New Epistles

New Epistles has now moved over to WordPress

2009-07-26T23:16:00.004-06:00

You will find New Epistles blog on the WordPress blog platform. You'll find my newer posts at the updated URL http://NewEpistles.com without the "www" in front of "NewEpistles.com"

Facebook has agreed to let third party advertisers use your pictures without your permission

2009-07-24T21:01:00.002-06:00

Facebook has agreed to let third party advertisers use your posted pictures without your permission. Click on "Settings" up at the top where you see the "Logout" link. Select "Privacy". Then select "News Feed and Wall". Next, select the tab that reads "Facebook Ads". In the drop down box, select "No One". Then save your changes. Do it now. Help your friends...cut and paste this into your status.

Note, the "Facebook Ads" page is visible on Internet Explorer and Apple's Safari, but not on Mozilla Firefox.

Switching over to WordPress...some day

2009-07-24T15:29:00.001-06:00

Brian (at Living the Crucified Life) asked me:

“When are you coming over to Wordpress? You can transfer everything over with no problems and get tons of more interaction!”

I’ve been thinking and thinking about moving over to WordPress for a long time but well, as a thinker who just keeps thinking about it but doing nothing about it, I ask myself “Will I ever get to it?” I see my friend Gary Zimmerli (Sundry Times) just recently switched to WordPress, and Better Bibles Blog also switched not too long ago too. I am slow. I have been a die-hard Blogger fan because it’s so easy to use. But I do know WordPress is really good. I will have to just do it and get it over with.

So, expect New Epistles to be on WordPress…someday.

Church on Sunday?

2009-07-24T05:33:00.004-06:00

Cartoonist Jon Birch has some great funnies on The Ongoing Adventures of ASBO Jesus. I love it because it makes me laugh when I need something less serious.

Who really deserves the Honest Scrap Award?

2009-07-23T00:06:00.001-06:00

Who really deserves the Honest Scrap Award? I have been tagged by TC Robinson who was in turn tagged by Polycarp (and I don’t know how much further back other taggers go?)

I’m supposed to tell you 10 HONEST things about myself and then nominate 7 other blogs that I think deserve to receive the Honest Scrap Award.

Here goes my ten honest things about myself:

I drive a black Volkswagon Golf and would never want to switch to another car (except maybe for a Jetta someday).
I never watch TV anymore because I don’t have cable or satellite, and I don’t regret it for one second.
I like science fiction shows and movies, and also thriller dramas, and I do not like horror.
I’m a thinker-type, as opposed to a feeler-type and so admit that I don’t have a lot of patience for people who don’t make any sense when they get angry or flustered. But I have to try since I am a pastor and a pastor is suppose to provide some pastoral care to people.
I was ordained back in April 2009 in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada.
Preaching really turns me on.
I’m a closet Calvinist but since I’m confessing this, I might as well call myself as a new Calvinist.
Politically, I’m a conservative who likes Barack Obama.
I have lived in three Canadian provinces (B.C., Ontario and Saskatchewan) and one U.S. state (Virginia).
I have mostly been a city slicker all my life but I’m currently living in a small town and have lived in one other small town before my current town of Davidson, Sask.

Now I nominate seven nominees:

I would like to be a Calminian, but I'm not convinced

2009-07-22T11:19:00.002-06:00

Craig Blomberg has just posted on the Koinonia blog about the middle position between Calvinism and Arminianism, which he labels as "Calminian”. I am not sure about this position. When it comes down to it, it seems to end up sounding like a form of Arminianism to me. The scriptures he refers to are also used to defend the 5-points of Calvinism. I don’t claim to be an expert in the Calvinist-Arminian debate and I would like to do further study in this middle position he describes as Molinism (named after the medieval Jesuit priest Molina).

Aside from this debate, I love his understanding because his quote indicates his struggle in this debate:

"so many Bible-believing, godly evangelical Christians would have wound up on each side. The former wants to preserve the Scriptural emphasis on divine sovereignty; the latter, on human freedom and responsibility. Both are right in what they want and correct to observe in Scripture the theme that they stress."

I can really sympathize with how Blomberg feels about this. He is right when both sides create caricatures of what the other side believes. I have seen and read it in books and I just laugh about it when I see it. These caricatures that Arminians are selfish and refuse to submit to the sovereign will of God is laughable. And the caricature that Calvinists are merciless and heartless souls who agree that God delights in condemning many to hell is also laughable.

Sometimes, I wish I was neither a Calvinists or an Arminian. But sometimes I take pride in the 5-points of Calvinism. And I also can sympathize with my Arminian brothers and sisters because I was one myself.

Was Bishop Schori really talking about the heresy of selfishness?

2009-07-22T02:17:00.006-06:00

I know others have already blogged about this but I will continue doing so here. Concerning the previous post on Bishop Schori’s claim on heresy, I had emailed her office about this paragraph below and asked for some clarification about what she meant. I was curious about her statement but did not get any reply.

"The overarching connection in all of these crises has to do with the great Western heresy – that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God. It’s caricatured in some quarters by insisting that salvation depends on reciting a specific verbal formula about Jesus. That individualist focus is a form of idolatry, for it puts me and my words in the place that only God can occupy, at the center of existence, as the ground of being. That heresy is one reason for the theme of this Convention."

"the great Western heresy – that we can be saved as individuals…. That individualist focus is a form of idolatry"

As an evangelical Lutheran who appreciates inner piety, it showed me that there are some in the leadership of The Episcopal Church that don’t get it. As evangelicals, we do believe that we can be saved on a personal basis. We are each saved one by one, where each person entering the new kingdom called into the glorious communion of Jesus Christ called the Church of Christ. Evangelicals are not individualist focus. We are all individuals and we are also united as one in Christ. We care about others deeply and if we didn’t, would we be doing so much evangelism? We care about the eternal and spiritual well-being of others, not just ourselves. If we don’t care about evangelism and inviting them into the kingdom of God, that would be selfish individualism. There are evangelical and non-evangelical Christians who have failed in caring for others. Selfish individualism is a fruit of sin, but the person in the individual is not a bad thing in and of itself. The person in the individual have received a bad name due to selfishness. So could it be that what Bishop Schori was really talking about was the heresy or sin of selfishness?

reciting a specific verbal formula about Jesus

Bishop Schori’s jab was directed at the sinner’s prayer that evangelicals appreciate. Evangelicals appreciate how we are saved by faith in Christ, and in faith confess our confidence in Christ in a public way. We also appreciate the opportunity for confession and forgiveness. That is what the sinner’s prayer essentially is. And why not? We profess our faith the Apostles’ Creed too? We also have confession and forgiveness to repent of our sins. We also publicly profess our faith when we are confirmed at age 15 or 16? Sometimes, much to my dismay, these public professions and confessions in our churches do not carry much meaning in a lot of lapsed Episcopalians/Anglicans and Lutherans who have left the church entirely. So much for “specific verbal formula about Jesus”! Meaning in words can be empty and meaningless when they do not come from the heart and when faith is non-existent within the individual. But thank God that as a church, our faith has not lapsed. As a church, our faith is upheld by the grace and mercy of God.

It saddens me that there is a lack of understanding of the evangelical faith and this gap is still wide. There are people like Bishop Schori, who remain cocooned in her liberal mainline ivory towers and never come down off from it. When they don’t come down to discover that there are some people in her denomination that appreciate a form of personal inner piety, they will remain ignorant about this until kingdom come.

What infuriated evangelicals was when she attacked this personal inner piety that she used to caricaturize evangelicals with. In doing so, she also knowingly or unknowingly attacked some evangelical Episcopalians in her own church. She may have been so focussed on attacking evangelicals that I think she also unknowingly attacked evangelicals in her own church. And yes, there are evangelicals in mainline denominations like the Episcopal Church. They are also sometimes called “orthodox Episcopalians/Anglicans” or “conservative Episcopalians/Anglicans”. If she did know her jab would insult some evangelical Episcopalians, I hope she does not just see them as merely collateral damage.

Perhaps she was already so furious with evangelical Episcopalians for leaving The Episcopal Church and the formation of the new denomination within the Worldwide Anglican Communion called the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) . Could it be the people in this new denomination she was really attacking? [Watch video on http://www.acnaassembly.org. Interesting to find Pastor Rick Warren addressing the Inaugural Assembly of ACNA. I don't remember ever seeing an evangelical Southern Baptist invited to speak at an Anglican inaugural event as important as this. This is truly something new. ]

The Bishop discovers heresy?

2009-07-21T16:02:00.004-06:00

Katherine Jefferts Schori, Bishop of the Episcopal Church (USA), recently used the word "heresy". Albert Mohler analyzed this usage. Here is the article:

Several years ago, Methodist theologian Thomas C. Oden announced a most unusual quest: "I am earnestly looking for some church milieu wherein the sober issue of heresy can at least be examined," he declared. He added, "I am looking, like Diogenes with his sputtering lamp, for a church or seminary in which some heresy at least conjecturally might exist."
As Oden acknowledged, his announced quest was deeply ironic, for in the world of mainline Protestantism heresy has become an almost absent category. With so many alternative theologies, revisionist doctrines, and radical conceptions of Christianity, heresy has become the norm, rather than the exception. As Oden explained:

I have sought for some years to find a theological dialogue where a serious methodological discussion is taking place about how to draw some line between faith and unfaith, between orthodoxy and heresy. But almost everywhere that I have asked about the subject I have found that the very thought of inquiring about the possibility of heresy has itself become marked off as the prevailing archheresy. The archheresiarch is the one who hints that some distinction might be needed between truth and falsehood, right and wrong.

In other words, the only heresy recognized in much of liberal Protestantism is the heresy of believing in the possibility of heresy. This is not only a matter of observation -- it is a declaration proudly made by many, who declare the categories of heresy and orthodoxy to be both out of date and out of style.

All this makes recent comments by Dr. Katherine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, all the more interesting. In her opening address to the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, meeting this week in Anaheim, California, the Presiding Bishop raised, of all things, the issue of heresy.

In the history of Christian theology, the word heresy has been most properly applied to what the church has recognized as false and unbiblical teachings concerning the doctrines most closely related to Christ and the Trinity. The word heresy should properly be reserved for teachings that directly reject what the Bible reveals and the Church has confessed concerning the person and work of Christ and the reality and integrity of the Trinity. There are any number of false teachings and erroneous doctrines, but the term heresy should be restricted to those most central to the Gospel itself.

The bishop raised no shortage of eyebrows when she ventured to use the word heresy -- a word hardly common to recent Episcopal discourse. As Bishop Jefferts Schori offered her remarks, her church was entering its General Convention after suffering the defection of many churches and several dioceses. As she acknowledged in an understatement, her denomination is in crisis. In light of this crisis, she offered her diagnosis of the problem. Here is the paragraph that encapsulates Bishop Jefferts Schori's diagnosis:

The crisis of this moment has several parts, and like Episcopalians, particularly the ones in Mississippi, they’re all related. The overarching connection in all of these crises has to do with the great Western heresy – that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God. It’s caricatured in some quarters by insisting that salvation depends on reciting a specific verbal formula about Jesus. That individualist focus is a form of idolatry, for it puts me and my words in the place that only God can occupy, at the center of existence, as the ground of being. That heresy is one reason for the theme of this Convention.

There it is -- that word so recently denied entry into any discussion. But note carefully that the Bishop identified as heresy what the church -- throughout all the centuries and in every major tradition -- has recognized as central to the Christian faith. The confession that "Jesus Christ is Lord" has been central to biblical Christianity from the New Testament onward. In every tradition, some individual profession of this "specific verbal formula" has been understood to be essential to Christian identity.

Interestingly, the bishop's comments could, in other contexts, have been directed at a legitimate concern more commonly known among evangelicals. A good number of American evangelicals press a simple formula often known as the "sinner's prayer" as an instrument of demonstrating conversion. The use of such a formula can be a way of reinforcing a convert's understanding of the Gospel and of assisting a convert to articulate the Gospel in a way that makes sense and expresses the new convert's faith.

On the other hand, the sinner's prayer can be used in a mechanistic and manipulative way in order to insinuate --- if not outright to declare -- that the repeating of these words in itself constitutes the experience of salvation. Had the Presiding Bishop been concerned about evangelistic excesses and confusions in her church, her concern might have been both timely and legitimate. Regrettably, this bishop has made clear that her concern is something altogether different.

Indeed, her assertion of heresy was directed to the very idea of individual conversion to faith in Christ -- the faith that has always and everywhere defined authentic Christianity. In her address, she made her views clear: "I said that this crisis has several elements related to that heretical and individualistic understanding. We’ve touched on one – how we keep this earth, meant to be a gift to all God’s creatures. The financial condition of the nations right now is another element. The sins of a few have wreaked havoc with the lives of many, as greed and dishonesty have destroyed livelihoods, educational possibilities, care for the aged, and multiple forms of creativity – and that’s just the aftermath of Ponzi schemes for which a handful will go to jail."

Don't miss this -- the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church openly lamented a focus on evangelization that would seek conversions for such a focus would divert the attention of her church from ecological, economic, and other political imperatives. This was the main thrust of her address, with this central theme indicative of her larger episcopal agenda.

The bishop is simply not concerned with seeing persons come to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. She has made this clear over and over again and her convictions were well-known when she was elected as the denomination's Presiding Bishop. Shortly after her election, she spoke to TIME magazine concerning Jesus Christ: "We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box." She explicitly denies that conscious faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation, and has done so on multiple occasions.

The irony of all this was not lost on many Episcopalians and other observers. The Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church finally summoned the determination to apply the word heresy --- and then applied this most serious term of odious rejection to the Gospel itself.

Of course, this reality is far more tragic than ironic. It does not take long for a church that is severed from Scripture to move from recognizing genuine heresy and denouncing it, to denying the very possibility of heresy at all, and then to reclaiming the word only to use it as an instrument of attacking the very heart of the Christian faith.

Eighteen centuries ago, Irenaeus (a bishop who sought to defend the faith against false teachings) warned his church and explained that heresy is often "craftily decked out in an attractive dress, so as, by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced (ridiculous as the expression may seem) more true than the truth itself." Well, heresy has taken off its disguise in the case of Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori. Here we see heresy -- true heresy -- in its most undisguised form.

________________________

Sources:

Opening Address by Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori to the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, Anaheim, California, July 7, 2009. [read here]

Thomas C. Oden, "Can We Talk About Heresy?," The Christian Century, April 12, 1995. [read here]

Who is more right?

2009-07-20T10:28:00.007-06:00

Who is more right? Evangelicals, Calvinists, charismatics, or Lutherans? I am coming to the conclusion that either none of us may be more right than the other, or we are all correct. This may sound like a statement lost in the morass of theological confusion.

