentance is positive not negative. Jesus announcement of these are three in one centered all on restoring God’s people to Himself. The main question is then and now; which God do you serve and covenant with?

The Bible Makes Sense By: Walter Brueggemann the 1st 2nd and 3rd Chapters

2008-07-21T09:11:00.001-07:00

The Next book is “The Bible Makes Sense” by Walter Brueggemann. There was no Introduction but Brueggemann jumps right into the first chapter. The first chapter is about perspective on the Bible. Brueggemann discusses in general the worldviews that influence how we interpret the Bible. The first is the Modern-Industrial-Scientific Model. It is marked with a strong cause and affect relationship. “Good people prosper, evil people suffer.” This view puts an emphasis on what is attainable, knowable, and predictable. It puts a low value on mystery and ambiguity. Everything must be managed. This viewpoint is easily seen attached with the Modern Era, as well as the Enlightenment. Brueggemann suggests that this is a very subtle and influencing factor in how we study the scriptures.

The next perspective is the Existential Model, a model born out of the Romantic period as well as an antithesis to the Modern Era. It is a viewpoint that re-defines reality to an individual experience. What was a reaction to cold calculated sterile decision-making, turned into an objective-less form of deriving truth. Existentialism has brought great understanding to the scriptures but also marked the start of individualism. Which developed solitary decision-making, and a mistake maker is tested to live with the consequences. Leaving an individual with no memory or continuity with history or community. Existentialism also put an emphasis on emotion and feeling.

The final perspective is the Transcendentalist Model. It is a simplification of reality. It sets a mode of living in life to that of an easier world. Having another sphere of reality that gives them meaning. Real meanings do not emerge from friendships, love relationships, or experiences in life. They come from the sphere protected from all that. We can see this with our romantic notions of the American Dream. It can also been in the church of self-involvement. It removes from the reality a need to see the dirtiness of the world. It is escapism and personal peace that is given priority. This view “conjures a God who dwells in quiet heaven to sanction such a settled life.”

Brueggemann moves on to a more proper way of reading the Bible. It is the Covenantal-Historical Model. Brueggemann explains this viewpoint in contrast of those described above. This viewpoint depends on the influence of the community, with dialogue and discussion. It should always be seen with-in view of the sin that plagues the world. It must give ground in the area of mystery. Brueggemann moves forward, saying that this viewpoint must try and forsake every conception of the world around it but be influenced by the covenant partner in whom we live our lives for, Jesus. It is more characterized by living in communion with the Father, trusting in the covenant we make to follow him with our very lives. Brueggemann moves on and describes this view as containing concrete reality. God chose a particular people, to do a particular task, for a particular reason. There is no abstraction in this. It is to call a distinct people in this world to do a distinct role, God’s work. Brueggemann also describes that our memory must not be in an abstract realm of ideas, but in an actual historical movement of people; attached to a vision and reason. It also adds a specific knowledge of the future. We are in covenant with a God who cares and will ALWAYS provide for us. The viewpoint also determines human existence in terms of vocation. Always answering the call of new forms of fidelity and faithfulness in every area of life.

Brueggemann ends the chapter explaining how an individual works through those viewpoints expressed above. He also ends the chapter with several questions and things to dwell upon.

The second Chapter dwells on how to develop a historical imagination. Brueggemann first describes a common approach using a common Bible study approach. Then he moves on to developing an historical imagination. This is marked with having the ability to continually see the scripture in new lights. It is easy to see Manna as a God’s provision, or you can see it as spiritual food. It is being able to see the scripture as having multi-layers in the same text. He does a quick description of the Exodus in terms of having a historical imagination.

Brueggemann says the bread in the wilderness can give us a fresh perspective on the Eucharist. It can also give us a new perspective on world hunger. It can also give us healthy rebuke to our current consumer society. It can also help us to let go of explaining everything, revealing our helplessness in the midst of God’s provision. This viewpoint is only accessible to those who are insiders. Not as if there is a special knowledge except for those that participate in the history of God’s people. In plain terms those who follow Jesus will have a greater understanding of God’s word.

The third chapter is how to make sense of the nature of the Bible. Brueggemann suggests that a chronological study of the Bible; though fine; is not always the best way to study. He suggests a new way of see the Bible. This is in order of magnitude. The first is the Primal Narrative. The second is Expanded Narrative. The third is Derivative Narrative. The fourth and final is actually three; Mature Theological reflection; Instruction and Vocation; and Institutionalization.

1. I realize that what I am saying is obviously disputed though I think Brueggemann adds to our understanding as he explains what these means. The first and most forceful is the Primal Narrative. The Primal Narrative is contained in the texts: Deut 6: 20-24, 26: 5-9, Josh 24:1-13, 1 Cor 1:23, 1 Cor 3:1, 1 Cor 15:3-8.

Deut 26: 5-9 is the liturgical statement of loyalty and allegiance, were Israel declares her deepest and most precious story.

Deut 6: 20-24 it is the message of Catechesis. It is what the people of God are supposed to pass on to their generation.

Josh 24: 1-13 the declaring of the one story that the whole nation partakes in. It is the shared ground of a common life that they all embody.

Brueggemann makes a small case that these NT statements below were written during the Gospels, thus these are early important statements about Christ. Maybe these were in some sense creeds.

1 Cor 1:23 This is the Gospel described.

1 Cor 3:1 this is the bedrock of how we approach God; as children.

1 Cor 15: 3-8 Paul’s understanding of the Gospel

These 6 verses to Brueggemann are Primal and the statements as Christians we live our life as.

2. The next level of impact texts is The Expanded Narrative. It is a collection of writings that describe all the ways in which the primal narrative has been perceived and handled. This is Genesis, Exodus, parts of Deuteronomy, parts of Joshua, and parts of Numbers. All of these texts affirm and inform the parts of the OT mentioned above. The Gospels are what influenced the Primal Narrative of the NT texts above.

3. The next section is that of the Derivative narrative. These are contained in describing how the people of God are responding to the Primal Narrative, 1, 2 Samuel; 1,2 Kings; 1, 2 Chronicles; Ezra; Nehemiah; and Esther. Of course Acts is how the young church is following the Primal narrative and Expanded Narrative of God.

4. Literature of institutionalization is sections of Exodus (the building of the Ark); the book of Leviticus; sections of Numbers; and parts of Ezekiel (chps 40-48). In the NT it is 1,2 Timothy and Titus. These sections of literature give us forms of how to respond to God in worship and structure. Maintenance, and discipline are described in both texts. These writings were crucial to the community and remain so pending on the texts.

5. The next is Literature of Mature Theological Reflection. These writings are the most complete and ripe form of theological discussion. They are Romans and Deuteronomy. Both writings were written when the people of God was approaching a syncretistic state; or in the case of Romans already living in a syncretistic state.

6. The final is the literature of Instruction and Vocation. This form of literature is contained in Isaiah to Malachi; Job to Ecclesiastes; 1 Corinthians to Revelation. These are scriptures that depict a vast array of thought and theology.

How these sections of scripture relate is important. The Primal Narrative is primary. Yet it is the Expanded Narrative that gives the Primal narrative meaning. It is the movement of God that gives these statements significance. The primal Narrative is only key when the Expanded Narrative gives the definition to the terms given. The Derivative Narrative is used not necessarily as a model for living (though it may) it is more used to see how the People of God responded to the Primal and Expanded Narratives. Points 4,5,6 (from above) are not held in any less importance than one another. They all respond and draw strength from the Primal Narrative.

I am not sure of the supreme orthodoxy of this hierarchy. The Primal Narrative seems very particular and I find warning in giving these statements the weight they are given. I guess if there are sections of scripture given this much weight these sections are not bad. Yet my question would be, why not Jesus Words for the NT? The answer to that question as I see it would be as follows. Jesus words and actions are what formed Paul’s words selected in the text. It is Paul’s cliff notes on the life and words of Jesus. Though those notes are useless without knowing Jesus’ words and life for yourself.

The Final review of "Reading the Old Testament with Ancient Church"

2008-07-18T08:54:00.000-07:00

The Final Review of “Reading the Old Testament with the Ancient Church. I would suggest this book as a companion to any serious or intentional Old Testament study. It is very insightful book but I would say that it draws from a broad range and you are left wanting more. It is a great primer to want to read ancient commentary as well as commentary from different cultures.

I absolutely loved the chapter on Moses. I found it to be exciting. This is what I wished the whole book to be. It was unfortunately not. The majority of the book attempted to bite off a lot. Heine did a wonderful job making the material concise and to the point however it’s the difference between whitewashing and painting. This has given me a massive thirst for reading the church fathers again.

My next book is going to be Walter Brueggemann’s “The Bible Makes Sense.” After that I plan to read several books that deal with ancient exegesis. The book after Brueggemann’s is a book similar to this one. “Reading the Bible with the Dead,” by Thompson. I also intend to read N.T. Wright’s tome “The New Testament and the People of God.” If you liked what you read about the last three blogs stay tuned. There is a lot to come.

Chapters 5 and 6 of Reading the Old Testament with the Ancient Church

2008-07-17T10:40:00.000-07:00

The fifth chapter of Heine’s book deals with Prayer in the Psalms. This deals heavily with understanding the Psalms as a devotional classic. Heine first speaks about Athanasius. Athanasius sees the Psalms as a table of contents of the Christian walk. It records the emotions and struggles of the follower of God. Unlike the Law of Moses we can be brought easily into praise and petition with the Psalms. They give us framework to see our own repentance as seen in Psalm 51.

Heine moves to Diodore of Tarsus. Diodore did not see the OT as figurative or allegory. Diodore saw it as imperative to read the Psalms with complete literalness. Though there was some leeway in his view when it concerned approaching things like Psalm 30. He believed that it spoke about the healing of Hezekiah. He would derive that God will also heal us from our enemies because what God has done in the past will be consistent with what he may decide to do in the future.

Heine moves to John of Chrysostom. John was known extensively for his preaching and in doing so used Psalms to affirm the sections of scripture he was preaching on. He also delighted in the liturgical usage of the psalms. He lays out a 6-step plan on how to pray:

1. The person must be worthy to receive something from God.

2. The prayer must be compliant with God’s Law.

3. The person praying must be persistent with offering the prayer.

4. Must ask for nothing earthly.

5. Must want truly beneficial things.

6. Must contribute everything to prayer.

The Psalms are clearly the guides to this type of disciplined prayers. If this is the perspective taken one can see how the Psalms was infused into John’s prayer.

Heine moves on to John Cassian. Cassian believed the Psalms needed to transcend a theological teaching and become our very words. Being fulfilled not only in the ancient Jewish fathers but also in our very presence. We enter into the same type of mindset as the psalmist when we begin to pray the words of the Psalms.

Heine moves away from the ancient churches understanding of the Psalms as a devotional, and moves toward the exegetical procedure of the ancient church. Heine continues with how Origen develops his understanding of the Psalms. The main issue here it seems is to understand the voice. Origen starts to see the Psalms as spoken by Christ. In doing so we have a greater understanding of the tone of the Psalms. There is a conflict when the Psalmist speaks about his own sin, obviously a conflict to the nature of Christ. A balance to keep is to see when David cannot claim the words spoken. These seem to be the words of Jesus. Consider the spiritual significance of each word, doing so in light of the whole body of the Bible. For example David’s Psalm 4 suggests that a parting of God’s people, but it can be seen as Jesus separating the faithful from the unfaithful.

Heine moves onto Jerome. Like Origen, Jerome gives attention also to the speaker, which is the key for how he understood the Psalms. Jerome sees the Psalms more as an overlapping of a dialogue. The Psalms can be seen as a discussion between David and Jesus, or an interlude from God in the midst of the words of Jesus or David. Or maybe it can be seen as a way to see David’s heart and hear Christ’s words prophetically. For Jerome it takes discernment, its not as easy as setting a rubric which to run the Psalm through, but a interpretive process.