What I sometimes notice in all these categories of theologies is a tendency in being over-anxious to defend their beloved theologies--especially on the blogosphere because we aren't talking to them in person. The reason I am saying this is so that I can confess since I have found myself exhibiting a less-than-graceful attitude toward someone. We seem to put down our critics in order to make a case for our own theology (or mix of theologies). Sometimes, I may do this too; so I must try to hold myself accountable or need someone to help me do so.

No matter how open-minded we may think we are, when a critical comment is thrown toward our way and a sensitive chord is struck within us while our guard is down, we can be quick to return critical comments with our own critical comments against our critic. When Lutherans attack charismatics…Calvinists attack Arminians…evangelicals attack seemingly non-evangelicals, it can create barriers. However, without any conversation, theological barriers will never come down. So we must continue to open and carry on theological conversations. That is why I feel that blogging on theology is a wonderful thing; however, blogging can also be a vehicle that creates barriers when we don’t exhibit grace to other people with different theological beliefs.

In reading books from various theological backgrounds, I see a common tendency towards anxiety in people from all denominations…especially when we feel insecure about our own theology. We tend to see our own theology making the most sense to us, being the most logical, most biblical, and therefore, the most orthodox and true. Until we see how one another’s theology makes logical sense from the other’s perspective, it will be difficult for us to respect the theology of the other, and barriers will continue without any hope of being dismantled.

I am sympathetic to people who hold any theological beliefs because I hold or held many. As a charismatic evangelical Lutheran who is a closet Calvinist and former-Arminian, I hope to see my entire Christian family in Christ come together some day in understanding, in grace and in love. I still have much to work on in myself.

Am I a closet Calvinist?

2009-07-14T19:18:00.010-06:00

Am I a closet Calvinist? I did not think I would start reading Calvins Institutes. I was only kidding when I said ìn a previous post 500th Anniversary of Calvin:

Perhaps I'll celebrate by reading a chapter from Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion? No, that's been done before.

First indication: To my surprise I actually started reading Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion. I like it but I do not think I will stop reading since I am on a roll. Yeah!

Second indication: What sort of confirmed my liking for Calvin, in a funny sort of way, was the result on a quiz Which Modern Evangelist/Theologian are You? My results are: here (John Piper). Does this mean I am a closet Calvinist? If so, do I need to come out of the closet?

Third indication: To strengthen this hunch that I might be a closet Calvinist, I also took this odd-ball of a quiz to see what my C-Factor was and I scored 83%. (HatTip: Nick Norelli)I do not give much validity to this stupid quiz. I cannot believe I scored so high...83%! This means I am too uptight. What does this mean for me? I really have to be less of a Calvinist because true Calvinist do not know how to take it easy in life. Here is the result to this test:

You are a genuine Calvinist. You have been tried and tested in Calvinism. Your attitude in live is straight and strict. You are a hard working person, who pays attention to others. However, you never show off these qualities. After all, in the eyes of God, everyone is a sinner. You know how to control your emotions, and no one can say you have an easy and luxurious way of life.

Work = 100%
Strictness: 80%
Sobriety: 60%
Relationships: 100%
Beliefs: 100%

Now you tell me if I am a closet Calvinist. If so, I might have to go and find a Calvin picture to hang in my office ;)

I came out as John Piper. What are you?

2009-07-14T16:13:00.006-06:00

I just took this quiz. HatTip: ElShaddai. Both ElShaddai and TC Robinson came out as Rob Bell. I know I am definitely not a Rob Bell so when I found out I was a John Piper, I was a little surprised but really should not be surprised. After all, I like listening to Piper. His preaching inspires me...a lot. Here is the result. You have to sign onto Facebook to take the quiz.

Kevin took the Which Modern Evangelist/Theologian are You? quiz and the result is John Piper

You are the Pastor of Bethlehem Baptist in Minneapolis. You are a brilliant thinker, writer and preacher. However, you also question wether John Calvin was enough of a Calvinist. You wield the sword of protection for any perceived threat to God's sovereignty. Unfortunately, your idea of God's sovereignty is pretty much limited to the idea of "Predestination" and not much else. No one can doubt where your heart stands, and you are deeply passionate about Christ. Unfortunately, you are often perceived as being narrow & rigid. It's not fair, but you might do yourself a favor by not reminding people what degenerate, filthy robots we are. (Most of us already know that)

The bible belongs in public school classrooms

2009-07-13T14:00:00.005-06:00

The teaching of the bible in our public classrooms has been reduced to “nil” in my country of Canada. I remember the last time the bible was ever publicly read in the classroom was in the second grade (in the Province of British Columbia). The loss of bible reading in public schools across our nation is a real travesty. The reading of scripture and teaching of Christian morality was never intended to be removed from public school classrooms. The founders of Canada's public school system would be shocked today.

The Ontario Public School Act (1896) states:

“It shall be the duty of every teacher of a public school to teach diligently and faithfully all of the subjects in the public school course of study; to maintain proper order and discipline in his pupils in his school; to encourage his pupils in the pursuit of learning; to include, by precept and example, respect for religion and the principles of Christian morality and the highest regard for truth, justice, love of country, humanity, benevolence, sobriety, industry, frugality, purity, temperance and all other virtues.”

What and how we teach in our public classrooms affects the next generation. If we are ignorant of our one and true Christian heritage, our next generation will be just as ignorant. One generation follows the next. Bishop John Strachan, one of the leaders who helped form our public education system said:

“The church must continue to play a central role in education. You cannot divorce religion from education because schools will inevitably reflect the philosophical and religious or (irreligious) biases of those who direct them.”

There is great wisdom in our Christian heritage. If we forsake this, we will eventually lose our nation. As a Canadian who loves my country, I hope and pray that our nation will return to God and recognize God's sovereignty in our lives. I’m not saying that our schools have to be church-run, nor am I say that our nation should be a theocracy. When American President Thomas Jefferson spoke about the idea of the separation of state and church, he was not advocating for the creation of a secular society that we have today. Our courts of law and public institutions have gravely misunderstood this and carried it into a wrong direction by denying God’s sovereignty and supremacy.

An informative starter guide I found helpful for public schools in the U.S. to put the bible education back in the classrooms can be found on the Society of Biblical Literature website. It's a guide for Bible Electives in Public Schools written by Moira Bucciarelli.

John Calvin's 500th birthday

2009-07-11T16:32:00.004-06:00

What did I do to celebrate John Calvin's birthday yesterday? Nothing except post this picture of him on the blog today. But I should do something original, shouldn't I?

Perhaps I'll celebrate by reading a chapter from Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion? No, that's been done before.

Perhaps I'll celebrate by hanging a picture of him in my church office? No, some even have his picture hanging in their washrooms already.

Perhaps I'll celebrate by praying for him? No, some have prayed for his life and even his death centuries earlier.

Perhaps I'll celebrate by naming my next child after him? Calvin Sam? No, it doesn't have a good ring to it.

I think I'll just admire this picture for a second and that'll be it.

Reconciling evolutionism-creationism with infallibility and inspiration of scripture

2009-07-11T12:56:00.003-06:00

Blogger Jeremy Pierce at Parableman recently posted Francis Collins and Intelligent Design about five different views in the spectrum of creationism-evolutionism. Jeremy Pierce is a blogger who has interesting things to say about social-political-biblical issues.

As a Christian, where do you stand within this spectrum of creationism-evolutionism views?

1. Atheistic evolution: Everything we experience is best explained by naturalistic explanations such as natural selection and random chance, with no guidance from an intelligent being.

2. Naturalistic-like theistic evolution: Natural selection and what appears to be random chance constitute the best scientific account of human origins, but God intelligently guided the process along by setting up the laws of nature so that they would lead to human development.

3. Non-naturalistic theistic evolution: Natural selection and the mechanisms of the standard evolutionary account are correct in postulating human origins from common descent with other animals, but God intelligently guided the process along by intervening in the natural order.

4. Special creation (old-earth): Divine intervention occurred to create human beings at a certain time in history without humans having descended from other animals. Nevertheless, this took place in the general time scheme scientists accept for when humans first appeared, and the universe and the earth are as old as our best science generally takes them to be.

5. Special creation (young-earth): Divine intervention occurred to create human beings at a certain time in history without humans having descended from other animals. This happened during the one exact week that God used to create the universe and all life on earth, with humans appearing on the sixth day of that week.

I commented that:

I've struggled in bouncing back and forth between views # 2-4. I still find these 3 views plausible within the confines of inspiration and infallibility of scripture, which are things I don't want to forsake. But I find that with view #2 I have a tough time reconciling with the infallibility of Scripture. I don't know.

Ephesians 1:4-5 – Whose love are we talking about? Our love or God's love?

2009-07-09T15:34:00.021-06:00

In Ephesians 1:4-5, whose love is the writer of Ephesians talking about -- the love in God's child or the love of God? Notice that εν αγαπη (en agape) in the Greek NT is located at the end of v.4; however, en agape could also be placed at the start of a new sentence in v.5, which would render a different meaning in the text. "Love" is stuck in the middle between v.4 and v.5. The various translations also take positions right down the middle. The NRSV, NASB, NKJV, NJB and REB locate love (en agape) at the end of v.4 so that love is understood as an attribute within the child of God. Love modifies holiness and blamelessness. Whereas, the ESV, RSV, TNIV, NAB, GNT and HCSB locates love (en agape) at the beginning of v.5; so then, love is understood as an attribute of God’s own character (i.e., "in love [God] predestined us"). As a result, these translations are understood as two differing ideas. It can be a major difference, not a minor one and it completely changes how the passage is understood by the reader. (Note, NLT also locates love in v.4 but love modifies the word "chosen" so it's meaning is understood almost the same as TNIV and ESV). [This post has been edited.]
______________________

Ephesians 1:4-5:

4 καθως εξελεξατο ημας εν αυτω προ καταβολης κοσμου ειναι ημας αγιους και αμωμους κατενωπιον αυτου εν αγαπη
5 προορισας ημας εις υιοθεσιαν δια ιησου χριστου εις αυτον κατα την ευδοκιαν του θεληματος αυτου (Greek New Testament, Nestle-Aland 27th edition)
...even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, (ESV)

For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—(TNIV)

Even before he made the world, God loved us and chose us in Christ to be holy and without fault in his eyes. God decided in advance to adopt us into his own family by bringing us to himself through Jesus Christ. This is what he wanted to do, and it gave him great pleasure. (NLT)

just as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love. He destined us for adoption as his children through Jesus Christ, according to the good pleasure of his will, (NRSV)

Before the foundation of the world he chose us in Christ to be his people, to be without blemish in his sight, to be full of love; and he predestined us to be adopted as his children through Jesus Christ. This was his will and pleasure (REB)

ESV Study Bible: a Reformed study bible?

2009-07-08T14:49:00.004-06:00

This Sunday, I plan to preach on the text of Ephesians 1:3-14. I noticed that, in particular, vv. 3, 4 and 11 are verses about predestination. I compared this passage in the ESV translation with other translations and did not find that the ESV had any bent toward predestination. Then I looked further and could not find any passage where the ESV was biased toward Reformed teaching of predestination. If the ESV bible could be accused of having a bent toward Reformed theology, it would have to be some of the notes in the ESV Study Bible.

I looked up some of the verses most commonly used by Arminians to challenge the doctrine of predestination. In it, the study notes in the ESV Study Bible, to a large extent, does defend the doctrine of predestination. But the study notes do not only defend Reformed theology since its contributors come from various denominations including some from non-Reformed backgrounds (e.g., pentecostal, evangelical, Southern Baptist, Lutherans). No, I'm not saying that the ESV Study Bible is a Reformed study bible. It is clearly not. But if the ESV Study Bible were to be labelled as a Reformed study bible, I don't think many in the Reformed camp would object this label? But if it were labelled as such, it definitely wouldn't be able to sell as well as it has.
________________________________

1 Timothy 2:3-4 “who desires all people to be saved”
“This statement figures prominently in theological disagreements over the extent of the atonement. It cannot be read as suggesting that everyone will be saved (universalism) because the rest of the letter makes it clear that some will not be saved”

2 Peter 3:9 “not wishing that any should perish”
“see note in 1 Tim 2:4”

Romans 14:15 “do not destroy the one for whom Christ died”
“beware lest they destroy the faith of a brother or sister”

1 Corinthians 8:11 “by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died”
“Others see this as a reference to the moral harm done to the weaker brother (his conscience “is defiled,””

Hebrews 10:26-27 “a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries”
“…if there is no evidence of fruit in one's life, to challenge such people to give fearful consideration as to whether they are in fact genuine believers.”

2 Peter 2:1 “even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction”
“they claimed to be “redeemed” and “saved” because they were part of the church, but their apostasy showed that they were not truly believers.”

John 4:42 “so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men”
“the first “all men” refers to all who are in Adam (every human being), while the second “all men” refers to all believers, to all who are “in Christ.””

Romans 5:18
2 Corinthians 5:14-15
1 John 2:2

Logos giving away 72 bibles

2009-07-06T10:55:00.003-06:00

I thought you all might like to know about this bible giveaway. I've entered for a free bible.

Logos Bible Software is celebrating the launch of their new online Bible by giving away 72 ultra-premium print Bibles at a rate of 12 per month for six months. The Bible giveaway is being held at Bible.Logos.com and you can get up to five different entries each month! After you enter, be sure to check out Logos and see how it can revolutionize your Bible study.

Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace? by James M. Boice

2009-07-02T19:50:00.005-06:00

Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace: Discovering the Doctrines that Shook the World
Author: James Montgomery Boice
Publisher: Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2009.
ISBN: 9781433509629

Thanks to Crossway for this review copy.

This book calls the evangelical churches to return to its origins; that is, a return to the doctrines of the five solas: scripture alone, grace alone, faith alone, Christ alone, and glory to God alone. Author, James M. Boice, who was senior minister of Tenth Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia for 30 years brings the reader a well-thought through analysis of the church’s need to return to the doctrines that made the church what it was.

His critique of the current state of the evangelical church can be sharp but it is warranted, given the state of the church. This book is like a prophetic cry calling the evangelical church to not be conformed to the pattern of this age but to be transformed by a renewal. Boice claims that evangelical churches have taken the misguided path of humanism, relativism, materialism, pragmatism, and mindlessness.

I am not sure if the entire evangelical church is in the sad state that Boice has described but I do agree with his assessment that describes parts of the evangelical church. His claims against the evangelical church is that it no longer believes the bible is adequate to meet the challenges of today.

His example is our need to develop lobby groups and elect Christian legislators to fulfill our need for power politics and money. In this sense, the evangelical church has also become like secular society and has followed the path of Christians who herald from established mainline churches. I feel that a more accurate diagnosis is that evangelicals have sought political power and money to effect more influence on the world around us. Why? Is it for the sake of power and money? No, I do not think so but I think this need arises from the feeling that evangelicals have not been effective in changing the world for Christ. Does this mean that we are in the beginning stages of the coming evangelical crisis? Not necessarily. Much of the church during the founding of the colonial nation had many people of Christian faith in political office. In fact, that was the norm. Personally, I think this is a good thing--even for today.

Contrary to Boice, I do not think there is anything wrong with this because, as Christians, we are called to be salt and light in a dark world. I agree with Boice in that we have put our trust and hope in power, wealth and influence. The emptiness in politics, and even the idolatry of religion and ecclesiastical power, are both equally temporary and fleeting when it is understood from a perspective in which we are depraved and separated from God. Christian leaders in every vocation are prone to falling into the trap of human sinfulness, and yes, including our seemingly faithful pastors, deacons, and church leaders.

Do we need faithful legislators, doctors, lawyers, teachers, truck drivers and local business owners? Yes, we do. My argument is that we make the mistake of putting our faith, trust and hope in them. Our own work in this world is open to corruption and human sinfulness. Boice says that:

“The Good News is that sin has been dealt with, that Jesus has suffered its penalty for us as our representative, and that all who believe in him can look forward confidently to heaven. Any ‘gospel’ that talks merely about the Christ-event, meaning the Incarnation without the Atonement, is a false gospel. Any gospel that talks about the love of God without showing that love led him to pay the ultimate price for sin in the person of his Son on the Cross, is a false gospel. The only true gospel is the gospel of the ‘one mediator’ who gave himself for us (1 Tim. 2:5,6). If our churches are not preaching this gospel, they are not preaching the gospel at all, and if they are not preaching the gospel, they are not true churches . Evangelicalism desperately needs to rediscover its roots and recover its essential biblical bearing at this point.” (p.105).

We must become more self-aware of our misplaced trust in our humanistic tendencies, which get played out in our self-esteem gospel, the health and wealth gospel, felt-need sermons or entertainment or ‘signs and wonders’. Moreover, our misguided humanism apart from God has led us to follow the wisdom, agendas, method and theology prevalent in our secular age. We have become humanistic, relativistic, and pragmatic, materialistic and this very visible in the way we do church. The author of this book says we see it in our church growth and building programs, and in our efforts toward defeating world hunger, racism, and ecology. This really hurts but I think it’s good prophetic medicine for a church that is sick.

Christ calls the church to repent and return to the Cross of Christ (or theology of the Cross). As the Holy Spirit of God opens our eyes, we may begin to see the offense of the cross and return to an understanding of why we need the cross. This is true Christianity, and without it, we are not being the true church. The author has challenged me to be true to Christ’s calling. This book will challenge you to think more deeply about one’s theology but the author has said more than what I have written here. It will challenge you to become more aware of our need for Christ and call you to the solas of the Reformation: sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”), sola gratia (“grace alone”), sola fide (“faith alone”), solus Christus (“Christ alone”), and soli Deo Gloria (“glory to God alone”). May all glory be to God alone.

Officiating my first funeral--it can be a challenge

2009-07-02T15:40:00.003-06:00

I will be officiating my first funeral and will deliver a short sermon to the family and friends of a deceased woman. I’m struggling a little about how and what to say because I did not know the person and did not know what her faith walk was like while she was alive. To know for certain whether she had faith or none at all would be easier. Not knowing seems to make it more difficult. The risk is that I might over-attribute or under-attribute her faith in the Lord. If I over-attribute, I would be saying too much. If I under-attribute, I would be saying too little. Maybe I should say nothing of her faith at all and just preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to her family and friends? Yes, I think I will do just that.

Regarding a similar issue of funerals, this week, I couldn’t help wonder what I would do if I had to officiate and preach a sermon at the funeral of the late Michael Jackson [I don't know why I'm still talking about this guy. Maybe he's more significant to me than I thought?]. Did he have any faith in Jesus at all? Did he truly convert to Islam, or what was the religion the tabloids said he adhere to…I do not really know. Would I be able to say that he “has been reunited with Christ and his heavenly Father”? If I’m not sure about that, I would be doing a disservice to his family by giving them a false hope, or to say that he’s on his way to heaven or to hell would not be right. Only God knows what happened to his soul. Boy, I’m glad I’m not officiating the funeral for Michael Jackson.

Making one-sided prayers

2009-06-25T21:57:00.003-06:00

The most significant current events around the world include the situation happening in Iran. The political unrest amongst the people is creating civil chaos that has become quite violent. There is injustice. There is blatant dishonesty in the current government. But I forgot to pray for the people in Iran. My question is: “Is it okay to pray for political issues like the political unrest in Iran?” Some churches feel it is okay to pray for one side of the issue but this is risky. If we’re careful we probably should not pray for or against one side because we do not have any hard evidence and information regarding how the election was handled in Iran. Should we Christians take sides and pray for one government over another? I think it’s better to be careful and refrain from making public prayers for one side or another because we might have wrong information. Personally, I don’t trust all our public information and news from television or even our newspapers. Even President Obama is being more careful about his public comments and isn’t making any one-sided opinions about this issue. However, I think the one thing we can pray for is for peace and for the truth to be revealed.

Where were you when you heard Michael Jackson died?

2009-06-25T20:15:00.002-06:00

I do not know why this story is important enough to bring me back to blogging but it is. Where were you when you heard that Michael Jackson had died? As I was returning home today on Highway #44 from a visit with parishioners this late afternoon, I turned on the radio in the car and tuned into news radio. I was stunned and felt a loss inside. The older generation will remember exactly where they were and what they were doing when they received the news when JFK was shot in Texas and had died. And just as people will remember exactly where they were when the Twin Towers tumbled in NYC, I will remember where I was when I heard that Michael Jackson suddenly died.

For some, Michael Jackson’s death has little significance, but for me, he was a real huge icon in my era. Yes, I do feel kind of sad and feel a part of me has died today. Why? Maybe it’s because, as a kid, I learned how to moonwalk from watching Michael Jackson videos of Thriller…. maybe it’s because I remember listening to hits like Thriller, Beat it, Billie Jean, Say Say Say, etc. Yes, I admit I was a fan of him when he was at his peak of pop stardom. I liked his music, his dancing and his originality. Regardless of the bad stuff that happened in the latter stages of his life, he will be remembered by millions of people around the world who liked his music. My thoughts and prayers are with him and may God be with his family members.

Just getting settled in and will be back to blogging

2009-06-02T21:05:00.002-06:00

Okay, I've had my holiday time and still feel like staying away from blogging for a while because life is more simpler but also more complicated too. Adjusting to new life in a new town and getting use to new people can be stressful. Any kind of change adds stress to life so I've tried to move slowly into this new phase of my life.

I also noticed I have nearly 900 unread posts in my google reader and I'm catching up to what everyone has been blogging about. I really like what I've seen in everyone's blogs. I'll be reading your blogs and some books too. Right now I'm content just reading what you're all blogging about. I'll be back to blogging some time soon.

Now it's official, I've been ordained

2009-05-01T20:53:00.008-06:00

On Sunday, April 26, 2009, I was ordained as a pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada. Now, I am authorized to administer Word and Sacraments. This took place at my home congregation of Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church in Saskatoon, SK Canada. I will be taking a call in a small rural parish in Davidson and Loreburn, SK.

Immediately after my ordination, a seminary classmate posed a light-hearted but interesting question to me. He asked: "Was there an ontological change after ordination?" Theologically-speaking, I don't think so...or at least I didn't feel any different after being ordained. Roman Catholic theology speak of an ontological change effective at the sacrament of ordination but Lutherans and Anglicans do not see ordination as a sacrament or see the pastor any different before one was ordained. Calvin and Luther saw that the only thing different is that one is called to a task that is set apart from that of the lay person.

Is "once a priest, always a priest?" Psalm 110:4 and Hebrews 5:6 says: "You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek." However, this refers to Jesus himself

Peter says: "But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's special possession..." (1 Peter 2:9, TNIV). This verse refers to God's holy people.

Hebrews also refers to Jesus as the great high priest, but to also to an earthly high priest in Hebrews 4:14 - 5:10. "Every high priest is selected from among the people and is appointed to represent them in matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins" (Heb. 5:1, TNIV).

So who can be a priest? Do we only have one priest in Jesus, or can we have many priest, as in the priesthood of all believers? Can ordination make one a priest before God?

(Note: The larger photo is of the bishop of my synod, and of my parents, wife and daughter. The small group photo of the pastors and classmates has been reduced in order to keep their anonymity. It's a tradition to pose for a large clergy group photo after ordination.)

My ordination and convocation

2009-04-21T21:20:00.006-06:00

The next few weeks will mark some very important milestone in my life. My graduation/convocation from seminary will be on May 8, 2009. Since the end of 2008, I completed all my seminary classes. By God’s providence, I was blessed with the opportunity to serve as a pastoral assistant on a half-time basis at my home congregation. In the mean time, I have been awaiting a call to serve as a full-time ordained minister of the gospel, and now, the time has come.

I have been offered a Letter of Call to shepherd two small rural congregations. This Sunday, on April 26th, I will be ordained as a pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada; and I will have an official title of Reverend Kevin Sam. It's hard to believe after all this time. I will also be busy packing, moving, and getting settled into a new place in the next several weeks. This means I’ll have less time for blogging in the next little while so don’t expect many posts but I will be back at my normal pace after I get settled. Peace and blessings to all my friends and readers of this blog.

Preserving Democracy by Elgin Hushbeck Jr.

2009-04-19T10:18:00.012-06:00

Preserving Democracy
Author: Elgin Hushbeck, Jr.
Publisher: Gonzalez, FL: Energion Publications, 2009
ISBN: 978-1893729537 (hardcover)

Recently, I have been doing more reading than blogging, and I am enjoying it. I have just finished reading a new book, Preserving Democracy, written by Elgin Hushbeck, Jr. It is published by a small but growing publisher, Energion Publications, and I wish to thank the publisher, Mr. Henry Neufeld, for a copy of this advanced edition.

I am a fan of the the U.S. Constitution because the Founding Fathers who designed the U.S. Constitution constructed the finest constitutional document, probably in the history of the world. To those who are critical of the United States, its ideals and its problems, I probably sound like I have been totally taken in or doofed by American propaganda (Note: I can say this because I am Canadian...and some of you know what it means to be Canadian). But to those who understand the history of the United States and who have read what James Madison and Alexander Hamilton reported in the Federalist Papers, one will appreciate the genius behind the framers of the Constitution. This document has become the model for many other national constitutions around the world. Americans should be very proud of the U.S. Constitution. If it wasn't a great document and so intelligently put together, I highly doubt it would be held in such high regard by so many other nations.

Yes, America has not been perfect, and it still isn't. Critics of the great American democratic experiment will be quick to point out the history of slavery and poverty; but this has existed in the histories of every country and I do not intend to condone any wrongs. However, I must ask: Is there any other country on earth where it has opened its doors to so many immigrants where so many have found freedom, equality and the liberty to pursue happiness, prosperity, and religious freedom?

In this book, the author defends the American democratic ideals. Hushbeck knows and understands the history of this nation from its Christian roots. He has helped to enlighten my eyes to what Thomas Jefferson really meant when he wrote to a Baptist group in Danbury, Conn.:

"I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State" (p.91).

Jefferson said this not to establish freedom from religion, but to establish freedom for religion. Today, the courts have twisted and corrupted the honorable intention of Jefferson such that many use this to mean that any public institution must be secular. This cannot be further from the truth. Anyone who doubts this piece of American history should read further into American history. Hushbeck has drawn his information from many sources and is well-informed about the history of the American Founding Fathers. I doubt that many history teachers know about this part of American history because many universities teach American history from a purely secularized perspective and is devoid of true "His-Story." This is sad.

True freedom can only be experienced within the confines and protection of the Rule of Law, and when the laws of the law promote justice and equality. Freedom is not anarchy, nor do I believe it is libertarianism. Americans should never take freedom for granted because it is, and still remains, one of the freest countries on the face of the earth. It is so because of respect for Rule of Law. It is Rule of Law, and not laws, that give people protection and security under the law. However, these freedoms are being eroded today. I really like what Hushbeck says in the chapter on The Rule of Law. He defines what this concept is.

"The Rule of Law is not law. Laws have been around since before recorded history…. While laws are the rules of conduct of a society that are backed up by the authority of the state; the Rule of Law is a concept that deals with how law itself is to be understood and more importantly to whom it is applied. In its simplest form, the Rule of Law can be summed up in the statement: No one is above the law, not even the ruler” (p. 80-81).

In dictatorships, nations under Mao, Stalin or Hitler did not have Rule of Law because they dictated what the law should be according to how it best benefited them. This still happens today under tribal leadership and dictatorship, and it is abuse. However, they would not consider it abuse because they do not have a true understanding of Rule of Law.

What is truly important about Rule of Law is that it provides a basis for true democratic government. The author used an example of Saddam Hussein who acted as though he was above the law. He changed the way elections were conducted at his own whim. Therefore, democracy never actually existed under Hussein. This sort of thing still happens in other countries today. In false democracies, posed as democracies, their practices are underhanded, or even unashamedly open-handedly but corrupt.

Hushbeck says that the American democratic republic could fail if the U.S. Supreme Court continues in it dangerous trend of where court justices set dangerous precedents to define how new laws should be applied. Judges who see the Constitution as a fixed standard treat the Constitution as if it is a “living document” in the sense that it “can grow and be expanded to meet the needs of an ever-changing society.” Should it be able to be expanded? Should the American people ever change the Constitution? I mean, should one fix what is not broken? Some feel that rather than fixing it, it would be easier to reinterpret what it says. When judges base their ruling on their own personal views as to what is important or what ought to be, it can set a dangerous precedent; and it has. “In short, it makes the judge more of a ruler than a judge,” says Hushbeck. Undoubtedly, this weakens the public confidence in the Constitution, the Rule of Law, and respect for the laws of the land. It also allows for injustice.

There is so much more to say about this book that I would need more room and time to say it. If you have an interest in American history, the richness of American heritage, and are concerned about the state of the nation today, you should read Preserving Democracy. This book has just been released on April 15, 2009 and is now available for pre-purchase at Energion Publications and on Amazon.com. I am very glad to have read this informative and well-written book. Thanks.