Heine moves on in the chapter with Augustine. Augustine like Origen and Jerome dug for the voice of the Psalms. He believes the voice changes rapidly and without complete warning. He uses Origen’s method of getting to the bottom of the voice, but goes much deeper as he says: “It is our voice here than not, it is Christ’s voice than it is not.” Augustine suggests that we need to see Jesus speaking for both body and head; the head as the leader of the body and the body as the Great Intercessor.

Heine ends the chapter by quoting Bonhoeffer: “We should speak to God, not in the erroneous and confused language of our own hearts but in the clear and pure language that God has spoken to us in Jesus Christ.” Through the understanding developed from the Ancient Church the Psalms become our instruction book on prayer.

The final chapter is a summary of application. Heine suggests that an attempt to approach the OT needs to be on the back of deep familiarity of the text. We need to constantly see the OT with complete Biblical lenses. The other aspect is living the text. One needs to be a living understanding of the text. Heine finishes with Origen and Gregory of Nyssa. Origen says that Christ appears to those who meditate on Him and live a life for him. He reads the OT narratives as an on going Christian experience. Where Gregory sees them as formative to the understanding of the Christian narrative. It is for the formation of becoming a true human being as God intended.

Chapters 3 and 4 of the Reading the Old Testament w/ the Ancient Church

2008-07-15T14:44:00.000-07:00

The next two chapters deal with The Exodus and The Prophets. I will start with the Exodus. This chapter of the book I found the most interesting. Heine contrasts two theologians and their view of how they interpret the Exodus. Though, Heine first focuses on our common interpretation of the Exodus, the liberation of bondage God’s people. He refers to John as a text that re-imagines the OT text. Heine points to John 1:29, 36 where it refers to Jesus as the “Lamb of God” a clear reference to the blood on the doorposts. It ends with the Lords Supper pointing to the ultimate sacrifice. Jesus embodies the Passover meal pointing it to himself. The blood in the communion is the blood on the doorposts ending in complete victory over the fall and ultimately victory over bondage. There is a depiction of the wondering in the desert of the Jews and that of Jesus. Manna from God was marked after the temptation of Jesus, in which Jesus did not let his physical weakness disturb his faithfulness to God. The clearing of the Temple is symbolic of the tabernacle. The word dwelt among us (exodus 40:34); The Word became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1).

Heine delves into two theologians; the first is Origen. According to Heine, Origen saw the OT as symbol. Just like Paul, Origen reads the crossing of the Read Sea as a baptism. Using 1 Corinthians 2:13, Origen saw the Spirit as a major interpreter. If Pharaoh is Satan, than the Jews are under bondage until God’s intervening. The symbol is crossing over from death to life, crossing over from Satan’s realm to the struggles of the Christian life associated to the wondering in the wilderness. Origen saw the tents as symbolic, because of what they are not, permanent. Tents show that as we walk in faithfulness with Christ we have prior camping places that reveal where we have come from; to pack up and move forward in our faith “pressing forward,” to use Paul’s language. New campsites bring new perspectives and a development in who we are in Christ. Which ultimately end in our entry into the Promised Land.

Heine moves to his second theologian Gregory of Nyssa. Heine did not highlight this to suggest it as an anti-thesis to Origen. Heine only suggests this as a way that Exodus has been read. Nyssa saw the life of Moses as a focal point for a virtuous life. Gregory suggests that the burning bush is the primary way in which God first reveals himself to Moses. The bright burning of the bush contained on holy ground is to that of a Christian who first approaches the throne of grace. When we declare Jesus as Lord for the first time we right a wrong in ourselves; crossing over from dark to light; a clear depiction portrayed in the burning bush Imagery God displays. That is to say Moses now has a better understanding of who God is in his life. This is how God elects to move in Moses’ life by declaring to Moses who the God of the Universe is. When Moses exited the mountain his prior conception of who God was shattered. Heine continues to describe Gregory, showing how there was immediate testing of Moses’ faith. Satan acted in the lives of the Pharaoh, and the magicians, to undermine the truth of God, and ultimately an unsure Moses. Gregory compares two perspectives that contrast his view, a holy virtuous life and an evil ungodly life. The culmination of the evil is manifested in the Pharaoh and the generational sins passed down from the parent to the child and are represented in the killing of the first-born. The justice of God is laid bare with the final plague; when He reveals the affects of a life in opposition to God’s will. Gregory continues by emphasizing the experience on Mount Sinai. The Jews were forbidden to even touch the mountain that Moses was now climbing, a clear contrast of the Holy. What once appearing as a light in contrast to darkness, now God is invisible and incomprehensible. To Gregory the beginning of knowledge of God once manifests in basic child-like imagery turns into the mere Word of God. The Word teaches Moses after a walk of faith to Egypt and back, that the God demands right belief and right conduct. This revelation for Moses is made clear when he asks to see God. Moses seeing God’s back reveals that to see God results in us following God. It was Moses’ ultimate expression of desire to know God, an expression that would not have been made before the journey to Egypt. Gregory describes a life marked by a faith journey depicted in Moses.

Heine ends by emphasizing that these perspectives are not in conflict they are just ways in which to see the multi-layers to read the word of God. Heine continues by saying that many preachers are removing themselves from seeing the OT in such a creative and constructive way. I will end with Origen’s perspective on Exodus 33. It is seen by Origen that the rock in which Moses was pushed was Christ. Christ is the vehicle that we see the Father. The protection of Christ as the “Rock” makes following the father possible. This is also the necessary action of the Christian, to be the rock in which those who don know God can see God. Just as Christ was the Rock in which we see God’s back so must we be the way the world sees the back of the Father.

The fourth chapter is the longest. I was however a little disappointed by it. It was a listing of the ancient churches view of the Prophets as Christ is revealed in them. Why this was disappointing was it truly is a reference. It does not go into detail of the thinking of several theologians but goes across a large selection of theologians as they interpret the Prophets to see Christ. It goes first into the deity and preexistence of Christ. It proceeds into the incarnation (all the things surrounding his birth as they were prophesized). The third section reveals the prophecy of the healing ministry of Jesus. The fourth section talks about the prophetic understanding of the suffering and death of Jesus. The fifth section goes into the resurrection and glorification of Jesus. The Final section goes into the calling of the gentiles. I will try to give you brief highlights of two sections, the first and second.

Heine starts with Christ’s appearance in Psalm 72. The early church saw the Psalms as a heavy prophetic book. The contrast might develop since Jews saw this as pointing to David’s hopes for Solomon. Yet Solomon’s own life would destroy this theory if it were perceived as a prophecy and less like a fathers wishes to his son. Tertullian undermines the common Arian/ Marcion/ Jewish conception by revealing the eternity of Christ in the quote “before the sun” to mean that Jesus was before the Sun. Tertullian connects Psalms 110 to this chapter, suggesting that both can not affirm Solomon.

Heine moves towards discussing the incarnation. He points to Isaiah 11. The staff from Jesse was the staff talked about in Genesis 49:10. Justin Martyr said that the star would rise from Jesse. The gentiles will put their hope in His arms. Rooting this text in Jewish theology, Isaiah 11 is seen as the Messiah text among Jews. Justin and others extend the understanding deeper in their Jewish history. Though traditionally Isaiah 7: 14-16 is seen by Jews to mean Hezekiah. Justin refutes this by adding Isaiah 8:4 immediately after reading chapter 7:14-16. In doing so he shows that there is never any proof that Hezekiah went to war with Assyria. This points to an unfulfilled prophecy in the Jewish paradigm and ultimately a subversion of their understanding. Justin reveals that Jesus is the prophesized in this text.

The rest of the chapter goes into very insightful yet dense study as to how Christ is the fulfillment of the OT prophecies. There is an interesting discussion at the end contrasting the OT understanding of Christ as the inheritor of the nations. Justin says it is the figurative, all nations where Tertullian roots the understanding of the text in the places where the Gospels extend. Even still this chapter radiates this type of material and is worth the purchase of the book alone. Heine finishes by saying Jesus is the bricks of the church but the Prophets are the mortar.

The Introduction, 1st and 2nd chapters of Reading the Old Testament with the Ancient Church

2008-07-14T14:59:00.000-07:00

The next book is “Reading the Old Testament with the Ancient Church” by: Ronald E. Heine. I plan to review the introduction and the first chapter, as they both set the ground rules for the rest of the book.

The introduction deals with lightly outlining the role of the Old Testament (OT) since the Reformation. It starts with Erasmus. Heine says that Erasmus was focused heavily on the New Testament (NT). He did not disregard the OT completely, viewing it as a backdrop to the NT. Though Erasmus was quoted as saying he would not mind if the OT perished as long as the NT would remain undisturbed.

Heine moved to Erasmus’s contemporary, Martin Luther. Luther’s approach to the OT is said by Heine to be complicated, though Luther considered the OT to be the Word of God. Luther’s view of the OT gets murky when one tries to understand the law in the role of the Christian church. Luther says the role of law is tied to that of the Jews and not the Christian. Not to suggest that the Law is removed from the role of the Church. In reality we cant know grace until we understand the affects of the law. Luther says however that both law and grace stand side by side. “Just as Christ is free from the grave Peter is free from prison,” says Luther.

The next perspective is Calvin. John Calvin, like Luther, believes Christ is in the OT. However they disagree in the role of Law today. Calvin suggests that the law is the system of religion given to Moses, dividing the law into two parts moral and ceremonial. To Calvin the moral Law is still valid; the ceremonial law was abolished in Christ. The moral law reveals 2 things, Gods righteousness and our unrighteousness, and the law restrains those who would never live by it in the first place. There is a final function of the law with Calvin, it teaches Christians the will of God. Between Luther and Calvin both found Christ prefigured in the ceremonies, stories, and prophecies. Both also saw the importance of the OT for the discovery of finding God’s will.

Heine moves towards the English Deists. I will only spend a short time in these theologians. Locke believed in a very intellectual approach to the Law. He said knowledge of Christ is unknown without the knowledge of the OT. Though Christians have the covering of Jesus to makeup for their shortcomings. Heine moves onto Kant. Kant suggests that the law is the make up of statues that govern a political organization. The Christian movement created a revolution that forgoes the Jewish Law. Heine finally touches on Schleiermacher. Schleiermacher fought cerebral notions of the OT in line with the romantic period. He says that the OT is no longer intended for dogmatic purposes. He would affirm usage of the Prophetic books and Psalms, but would like to add the OT as an appendix to the NT.

Heine finishes the introduction with Harnack, Barth, and Bultmann. Harnack was in line with that of the heretic Marcion. Which down grades the OT as obsolete. He would say it is worth reading yet like any other book in a church library. Heine moves on to Karl Barth. He affirms the advancement of both the OT and NT as cannon and removes all doubt that both books are to be considered Canon. Heine doesn’t go into Barth’s view of the Law, however knowing on my own, Barth would depart from his Lutheran roots and affirm a more Calvin stance. The final theologian is Bultmann. Bultmann says two things about the OT in the usage of the church. He says that the OT must be read literally and used in the preparation for the Christian life. He would align himself with Luther as it pertains to the law.

It was a shame what the Enlightenment did to our Old Testament exegesis. Calvin and Luther were drawing wonderful thoughts from the OT. Yet in the midst of excessive intellectualism we lost a lot. Bultmann and mainly Barth brought the usage back to the main stream, or at least in the form of preaching.

The first chapter is a brief introduction to the texts that made up the early church’s OT. This is an interesting chapter but is only a brief discussion outlining the different forms the OT came in. Any historical study would yield the same results. The Septuagint is the Greek OT. The Vulgate was the Latin OT. There is several more like the Targumim and the Syriac Peshitta. I wont go into anymore detail.

The second chapter of Heine’s book deals with the early churches dealings with the same problems. The Church Fathers dealings with the validity of the OT deal heavily with a reaction to Marcion; he thought that the OT should be removed completely from our understanding. Marcion believed almost in an incomplete God, a God of incomplete knowledge. The first response comes from Justin Martyr. Justin saw the Law as coming from God and going forth to all His creation not just Jews. Though Justin would say the law was given because of the hardness of the hearts of the Jews. The ritual laws were used to keep God on their present minds. Justin would also say the law creates righteous living and ultimately worship. What is interesting though, Justin says that the time from Abraham to Moses constitutes that the Law of ritual did not please God since Abraham did not observe a Sabbath. In doing so Justin saw ritual more as a spiritual discipline given by God.

Heine jumps into two writers. The first is Barnabas, who says that the entire law is to be seen figuratively. This approach was affirmed and added on by Melito. Melito says that the words of Moses must be seen as patterns for the Church. The Gospel puts meaning to these patterns. This doesn’t sound as vague as it seems. Moses spoke in parables that seemed impossible to reach until Christ explained them all. Origen drew out Barnabas’s thoughts; saying that the story of the OT was a story of a people recovering from the affects of the Fall. Here are a people who just come from a context of idol worshiping and Moses is giving them laws and rituals to rehab them from their context. These acts are the telling of the worship in ancient Israel. The law is a shadow of the things to come. The law and forms of living were made current in the Gospels.

Heine speaks about Gnostic thoughts (which I found to be boring) yet he writes about the Christian response to these. I will write about Irenaeus’s response. Irenaeus the “Word” being Jesus has always been apart of God’s economy. Never did God move, not considering Jesus as a factor in the movement of the world. Irenaeus lists what Abraham has done to be counted as righteous (Romans 4:3). God reveals himself to be creator when His word became flesh. Irenaeus draws a connection between the OT and NT, in doing so he suggests the importance of the OT to the NT. He continues by saying that the Mosaic Law is limited without a faith relationship with God, meaning that the law was hollow with out its intent to follow God. The redemption of the world began with a faith relationship, that of Abraham’s and ends with those who have a faith relationship in Christ. The Pharisees added and adhered to the law more than what God intended. The purifications they lived caused them to not be able to hear the law of Christ; love God, love your neighbor. Though Irenaeus says, the one who created the law is the one who put an end to it, Jesus. It is only in Jesus that we know the end of the law. Like a slave we are given a law, a law to teach people to worship God, we are now free to worship God without fetters, yet this freedom now requires of us a larger subjection to the one who we worship. Heine ends the chapter by talking about Marcion. He also adds in his conclusion that the law was seen in two ways, historical and the other hermeneutical. Historical would say the law is suited for the perspective in which they play. The hermeneutical is thought to understand what the law meant. In the 2^nd and 3^rd centuries these views did not stand in conflict. They added to our understanding.

The final review of "The Jesus Way"

2008-07-10T16:06:00.000-07:00

The final review of Eugene Peterson’s “The Jesus Way.” If you have taken the time to read my posts you would see that this book comes highly endorsed by me. Peterson grounds his message in scripture, giving a very good covenantal understanding of God’s redemption. I enjoy studying about discipleship; I have not found a book that works at creating a theology for spiritual growth and discipleship like this book. Many books do a great job at giving you practical skills at disciplemaking. Very few books go at this length to subvert the modern problems in disciplemaking by realigning the reader in good Biblical theology.

A well-read man suggested this book; it has taken this him a year so far to get through it. After reading this book I have realized it is not because of the length but the importance of the content that prompts you to read it slowly.

I give this book a high endorsement and would suggest anyone to read it if they want to be challenged to grow in biblical theology of Christian growth. The Jesus Way broadens the common view of the Christian’s walk with Christ and connects us to the Father. This is the sole message that is constantly highlighted; The Jesus Way is to always be found in the Father, the source of all growth.

On a personal note… I will be in Michigan most of this weekend and won’t post again until Monday.

Chapters 8, 9 and 10 of the Jesus Way

2008-07-09T20:23:00.000-07:00

The 8^th, 9^th, and 10^th chapters of the Jesus Way deals with the ways in which Jesus is not. It takes a look at Herod, Caiaphas, and Josephus. We will look at the first being Herod. Peterson draws out an angle that Herod was a figure who tried to be great on his own terms. Peterson quotes N.T. Wright by saying that, “to say one’s prayers in private, maintain high personal morality, and then go to work to rebuild the tower of Babel.” The Christian Faith is not a faith that can be lived in conflict to your whole life. Herod killed and murdered to assure his own kingdom. Herod injected wealth, entertainment, and Hellenistic living into a body of “God’s people” to assure his on safety and success. Peterson moves toward the Pharisees in the same line of Herod. The Pharisees did not align themselves to Herod yet the Pharisees used language and theology to distance themselves and their followers from the world around them just like Herod. The Pharisees tried to assure their own religious safety. But Peterson says that Herod depersonalizes people to serve his own desires, treating them as tools of his own function. The Pharisee creates an identity that depersonalizes themselves from the world they are called to help redeem. The Pharisees remove themselves from a world that may contaminate them, separating themselves from God’s creation and covenant. The Jesus Way in light of these two agenda laden paths of life is by praying the prayer of Mary “I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word. And the angel departed from her.” Peterson makes a great point here by drawing our attention to the verbs we use when we pray. Do we say like Herod, “Make me Great”? Do we pray prayers like the Pharisees, “O God, thank thee that I am not like this tax collector”? Or our prayers acts of obedience “Let it be to me according to your word”?

The 9^th chapter speaks at length about Caiaphas and the Essenes. Peterson suggests that Caiaphas the High Priest was focused heavily on earthly goals. Caiaphas took control of the relationship he was called to have with God. In 2^nd century BC the Maccabean Revolt established an independent state in Israel. Which gave the High Priest power again and ultimately gave Caiaphas a lucrative living. Peterson draws attention to religious institutions like that of Caiaphas’ high priesthood unfortunately as a way to see the institution as more important than what the institution stands for. Peterson uses an analogy of bark on a tree that protects the life giving cambium inside. The bark never creates the life but the cambium. When Jesus says, “Follow me” hopefully the followers will not point to the institution but the relationship with God that the institution represents. Peterson moves on to the Essenes. The Essenes were most known as the sect of people, we get the Dead Sea Scrolls from, Jews who were completely removed from society. They separated themselves for the desire to live a life like that of Moses and Abraham. Jesus’ interaction with the losers and sinners reveal that Jesus’ devotion to God could only be lived in the midst of the world not in seclusion. This is why we don’t take control of God by manipulating the road were on like Caiaphas. This is also why we don’t take control of our relationship with God by never being faced with the difficult test of faith like the Essenes. Like the pre-upper room Thomas, we are faced with a life under the assumption that Jesus is an after thought, saying I must now control my life. This is what happens when Jesus appears in your life; you will never know where it may take you. However you must follow a God who does.

The 10^th and final chapter Peterson focuses on the way of Josephus. This was a very informative chapter. I was surprised to learn about Josephus the revolutionary. It appears Josephus started to create an army to over throw the Roman Empire. In the line of Benedict Arnold, Josephus completely went from hero to villain in one day. He turned in Jewish leadership for the sake of his own hide. This is where Josephus became a historian for the Roman government. Josephus never had “deny yourself” in his vocabulary. Peterson moves to the opposite of Josephus, the Zealots. The Zealots were revered for their self-sacrifice for their faith. The Zealots would die instantly for God, usually not at the ends of persecution but at the ends of war. Between the Josephus and the Zealots, they both desired an immediate glory. Their kingdom was coming soon but it was small. 1^st century Christians never partook in war. This focus on peace reveals something; those who carried the truth of God with peace carried the enduring truth of Jesus. We wont be able to last as a follower of God when we cut the ear off an attacker, like Peter. The truth of Jesus lasts in the presence of love and peace. Peterson says “Followers of Jesus’ Way need to embody a robust confidence in God’s Rule and a relaxed acceptance of our humanity.”

I will finish with the last paragraph of the book, which summarizes the last three chapters.

“Herod, Caiaphas, and Josephus, all three in their lifetimes, were more influential and more effective than Jesus. The three protest movements, prominent during the years when Jesus was announcing the presence of God’s kingdom and when his resurrection was in formation –Pharisees, Essenes, and Zealots- all attracted far more followers than Jesus did.

And here’s the sobering thing: they still do. We are faced with this wonderful, or not-so-wonderful, irony: Jesus- most admired, most worshiped (kind of), most written about. And also least followed.

But in every generation a few do follow Jesus. They deny themselves, they take up their cross, and follow him. They lose their lives and save them- and along with their own, the lives of many others.”

Chapters 6 and 7 of "The Jesus Way"

2008-07-08T15:07:00.000-07:00

Chapter 6 and 7 break Isaiah up into two sections. The first being that of the pre-exilic prophet and the second being of the postexilic prophet. Chapter 6 is where I will start. Peterson jumps immediately into Isaiah's calling for holiness. Peterson suggests that holiness isn’t about making God small and easily attainable; rather it is making us, a larger functioning member of the kingdom to be used by God in larger ways. He says that Holiness is the most authentic form of living; it is not seen from a distance. We find ourselves in the operation of God’s action in the world; we are not just talking about it or reading about it. Isaiah didn’t record the song of the seraphim on a CD to re-listen to, to gain some spiritual experience when Isaiah wanted to feel close to God. The act in the moment was the experience that demanded his action. Peterson goes on in an amusing manor, highlighting how other Biblical figures didn’t make God a commodity. This is perfectly shown by a quote from Peterson that highlights the foolishness of how we deal with God.

“John of Patmos didn’t reduce his vision of Jesus into charts and graphs to use them to entertain religious consumers with sensationalized views of the future. “Our God is a consuming fire” (Heb12: 29), not fire to be played with. Holy, Holy, Holy is not Christian Needlepoint.”

Peterson wants us to see that when God interacts in our lives we cannot act as if we have seen the Grand Canyon be amazed and just leave. In a place like 600 BC Israel, Isaiah was in an un-holy place. Yet Isaiah at the Temple in Isaiah 6, he was plunged immediately into the Holy. The act of being plunged into the Holy he was also pushed to do the work of the Holy. We as followers of Christ need to see the work of God as finding the Holy in every place. God is a creating God creating; which means that He is and was present in our history, culture and modern context. No matter what happens to our cities and our places of worship God is still in the act of redemption, are you going to partake? This is the mission of Isaiah.

Peterson moves forward in chapter 6 of Isaiah, highlighting the purification of Isaiah’s lips with a hot coal. God’s act declares that the work of Isaiah would be littered with God’s word. Drawing a beautiful connection Peterson makes the case that the work of the Holy will be inundated with the word of God. He points to: John of Patmos; Moses and the Burning Bush; and finally the works of Isaiah. These experiences cannot be rendered to an emotional devotional experience in order to “feel spiritual.” The Holy ground will always challenge you to do the work outward. Holiness demands content, not inspiring experiences of unclear abstraction. Holiness will always center on God’s word, not a feeling based language.

Peterson continues to comment on Isaiah 6. He says that common interpretations would split the chapter in two, 1-8 and 9-13. Peterson says this does a major disservice to God’s intention. The first half rightly ordains Isaiah to do his ministry. The second half is a prophecy that Isaiah is intended to preach to the Israel. I can see how if an individual were intended to preach on this he or she would split the two. Yet Peterson makes a case that we shouldn’t. The ordaining of Isaiah is intimately connected to the stump imagery. A holy God and a holy stump are right next to one another. The imagery of an empty field with stumps alludes to a place where God is not. The imagery is made bare in the Tomb of the Resurrection, where the absence of Jesus’ presence is eloquent in showing God’s mission in this world.