Calvin by Willem Van't Spijker

2009-04-15T10:20:00.006-06:00

Calvin: A Brief Guide to His Life and Thought
Author: Spijker, Willem Van’t
Translated by: Lyle D. Bierma.
Publisher: Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009
ISBN-13: 9780664232252

I would like to begin by thanking Presbyterian Publishing for sending me a copy of this book to review.

I have to admit that I am not a history buff and when given a choice, I would naturally prefer reading theology over history. When I started reading this book, I was expecting to read more about the theology of John Calvin but I realized that this was more of a historical biography than an explanation of John Calvin’s theology. Ten of the eleven chapters deal with the historical biography of John Calvin, which left only one chapter dealing solely with the theology of John Calvin. Needless to say, I enjoyed reading chapter 10 “Contours of Calvin’s Theology”. (In fact, I jotted many notes as I was reading this chapter because I felt that Spijker made many fine points on Calvin’s theology).

As I kept reading, I also began to realize the magnitude of Calvin’s struggles and challenges. Of the Reformers, I had only had prior knowledge of Martin Luther and a very basic introduction to the man of John Calvin through my studies in seminary about the history of the Protestant Reformation. However, after finishing his book today, I realized that I had only begun to scrape the surface of what lies beneath a great man of deep conviction and faith. I would opine that the accomplishments and influence of John Calvin is equal to that of the other great Reformer, Dr. Rev. Martin Luther.

The author, Willem Van’t Spijker, is one of the leading scholars on John Calvin. As I said, this book is not so much a book on the theology of Calvin as it is on the history of the person of John Calvin. The events and accomplishments of Calvin are presented in chronological fashion. Throughout the book, Spijker mainly talks about the events and actions of Calvin during his lifetime that created the Reformation in the early to mid 16th century.

Spijker takes his readers through the history of Calvin, from the beginning of the 16th century to Calvin’s early life and development, to his Institutes and the origins and formation of the church in Geneva, as well as, Strasbourg; then into his formation of the four offices, the independent authority of the church, and the completion of the Institutes in 1559.

A common theme that seems to occur throughout the pages of this book is the idea or practice of church discipline. For those who come without any prior knowledge of Calvinism and what it is, one might carry the image of strict ladies with hair rolled up in a bun, up tightness, and of law and obedience. That’s the negative stereotypical image of people who practice church discipline. After reading about Calvin’s theological reasoning behind church discipline, I realized that it is not such a far out, wild and crazy idea for a church to have. I understand that church discipline is required in any church and congregation and it must be carried out in order for the church to maintain some ecclesiastical and spiritual order within the body of Christ.

Yes, Calvin did support punishment of heretics by banishing them from the city of Geneva, or levying the heavy punishment of death upon those who disagreed with him. By today’s standards, this would obviously be considered extreme religious persecution and a strict violation of human rights. However, in his days, this was the normal practice of church discipline. It was also the experience of the other contemporary Reformers like Martin Luther.

For our many friends who are of the Presbyterian or Reformed persuasion, you would cringe at the thought of such practices and would even condemn those who do the same. Well, Calvin was not a tolerant figure and this shameful image is not what any of us would like to read about in our books on church history. However, it is good to know how our early predecessors from the Reformation past conducted themselves in the post-Roman age and learn from that era what we must not do in the future.

With this said as a prelude, I must admit that some measure of church discipline is necessary because of the chaos the Reformation created. The Roman Catholic Church was also fully immersed into the practice of church discipline and was the epitome of such practices. Spijker says:

"With respect to church discipline, [Calvin] emphasized the principle that actions by the consistory out not to interfere with procedures in the civil courts. It was also his wish that people not be dealt with too harshly in church discipline and that there be no difference between the discipline of laypersons and office-bearers. The latter should be subject to the same punishments as the former” (p. 164).

I am not sure I would agree with Spijker’s statement here. Calvin’s practice of church discipline was guided by a distinction between the spiritual discipline of the church and the punishment of the civil government. He claims Calvin did not want to mix the two realms of civil jurisdiction and the authority of the church. However, both seemed to be heavy-handed at times.

Spijker does not hide Calvin’s leaning toward church discipline. He writes:

“On the matter of church discipline as an effective means of combating sins and shortcomings, however, tension between the magistracy and the consistory continued to exist. On more than one occasion, Calvin was called upon to be more moderate in his preaching, as a means that he was using to propagate his belief about church discipline” (p. 99).

This book covers a lot more than church discipline. It also talks about how Calvin wanted to transform the City of Geneva under Calvin’s vision as a model of what a Christian society should look like. It is interesting that Spijker says Calvin felt that he failed in his plan to transform this city. Luther’s doctrine of the Two Kingdoms did not function in the same way as the Geneva model. Calvin saw both kingdoms under one Lord. Calvin thought his model was the only way and perhaps that is why he felt he failed in achieving a model Christian society?

La Résurrection by James Tissot

2009-04-12T18:27:00.005-06:00

This painting called La Résurrection by French artist, James Tissot, is done in watercolor. It is held at the Brooklyn Museum. La Résurrection actually depicts Christ rising from the place of the dead. I like this painting because it depicts Christ's amongst the dead and supports the theology that Jesus actually visited the place of hell after his death on the cross in order to preach to the spirits who had already died a physical death but who have yet to experience a spiritual rebirth.

"For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. In that state he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits..." (1 Peter 3:18-19, TNIV).

In the Apostles’ Creed, the newer version states: "He descended to the dead.” I think "The dead" may be a more accurate interpretation because it connotes a place where the dead rests. (In the Greek, this place of the dead is called sheol in Hebrew or hades in Greek). In our contemporary language, we currently refer to this place as hell; however, it might also be called the place of the dead because it is where people go after they die.

Do you think the place of "the dead" or "hell" would be a more accurate description of what hades really is?

The Resurrection (La Résurrection)
Series: The Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ (La Vie de Notre-Seigneur Jésus-Christ)
Artist: James Tissot, French, 1836-1902

He is Risen! Hallelujah!

2009-04-12T17:16:00.009-06:00

Hopefully, you have been encouraged this Easter Sunday morning of Christ’s resurrection. For me personally, Christ's resurrection is the most important event and theological issue for the church. Moreover, I would consider one's belief in the resurrection to be the most important factor in determining the current status of a person's life and faith in Christ in that moment in time. You may have another.

L: He is Risen! Hallelujah!
All: He is Risen Indeed! Hallelujah!

That is what we profess from our ancient church creeds; and that is what we proclaim to one another and to the world. In the Apostles’ Creed, we profess that:

“On the third day he rose again; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father, and he will come to judge the living and the dead….I believe in…the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.”

There is a connection within our confession and profession of faith. It is because Christ has risen on the third day, has ascended into heaven and is now seated at the right of the Father, that we believe Christ will come again and we look forward to the resurrection of the body and life everlasting.

If Jesus did not rise from death, there would be no reason our whole celebration of Christ resurrection, and therefore, no reason for Easter season.

Would there be a reason for Christianity if there was no reason for Christ’s resurrection, and for our own resurrection in the future?

Undoubtedly, there are many non-believers, and even amongst some self-professed Christians, who doubt the resurrection of Christ. If we have no reason to believe in the resurrection of Christ, we have no basis to believe in the future of our own resurrection from death. We would just be temporary living blobs of life who will live and die and never again experience life; nor will we have any memory of having lived life on earth.

Yes, I am one of these hopeful Christians who believe that we will rise again from death and retain our living memories of our time on earth and live again to experience life forever with God in Christ Jesus. Whether we will be resurrected in body form or another form is a non-issue for me personally.

The most important issue for me is that we will be resurrected from death into life, as in accordance to scripture.

Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene at the tomb saying: “Mary…do not hold onto me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, “’I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” (John 20:16-17, NRSV).

The women Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome saw only an empty tomb and an angel dressed in white who asked: “Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here” (Mark 16:6, NRSV).

Would you consider the resurrection to be the most important factor in determining the current status of a person's life and faith in Christ in that moment in time?

HatTip: Eddie Arthur

Should we do away with "and the Son"?

2009-04-03T07:55:00.005-06:00

Inspired my review of Alister McGrath’s book in my previous post regarding the theme of the Trinity, it prompted me to ask myself a question. If “and the Son” was removed from the Nicene Creed, would that bother me? For me personally? My answer from the gut would be: "No." But then, many people thoughout the centuries have been accused of heresy for saying "No".

You might be asking: "What in the world is the filioque?" The Nicene Creed, an ancient creed of the church, is accepted and recited universally by Christians around the world.

The Western Church (Protestants and Roman Catholics) recites the Nicene Creed with an addition of three words to one line (in our English translations). This is called the filioque clause; and it reads:

“We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son”

The Eastern Church (Orthodox), however, recites the creed without “and the Son” (the filioque clause):

“We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father.”

It’s interesting to note that: “and the Son” was not originally in the Nicene Creed but was later added. Apparently, this filioque clause was added in the 6th century to prevent a doctrinal error called Arianism. But is it necessary today? Who is correct, the East or the West?

Furthermore, this addition seems to conflict with scripture (see John 15:26 below). Where does scripture say anything about the Son proceeding from the Father? Okay, we do know that the Son proceeds from the Father but is it necessary that it also be stated in the creed?

"But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me.” (ESV)

"When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father--the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father--he will testify about me" (TNIV)

The Spirit should not be perceived as being born from the Son because all three has always been (sense of birth/generation). The Spirit can, however, be perceived as coming after the Son during Pentecost (sense of order/timing). I know all this can be confusing and I think I am still confused myself.

Do you think the Son proceeds from the Father, and the Spirit from the Son?

Or do you think the Son and Spirit have equal footing where both equally proceed from the Father?

What did you learn or recite in church? Or do you recite any creed in church?

Alister McGrath: The Christian Vision of God from Fortress Press

2009-04-02T09:13:00.010-06:00

The Christian Vision of God
Publisher: Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2008.
ISBN: 9780800637057

First, I would like to thank the fine people at Fortress Press for a copy of this book.

In his book, The Christian Vision of God, the highly regarded theologian Alister McGrath has combined his reflections of the trinity with Christian artwork. If I had to describe this book in one sentence, it might be this: “theological reflections of the Trinitarian God laid upon the canvas of Christian art.” I like theology but I’ve never been into art; however, I find this combination quite enjoyable. Also, this is a short book that can be read in one sitting.

His Trinitarian reflections are enhanced by his artwork. The artwork gives him a starting position from which to lead into some discussions about the trinity. It blends very nicely because it adds a bit of color to his theological reflections. McGrath’s reflections of Christian art is not the main emphasis. His commentary on the artwork sort of hangs merely as a backdrop; and it leaves his theology of the trinity standing out very boldly on the forefront within the pages of his book.

McGrath has chose to draw his Trinitarian reflections from seven items of art:

Pearl of Great Price, by Daniel Bonnell (b. 1955)
The Kiss, 1907-08 by Gustav Klimt
The Storm on the Sea of Galilee, 1633 by Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn
Pentecost, by Pier Francesco Mazzucchelli
Moses and the Burning Bush, by William Blake
The Holy Trinity with St. John the Baptist, Mary Magdelene, Tobias and the Angel, c. 1490-95 by Sandro Botticelli
Icon with the Trinity, by Andrei Rublev

I also wish to share a few insightful comments from this book. How can one describe the Trinity? The author puts it this way:

"... something incomprehensible, combining mathematical absurdity with theological obscurantism. We can do without this sort of thing, can't we? Perhaps it is not surprising that most Christians rarely talk about the Trinity, even though they talk about God rather a lot" (p. 62).

I am glad the author understands the difficulty inherent in this doctrine saying that: "It is clear that many need reassurance that this doctrine is well grounded in the Bible, and that its apparent nonsensicality masks its capacity to be profoundly helpful in matters of faith" (p.74).

This question of the Trinity was perhaps the first question I struggled with in the beginning of my faith formation. I remember asking a pastor about the different theology the Jehovah's Witnesses were teaching as compared with the theology he was teaching. He provided me great pastoral care and teaching that solidified my faith in the Trinitarian God who gave me salvation, life, and forgiveness.

Perhaps something that will help those who have trouble wrapping their heads around the Trinity is to develop a fuller model of a combination of a:

1) transcendent God who lies beyond the world, as its source and creator;
2) immanent God who is present and active throughout his creation; and
3) human face of God revealed in the person of Jesus Christ.

McGrath believes that we need these three ways of visualizing God together if one is to have an authentically Christian view of God. I have heard some people argue for a predominantly transcendent God...and some for an immanent God. The debate goes on and on; but I believe this debate is endless and absolute useless because God's character can include all three. I am glad I was able to figure this out early on in my Christian walk.

In The Holy Trinity, by Botticelli, the author insightfully recognizes that:

"The Spirit is represented in a curiously understated manner by a dove, hovering between the dominant figures of the Father and the crucified Son... Botticelli seems to suggest that the Holy Spirit is less personal, less important, and somehow less connected with us than the two central figures of the great drama of salvation" (p. 63).

I could not agree with McGrath more. I would also add that our theology of the Trinity has understated the importance of the Holy Spirit to such a degree that we do not think it is kosher to pray to God the Holy Spirit. I believe we can and should also include God the Spirit in our prayers. Moreover, I also sympathize with the thought that our limited human understanding of the Spirit prevents us from painting an accurate picture of the Holy Spirit in a way that does not even come close to glorifying and worshiping the Holy Spirit in a way the Spirit deserves to be glorified and worshiped.

On the Icon with the Trinity, McGrath states:

“their heads are slightly bowed towards the Father, in acknowledgement of his ultimate authority. The Father’s hand points toward the Son; the Son’s toward the Spirit. It is a symbolic representation of the great pattern of revelation that we find in the New Testament, especially in John’s gospel: the Father sends the Son; the Son sends the Spirit” (p. 80).

Since this is item of art is Orthodox in origin, I find it interesting that McGrath did not mention Vladimir Lossky and the Orthodox Trinitarian doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit (or more specifically, the issue of filioque). An Orthodox understanding of the Holy Spirit’s procession is different from that of the Western Church. This can be an endless debate of “who” proceeds from “whom”. On one hand, since the trinity is a mystery, maybe less commentary is better? On the other hand, though difficult to read, I do like Augustine’s prolific treatise, De Trinitate, which is a major writing on the Christian understanding of God. McGrath does not go as deep as the early church fathers but does give his readers many reflections to think about.

Concerning William Blake’s Moses and the Burning Bush, the author says:

“Blake appears to depict Moses as somewhat underwhelmed by his experience. He seems unmoved by what he observes; he gives little more than a sideways glance toward the ‘burning bush’; and he makes no attempt to remove his sandals as a sign of reverence. Blake seems to suggesting that Moses failed to realize the significance of what he observed, and challenges us to appreciate its mystery more fully” (p. 53).