God filled the emptiness of the Holy of Holies while sharing an image of absence. In the midst of this imagery of God’s absence, God reveals to Isaiah the manner in which he must apply this truth to his audience. Peterson says that the Israelites are God consumers with a desire to consume God on their terms. Their eyes are obscured by sin. The preaching of Holy is not a problem to be contextualized. It is truth that demands understanding. Teaching them the truth by overcoming their sin obstacles takes time not a watering of the truth. The sobering reality of the mass lost by sin will tempt us to contextualize the Holy to a point of losing God’s desire. Peterson says, evangelicals are mystified by success, but God gives Isaiah the success to Isaiah as a barren wasteland of stumps. This is said to reveal to Isaiah that success is faithfulness to God not a mass amount of converts. The stump is a reminder to Isaiah that his work here on earth will be centered on pointing people to the holy, using the words that God gives. In chapter11 the long-term plan of God is made bare with the stump bearing a shoot upward. This shoot that comes out of the stump is Jesus and ultimately the chosen people of God. A beautiful image of Gods redemption begins with the repulsive. The work of Isaiah is not centered on the suave and beautiful, but faithfulness to God and His Word. The Holy as it pertains to Peterson is being faithful defining faithful in the absence of earthly definition. Following Jesus might bring us to see in our work the lack of veritable fruit and consumer rewards; The Holy is non-negotiable hard and filled with God’s word. It might lead to a field of stumps, but never a lack of God’s redemption. Jesus knew this when everyone of His followers denied Him.

Chapter 8 of “The Jesus Way” speaks about the post-exilic Isaiah. Peterson starts with the paradigm shift of the destruction of Israel’s temple, walls, and cities. Walking a great distance with every presupposition the Jews had about God shattered. Being treated poorly the people was wondering what could have caused this lapse in God’s provision. Jeremiah and Ezekiel addressed the vast array of responses. Jeremiah said in short, go and make the best of this remembering your true God. Ezekiel was a little harsher in short he said, this is a living analogy of your relationship with God. Isaiah took a different approach. The unnamed prophet (Peterson is convinced the post-exilic prophet is not the same Isaiah) was with the exiles. Isaiah in the first part went down the list of the sins of the nations that the Israelites were neighbors of. The Isaiah called judgment down upon the idols of the nations, in doing so Isaiah was calling judgment upon the Israelites that consumed these Idols. However the Unnamed Prophet was the ever-present reminder to seek God. “Seek God in your context” was his reminder. The Unnamed Prophet did not give the Israelites a set pattern to better their current condition. He preaches the Gospel: God is alive, present, and active in their immediate context. Peterson says “preaching about us is not Gospel preaching.”

Peterson says that The Prophet employs a three-element strategy to his preaching. One the Prophet provides images of God for the People of God. Two, the Prophet provides images that are personal, relational, and that intend Gods salvation of His people. Three, he roots the first two in their Genesis and Exodus beginnings.

These three elements are highlighted among an array of different perspectives. Peterson first points us to Creation and its connection to the covenant of salvation.

“Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth!

For I am God, and there is no other. Isaiah 45:22

Creation is the building in which worship must exist. The creator still exists in Babylon as He did in Israel. As the story of redemption continues, God reveals his faithfulness as stories of Daniel and Ezra fill their eyes.

The next theme highlighted is Idols. In brief the Prophet shows that the same created order that is used to burn and keep warm is the same created order that is worshiped. The Prophet has a good time highlighting the ridiculousness of these acts.

Peterson continues by concentrating on the Exodus. Isaiah 51 draws the Israelites attention to how God once released Israel from oppression. How can God not do that now? God worked out of the seemingly godless centuries to bring Israel into the Promised Land. Cannot God do this again if He chooses to do so?

Peterson moves on to the four “Servant Songs” at the end of Isaiah. In short the Prophet draws attention to the requirement of being a servant in God’s kingdom. The story of Calvary shows how this requirement is a must not a choice. In view of a temptation to fight for freedom, Christ and the Prophet preach a different message.

Peterson ends the chapter by drawing attention to the theme of Beauty. He says that Beauty is when the formless takes shape. When God calls out of nothing the creation of the Earth. Out of broken sinful lives God creates holiness. Peterson says: “Sin is not redeemed by scrubbing it out of existence but by taking it in as a sacrifice that makes “many to be accounted righteous.” We as Christians partake in the work of what Jesus did on the cross. Becoming participants in God’s reconciling world. Salvation is at the center of everything in a fallen creation, history, and community. Peterson says: “the servant is an agent of beauty not by getting rid of the ugly but by following the Servant in discerning, reading, praying salvation into form and fullness right here where we are now.”

Subverting Idols; calling for faithfulness; asking for trust in God when trusting God is hard; is to emphasize the beauty of God’s immanent creation, a beauty that gets involved with the ugly and the lifeless stump. All things the prophet did while in the exile, yet also the work of Jesus.

The 5th chapter of "The Jesus Way"

2008-07-07T08:40:00.000-07:00

Chapter five of “The Jesus Way” centers on Elijah. This is very Brueggemann in its approach to the prophets. It speaks to a degree about the prophetic potential of us as Christians. Peterson starts by filing in some of the story between David and Elijah. He than introduces us to his draw towards Elijah, for Peterson it is a realization that in a world full of idols Elijah remained strong. Peterson can’t help but see the same lure of idolatry for our own lives today.

The majority of the chapter consists of Peterson reframing the Elijah story with his observations melted in. Peterson suggests that the drought prophesied has a representation of the bareness of the Baal cult that dominated the Israelite nation. After some time, a land flowing with milk and honey is now a barren wasteland. Peterson says: “Elijah’s seventeen-word sermon is an altar call.”

The beginning of the drought brought forward the repercussions of an angry king. When God asked Elijah to go to the brook Cherith he was protecting him. This is the boldness demanded when asked to deliver a message for the Lord. He will turn the bad into good according to His purposes. God was preparing Elijah for this by giving him clear provision and safety. Elijah’s time in the wilderness creates in him an effectiveness that is achieved by God preparing him in the wilderness. The education continues with the service of helping the widow and the boy. In a controlled environment Elijah experiences the power of God, as God uses Elijah to raise a boy from the dead.

Peterson moves into a very powerful and hard-hitting critique of modern worship. Peterson suggests that the common emotion filled style of worship that is common to that of Baal. “Lets have a worship experience” is what Peterson clashes with. A person experiences something that excites them and puts spiritual wrapping on it. In doing so feelings and emotion override the Word of God. A worship experience of this form is something that can be experienced anywhere. Though, it isn’t worship it is something that reminds you of a positive religious experience. The Biblical definition would consist of responding to God’s word in context of the community of God’s people. Worship is not experience; it is something we do; regardless of how we feel about it. We are waiting for the “Seraphim Experience” in worship. Elijah depicts this in a beautiful worship service at the competing altars. Where one side was weeping and crying raising there hands in complete emotional experience, while Elijah calls upon the Lord responding to what God told him.

Peterson moves towards the thought of idolatry. Elijah’s fight was the same as Moses’ fight against idolatry. Image making was common; so Peterson draws out an application for today. He suggests that we are guilty of doing the same thing today. Putting God in a convenient box hems God’s ability to change your life. Making God impersonal and rule oriented makes an infinite God finite. We begin to cut God down into a manageable size. We won’t have to have a relationship with something that is impersonal and removed from reality. The slow trudge through the wilderness gives Elijah the opportunity to encounter God. God’s breath appeared not in a thundering approach, which would be a common thought of God leading up to this. It is the breaking of an anticipated mold that God would speak with a loud crash, like He did with Moses. Though, God spoke with a gust of wind, a breath, which is a foreshadowing of Jesus breathing of the Spirit into his followers. Elijah expected a loud crash, and ultimately a preconceived image Elijah had was projecting on to God. God Broke Elijah’s notion of who God is by appearing in a gentle wind. God was up to subverting even Elijah’s (and our own) idolatry of who we think God is.

Peterson says there is an addictive quality to Baal. However giving up Baal meant to give up control over God. We begin to give up our ability to get what we want from God. We give up a track to an entertainment filled faith that produces false ecstasy.

What Elijah has done is rid us from a life that is dictated by the world around us. God has used prophets to separate us from the illusions that make up our everyday life and put us on a path of obedience and worship of the true God. Prophets help us discern the ways of the world and the Ways of Jesus.

Chapter 4 of "The Jesus Way"- Perhaps the most important Chapter of the book

2008-07-03T09:29:00.000-07:00

Chapter four of “The Jesus Way” was titled; David: “I did not hide my iniquity.” The title gives the theme away. Peterson is trying to fight against our common desire to finish the task, accomplish the goal, to solve the problem. The problem we are attempting to solve is our sinfulness. He doesn’t speak against working on sinfulness. Though Peterson wants to give a lot more credence to Jesus’ ability to be patient while we trust His grace. Peterson moves towards looking at the narrative of David. Peterson observes that the Bible reveals a lot more of David’s dealings with God than it does his dealings with the Goliath, Saul, or the Philistines. There is not an attempt to make David admirable in any writings of or about David, yet we get a strong sense for his heart for God. Peterson suggests that the stories are not a warning about bad behavior but a depiction of normalcy, a telling of the story of inevitable imperfection.

David chose not to kill Saul in doing so he showed the tension of righteousness inner-tangled with brokenness. He chose not to kill Saul when in reality he would not have been blamed or seen as evil for doing so. Though when David killed Uriah to cover up his affair with Bathsheba, David shows his horrible imperfection. What we love about David should not be canceled out by what we hate about David. This is the view that Christ has for of all those who pursue him. David is a man of God but not a perfect man.

Peterson directs our attention to David’s Prayers in the Psalms. He looks at Psalms: 6, 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, and 143. These are prayers prayed by someone who is not perfect and struggling. “Every night I flood my bed with tears”, is a prayer that is of someone who doesn’t have it all figured out. This prayer is of a man who is struggling with his own inequity. The way of imperfection is not easy and takes us to places of difficult sadness.

“For when I kept silent (silent about his sin), my bones wasted away through my groaning all day long.” Psalm 32 reveals the repentant nature we need to have with the way of imperfection. Peterson says that the greatest sin is the refusal to admit your sin. When we follow “The Jesus Way” we are always dealing with our own sin. Confession is the way in which we uproot our attempts to manage our own sin.

“There is no soundness in my flesh because of your indignation; there is no health in my bones because of my sin." Psalm 38 is David’s prayer of recognizing how sin is poison to who were created to be. There are no fantasies of “getting right with God.” Getting right with God usually means overcoming the sin that causes us to say such a statement. However “getting right with God” is a logical fallacy since Christ is the source of overcoming sin and ultimately forming the relationship we have with God. Peterson highlights the importance drawn forth in verse 22, “Make haste to help me, O Lord, my salvation.” David knew of his terminal condition and how it deadens his body to the created nature of who he is. In the prayer David draws upon the only source that makes us “right.”

“Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.” Psalm 51 is recognition of a metaphorical dirtiness that accompanies our sin. The imagery of dirt gives dignity to dirt; never does dirt seem negative in the creation. Yet when dirt is outside of its created order do we see the negative language associated with dirt. This is a creative observation by Peterson. When the created order is out of place, being used in a manner not attuned to its nature, we see the need for God’s interaction. In this example David cries out to see the need for a purging of the dirt associated with his sin. Its foolish to think David was actually dirty, instead the imagery of dirt being cleaned by God; is God putting things in their proper order, David and dirt. There is no way to deal with the sin that occurs except through God’s interaction. Another piece of imagery seen in the metaphor is how sin demands getting dirty to get clean. How can we not see this with Jesus at Calvary?

“He regards the prayer of the destitute and does not despise their prayer.” Psalm 102 reveals to us that David knew all to well the truth of this prayer. Yet Peterson draws our attention to Jesus, the glorious entry into the city at the end of the festival parade of Palm Sunday, ultimately ended in the garden of Gethsemane. It was the burden of imperfection that Jesus had to soon carry which caused the sullen heart. Judas would betray him; Peter would deny him and Jesus knew it. If Jesus was burdened with our sin this much we are best not to take a road easier traveled to avoid such a scrutiny. The burden of sin cannot be avoided, Jesus didn’t and David knew it. Like David we need to realize the sin that weighs us down is not too hard for God to hear, He desires our prayers and reliance upon His strength.

“Wait for the LORD, my soul waits, and in his word I hope.” Psalm 130 reveals something close to my heart. It is the waiting that is the hardest part. This is where God reveals himself, on His own schedule. The only thing we have as an anchor in the storm of our tumultuous sinful life is God’s word. It is the promises of God in which we must rely upon that gives us patience to wait upon God. In our imperfection God has called us righteous through Jesus (Romans 5:8). As followers of Jesus we must attach ourselves to this truth. Seems obvious yet waiting and trusting that God forgives is easily forgotten. Western Culture solves its own problems, though in God’s economy we wait for it to be solved for us. We wait for God to do for us what we can’t do for ourselves.

“Enter not into judgment with your servant, for no one living is righteous before you.” Psalm 143 Peterson quotes another part of it, “I meditate on all that you have done; I ponder the work of your hands.” As a “Holy and separate” group of people we find it easy to bring forth judgment to a fallen world around us. Listing the sin of the culture around you is never a healthy exercise. Instead David finds in his prayer that everyone is sinful, no one person is above it. Yet David strives toward God in the midst of it. Justification comes from the Lord, when we stand as the judge of sin we ignore the fact that we ourselves are just as fallen as the world we judge. The act of judging is the removal, from the mind, that God can and does forgive anyone who comes to Him. Peterson suggests that an ever-increasing focus towards God helps us see through the sin in our own lives as well as the sin of others. The attractive thoughts of sin around us melt in the presence of our thoughts and prayers towards God. Sin is the backdrop but God provides the subject matter. An obsession with sin (in the University, particularly lust) is unhealthy. Dealing with Sin is God’s business; pursuit of God is our business.

Peterson makes another point (I think foundational to spiritual growth) is that in all of the Psalms David never made a pact, never bargained. Not a single spiritual resolution is brought forward. The manner in which God deals with our sin is forgiveness; his forgiveness is much harder to deal with than we would like to admit. If our love for Jesus is true, the last thing we want to hear is, your forgiven for the same sin you commit all the time. Our love for God prompts us to bargain and say, “let me work this sin off.” In the midst of our bargaining Jesus says you are forgiven, go and sin no more. David’s way of imperfection never makes room for our interaction, it is God’s work. The narrative and Psalms of David reveal to us a life of imperfection is how God perfects us, not our ability to perfect ourselves.

“The Jesus Way” in this chapter is seen with those whom Jesus wants to follow him. Jesus is able to sympathize with our sin (Heb 4:15). David illustrates the heart of knowing and dealing with our imperfection. “The Jesus Way” of dealing with sin is actually to grow in relationship with the one that deals with our sin. The Holy Spirit is not out recruiting the Christian All-Star team, but people who want find strength in Jesus.

Chapters 2 and 3 of "The Jesus Way"

2008-07-02T08:16:00.001-07:00

I wrote on Chapter two and three of “The Jesus Way,” because they were both fairly short.

The Next chapter describes how Abraham shows how Jesus is “The Way.” Peterson hones in on the Isaac story of Abe being asked to sacrifice his son (The Akedah). Abraham dropped the love for his son lower than his love for God. A story of faith in God’s good plan and purpose. Abraham had a faith that was not just doctrine. A cold sterile calculation of logic did not depict this scene for Abraham. It was a hard act of compassion. It’s this type of Faith that Paul refers to in Romans several times. It is a resounding and resolute yes to God that says, “I will follow.” Leading up to the Akedah story, Abraham had failures of faith. Though when asked to go he did. Faith is an action that maybe visible or personal, though it is far too complicated to just generally explain. What the Abraham story tells us about faith is what faith looks like with out explaining in words what it means. Abraham embodies the definition of what faith is. Faith transcends a set of skills or thoughts copied or worked out, they are lived. Abraham did not become a man of faith by having someone explain it to him in a book. He did by living it out.

Peterson brings to light the sacrifice theme heavily played in the text of the Akedah. Peterson says: sacrifice to Faith, is what eating is to nutrition. Abraham showed his faith by saying “Here I am.” He was willing to sacrifice his son, though in reality he put himself up as a sacrifice even more so. He sacrificed his very heart and desire. This is the role testing plays in our own lives. Peterson suggests that God’s test of Abraham is to reinforce to Abraham that God is Lord, not Lord on Abraham’s terms. Peterson draws attention to the lack of hesitation in Abraham’s character; there was a three-day journey into Mount Moriah. Not a word of surprise or hesitation from Isaac or Abraham. It was a 100-year faith journey that developed Abraham to act with such resolute.

Peterson shows this act of faith not as a way to venerate Abraham but a way to see God’s desire for faith in our lives. This story of faith is fully completed in the Garden of Gethsemane when Jesus says, “Not my will, but yours be done.” Jesus is the culmination of this faith as Abraham is a testimony to it.

The third Chapter delves into Moses. Peterson directs the reader to seeing Moses as the author of the largest section of scripture. Because of that Peterson first tackles in brief the criticism of the words of Moses. He does this because he wants to emphasize the concept of Words in this section. Peterson draws first towards the importance of the usage of spoken language. When you say one word and mean it you can’t mean another. Peterson says there are three things intertwined with Moses and words: Words, Story, and Signposts.

Names are important to us as Christians. When Moses used genealogies he embarked on talking about the faithful and unfaithful. It dictates God’s use of the person. Moses usage of names transitions to stories. Moses uses story to get us in touch with what God is doing; we regain perspective of living a life of faith. Finally, Peterson uses words as signposts. The Ten Commandments, or the Shema (Here o Israel) are used as a way to declare the severity of God. Deuteronomy and Leviticus exist because we as followers find holes in the fence of the Ten the commandments. Peterson tells a story of how a cattle rancher will ride fences for weaknesses. If there is a weakness in the fence cattle will find it. This is us in Christ. Moses uses guideposts, because we search, with our lives for loopholes in the fence.

This leads Peterson to his point. As Christians and Leaders in the church, we need to use words carefully and with wisdom. Using them to edify and grow the church and body in the way that Moses did. Moses keeps us story trained, personal and direction oriented with words. With Jesus as the culmination of this when He uses Parables and gives direction. Calling people out by name and even changing names Jesus knew the importance of words. Do we?

I wrote on two chapters because they were both fairly short.

The first chapter of "The Jesus Way"

2008-07-01T10:34:00.000-07:00

Peterson starts off his first chapter explaining the meaning of Jesus as “the way.” He first explains the usage of “The Way” as a metaphor. Peterson suggests that the writers of scripture are masters of metaphor. “You are a Rock.” Using a word to refer to other things demanding all five senses to interpret the meaning. In doing so Peterson suggests that Jesus was using “The Way” to trigger our imagination. When you imagine how Jesus is “the way” you start to think of a multitude of things. Jesus isn’t saying that he is solely here to be a sacrifice for your sins but something more. He is the very way to everything. He needs to be the way we love, talk, walk, appear, behave, everything.

Peterson moves on towards seeing “The Way” as discernment. This is not as broad as metaphor. Discernment of how Jesus is “The Way” is discerning our ends versus the means. Technology has mired our ability to see the ends clearly. We tend to venerate the ends over the means. Unfortunately venerating technology means you get more things but generally not closer to God. Discerning how Jesus is “The Way” in light of the lures of things like Technology is the key to growing in the Lord (Says the guy with a new computer).

Temptation is the next theme Peterson tackles. The temptation of Jesus was the beginning of Jesus ministry and a reflection of how Jesus is “The Way.” Peterson breaks down the three temptations at length which I will do in brief. The first temptation was to turn stones into bread. It was a temptation to turn creation into a commodity and do something useful with it- an obvious and good thing to do. It would lead Jesus to do a career of good works and fulfilling people’s physical needs. This temptation is similar to our own. The temptation is a reduction of people to just there physical needs. We are called to serve and meet peoples needs, though it should not be reduced to just that.

The second temptation is to jump off the roof of the temple. The Devil wants Jesus to dazzle the crowds of people on the street below. The temptation is to embark on a circus career of roadside miracle shows. The temptation for us is to use Jesus as an answer to the humdrum life we live, a weekend festival distraction to everyday life. It is a temptation to use Jesus as an emotional cruise director drifting from one activity to another with out real heart change. We become spectators of life and ultimately spectators to aliveness in Christ. “The Way” is not substitution to the ordinary, it is living intentionally with the body in the here and now, in the dirt and reality of life.

The final temptation is for Jesus to run the world. Jesus rejection of the political Rule over creation shows that Jesus wanted a personal interaction of Rule over creation. Jesus did not want an impersonal Rule using laws and ordinances. Such a Rule would result in an imposing of who He is. Jesus did not intend his Rule or standard of life to be thrust upon anyone who didn’t ask for it. Thus is the Rule in which we live. Peterson doesn’t suggest we remove our engagement of values upon politics. He merely suggests considering that even Christ removed himself from this type of action. If Jesus wasn’t willing to follow the call to reform a political structure than what should we expect of theocracy. We shouldn’t fall to the temptation of ruling from a bureaucracy of abstract rules and disembodied principles thrust upon men and women without any trust or love. Values and rules are followed best from an internal compulsion not an external obligation. Jesus was never impersonal, never was He nameless.

It is clear that Jesus would never have been the atoning sacrifice for our sins had he followed these roads yet. It’s a logical imperative that Jesus dies for our sins; however, Jesus was not focused on solely being the atonement for fall of the world, but being “The Way.” In light of this, Peterson speaks about how Jesus is “The Way” to God, but also God’s way to us as his creation. That is seen fully after the atonement; the gift of the Holy Spirit dwells with in humanity. Our task is to come into an ever increasing and intimate relationship with the “The Way.”

Peterson ends the chapter with a metaphor explaining his how we engage “The Way.” Peterson describes how he and his family went on a hike up a mountain. His two adolescent sons made a competition out of getting to the top of the cliff. He and his wife made a point of enjoying the way there. I think the metaphor uses youth as a point to show folly and the path to show the road were on. Each member would get to the destination, though some made it a task and others made it a complete encounter with the way to the top.

The Introduction to "The Jesus Way"

2008-06-30T07:53:00.000-07:00

I have never read an authors introduction to a book that excited me to read the book more than this introduction. I found myself humming and raising my hands while I read. Maybe some of that was an exaggeration. Though, with in the second paragraph of this book I enjoyed this comment Peterson made about why he wrote this book:

“My concern is provoked by the observation that so many who understand themselves to be followers of Jesus, without hesitation, and apparently without thinking, embrace the ways and means of the culture as they go about living their daily living “in Jesus name.” Though the ways that dominate our culture have been developed either in ignorance or defiance of the ways that Jesus uses to lead us as we walk in this… God ruled world in which we find ourselves… The ways of Jesus are never just useful only in compartmentalized area of life labeled “religious.”