In my observation, I would suggest that Moses was not unmoved by emotion. Blake may have depicted the specific moment in time when he first noticed the burning bush. Though this may be McGrath’s personal interpretation of Blake’s artwork, he does use his reflection as a lead into further theological discussion into the mystery of God.

This book is well done, and it will be a book that I will open up again, not just to admire for its artwork but also to further ponder upon the author’s Trinitarian reflections. Alister McGrath has adeptly used art to enhance his scholarly theological discussion on the Trinity, which I am sure will benefit others who are on a quest of forming one's Christian vision of God.

NLT Discover God Study Bible by Tyndale

2009-03-31T10:07:00.008-06:00

Thanks to Laura Bartlett of Tyndale House Publishers for sending me this hardcover edition of this wonderful study bible.

The Discover God Study Bible was released a while back but it doesn’t seem to have a big readership because when I checked the local Christian bookstore, I noticed only a few copies on the shelf. It doesn't seem to be as nearly as popular as the NLT Life Application Study Bible or NLT Study Bible, which are great bibles; but I think this study bible deserves more recognition because of its helpfulness within its pages of study notes.

This bible is a devotional study bible and is unlike many other study bibles out there because it is full of good advice and wisdom for living a holy and devoted Christian life. It is unlike the NLT Study Bible, the NIV Study Bible or most any other study bibles I’ve seen. If I had to compare this, it might be a little like the NLT Life Application Study Bible because it gives the reader advice practical ways to live a pious Christian life. I have also seen other study bibles like the NRSV Renovare Bible and NRSV Discipleship Study Bible but this one seems to go deeper in its appreciation of Christian piety and is like “highly-caffeinated” training in godly living and deepening our knowledge in the living God (…I’m sitting here at Starbucks writing this).

In my devotional reading this morning, I read gospel-oriented study notes from Jeremiah 29: 11 that came under the topic of God:

29:11 Hope for the future….The Bible’s version is a hope that’s grounded in what God has promised to do in the future. Our great expectations of God and his promises will always fall short of His grand plans (Romans 5:5) because He loves us—and just like us, God never wants to disappoint those He loves. Put your hope in God and be prepared for Him to go beyond everything you can hope and pray for (Ephesians 1:19-23). (See God> Salvation> Holy Spirit> Comforts, TopicGuide page A15.)

There are over 9,000 wonderful study notes like this. They are drawn from the well of wisdom and deep devotional life of Dr. Bill Bright. The notes were organized by a team of bible scholars and teachers into the ten core topics in the TopicGuide found in the beginning of the bible.

The topic guide gives us some ideas on what is covered:

Holiness: living for God
The Bible: trusting God’s word and its authority in your life
God’s Purpose: embracing God’s will and master plan
Worship: giving God the praise and glory He is due
Spiritual warfare: resisting temptation and Satan’s schemes
God: cultivating your relationship with God
God’s Salvation: appreciating redemption from sin and death
Adoption: finding your identity in Christ
Church: joining with God’s people
Ministry: becoming an agent of change

These topics are then subdivided into two more levels of subtopics so this natural organization and division makes it easier to find what you are looking for.

People struggle to know God in a more personal way and understand him. We know that this is best achieved by attending church, reading our bible regularly and prayer; however, the purpose of this study bible is to give us a tool to help us along in this journey.

I like the theology of worship written as an introduction to the Discover Worship TopicGuide:

“We don’t come to God offering up our obedience, as if He needed our help with anything. True worship, and this outline, begins with awestruck reverence for who God is and what He has done for us….He could have left us in the dark, groping around for the right things to be, say, and do to please Him. But He gave clear instructions in the Bible for how He did (and didn’t) want to be worshiped. This section of the outline lays out God’s preferences for how He wants us to show our love for Him.” (p. A25).

In the topical section of Holiness, there is a subtopic called Law and Grace, which I found contained a theologically sound understanding of law and gospel:

The graciousness of the Law: How do grace and law work in the Christian life?
Law: We do not reject the law….
Grace: We do not reject grace….

I also like the study notes approach to the sacraments of Holy Communion:

…Make sure you know when your church will be celebrating the Lord’s Supper and examine your heat beforehand—do not simply show up as if it is an ordinary day. Prepare by reflecting on the meaning of the sacrament, your repentance from sin, your love for God and others, and your desire for new obedience to Christ. (See Worship> NT> Our Role> Mind and Heart> Lord’s Supper to be taken in a worthy manner, TopicGuide page A32).

This is good teaching because we don’t seem to hear this kind of teaching in our churches anymore. Furthermore, I noticed there were two sections in the TopicGuide recognizing Baptism and Holy Communion as Sacraments and labelled it as such (p. A34).

I don’t think I overstated this bible as a “highly-caffeinated” study bible because I can feel a very strong sense of encouragement toward godly living in almost every single study note. If you want to grow in your faith and knowledge of God, the Discover God Study Bible will be an invaluable resource for you in your daily devotional reading of the bible. I will use this as a devotional resource.

How do you listen to your Christian music?

2009-03-29T20:45:00.002-06:00

I recently bought a WOW Hits 1 CD from 2008 and found a few artists and groups with some really awesome songs, e.g., Jeremy Camp (“Give You Glory”), Newsboys (“In Wonder”), Point of Grace (“All the World”)and Third Day (“Tunnel”). Okay, I'm not on the cutting edge music scene. I’ve discovered that getting the WOW #1s CDs are a good way to go if you don’t have the bucks to spend on to collect all your favourite Christian artists. I don’t know why I didn’t start doing this sooner. My next one will probably be Wow Hits 1 2009.

Anyways, I realize that listening to Christian music over the radio is good too but the problem is that Christian radio doesn’t necessary play all the good stuff. So I was wondering why radio didn’t play all these new good stuff. I’ve learned that the Canadian regulatory agency CRTC restricts how much non-Canadian content can be played on the radio. I don’t like this kind of over-regulation.

I’ve been thinking of Internet radio would would be a good option to get around this regulation but I can’t really get Internet radio in my car when I travel, which is when I usually listen to Christian music. This exists now but I would have to subscribe to this service.

How do you listen to your Christian music?

I'm singing liturgical music by Marty Haugen

2009-03-29T19:46:00.005-06:00

When you think of liturgical music, what’s the first thing that comes to mind? Slow? Chanting in the monastery? Boring? Not necessarily because there is Marty Haugen’s liturgical music will transform your image of monastery music into modern and contemporary flavor. It's published by GIA.

Marty Haugen is a composer of liturgical music but not like the type we would imagine being sung in 16th century monasteries. He composes the best liturgical music because it sounds modern and is beautiful enough to make a grown man cry.

Previously, I wasn’t into this liturgical music but since I’ve encountered this stuff, I’ve grown to like it. I first encountered Haugen’s Holden Evening Prayer and Beneath the Tree of Life while attending seminary.

Recently, I’ve been learning the Holden Evening Prayer and getting ready to lead it during a Lenten service. It will be my first time singing in public and I hope I won’t flop on Wednesday. Well, it’s the Lord’s service anyway… not mine.

Do you have any experience with Marty Haugen's music or liturgical stuff? What do you think of liturgical music vs. contemporary worship?

Tsunami tidal wave in the worldwide Anglican Communion

2009-03-25T09:17:00.004-06:00

It is like as if several tectonic plates around the Anglican world are shifting; and this shift is about to trigger a huge tsunami tidal wave in the great big sea of Anglicanism. This has been happening for quite a while now and is nothing new but I am just starting to listen in on this conversation (or rather, dispute) to learn about what is going on.

For those who do not know anything about what the Anglican Communion is about, it is like a big umbrella that holds all Anglicans around the world together, and this umbrella feels like it is about to split at the seams.

For traditional Anglicans, it seems that the Anglican provinces of Canada and the United States within this Communion are desiring to move away from its traditional Christian beliefs regarding same-sex marriage. For traditional Anglicans, they claim that it is not only about same-sex marriage but also about the way Christians should view scripture.

Many traditional Anglicans do not approve of this revisionist agenda because they feel that its leaders are trying to move the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church into uncharted unorthodox waters. The "revisionist agenda" is a label pinned on the liberal movement to "unorthodoxy" (which can also be a loaded term to those on the liberal side of Anglicanism).

Note: A conservative site to peruse through is at the Anglican Network website of video on YouTube, and documents and PowerPoints from the natonal conference). It gives you a sense of what is happening from a traditionalist point of view.

Jer. 31:32 - Jeremiah’s play on words: Baal and husband

2009-03-24T09:35:00.005-06:00

“not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD” (Jeremiah 31:32, ESV).

בעלתי (husband, master): The verb form of “husband” means to “marry.” This is meant to emphasize the idea of the rights of the husband in the context of marriage (e.g., Gen. 20:3; Deut. 21:13; 22:22; 24:1). Does this mean that God has a right to exercise rights over his people in a religious covenant? I would think so, especially when this is placed in the context of covenant. The writer is trying to emphasize the seriousness of their covenant by making a comparison between a marriage covenant and a religious covenant.

God was calling his covenant people on violating their religious covenantal agreement. However, the writer of Jeremiah also added a play on words only noticeable in the Hebrew language. He points out the people’s adulterous worship of Baal with a pun. I am not a Hebrew scholar so I'd appreciate it someone will correct me if I’m wrong. It is interesting to note that there is an intended pun with the name Baal (בעל), which in the original Hebrew, rhymes with the word “husband” (בעלתי). To serve בעל, “Baal,” was to abandon the LORD who had "mastered" or "married" them as a בעל, “husband.”

Why did the writer use this marriage analogy? It was to teach the people that a covenant made with God was to be taken as serious as a marital covenant. God demands loyalty and purity within a relationship with him.

However, since we have failed in keeping the old covenant of the law, God decided to give us a “new covenant” that is to be written on the tablets of our hearts. This is where we can find the gospel of the messiah in this Old Testament text.

Next post: Sexual imagery in Revelation

A new wave of the Holy Spirit's work in the church has emerged

2009-03-22T22:53:00.007-06:00

This is my response to the recent posts at InternetMonk.com on the “Coming Evangelical Collapse” (Part 1 and Part 2) and comes as my personal response just after I made my first post (here). I'm sitting here on Sunday night thinking: "Okay, the church seems to be waning" but I ask myself if Christ is still the lord of the church? I believe he is. Michael Spencer may pessimistic (and perhaps also realistic) about the old-school evangelical church in North America, but I think he may be missing what God is doing around the world. Sorry Michael... but with all this bad news in the decline in evangelicalism, I do not think God is done with the evangelical churches, or even the mainline churches. In fact, I dare say that God will revive the evangelical churches and mainline churches.

Jesus is the Lord of the church and will always be the lord of the church. We humans may try to usurp God but think we can figure him out but God is going to confound us intelligent humans by doing something unintelligible. God will transform his church. Who is to say that the evangelical church that iMonk is speaking of will not change? I believe the Holy Spirit will do his work and move in a new and sovereign way to renew Christ’s church. It will look radically different from the old form. It may be scary to us but not to the new generations of new Christians who will enter this new church that will emerge.

Let’s never forget what God has done throughout the recent history of the church. God used Martin Luther and John Calvin to give birth to the churches of the Reformation (i.e., Lutheran and Reformed). The Holy Spirit used Luther and Calvin because the Pope, and those high up in the ecclesiastical ranks of the Roman Catholic Church, denied certain evangelical truths. (Note: let’s not get hung up on theology at this point, which can be debated until kingdom come). Later, God used evangelical revivalists such as John Wesley, George Whitefield, and Charles Finney to give birth to the evangelical churches because the churches of the Reformation became complacent. Then God used Charles Parham and William J. Seymour to give birth to the pentecostal churches because evangelical churches became complacent. Now God is using new generations of charismatics to give birth to third and fourth generations of Pentecostal-charismatic churches because the first wave of Pentecostalism has become complacent. Each generation of churches have neglected an important aspect of God's truth and reality so the Holy Spirit has raised up a new generation to include important aspects of God's truth in his church today. Today, a new wave that has emerged in the charismatic movement is spreading like wildfire around the world. However, God is not ignoring the older church denominations either. I believe God is merciful and will revive the older mainline and evangelical churches. I do not believe that God wants to throw out the old for the new.

While we are seeing a decline in attendance and memberships in many all of the mainline protestant denominations in North America and Europe, the charismatic movement is spreading very rapidly around the world. In fact, it is spreading so fast that we in the western world cannot even begin to keep track of what is happening in the new church around the world. That is where the bulk of the growth is. In fact, the charismatic movement is even giving a re-birth to the old mainline denominations in the developing world (e.g., Lutheran, Reformed-Presbyterian, Methodist, including the Roman Catholic Church). It is through this charismatic revival that the old mainline and evangelical churches are being revived in the developing world through. (Old school theologians may not want to admit to the huge contribution of the charismatic movement but it’s true).

Furthermore, evangelical churches around the world are not dying; they are actually also growing very rapidly. This charismatic revival is reviving the evangelical churches around the world too. Baptist churches around the world are also growing. In fact the number of denominations around the world are increasing every day.

So even though the mainline denominations seem to be in the latter stages of life, and the old-old school evangelical churches (e.g., Baptists) are just entering the latter stage of life, God is reshaping and recreating a new church that will take the place of the old. I am not at all afraid of the future because Jesus Christ is still the lord of the church. Just as old wine is meant to be stored in old wineskins, and new wine is meant to be stored in new wineskins, Christ’s new emerging church will take a new shape and form that we will not recognize. We might be wise to put on our seatbelts and take hold of the handle bars, because God is birthing his church around the world that will surprise the old former Christian world.

2009-03-21T22:18:00.003-06:00

Congratulations to Crossway, publishers of the ESV Study Bible, which has just won the 2009 Christian Book of the Year and winner in the Bible Category. It was awarded by the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association yesterday.

The coming evangelical collapse

2009-03-21T21:12:00.006-06:00

I have been reading some recent blog posts about the “Coming Evangelical Collapse” at InternetMonk.com (Part 1 and Part 2) and was also produced in the Christian Science Monitor. It predicts that there will be an evangelical collapse in the near future, and that in the next few generations in the life of evangelical churches will be devasting. I have to admit that after reading it, I was stunned for a few days because I was left wondering if he was right or was he just blowing smoke and just trying to stir the pot of negativity. Are you stunned or unmoved by this? It was an interesting read and it is reproduced below.

Oneida, Ky. - We are on the verge – within 10 years – of a major collapse of evangelical Christianity. This breakdown will follow the deterioration of the mainline Protestant world and it will fundamentally alter the religious and cultural environment in the West.