Peterson says that our compartmentalized way of learning lends us to see the world as different sets of skills that play together to accomplish a task. He says that “the accomplishing the task” mindset is the beginning of the problem. We are not accomplishing anything in our faith; it is what Christ does in us. Also the problem extends in the compartmentalized view expressed in the elementary school, you learn this skill than that skill all for the purpose of getting what you want in the future. That is the root of the temptation Satan gave Jesus.

Worship is an offering of sacrifice, a sacrifice of yourself. The worship service is the culmination of your week of worship, offering yourself before the altar of God. However Peterson clams that the American understanding of this service is of a consumerist nature. We have developed a nature of consumption, which leads us to consume from God. Attractional churches identify what consumer Christians want and gives it to them. Peterson goes on to say “We can’t suppress the Jesus Way to sell the Jesus truth.”

Peterson moves on toward the way we lead. He refers to corporate methods of leadership development to guide our own success. What is interesting is reading books of how a corporation or politician was successful is often the exact opposite way in which Jesus called us to lead. Peterson quotes Joseph Hall, a Puritan, “God loveth adverbs, and careth not how good, but how well.” Peterson uses the quote to show that our faith is not “What Would Jesus Do,” but how would Jesus do it. We often are very result oriented that we find ourselves forsaking what it might take to get to the result we set.

Peterson suggests a complete overhaul of our imagination. Following Jesus is radically different than following anything else. In doing so Peterson wants to draw attention to the ways our attention is drawn to the world around us. Peterson attacks the double standard of the laity versus clergy. The expert in Christian faith is a not when it comes to Christianity. Peterson is not calling for an egalitarian sweep for all, he simply says when we are consumers we tend to just consume. In a world were there are experts and people who need help from experts, the expert role should be for all who call themselves Christian. There is no priest or professor among the twelve, no one takes that mantle for the twelve. In some way Peterson sets the bar high for all. I know of laity that could pray me out of the water, yet I may “know” more than them, I should see the standard of good praying is necessary for myself like knowing more is a standard for them. Peterson makes the case that the priesthood of all believers needs to be seen as the priesthood together, not an individualistic endeavor. Though as a priesthood we MUST take responsibility for our own growth in the Lord. We cannot just rely on the leaders of the church.

Peterson finishes the introduction by describing the outline of the book. He proceeds to show how the Israelites drew from the culture and asked for a king. In doing so, 100 years later the failings of Solomon fractured the nation and a prior glory, was never experienced again in Israel. It was Jesus that mended that fracture and brought glory to Israel. Peterson proceeds to show how Jesus is the way in mending the fractures of the church today.

Final Review of Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places

2008-06-27T10:37:00.000-07:00

The final review of the book “Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places.” Peterson has produced a book that can make a person believe that their faith is more layered than they would like to admit. Peterson does spiritual growth in the world of the unknown. He gives you a glimpse and says to you no figure it out. The walk Peterson suggests is far more intense than a lay leader in the church would like to attain. The Christian culture craves particular lists and direction; Peterson does not give you that. He suggests a starting point for growth and than challenges you to grow. This way of spiritual growth sets a pace guided by the spirit. It sets no false standards for a walk with Christ. It is the Spiritual growth of the unknown and uncontrollable that Peterson gives which is interesting. In reading this book you see that Peterson’s ultimate enemy is dualisms. Peterson gave three examples of how Christ wants us to tap into growth that the common Christian culture is not pursuing.

Creation, History and Community are the three places that Christ wants us to play and realize His sovereignty as well as His strength. In doing so Peterson tries to remove us from how we commonly see our Christian faith as a set list of things we need to accomplish so we can get to our the more exciting and tangible parts of our life. Is our faith and leadership turned off once we exit the church committee meeting? Peterson’s implications would suggest so.

You get a feel for Peterson’s faith while reading this. He seems very extreme. Yet, what is extreme when living for Christ? There is extreme or misguided. I often think we are afraid of being extreme when in reality we should be afraid of being misguided. Extreme needs to be redefined as the mark of what a normal Christian life should be. Our desire to co-opt what is cool by slapping a cross on it is not good. It is neither extreme nor healthy. Unfortunately, the measure of an extreme Christian today is what people are willing to do when people see, how about when people can’t see? This is the problem Peterson is subverting with trying to draw your attention to Christ as He plays in your everyday life.

I was impressed with the author list he directed you towards in the prologue. I find that the strength of this 350-page book comes from the 200-pages of Bible study involved. He crosses over many disciplines quoting Annie Dillard, as well as denominations; quoting Karl Barth. I find this book to be a treasure for a deep approach at being a better disciplemaker. Due to the lack of concrete guidance for spiritual growth I would not suggest this book separated from its series. In Peterson’s other book “East this Book” he highlights an individuals need to grow in their understanding of Scripture as well as their need to be people who read. If you found you wanted to suggest this book to a young Christian; I suggest encouraging a reading of it in cooperation with “Eat This Book.” There are a lot of books good at getting a young Christian hooked on Christ. Yet very few transcend the “now what” thought when you are done reading them. This book I believe attempts at helping you tackle the “now what” thought involved in Christian growth.

Christ Plays in Community

2008-06-26T10:06:00.001-07:00

In Peterson’s 3^rd and final chapter he shows how Christ plays in: Community. Sectarianism is the theory that I think would help all of us understand what Peterson is trying to fight. It is the threat posed to Community. We can define sectarianism as a rampant individualism. Whether it is individualism due to personal dysfunction, or group dysfunction; when an individual feels it good to be alone the creation groans. Peterson further defines sectarianism as particular as someone is offended by the personality of a group member. When we as God’s creation fracture we kill a way in which God wants to help us grow.

The antithesis gives us a good understanding of Peterson’s thesis about Community. The chapter starts with how Jesus did acts of service and love than suggested that the disciples do it themselves; I washed your feet, now go wash others. Its when you yourself experience community can you also be apart of participating. The benefits of community are not individual or harboring of anger. Peterson says: “The Christian life is not a self-project.”

Peterson jumps into Deuteronomy as his Old Testament text. He uses it because it is also the text that Josiah and Jeremiah use to help reform the Israelite community. God mandated the Israelites to grow in their ability to be communal by sending them to the desert for 40 years, nothing to distract them or persuade them but God and each other. At the beginning of the wondering, God gives them The Ten Commandments. A list for life, but Peterson suggests a list to be able to be a better Community. Peterson proceeds to make a strong case breaking down every Commandment; revealing how all ten should be the flavor of our community (Not just the last six which is the popular perception). Peterson speaks how it seems that only the last six are for communal living. Yet when we are engaged in each other’s life we should be enacting all ten with each other. Peterson believes that no matter what we believe about God, believing without love is useless. This belief is seen in the Shema text of Deut 6:5, where we are commanded to Love the Lord our God with all our Heart, Soul, Mind. Keeping this ideal, God gives direction for the very particular of our lives. The dirty housekeeping needs of the Israelite community are spoken at great length in books like Leviticus. Yet the Commandments are contained in Deuteronomy. God was praised in community off the wings of God’s divine and undeniable interaction of salvation. Idolatry; in the view of a God loving community; is blown to pieces with people invested to help, love and care for each other as they pursue God. Peterson says:

“We have to revise our idea of community to conform to what is revealed in scripture, even though frequently suppressed. It means we cannot impose our paradisiacal visions of hanging out with lovely, upbeat, and beautiful people when we enter a Christian congregation. God’s way of working with community has virtually nothing to do with the worlds idea of getting things done, of what “works” and what doesn’t… If we want to get in on what God does in the way God does it in all matters of community, will have to give up pretensions of shaping an organization that the world will think is wonderful as we parade our accomplishments to the tune of “worship” or “evangelism.”

Peterson moves towards the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. Peterson suggests something that I think is interesting since N.T. Wright makes a similar claim but from a different angle. The Birth Narrative of Jesus in Luke is a major testimony of the Spirit. Wright would say this is the beginning of the Temple language moving from a building towards humanity. The Temple of the Lord, a place where the spirit rests, is now the followers of Jesus. Which in reality fits very well with the point Peterson tries to make. We first see five types of prayer prayed among the early figures in the Birth Narrative. It is a study that is brief, but for me to explain would take a lot of words (I tried). You will have to buy the book to get the explanation. However Peterson says that these five forms of prayer are themes of the way we should pray. These themes can be seen being prayed by the very early church like Mary, Zachariah, and the shepherds. The five forms being: The Fiat mihi, The Magnificat, The Benedictus, The Gloria in Excelsis, The Nunc dimittis. Peterson shows how these five forms support our very community. Being a community of prayer is the act the community in the Old Testament didn’t perform which must happen now in community. Another theme Peterson shows in the text is being community among the unwanted. It is clear how we can see this in the scripture, though Peterson doesn’t shy from explaining the need to be Christ to EVERYONE. The third theme Peterson declares is Trials. The end of Acts leaves us in the air with the fate of Paul unknown. Though this maybe on purpose, it shows the reality of trials we may face, leaving no hope of an immediate comfort. As a community, it is necessary to not shy from trial but ultimately hold each other up through it. The final theme of Luke’s testimonies is rooted in the same thought as trial. Which are open spaces. The end of acts hands us the baton; Imagining the thought of the Gospel reaching anywhere, changing anything. Luke’s telling of Jesus parables expands our imagination to think how Christ’s action is not flat and 2 dimensional. Rather, Christ truly does play in Ten Thousand places.

Peterson discusses the practical finally by showing 2 ways to see how Christ plays in Community. Baptism and Love are his explanations; it is so easy to see how that is true without even having to read on. As a community we partake in an individuals Baptism. In doing so it isn’t an individual process, but communal. Finally Love, which again is very easy to see as communal. Though it needs to be mentioned, to think of love as an after thought, might reflect how much we need to be better at it.

This is the end of Petersons Book “Christ Plays In Ten Thousand Places.” I will give a quick review on my next blog however this book I believe demands a slower reading for those who want to pursue a deeper push towards spiritual growth. Like I mentioned several times before, Peterson does not give you anything concrete to enact in you life right now, it demands contemplation and truthful introspection. I will say again, for this I am grateful.

My New Nephew

2008-06-22T21:29:00.000-07:00

My New Nephew!!!!

I understand to a greater length what God means with Psalm 127:3-5:

Don't you see that children are God's best gift?
      the fruit of the womb his generous legacy?
   Like a warrior's fistful of arrows
      are the children of a vigorous youth.
   Oh, how blessed are you parents,
      with your quivers full of children!
   Your enemies don't stand a chance against you;
      you'll sweep them right off your doorstep.

Christ plays in History

2008-06-20T13:31:00.000-07:00

Peterson’s third chapter is how Christ plays in History. While approaching this section I was excited because I love history. I can’t say I ended the chapter with the same type of excitement as I did when I entered it. Peterson’s main thesis is that when Christ plays in history we are reminded of his redemption, or as he puts it salvation, through the course of time. Peterson asserts that that the Bible, the Law, Gods interplay in creation was not a standard for living so that we can live a good life. It is more defined with a tinge of God’s redemption in history is for us to be apart of what God is doing. A paradigm shift definitely for the college age; most college age people are so wrapped in the American Dream that the thought of God leading them down a path of difficulty is unforeseen. The main threat to this thought is moralism. When one looks at morals as a formula for living good one loses the fact that living good maybe defined differently to God than to the person living out the morals. Most dreams of success are mainly contained outside of the history of God; for the history of God’s goal is redemption; Peterson suggests that most movements in global history affirm this truth, though don’t live by it. We as Christians bare the mark the Crusades have left on our lives and we don’t know it. This is the same mark that plagued the Romans, the Goths, and he moves into the Egyptians. This mark is defined as trying to attain success without God. Peterson discusses the Egyptian slavery of the Israelites in detail, to highlight this point.