Within two generations, evangelicalism will be a house deserted of half its occupants. (Between 25 and 35 percent of Americans today are Evangelicals.) In the "Protestant" 20th century, Evangelicals flourished. But they will soon be living in a very secular and religiously antagonistic 21st century.

This collapse will herald the arrival of an anti-Christian chapter of the post-Christian West. Intolerance of Christianity will rise to levels many of us have not believed possible in our lifetimes, and public policy will become hostile toward evangelical Christianity, seeing it as the opponent of the common good.

Millions of Evangelicals will quit. Thousands of ministries will end. Christian media will be reduced, if not eliminated. Many Christian schools will go into rapid decline. I'm convinced the grace and mission of God will reach to the ends of the earth. But the end of evangelicalism as we know it is close.

Why is this going to happen?

1. Evangelicals have identified their movement with the culture war and with political conservatism. This will prove to be a very costly mistake. Evangelicals will increasingly be seen as a threat to cultural progress. Public leaders will consider us bad for America, bad for education, bad for children, and bad for society.

The evangelical investment in moral, social, and political issues has depleted our resources and exposed our weaknesses. Being against gay marriage and being rhetorically pro-life will not make up for the fact that massive majorities of Evangelicals can't articulate the Gospel with any coherence. We fell for the trap of believing in a cause more than a faith.

2. We Evangelicals have failed to pass on to our young people an orthodox form of faith that can take root and survive the secular onslaught. Ironically, the billions of dollars we've spent on youth ministers, Christian music, publishing, and media has produced a culture of young Christians who know next to nothing about their own faith except how they feel about it. Our young people have deep beliefs about the culture war, but do not know why they should obey scripture, the essentials of theology, or the experience of spiritual discipline and community. Coming generations of Christians are going to be monumentally ignorant and unprepared for culture-wide pressures.

3. There are three kinds of evangelical churches today: consumer-driven megachurches, dying churches, and new churches whose future is fragile. Denominations will shrink, even vanish, while fewer and fewer evangelical churches will survive and thrive.

4. Despite some very successful developments in the past 25 years, Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism. Evangelicalism has used its educational system primarily to staff its own needs and talk to itself.

5. The confrontation between cultural secularism and the faith at the core of evangelical efforts to "do good" is rapidly approaching. We will soon see that the good Evangelicals want to do will be viewed as bad by so many, and much of that work will not be done. Look for ministries to take on a less and less distinctively Christian face in order to survive.

6. Even in areas where Evangelicals imagine themselves strong (like the Bible Belt), we will find a great inability to pass on to our children a vital evangelical confidence in the Bible and the importance of the faith.

7. The money will dry up.

What will be left?

•Expect evangelicalism to look more like the pragmatic, therapeutic, church-growth oriented megachurches that have defined success. Emphasis will shift from doctrine to relevance, motivation, and personal success – resulting in churches further compromised and weakened in their ability to pass on the faith.

•Two of the beneficiaries will be the Roman Catholic and Orthodox communions. Evangelicals have been entering these churches in recent decades and that trend will continue, with more efforts aimed at the "conversion" of Evangelicals to the Catholic and Orthodox traditions.

•A small band will work hard to rescue the movement from its demise through theological renewal. This is an attractive, innovative, and tireless community with outstanding media, publishing, and leadership development. Nonetheless, I believe the coming evangelical collapse will not result in a second reformation, though it may result in benefits for many churches and the beginnings of new churches.

•The emerging church will largely vanish from the evangelical landscape, becoming part of the small segment of progressive mainline Protestants that remain true to the liberal vision.

•Aggressively evangelistic fundamentalist churches will begin to disappear.

•Charismatic-Pentecostal Christianity will become the majority report in evangelicalism. Can this community withstand heresy, relativism, and confusion? To do so, it must make a priority of biblical authority, responsible leadership, and a reemergence of orthodoxy.

•Evangelicalism needs a "rescue mission" from the world Christian community. It is time for missionaries to come to America from Asia and Africa. Will they come? Will they be able to bring to our culture a more vital form of Christianity?

•Expect a fragmented response to the culture war. Some Evangelicals will work to create their own countercultures, rather than try to change the culture at large. Some will continue to see conservatism and Christianity through one lens and will engage the culture war much as before – a status quo the media will be all too happy to perpetuate. A significant number, however, may give up political engagement for a discipleship of deeper impact.

Is all of this a bad thing?

Evangelicalism doesn't need a bailout. Much of it needs a funeral. But what about what remains?

Is it a good thing that denominations are going to become largely irrelevant? Only if the networks that replace them are able to marshal resources, training, and vision to the mission field and into the planting and equipping of churches.

Is it a good thing that many marginal believers will depart? Possibly, if churches begin and continue the work of renewing serious church membership. We must change the conversation from the maintenance of traditional churches to developing new and culturally appropriate ones.

The ascendency of Charismatic-Pentecostal-influenced worship around the world can be a major positive for the evangelical movement if reformation can reach those churches and if it is joined with the calling, training, and mentoring of leaders. If American churches come under more of the influence of the movement of the Holy Spirit in Africa and Asia, this will be a good thing.

Will the evangelicalizing of Catholic and Orthodox communions be a good development? One can hope for greater unity and appreciation, but the history of these developments seems to be much more about a renewed vigor to "evangelize" Protestantism in the name of unity.

Will the coming collapse get Evangelicals past the pragmatism and shallowness that has brought about the loss of substance and power? Probably not. The purveyors of the evangelical circus will be in fine form, selling their wares as the promised solution to every church's problems. I expect the landscape of megachurch vacuity to be around for a very long time.

Will it shake lose the prosperity Gospel from its parasitical place on the evangelical body of Christ? Evidence from similar periods is not encouraging. American Christians seldom seem to be able to separate their theology from an overall idea of personal affluence and success.

The loss of their political clout may impel many Evangelicals to reconsider the wisdom of trying to create a "godly society." That doesn't mean they'll focus solely on saving souls, but the increasing concern will be how to keep secularism out of church, not stop it altogether. The integrity of the church as a countercultural movement with a message of "empire subversion" will increasingly replace a message of cultural and political entitlement.

Despite all of these challenges, it is impossible not to be hopeful. As one commenter has already said, "Christianity loves a crumbling empire."

We can rejoice that in the ruins, new forms of Christian vitality and ministry will be born. I expect to see a vital and growing house church movement. This cannot help but be good for an evangelicalism that has made buildings, numbers, and paid staff its drugs for half a century.

We need new evangelicalism that learns from the past and listens more carefully to what God says about being His people in the midst of a powerful, idolatrous culture.

I'm not a prophet. My view of evangelicalism is not authoritative or infallible. I am certainly wrong in some of these predictions. But is there anyone who is observing evangelicalism in these times who does not sense that the future of our movement holds many dangers and much potential?

• Michael Spencer is a writer and communicator living and working in a Christian community in Kentucky. He describes himself as "a postevangelical reformation Christian in search of a Jesus-shaped spirituality." This essay is adapted from a series on his blog, InternetMonk.com .

Public outrage against greedy AIG executives

2009-03-19T15:56:00.006-06:00

What has outraged me and millions of people this week was the greed that was unashamedly displayed by AIG’s corporate executives. They took $165 million in bonuses. It was a company that received $170 billion in taxpayer money as part of the stimulus package from President Obama’s administration. This not only has angered liberals but also populist conservatives.

Money like this should be used to keep the jobs of AIG employees who are on lower incomes—not to line the pockets of corporate executives who already make nice salaries. What’s happening is that taxpayers are helping to keep the company above water and at the same time, the executives get rewarded for it by accepting $165 million? It really doesn’t make any sense to me.

If they had any decency at all, they should be the first to be receiving a pay cut. If they had any honor at all, they should resign from their positions and free up their own salaries to help the company stay afloat. That would be an honorable thing to do but I don’t think this kind of honor exists anymore.

This display of corporate greed will undoubted hurt the image of AIG. At the same time, it will give reason for people to bash capitalism. This greed will give capitalism a bad name and it reinforces the image that corporations are greedy. If there is a better time for proletariats to reinforce to negative image of the: “Capitalist pigs!” it’s now. Personally, I wouldn’t hesitate at all to raise the corporate taxes on AIG. In fact, I wouldn’t hesitate to pull the plug on AIG and them go down with the rest of the insurance companies. But the one thing holding me back from this are the honest hard working insurance holders who invested their savings into purchasing insurance from AIG. It would be disastrous for the economy if this major insurer went under. A public bailout for all the insured would be far worse.

There are enough insurance companies and financial institutions that went under that this kind of money could have gone to help them. But "no", it went to AIG. This was why some conservatives and Republicans were so hesitant to see this stimulus package go through Congress. It’s corporate welfare and I don’t agree with corporate welfare at all except with cases of uncontrollable circumstances.

I hope this administration can turn this around and get the money back out from the pockets of those greedy executives. I would also encourage everyone to boycott this company's insurance products. Don't buy AIG in the future.

Have you heard a good sermon lately?

2009-03-14T10:37:00.003-06:00

Have you heard sermons that are so good that after you leave the service, you feel encouraged that you have heard the Word of God speak clearly and directly to you? It is most likely the case that the pastor has invested time in prayer with God, the indwelling Spirit; in study and deep reflection of the scriptures; and plain hard work into the writing of the sermon—either all three or some of these.

Are you one of those people, after hearing a sermon, know that your pastor has not invested any deep thought and hard work into sermon preparation? This can be somewhat disappointing for people who walk into a church expecting to hear a good word of encouragement but end up receiving nothing from the word except for some good feeling from the beautiful worship songs. As a layperson, I have experience this and asked myself: “Why do I want to come back to this church?” So I can relate to people who have been disappointed with church.

Lawrence W. Farris says that one temptation for some pastors is to go into the old barrel to pull out some old sermons because it saves time in preparation. One of the ten “commandments” that Farris, from his book Ten Commandments for Pastors New to a Congregation, brings up is: “Thou shalt attend to thy preaching.”

I haven’t been in the ministry for very long and am just barely getting started. I hope to be ordained in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada in the very near future. Anyway, I try to put in a lot of time into sermon preparation because the spoken word of God brings encouragement and life into people's lives. People generally do not know how much time goes into a well-crafted sermon but from what I’ve read, some suggest an hour of preparation for each minute of sermon preached. Yikes!! That's a lot.
__________________________

Farris, Lawrence W. Ten Commandments for Pastors New to a Congregation. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003. pp. 94. This a nice easy read and is full of practical information for a pastor moving to a new congregation. It’s dated but it was required reading for me in seminary. It’s useful for seminary students ready to leave the student desk for the church office.

Another very useful (but dated) book I've recently finished reading is:
Moore, Christopher C. Opening the Clergy Parachute: Soft Landings for Church Leaders who are seeking a Change. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1995. pp. 190. This one is excellent for pastors heading into an interview situation.

A most recent, and new, book I've finished reading, and blogged on here, is:
Carl, William J., editor. Best Advice: Wisdom on Ministry from 30 Leading Pastors and Preachers. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009. pp. 190.

If anyone else out there knows of any good books in this same genre, feel free to share them here. I'm sure I or anyone else in ministry would be interested in hearing about them.

What does Holy Communion mean to you?

2009-03-13T12:23:00.006-06:00

I will be teaching some young people at confirmation class this Sunday night about Holy Communion. I’m thinking about what to tell them to encourage them in the faith and I'm looking for stories.

Holy Communion is called the Mass in the Roman Catholic Church.

In mainline protestant churches, it’s called Holy Communion, Eucharist, the Lord’s Supper, and Sacrament of the Altar (e.g., Lutheran, Anglican). It is regarded as a sacrament.

In evangelical churches, it’s understood and received differently and can be called Holy Communion, the Holy Supper, or the Lord’s Table (e.g., Reformed, Baptist.

I was at a service in a Roman Catholic Church and saw the line of people eagerly waiting to partake in the Eucharistic sacrament. A few questions that went on in my mind were:

Were they doing this because it was a commandment of the Lord in scripture (Matthew 26:26-28; 1 Corinthians 10:17; Luke 22:19-20; John 6:35-59)?
Were they doing this because they wanted to receive the body and blood of Jesus?
Were they doing this to receive forgiveness of sins?
Were they doing this because they were taught to do this regularly by the church?
Were they doing this to remember the Lord’s defeat of sin, death and evil on the cross?
Were they doing this to nourish and strengthen their faith in Christ?
Were they doing this to celebrate a thanksgiving for what Christ has done?

Some people report that they feel different after receiving Holy Communion. How do you feel after receiving Holy Communion? Do you feel a difference in receiving the Lord’s Supper? Has it made a difference to your faith and the way you feel about God?

Functional equivalence comparison #3: Romans 7:15-16

2009-03-10T15:42:00.007-06:00

Finally, the comparison between functional equivalent translations continues with Romans, ch. 7.

I have been on a blogging hiatus for a while but I've finally found some time to catch my breath. I like doing these translation comparisons but they take a lot of time to prepare. I have found that comparing eight different translations is just too much, so to simplify things, I will limit the number of translations I am comparing to these six: NLT, NCV, NIrV, GW, CEV and GNT.

Romans 7:15

I don’t really understand myself, for I want to do what is right, but I don’t do it. Instead, I do what I hate. (NLT)

I do not understand the things I do. I do not do what I want to do, and I do the things I hate. (NCV)

I don't understand what I do. I don't do what I want to do. Instead, I do what I hate to do. (NIrV)

I don't realize what I'm doing. I don't do what I want to do. Instead, I do what I hate. (God’s Word)

In fact, I don't understand why I act the way I do. I don't do what I know is right. I do the things I hate. (CEV)

I do not understand what I do; for I don't do what I would like to do, but instead I do what I hate. (GNT)

v.15: the original Greek says κατεργάζομαι οὐ γινώσκω (katergazomai οὐ ginōskō, “deeds not know,” “deeds not understand”). Therefore, the NLT’s idiomatic expression of “I don’t really understand myself” is not accurate. Paul does understand himself; what Paul says he does not understand is his own deeds or actions.

In the Greek, Paul did not say: “I don't do what I know is right” (CEV). Paul actually said: “I do not do what I want to do.”

The GNT also uses: “would like to do.” In the Greek, Paul used θέλω , which means one’s will or volition, rather than, one’s liking. We know in v.18b, Paul says he has a will but just can’t act according to his will.

Concerning v.15, I prefer the renderings from NCV, NIrV, and GW.

Romans 7:16

But if I know that what I am doing is wrong, this shows that I agree that the law is good. (NLT)

And if I do not want to do the hated things I do, that means I agree that the law is good. (NCV)

I do what I don't want to do. So I agree that the law is good. (NIrV)

I don't do what I want to do, but I agree that God's standards are good. (GW)

Although I don't do what I know is right, I agree that the Law is good. (CEV)

Since what I do is what I don't want to do, this shows that I agree that the Law is right. (GNT)

v.16: The original Greek expresses the first phrase in the positive—“I do”; but the GW and CEV expresses this in the negative—“I don’t”. This is not accurate.

All the translations, other than GW, rendered nomos as “law” rather than “standards”. The Greek used νόμος (nomos, law), so the GW inaccurately rendered this as “standards” instead of “law”.

The NCV’s negative expression is difficult to understand and it also adds “hated things”, which is absent in the Greek.

The NLT uses the word “wrong” but this word is also not in the Greek.

The GNT renders “law is right.” In the Greek, Paul uses the word καλός (kalos) which reflects the agreeable impression made by the good. It is not related with a legal judgment in the sense of being right or wrong, which would otherwise be expressed using δικαιος (dikaios).

I hope that I do not disqualify every translation in this series. They all have their strengths in various passages of texts. But regarding Rom. 7:15-16, the NIrV seems to have come out on top.

also see related posts on functional equivalent comparison: The search begins || 1 Sam. 3:7 || 1 Sam. 3:13 || Rom. 7:15-16

Scientific research: believers have lower levels of anxiety

2009-03-09T10:22:00.005-06:00

A group of Toronto scientists has found that God has an effect on a believer’s state of mind. Here it is.

New research by University of Toronto and York University professors show that people who consider themselves religious, compared to non-believers, show reduced levels of stress and anxiety. As a result, believers perform better on cognitive tests.
The brain activities of people were monitored with electrodes. Results showed that subjects with more religious zeal experienced less activity in the anterior cingulated cortex (part of the brain that experiences anxiety and helps modify behaviour). The more religious people were, the better they did on the test.

The University of Toronto reports:

"You could think of this part of the brain like a cortical alarm bell that rings when an individual has just made a mistake or experiences uncertainty," says lead author Inzlicht, who teaches and conducts research at the University of Toronto Scarborough. "We found that religious people or even people who simply believe in the existence of God show significantly less brain activity in relation to their own errors. They're much less anxious and feel less stressed when they have made an error."

In a second test, subjects were asked to rate their belief in God. Fervent belief in God showed results of lower levels of anxiety than among non-believers. Members of one group were asked to write down why their religion was important. A different group of people were asked to describe a topic (e.g., their favorite season). Those who discussed religion showed lower activity levels in the part of the brain associated with anxiety.

The Globe and Mail reports:

“[Religious people] were much less anxious and stressed when they made an error,” said Michael Inzlincht, assistant professor at the University of Toronto and co-author of this study. “I don’t think this has to do with fundamentalism, it’s something deeper—religion provides meaning in people’s lives.”

I wonder why some of the Christian brothers and sisters I know seem like some of the most anxious people in the world. I guess we may all have our anxious moments.

The paper, appearing online in Psychological Science, was co-authored by Dr. Ian McGregor at York University, and by Jacob Hirsh and Kyle Nash, doctoral candidates at the University of Toronto and York University, respectively.

Tyndale's Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, Volume 17: 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Hebrews

2009-03-09T09:47:00.005-06:00

Authors:
1 Timothy: Linda Belleville, MA, PhD, Professor of Greek and New Testament at Bethel College
2 Timothy, Titus: Jon C. Laansma, MDiv, PhD, Associate Professor of Ancient Languages and New Testament at Wheaton College
Hebrews: J. Ramsay Michaels, ThM, ThD, Professor of Religious Studies Emeritus at Missouri State University

Publisher: Carol Streams, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2009
ISBN: 9780842383455

I would like to thank Laura Bartlett at Tyndale for sending me this volume of the commentary.

The Cornerstone Biblical Commentary is based on the New Living Translation (2007) and is authored by nearly 100 biblical scholars; some of them were also participants in the NLT translation. This commentary series, published by Tyndale House, is new to me personally. It is quite good and readable biblical commentary. It seems to be aimed at a wider audience, and not just pastors who know how to read Greek or Hebrew. It uses transliteration of the original language, rather than, Greek or Hebrew. I know this will be a welcome addition on the bookshelves of pastors and students of the bible, who have never learned the original biblical languages. I would even suggest it is very useful and usable for the average layperson. Even though it is easy to read, it is not a commentary that is elementary; rather, it is a serious commentary aimed to provide biblical research and interpretation for pastors preparing sermons and studies.

First, on Hebrews. J. Ramsay Michaels does not rule out Pauline authorship but he does say that “the likelihood is that the real author was in fact one of Paul’s followers or associates,” which is why Hebrews is classified as “Deuteron-Pauline.” Michaels speculates toward Timothy as author because he briefly presents a case for Timothy as author or at least co-author. However, he is careful not to state his opinion as fact.

In Michaels’ opinion, the genre of Hebrews is a letter of exhortation. Actually, he says it is the only complete Christian sermon in the New Testament. “Possibly, it was preached in one setting and then transcribed for a different audience in another place, but more likely it was a literary creation composed specifically to be read aloud to a specific congregation,” says Michaels. He continues by saying:

“Hebrews is a written sermon, the earliest full-length Christian sermon that we possess, meant to be read aloud, probably to a congregation known to the author. It is written in elegant Hellenistic Greek, resembling some of the treatises of Philo of Alexandria and various speeches recorded in the writings of Josephus” (p. 314).

Others theorize that Apollos or Stephen might also be authors. Michaels has researched Hebrews and his background knowledge on this epistle conveys this.

Michaels recognizes the ambiguity of the epistle’s intended audience. Many believe that the audience were Jewish Christians, or even gentile converts to Judaism who then converted to Christianity. He does not make many claims but he does come through as a defender of the traditional notion of the suffering Messiah.

“Far from downplaying Jesus’ suffering on the cross, Hebrews accents it more than any other New Testament book but does it in a way that Jesus is presented not as a victim or passive sufferer but as High Priest and active Redeemer in shedding blood on the cross. This is the distinctive contribution of Hebrews to the New Testament theology of the Cross, and the author’s purpose may have been to respond to the danger that Christ might be seen as a weak or helpless Messiah, and therefore as no Messiah at all” (p.317).

This is my favorite line from Michaels, to which I give him kudos. He presents a good commentary on Hebrews and discusses the important issues in his commentary.

Belleville and Laansma seem to support Paul as the author of the Pastoral Epistles (First and Second Timothy, Titus). They indicate their support for Pauline authorship through internal support of autobiographical comments, structures, vocabulary, phraseology, historical, and other distinctive characteristics.

Belleville and Laansma identify the major themes in 1 Timothy as: God, Christ, Holy Spirit, salvation, righteousness, piety and wholesome teaching, and heresy. I have wondered why the pastoral epistles are called as such; I have found the answer to this question. They state that:

“One of the theological distinctive of the Pastorals lies in its pietistic language and creedal emphasis. The Greek word eusebaia (and its various forms), commonly translated “godliness” or “religious,” is found 13 times in the Pastorals” (p.19).

It was interesting to learn that canonical support for the Pastorals is extremely high (exceeded only by Romans and 1 Corinthians). They state:

“The Pastorals were known and used at the turn of the century by Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna (c. AD 156), Justin Martyr (c. 165), and Heracleon (second century)....All the church canons except for Marcion’s contain the Pastorals....The Pastorals are found among the 13 Pauline letters in the Canon of Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 350), the Cheltenham list (c. 360), the canon approved by the Synod of Laodiceans (363), Canon 85 of the Apostolic Constitutions (c. 380), the Canon of Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 380), and the Third Council of Carthage(397)” (p. 14).

I often hear of Romans and 1 Corinthians being the two most canonical letters of Paul but I will now add 1Timothy to my list of canonical epistles.

In chapter 3 of the 1 Timothy commentary, Belleville and Laansma view “bishop” as a mistranslation of episkopos. They say:

“What we do not find in the Pastorals is anything like the second-century monarchical episcopate, although this is often read into the roles of Timothy and Titus…Nor do we find anything like our modern concept of a bishop. The fluidity with which overseer and elder are mentioned in these letters speaks decisively against distinctive and official roles” (p. 5).

This challenges the commonly used “bishop” designation in many of our mainline churches. I agree that episkopos has a pastoral aspect, but I believe that our modern-day bishops also do the ergon (“work”) of an episocopate; they do not merely carry the office of an episcopate.

Belleville, Laansma and Michaels have done a very good job of the pastoral epistles and Hebrews in this volume. I like how the commentary leads the reader through the text in structured way, passage by passage. The commentary does not seem to deal with the form and structures in the text but it does provide more interpretation of the text. It seems to provide the reader with interpretation and discusses the meaning of the scriptural passage. Interpretation will benefit preachers and students of the bible who will be preparing sermons. I have been pleasantly surprised by this commentary. If this is indicative of the entire series, I can safely predict that Tyndale will do very well in producing a fine commentary series in the upcoming future volumes. Congratulations Tyndale!

General editor, Philip W. Comfort, states:

"The commentators represent a wide spectrum of theological positions within the evangelical community. We believe this is good because it reflects the rich variety in Christ’s church. All the commentators uphold the authority of God’s word and believe it is essential to heed the old adage: ‘Wholly apply yourself to the Scriptures and apply them wholly to you."

Best Advice: Wisdom on Ministry from 30 Leading Pastors and Preachers by WJK

2009-03-05T10:25:00.003-06:00

Best Advice: Wisdom on Ministry from 30 Leading Pastors and Preachers

Editor: William J. Carl III
Publisher: Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009. Pp. xi, 193.
ISBN: 978-0664232436

I want to express appreciation to Presbyterian Publishing for this book.

For those who are in the ministry, you will find Best Advice packed with gems of wisdom from some of the leading preachers/pastors in the country. After I started reading, I couldn’t stop reading this wonderful book. It is a compilation of 30 short essays from pastors. Since I am in ministry, I have found this one of the most useful books to help guide me in my pastoral ministry and preaching.

Some of these are distinguished authors and teachers of homiletics: Will Willimon, David Buttrick, Fred Craddock, Thomas Long. Some are professors of preaching: Ronald Allen, William Carl, Jana Childers, Mary Lin Hudson, Cleopas LaRue, Jennifer Lord, John McClure, Alyce McKenzie, Marguerite Shuster, plus Dawn Wilhelm. Some are authors like Eugene Peterson, plus many are pastors who share from their experience in ministry.

I like what David Buttrick says “no-holds barred” concerning preaching as a craft:

“…be concerned for craft. Not art, but craft. There have been books on “the art of preaching.” Skip them. Preaching is a craft to be learned like carpentry or cooking. Ego-driven self-expression is not what’s wanted. We can live without polished sermons, the kind that draws admiration from listeners. A good sermon moves in the minds of listeners like their own thoughts. They are not aware of your sermon as separate from their hearing. They certainly don’t give a hoot for aesthetic considerations; neither should you. Instead, you will study homiletic craft” (p. 35).

I whole-hearted agree because I have heard some sermons that were very aesthetically pleasing to the ear, but do not seem to make much sense. I’ve come out of the service wondering: “What in the world did the preacher just say?!” To this, I say: “Amen.” I’d prefer a well-crafted sermon that makes sense, rather than, one that sounds good but does nothing for my inner spirit and soul.

Fred Craddock recommends every pastor to deliver what is called the “Signature Sermon,” about once per year. It is appropriate for every congregation. Concerning this, he says:

“It gathers up in one message what the preacher believes, what the congregation believes, and what the historic church believes, framed in such a way as to remind, inform, correct, and call to a new level of discipleship. It will be a bit longer than other sermons that interpret a particular biblical text or topic and urge a particular response… The Signature Sermon marks a path through the woods and makes clear this is who we are, whence we came, whither we go, and why we are here.”

He advises the reader to be prepared for requests for copies, and that quotations and allusions to the Signature Sermon will appear regularly in church school classes and fellowship conversations.” This was the first time, I have heard of this. The signature sermon is definitely I will try in the future and turn into a personal tradition (p. 53).

Joseph L. Roberts, Jr. gives fourteen points regarding conduct of a pastor. Everyone is sound and I’ve already implement some of them in my life.

Eugene Peterson tells of his search for a once-upon-a-lifetime fantasy church “as beautiful as Tirzah” (Song 6:4); however, he realized that this was an adolescent fantasy. He says:

“I would be a witness to the Holy Spirit’s formation of congregation out of this mixed bag of humanity that is my congregation—broken, hobbled, crippled, sexually abused and spiritually abused, emotionally unstable, passive and passive-aggressive, neurotic men and women…spirited young people, energetic and eager to be guided into a life of love and compassion, mission and evangelism; a few seasoned saints who know how to pray and listen and endure; and a considerable number of people who pretty much just show up. I wonder why they bother. There they are: the hot, the cold, and the lukewarm; Christians, half-Christians, almost Christians; New Agers, angry ex-Catholics, sweet new converts. I didn’t choose them. I don’t get to choose them” (p. 132).

Peterson taught me this is what the church is—a hodgepodge, a mosaic of our society—that is the church today assigned to us by God to shepherd and lead in the way of my master and lord, Jesus Christ. I think if I am prepared for this, I’ll know what to expect in the future and not be disappointed by a garden of roses amongst a pasture of weeds, or a garden of weeds amongst a pasture of roses. Either way, it is from God and it our responsibility, as pastors, to tend to this mixed patch of garden work.

Professor Miguel A. de LaTorre deals with racial diversity and pokes hard at our prejudices. One paragraph really grabbed me and hit me hard. He says:

“Why,” I asked, “do you assume I would even want to worship at your church? After centuries of exclusion, why should I come running now that you think it makes your church look good by having a black or brown face in the pew to prove that your congregations aren’t racist?” My questions were not very well received. Nevertheless, I went on to say that it was difficult for me to pray while sitting next to the banker who will charge me an extra point of interest because my last name sounds Hispanic. It’s hard to shout praises to the Lord while being stared at by the police officer who gave me a ticket for driving under the influence of being Hispanic….it is unlikely that I, and I suspect most believers of color, will pretend to forget what goes on outside of the church building and just come on in” (p.58).

De LaTorre asks to be a righteous people who acts justly. I believe this is what the Holy Spirit is calling us to be and to do, as believers in Christ, who live in awe of our holy God.

This book has much more wisdom than this. I have only quoted from four essays and there many more golden and colourful gems of advice from 26 other pastors. This is a book I am sure I will pick up again when I am feeling a need to soak up some pastoral wisdom. It is on my bookshelf labelled “very useful book” under Practical Ministry. Our thanks go to Rev. William J. Carl III for compiling the fine essays in this book.

Church and society: fusion or confusion of Christians?