In telling the story of the Israelites God moved in Moses to keep him safe. If the soldiers were doing their duty Moses would be dead, a task completely outside the control of Moses. The story moves forward to help the reader of Exodus see that the condition of the Jews was of great despair. No control over their desire to be free. Peterson does an excellent job at showing how the Israelites were consumed with the idea that God was absent. Than God proceeds to show he is not absent but waiting. His presence has always been with them. He flaunts that idea by revealing so in his name “I am.” Leading Peterson to describe God’s effort to exorcise our past thoughts of who we think God is. He draws attention to that, by showing the Israelites need to return to the God they think they worship. A God they think will abandon them. God shows through the many miracles in this section that there is only one game in history, which is God’s salvation. With the many plagues, God starts showing history that he is not a God that is impressed by human attainment. With each plague a huge blast to the ego of humanism. Nothing of man can stand in light of God’s desire for his humanity. Yet when we are found with this strong winning story we are lost with the very present reality of our lives not reflecting what we would hope. This is why God doesn’t connect your ability to follow him with how good or bad your life may be; because of this an amount of Israelites were found vanishing in times of trouble. Their history in the Lord was lost when things got tough. They lost their history that God was about saving His creation.

Peterson moves to Mark. Peter’s gospel through the penning of Mark suggests that either Peter of Mark got this idea. Peter was the one that looked the least of all disciples in the texts of Mark, even being called Satan by Jesus. Peter wanted Jesus to know that Jesus could avoid the cross, though he didn’t want Jesus to avoid the cross as much as he himself wanted to avoid it. From here Peterson shows the chiastic nature of Mark. Looking at chapters 1 and 12 as the burial, 2 and 11 as the Eucharistic, 3 and 10 as the cup and prayer, 4 and 9 as the cross, 5 and 7 as the trial, and finally 6 and 8 as mockery and denial. This chiastic nature can show us that everything can be found in death, first the death of Christ, secondly the death to ourselves. In dying the death of Jesus we enter the center of the story without becoming the center of the story. Through our death in Jesus’ death we take part of the history laid up for us since the beginning.

Peterson gives us two tangible ways to grow in this, the first being Eucharist. He starts discussing the two major components of the Eucharist; remembrance and proclaiming the Lord’s death. In doing so we are first reminded of the fact that God died for us; no soft edges or sugar to make such an act easier to deal with. This puts us in a place of true repentance and desire of God. In doing so we are reminded that no errands or acts can bring us to a place with God, like what Christ did for us in his death. This gives a newer perspective on the Law as good only in knowing our falleness. It’s in the Eucharist that we find our desperate need to follow Christ to the cross ultimately to receive His life.

Peterson than moves towards our understanding of the words: Take, Bless, Break, and Give. He explains that these words (originally written in a paper by Dom Gregory Dix, an Anglican monk) reveal themselves in many Gospel narratives. He takes from us what we are willing to give. He blesses what we give, for example when given two fish he doesn’t say “is that all” He just blesses. He breaks, the scripture says “the sacrifices of God are a broken and contrite heart.” Finally, he gives in this sense he gives Holy Communion in the form of the Spirit. It is not hard to see how this is the method in which we now must interact with others.

The final method of History is Hospitality. Much can be said about this, but the things that Peterson suggests is that Jesus would welcome another’s hospitality whenever presented. A concept that has long since been forgotten; hospitality is a necessary form of growth. When we take someone into our home, we are reminded of their history of who they are and they live and visa versa. Hospitality has its roots deep to Abraham, which Abe welcomed angels into his home. The act of hospital contains Eating meals, watching nighttime preparation, to just laughing with one another; we are granted access into someone’s life. Even on a deeper level we are to invite others into our everyday life.

I have found that this 90 page section to be chalk full of good scriptural hermeneutics. Peterson again gives you a glimpse not an outline into being faithful; which I am constantly reminded how valuable this approach is to our faith.

Repentance in line with the Simpsons

2008-06-19T09:20:00.000-07:00

Beyond being incredibly funny the Simpsons are a poignant social commentary tool. If you listen to Matt Groening’s commentary about anything pertaining to Christianity, he is surprised that the biggest fan of said material is Christians. I however am surprised at how right he is with matters of Christianity and yet is not a Christian himself. What can be observed from this clip is a play clearly on the Charlton Heston classic “The Ten Commandments.” Yet the wealth of this clip I think comes more from the cartoonist ability to recreate the human condition.

The genius of the clip comes when our current condition of sin collides with the mystery of what happened at the base of Mt. Sinai. The root of this clip is found in the Exodus texts depicting the Israelites fall away from God, while Moses was on top of the mountain talking to the same God. I am so astounded with the thought of how the Israelites, who had seen so much, still fall away? The beauty of the clip gives me a glimpse as to how that might be true.

When you enter the scene you see the hilarity of someone carving graven images. As absurd as this may be one only has to see the overt sin of a church to see that when we fall we fall hard and overt. He is carving images and it seems to be that he is selling them. Which enters Homer, addressing the carver of images as “Azron carver of graven images,” duly Homer is called “Homer the Thief.” Their sin was so much who they were that others addressed them with their respective sin. Something can be said about knowledge of sin.

I realize I am theologically breaking down a cartoon, though in reality the Israelites did not know what they were doing was wrong. Romans 5:13,14 says:

“for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.”

From a secular source as the Simpons you get a truth that sin is enjoyable. When you watch Homer and Zolar the Adulterer you see them laugh at their own satisfaction of an accomplished sin. Though when we laugh, we laugh at their very obvious near sightedness. Homer just delivered a message to Zolar that should make him sad and bring him a sense of betrayal. We also laugh at Zolar being oblivious to his victimization. We laugh at Azron’s ignorance to how long they will be in the desert. We also laugh at how they find their sin normal. Yet isn’t this what Paul was talking about in the above scripture?

Homer and the like might have known what they were doing was wrong but surely the affects of their sin would have caused their agony in the here and now, whether they realized their sin or not. How beautiful this is, what we laugh at is what we ignore in our own lives. We all have sin that frames our lives, that might even give our life meaning yet is ignored or worse laughed about. I speak more directly to those who know Jesus. For we have a lot to praise God about, yet how often do we get defensive when approached with the falleness of our own immediate walk with God? We are not necessarily living out the above scripture that implies an immediate genuine repentance when faced with a realization of our own sin. In the moment of understanding the possibility of your sin do you laugh or do you respond in the same manner as the Israelites, repentance.

“Look Busy” easily the funniest line in the clip. How do they look busy? They looked busy by intertwining with the world, the fall, their own sin. What an obvious critique of religion. We are so wrapped from time to time with the world that to look busy in the presence of God is to do the very thing he doesn’t want you to do.

Homer, Azron, and Zolar was clearly disappointed with the fact; that what gave them pleasure was no longer allowed. That is, if you look at what they were doing as ever being allowed in the first place. They are now aware of their own sin. The video showed that they were disappointed, should this be our response? Shouldn’t we, when faced with the opportunity to be faithful, delight at the opportunity to be more faithful to God? Often we respond to conviction with hurt and anger, which is a human response, but trusting in God’s mercy shouldn’t result in sadness. Often God’s grace is cheap and abused, God’s mercy is given so that we can delight in the opportunity and strength to be more like Christ. Unfortunately we respond more like Homer.

This video is found on the second season of The Simpsons, The episode name is “Homer verse the Eighth Commandment.” This blog addition kicks off another goal of what I intend to do, which is add clips of things I watch and comment on them.

Christ Plays In Creation

2008-06-16T16:18:00.000-07:00

In chapter 2 of “Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places,” Peterson tackles the importance of Christ in Creation; discussing the tangible materialness of the existence of Jesus. Drawing upon the Christmas story in Luke, Peterson describes the birth of Jesus as a connection to creation. The physicality of Jesus in creation creates a bind from the divine to the created. Looking at a baby in the grocery store running and jumping Peterson imagines a very young Jesus wrapped in the same form of creation and believes there is something that can be learned by the incarnation.

Almost immediately Peterson attacks the very persistent heresy of Gnosticism. He highlights modern Christianity’s view of the World as going to Hell in a hand basket. We disassociate ourselves from seeing that the world as created by the God we worship. This is the debate that is not new to anyone, but generally ends with some suggesting: “The world is all fallen.” However, Peterson would suggest that believing that will short change your ability to grow in a way that God has given us to grow. If we keep this in the realm of spiritual growth we will see that creation is a gift of experience. A pond, a city sky line, a sunset are just a few things to perceive as gifts from God. Peterson doesn’t flesh out the more gray of Movies and Art and nor do I think he intends to. What he is saying is one should never see a time in their own life as not being grounded in the spiritual realm and guidance of God whether you are in a Bible study, Church, office or mountain peak.

Peterson moves toward a very overlooked yet important gift of creation: Time. We have a Hope of the future but we are stuck in the now. So many people expressed by Peterson are wrapped up with where they are going in the future. These same people shortchange their growth and intimacy they can be having with Jesus now. Peterson talks about a old lady in his congregation who was so wrapped up with the rapture that she never dealt with the hear and now. Stopping to see the world around for only brief moments to see them as speed bumps on her way to a glorious future. Peterson says this:

“The end time is not a future we wait for but the gift of the fullness of time that we receive in adoration and obedience as it flows into the present.”

He ends the section talking about work rhythms, suggesting that our week is supposed to be in a harmony of rhythm connecting Sunday to Sunday with a week full of worship.

The chapter starts to give more particular examples of creational spiritual growth. Peterson describes our need to be moved in our place. There is a lot that can be said about place, however what is said here is suggesting that our immediate longing to make our current place a utopia creates in us a false reality of what the goal should be in our lives. Peterson moves from there to Human experience. From marriage to brotherly intimacy is all ways in which the growth in Christ can be experienced. Your choice to be intimate with a friend or confidant shows more about your ability to truthful to yourself as well as God.

After several bible studies in Peterson describes two theories that are highlighted that trip us up as Christians: Glory and Signs. Jesus was always asked to give signs to affirm his glory. Only those who walked with Jesus and knew Jesus and experienced Jesus saw the signs. Peterson puts it best:

“But in Johns Gospel the people looking for clues, the signs and sayings that John brings to our attention as Jesus “Moved into the neighborhood,” (Message version of The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us; John 1:14) found themselves in a new creation. At the end of the day, some at least who had watched and listened knew that not only the neighborhood but they themselves had changed forever: they had seen the glory.”

When one taps into the reality of who Jesus is it will cause them to be a new creation. Ultimately causing for us the Spirit to help us see and participate with creation with new eyes.

Finally, Peterson gives two tangible ways in which you can experience the creation. The first is Sabbath, which can be spoken at great length. Peterson suggests that we should evacuate our entire need to do anything but be in the Lord during our Sabbath. The second way in which Peterson suggests growth is wonder. Wonder is described in brief as our need to leave things unknown. A sunset can evoke many emotions, but one thing it shouldn’t do is create a direct connection of authority over your life. Mystery is supposed to be just that a mystery. We stand on this side of the enlightenment suggesting that, me as a rational human being can will truth from such things as a sunset. This idea of wonder and mystery are supposed to shade our longing for God and ultimately envelop our Sabbaths.

I feel that Peterson is not the Pragmatist that I find myself to be. However he has been a great jumping off point of thought. The very basic yet profound observations about creation Peterson has made in this chapter sort of confound me and cause me to dwell on what I am doing as Christian, rather what I am not doing. I enjoyed his description of Gnosticism as well as his describing the Scripture. I enjoy the fact that Peterson is not giving a 1,2,3 step guide to a better life in Jesus. I also find Peterson desiring to deal with sin but in a way that alludes to its affects. Not as a prescription to a particular sin but a reversing of the affects of the fall in an individuals

Clearing the Playing field

2008-06-12T23:06:00.000-07:00

Eugene Peterson’s book “Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places”

I said I would start today and here we are...

The first chapter addresses the co-opting of the concept of spirituality. Peterson starts by dealing with chapter 3 and 4 of John. Nicodemus didn’t understand the interplay of Jesus’ use of wind breath and spirit; which is one word in the Aramaic language. The wind metaphor in 3: 7-8: “The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.” is also similar to the water metaphor in 4:10: "If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water.” These two metaphors are ambiguous for a reason; they allude to the very undistinguishable relationship we have with God; unlike Nicodemus the woman at the well got it because she just trusted and believed.

Some people believe that wind causes the trees to blow; others say it is the trees that move the wind. This was the metaphor Peterson got from Chesterton to describe the reality of how we try to manipulate our relationship with God. It is the visible to some that mean more than the invisible. Peterson moves to showing this through scripture. He shows how the spirit flows to and fro in Genesis 1. Moving to Jesus’ baptism in Mark 1. Sighting that culmination of water and spirit in a fully observable manifestation of a Dove. The spirit happens upon an event that represents God’s redeeming plan for his creation. The God breathed Spirit that created the Earth, has descended upon Jesus speaking salvation into the World. Peterson finally draws upon Acts 2 at Pentecost. Again God uses breath to affect the word that is spoken. In doing so Peterson tries to show that God is not up for manipulation. He draws so many conclusions but in short Peterson says that waiting and believing must manifest into reality. Not a spirituality that is in words defined but lacks action like Nicodemus but a spirituality that is word and deed. Also, not a spirituality with just action without Jesus. When the spirit came upon the creation, Jesus and Pentecost there was always Word.

Peterson defines some misused terms in the field of spirituality like soul, Jesus, fear-of-the –Lord and spirituality. He finishes the chapter by driving home his point. His quote on page 43 is key (when Peterson refers to Codes of Conduct he means a track of classes or rules of living that is not intended by God):

“But the fundamental inadequacy of Codes of Conduct for giving direction on how to live the spiritual life is that they put us in charge (or worse someone else); God is moved off the field of action to the judges stand where he grades our performance. The moment we take charge… we are in trouble."

"However useful Codes of Conduct are in the overall scheme of things, they are not the place to begin answering the question, “Now, what do we do?””

He goes on to say: “Fear-of-the Lord nurtured in worship and prayer, silence and quiet, love and sacrifice, turns everything we do into a life of “Breathing God”

I have really enjoyed Peterson’s ability to craft sentences as well as his realistic content. I would say that his words in this first section were letting the reader know that the Christian walk is not a rubric to accomplish. He holds a healthy tension between the falleness of our lives and the enormous call upon all Christians to be sanctified. Peterson addresses the problems with discipline-oriented discipleship as well as definition-less discipleship.

And were back!!!

2008-06-11T17:55:00.000-07:00

Well for the one or two (maybe none) that still check this blog... I am Back.

I never made this a good discipline last summer; for many reasons, one of which I was nervous about my grammar. Several grammar books finished and a swell of competent literary confidence; I now commit to write more.

I intend to review my summer reading. I am currently: re-reading Karl Barth's commentary on Romans and Eugene Peterson's "Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places."

I will give a grand summary of Barth's book but will journal what I read in Peterson's book.

I finished the first chapter yesterday and plan to tell more tomorrow.

Until tomorrow.

Dan

A good movie to watch...

2007-10-04T10:40:00.000-07:00

Ordinary People.

As a campus minister I cant walk away from this film and not see the need of Christ in a the under 25 age group.
This picture deals with a young man recovering from a failed attempt at suicide after dealing with his brothers death.
The young man named Conrad, was dealing so heavily with his brothers death that he attempted suicide. The film picks up after he gets out of the hospital and acclimating back into life. This is an honest approach at a normal kid dealing with pain and hurt. This young man needed the unconditional love of a Christian in his life. What an opportunity for a Christian to help introduce Christ into his life by loving him and telling the truth of God.
As you move through the lives of Conrad's parents you see the affects of sin in a upper class life. The movie for me shows the vast need for the church to be able to speak to these people in tangible ways of love. This movie highlights the availability the church could poses to help. To often, the church doesn't and even more often they would be a pressure for the family to not be open. My observations of the Church have led me to at least in part conclude that they are highly unequipped to deal with these types of problems. Often the church becomes such a place of status that when you are dealing with the hurt this family is dealing with, the church is seen as place to hide these types of things for the sake of your status.
The family portrayed in the film was hurting and was not willing to deal with the truth of their own situation. The Psychiatrist in the film played the same role that I see the minister could play for this family.
Not knocking counseling or psychiatry but knocking the church for not seeing the needs in the community and filling them. I guess that has been the case for some time now. Just this movie for me showed me how Christ has a lot to say to this family and there was absolutely no one in their life to be the mouth piece. I suspect that is the case more often than not. As a minister that grieves my heart.
However it was a good film.

Today will make it 6 years!!!

2007-08-11T14:46:00.000-07:00

I have been Married to my lovely wife for six years.
We are happy. When I think about the last six there is nothing I can say that has been better to show me about God's love. I can understand how God desires to know me, how He desires my obedience, how He is patient, how He loves, plus much more just by the way Leslie loves me.
I can honestly say I know God's love more because she is in my life.
We have dated since late 1995, We got married in 01. During that time we both accepted Christ, we we moved 8 times, Leslie got two masters, I started a ministry in three different places. God's hand was in our lives, even as two young kids in High school. Though this milestone is even more interesting because we now have been married longer than we have dated.
I am very lucky and have no idea why she loves me though one thing is for sure, she does because of that I am blessed.

Factory Girl...

2007-07-26T13:20:00.000-07:00

In my best Pittsburgh Accent (which is pretty good I must say so myself) "There ain't no way yinze guys talkin bad about der dat Andy Warhol."
But it is true. Factory Girl (renter be ware: nudity riddled) a movie about the life of Edie Sedgwick. It was fascinating. I mean a very good movie, even though they talk bad about Warhol. The movie cue's Bob Dylan half way through and ultimately creates a contrasts of arts. Dylan the Art with substance with practicality. Warhol the art with glamor and ascetics. It was the timeless architectural clash of Form vs Function. Dylan Called for peace, Warhol could care less. Warhol called for a stimulating experience and Dylan... well Dylan played his guitar. In short the movie did a service to both art forms even though it made Warhol be the villain and Dylan be the hero. The movie tells how humanity can not be about appearances only. Dylan's character (Hayden Christiansen --- you know Darth Vader) does this well. He Shows Sedgwick that she cant continue to live as Warhol's art piece for ever. It was moving as he pointed to her and said whats in here. It highlights the necessity of beauty inside and out and being truthful on both levels. A great illustration is when Edie thought she was still Warhol's piece even though she was high and covered with bruises. Edie was lying to herself. Innately God created us to value both the inside and outside of all creation. I appreciate the contrast Dylan and Warhol brought in the movie.
Yet I see that Christians deal with the same crap. We either live it inwardly or outwardly yet we rarely value the other. We are so worried about the view someone else has of us that we go through Christian motions. Or we are so personally Pious yet will threaten to punch a man (which i just seen a week ago). Or Find social justice is more important than having sex outside of wed lock. Or reading your Bible day and night yet you will condemn a homosexual to hell.

Ya! Like I said it was a good movie!! (for 50 cents name that movie line)

I am floored.

2007-07-11T11:54:00.000-07:00

I am currently reading N.T. Wrights book "The Challenge of Jesus." I am floored by some very simple things. One of them is the simplicity of Christ's message. When you read common scholarship about the life of Jesus it doesn't read as simply as the words of Jesus. I mean just read a scholarly commentary about Jesus and see the complexity in which we handle Christ. But none of those books hold a candle to the Gospels themselves when it comes to readability. I have to see more in to the Words of Jesus because his words are to simple.
Which leads me to my next observation. His words are simple, our application is hard. Can you imagine if we turned the other cheek to Osama Bin Ladin. To see him as forgiven. I cant even imagine, because I spend a lot of time doing a hard arduous amount of theological thinking to justify my wrath. My point is maybe I miss the easiness of Jesus message because I just have a tough time applying it to a fallen world.

N.T. Wright's Evil

2007-07-10T13:55:00.000-07:00

No I am not making claims to the type of person Tom Wright is. His DVD Evil is amazing. His final thesis is forgiveness. He shows how Apartheid’s end and the council of Reconciliation were true to the problem of Evil.

Wright doesn’t use any philosophical answers or teaches any common human answers that you see from other sources. He totally relies on the covenant understanding of God “putting things to right” in Christ. We have to be people who carry the death of the cross and live the answer with the resurrection as the sign. In other words we must be the agents of change in this word. You see this in a very powerful scene from Arch Bishop Desmond Tutu and the council listening to confessions. At this council they would ask for full confession and adversely the council would grant a full pardon. The scene was something I never seen before but it showed a man confessing and a woman crying as she left the room. The man killed the woman’s family member. It was heart wrenching to see her pain.

It is a must watch, it added to my understanding of forgiveness.

Let me ask you though I understand forgiveness being Christ’s way of putting evil to rights. However as Wright puts it “to turn back the thick tide of evil you must forgive.” Is that it?

Is that all we have to do is always forgive? It seems a little thin, am I wrong? It might seem that he was just saying; a start is to forgive?

Any thoughts…

The Great Big Enemy Karl Barth????

2007-07-09T12:02:00.000-07:00

So I finished reading Karl Barth’s “Epistle to the Romans.” This would make a third book by Karl Barth that I read, 1^st vol of Church Dogmatics, Evangelical Theology. I cant understand why everyone is so contentious with his work. It seems that even people who agree with him will have to hedge their agreement. Now I understand that he was controversial and maybe I drank the cool-aid but it seems that any evangelical that would hedge their agreement with Barth is falling into the same things he fights against, which is, believing a prepositional truth agreed upon by consensus instead of deriving truth straight from scripture. This by the way is an openhanded view of systematic theology and a more closed view towards Biblical theology. I can see how someone who devoted their life to Calvin and institutes derived from councils and elements of such nature would disagree with Barth. However is that right? Barth gets pinned with things like the Ecumenical Council of Churches but that wasn’t his goal either was Neo Orthodoxies extreme directions after he died. These were tourniquets of an ever bleeding body of truth. We have common biblical scholarship and evangelicalism (the old definition) to thank Barth for. His pursuit of evangelicalism was a so forward thinking at the time and we totally take that for granted now. He made Faith intellectual again. Sorry Ray Comfort but rationally proving Christ didn’t exist for Barth, you didn’t need to. My favorite comment’s from Barth are:

“Jesus does not give recipes that show the way to God as other teachers of religion do. He is himself the way."

"The best theology would need no advocates: it would prove itself."

So If you can tell me where I am wrong (Please, I truly don’t see it) .

Thanks

Dan

My first post.

2007-07-05T11:02:00.000-07:00

I am a new man.
Thats right I am now 235 lbs. WHAT!!!
The biggest problem is what am I going to do with all my big pants?
Pants that fit me at 290 lbs. What!!!
Don't ever over look the importance of diet pills... Just kidding.
I worked out three times per week since early January and i tell ya that is about it.
I stopped drinking pop, that was for dental reasons as much as it was width reasons.

Besides being fleet of foot I now have got involved in the business of Blogs. I am reading blogs everyday. Bloglines.com is awesome it watches every blog i want to read and alerts me when there is a new post. It is awesome.

Finally, I am reading my face off. I have devoted my summer to learning.

The reason I am posting this is to advertise my new Blog and give you something to read.
This Blog will be geared to talking about what I am learning.

up next...

What happened to Tony Jones at Wheaton...
and
What is wrong with Barth?... I don't know.

Dan