2009-02-25T14:55:00.009-06:00

Some of you may know that I'm a secret (actually not-so-secret) admirer of President Barack Obama, who I believe has a lot of admirable qualities. I believe that he will be known as one of the great political leaders of our day. But this article from the Catholic News Agency knocks some reality back into our consciousness. For those who are admirers (or even secret admirers) of Pres. Obama. We have to remember that he is not a messiah, but is only a man.

People packed St. Basil’s Church in Toronto on Monday listen to Archbishop Charles Chaput (Prelate of Denver) speak about how Catholics should live out their faith in the public square. This took place on the campus of the University of Toronto (St. Basil’s Church) and was attended by an overflow crowd of over 700 people. Here is what some of the article said:

"President Obama is a man of intelligence and some remarkable gifts. He has a great ability to inspire, as we saw from his very popular visit to Canada just this past week. But whatever his strengths, there’s no way to reinvent his record on abortion and related issues with rosy marketing about unity, hope and change. Of course, that can change. Some things really do change when a person reaches the White House. Power ennobles some men. It diminishes others. Bad policy ideas can be improved. Good policy ideas can find a way to flourish. But as Catholics, we at least need to be honest with ourselves and each other about the political facts we start with."

Yet this will be "very hard for Catholics in the United States," Chaput warned.
According to the archbishop, the political situation for Catholics is difficult to discern because a "spirit of adulation bordering on servility already exists among some of the same Democratic-friendly Catholic writers, scholars, editors and activists who once accused pro-lifers of being too cozy with Republicans. It turns out that Caesar is an equal opportunity employer."

We have heard of conservative Christians and evangelicals cozying up with the Republicans (Conservatives); so much so that the two have almost become synonymous. Catholics and Protestants who lean left should also be aware of this fused identity of politics and church. It happens; and I have seen it amongst many mainline Christians who tend to lean left.

Here in Canada, the United Church of Canada (UCC), tend to lean toward the more liberal policies and politics of the New Democratic Party (NDP). I hear ramblings that the Saskatchewan NDP leader, and former Premier of Saskatchewan, Lorne Calvert, will become the next president of St. Andrew's College (UCC) located here in Saskatoon, SK. Now if that's not an example of fusion (or confusion) of politics and religion in a church, I don't know what it is.

Click here to read the full article. It's quite interesting.

Hat tip goes to Stan McCullars who just wrote a post based on this interesting article.

Ministry in postmodern society #1: seeing our differences & commonalities

2009-02-16T11:45:00.017-06:00

When I hear the bickering that goes on between mainline churches and evangelical churches, I shake my head and laugh at what both sides are saying about each other. Mainline churches accuse evangelical churches of sheep-stealing; but the fact is that this is far less a significant issue than the baptised-confirmed members in mainline churches having chosen to stop attending church on their own, even before they have decided to make the switch. If they have switched to an evangelical church, they have chosen to do so likely because they have found that their once-staggering faith had been reignited and have experienced freedom and refreshment through the work of the Holy Spirit. Traditional mainline churches need to realize this and stop the blaming.

When young people choose to stop attending church, they do so mainly because their faith has not been solidly formed, and/or they no longer see church as being a significant community to belong to, except for, perhaps, the purposes of getting married, baptized and buried (or what is known as "match, hatch, and dispatch"). The fact is, many no longer even view these rites of "match, hatch and dispatch" as significant life rituals.

Increasingly, evangelical-conservative churches are also facing the same problems as mainline churches. Many young people raised in evangelical homes have chosen to stay away after they leave home for school. Why? Perhaps it was due to ineffective discipleship? Church is no longer a significant part of their lives because they have been overtaken by the mores and values of the dominant culture. They no longer see church as a significant community to belong to, so they choose never to return to church after college or university.

It is an undisputed fact that the majority of teens, twenty to thirty-somethings do not attend church, and, many, have absolutely no idea what church and the Christian faith is about. Many have never even stepped foot inside of a church and do not personally know anyone who is a regular church attender. Thus, it is safe to assume that we are living in a post-Christian culture.

Since we are living in a post-Christian society, or what I’ve heard some call a “repaganized” society, I am increasingly convinced that the church’s call to God's mission (Missio Dei) must be approached within a contextualized framework that acknowledges a new generation of postmoderns who have no idea what the Christian faith is really about. We can no longer assume any knowledge of Christian faith. They may be spiritual, but are not religious. The problem of the church is that many who come from the traditional evangelical and mainline churches are either slow to recognize this, or they don’t want to admit this as a real-world fact. Many are living in what I call “lala land” and are self-deceived into believing that our society is still in an era of "Christendom". They are stuck in their current framework and cannot figure out why their churches are seeing a greater decline in membership. This is true of many traditional denominations, from Lutheran (ELCA), Anglican/Episcopalian Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), United Methodist, American Baptist, United Church (UCC), and others.

I wish both evangelicals and mainliners would stop fighting each other and try to begin to understand each other, and understand their common struggles, and begin to work together in God's mission. It is funny how denominational lines and theological differences can prevent cooperation. Yes, I know there are still theological differences between mainliners and evangelicals. Sometimes, I see hope, and sometimes I don't see any glimmer of hope of bridge-building and real ecumenism. My personal hope is to help each other to begin to understand our differences and our commonalities so that we can cooperate and do ministry together within a postmodern society without the bickering, blaming, and high-nosed snobbery that goes on.

For the near future, I’m thinking about starting a series of posts to discuss the differences and commonalities between evangelicals and mainliners for the purpose of building mutual understanding and demystification.

Thomas R. Kelly on submitting to God's holy guidance

2009-02-14T21:26:00.002-06:00

I have just finished reading from a wonderful book called: “A Testament of Devotion” by Thomas Kelly. As an intellect who holds a doctorate in religious philosophy, he recognized his need to listen to the divine Center. He sought out how to live a simple inner spiritual and physical life and the simplicity of devotion toward God. May this quote by Kelly be a blessing. In the 5th and final chapter, Kelly writes:

“Life is meant to be lived from a Center, a divine Center. Each of us can live such a life of amazing power and peace and serenity, of integration and confidence and simplified multiplicity, on one condition—that is, if we really want to. There is a divine Abyss within us all, a holy Infinite Center, a Heart, a Life who speaks in us and through us to the world. We have all heard this holy Whisper at times. At times we have followed the Whisper, and amazing equilibrium of life, amazing effectiveness of living set in. But too many of us have heeded the Voice only at times. Only at times have we submitted to His holy guidance. We have not counted this Holy Thing (who is God) within us to be the most precious thing in the world. We have not surrendered all else, to attend to it alone.” (Kelly, 93).

He continues several pages after saying:

“We calculated that that task had to be done, and we saw no one ready to undertake it. We calculated the need, and then calculated our time, and decided maybe we could squeeze it in somewhere. But the decision was a heady decision, not made within the sanctuary of the soul. When we say Yes or No to calls for service on the basis of heady decisions, we have to give reasons, to ourselves and to others. But when we say Yes or No to calls on the basis of inner guidance and whispered promptings of encouragement from the Center of our life, or on the basis of a lack of any inward “rising” of that Life to encourage us in the call, we have no reason to give, except one—the will of God as we discern it. Then we have begun to live in guidance.” (Kelly, 99).

Life application bible studies: John, Acts, Hebrews, James

2009-02-11T06:23:00.009-06:00

Tyndale has released a new bible study series called the Life Application Bible Studies. To date, four books are available: John, Acts, Hebrews, and James. More are scheduled to be released.

Each book in this bible study series include two parts: 1) the complete text of the selected bible book from the Life Application Study Bible in the New Living Translation (2007 ed.), including the study notes, full maps, charts and people profiles; and 2) bible study questions. Each book in this series include thirteen ready-to-use lessons to stimulate thought, discussion, and practical life application. They each begin with a few warm-up questions; the reader is then invited to read the passage. This is followed by 10-16 questions to help the reader reflect and apply the biblical lessons into real life situations. There are also extra questions at the end to help the reader reflect more deeply upon the passage at hand.

The series of questions are divided into sections:

Reflect on your life (5-10 min.)
Read the passage (10-15 min.)
Realize the principle (15-20 min.)
Respond to the message (20-30 min.)
Resolve to take action (10-15 min.)

The Life Application Study Bible is probably the most helpful devotional study bibles to help readers reflect upon their personal lives. It helps the reader make sense of the bible and apply the lessons into their lives. I don’t think there is anything else out there that does it better. It is the most unique devotional study bible available because it does what other bibles don’t do. This, combined with study questions, gives the bible study participants and leaders a lot of thought-provoking material for a very enjoyable bible study. Good job Tyndale.

My thanks go to Laura Bartlett from Tyndale for sending me review copies of John, Acts, Hebrews, and James.

Call to politicians: honesty and fairness needed

2009-02-08T21:36:00.006-06:00

I hope that Pres. Barack Obama and the Democratic-led Congress can do the right thing to set things in place to help stimulate the economy and get it back into gear. Hopefully a stimulus package can help but it should not be seen as a salvation for the economy; but who says lower taxes and wiser spending can't help either? None of these can guarantee anything to stimulate the economy but we seem to put so much premium in our human ways and means.

No matter what political persuasion we align ourselves to, we do need to pray for President Obama, his Administration, and Congress to get through this economic downturn . Whether we admit it, or not, the fact is that other nations, including Canada, Europe, Asia and the rest of the world, are also relying on the success of the American economy because almost every nation around the world today is, in many ways, interconnected and interdependent upon one another. Whether we like it or not, we are living in a global economy; and when one nation “sneezes”, other nations will somehow be affected. Whether our economies are in an upturn or a downturn, we need to help one another within this community of nations. St. Paul says that we, as a church, are each interconnected and interdependent upon one another because we are all members in the body of Christ. If Christ calls us individually to live as a community of people within our immediate world, then Christ’s call to live in community also applies to our community of nations; and as a community of nations, Christ also calls us to genuinely care for other nations around the world. We must never allow ourselves to live as islands unto ourselves. To do so is to ignore the call of Christ to love and serve one another. Let us live and act justly while relying upon the power of the Holy Spirit to love God and love one another.

In the world of politics, this Christian principle can and should ideally be applied in the world of politics. Democrats need Republicans and Republican ideas, and Republicans need Democrats and Democratic ideas. Policies and ideas get hashed out in debate in both houses and committees but don’t often get done with much honor. I wish politicians played fairly and honestly. There are many people who haven’t given up on politicians but I think people do want to listen to politicians if they speak and act with fairness. We need politicians and political operatives who are committed to acting being honest, just and fair.

Now that President Barack Obama has been president for about one month, I whole-hearted wish him congratulations. I was happy to see his inauguration and was very impressed with his speech. However, we should not forget about the good things that the Bush administration has done either. I believe the press and Democratic political operatives have been overly harsh with Bush’s record. God bless former President George Bush. President Obama honoured him on Inauguration Day by seeing him off when they stood on those steps of Congress waiting for the helicopter to land . Despite Bush’s blunder on the Iraq War, some of his policies, overall, have done some good for America and for other nations around the world. Pro-Democrats have harked on and on about the Bush Administration’s mishandling of the economy. I’m tired of hearing this. It’s the Democrats’ turn now and they’ll be on the hot seat.

Many may disagree with me but I think the Republicans have actually handled the economy very well, or at least as well as anyone else could have done with what they had. The economy during the two terms under George Bush cranked into high gear and grew in strength since the Clinton Administration. More jobs were created during the Bush Administration and the economy got so hot that it overheated into a housing crisis. The housing crisis was not a result of George Bush’s policies because it was a direct result of the banks’ bad judgment for handing out too many loans to home buyers who could not afford to pay their mortgage payments when the economy overheated. I feel badly for the many millions of hardworking homeowners who saved up for their down payments only to lose it all in the end. If anything could have been done to prevent this housing crisis, it could have been done way back in 2003. The new RNC Chairperson, Michael Steele, reminded George Stephanopoulos, a Democratic advisor-turned-political commentator on ABC, that President George Bush introduced a bill back in 2003 to correct the dangers inherent in Fannie and Freddie. However, the Democratic-led committee refused to allow this bill to be addressed in Congress. Democrats also need to take responsibility and stop this blame game. Now they say they want cooperation but they refuse to take any responsibility for what happened back then?

People who can only complain, criticize, and are self-seeking are selfish and are blowing hot air and people recognize this when it happens. We are not blind and can’t be easily fooled. Talk-only doesn’t cut it. We need fair and honest people in government in all political parties who act fairly, honestly, and justly. Let’s hope and pray that the Obama Administration can do this. May God bless President Barack Obama and give him the strength to do the right thing.

Functional equivalence comparison #2: 1 Samuel 3:13 - What blasphemy?

2009-02-03T10:40:00.010-06:00

The comparison between functional equivalent translations continues with the First Samuel 3:13.

NLT: I have warned him that judgment is coming upon his family forever, because his sons are blaspheming God and he hasn’t disciplined them.

GW: I told him that I would hand down a permanent judgment against his household because he knew about his sons’ sin—that they were cursing God—but he didn’t try to stop them.

NIrV: I told Eli I would punish his family forever. He knew his sons were sinning. He knew they were making fun of me. In spite of that, he failed to stop them.

Message: I’m letting him know that the time’s up. I’m bringing judgment on his family for good. He knew what was going on, that his sons were desecrating God’s name and God’s place, and he did nothing to stop them.

GNT: I have already told him that I am going to punish his family forever because his sons have spoken evil things against me. Eli knew they were doing this, but he did not stop them.

NCV: I told Eli I would punish his family always, because he knew his sons were evil. They acted without honor, but he did not stop them.

CEV: He knew that his sons refused to respect me, and he let them get away with it, even though I said I would punish his family forever.

REB: You are to tell him that my judgement on his house will stand for ever because he knew of his sons’ blasphemies against God and did not restrain them.

In the original Hebrew, it is not very clear what “making themselves vile” really means. What were the sons of Eli doing to actually make themselves contemptible or vile? To make oneself vile is taken to be a blasphemy against God. But was it an act directed against God’s holy sacrifice (as the NCV implies), or were they doing something to themselves that made them vile? Amongst the functional equivalent (F.E.) translations, the NL T renders it as “blaspheming God”, which is the traditional rendering (also NRSV, ESV, TNIV). It is all by itself on this one because the other F.E. translations are very wide and far apart in their interpretation of the nature of this blasphemy.

The NCV’s use of “acted without honor” implies a physical action. Whereas, GW (“cursing God”), NIrV ("making fun of me"), and GNT (“spoken evil things against me”) implies speech. The renderings of CEV, Message, NLT and REB could go either way—action or speech. CEV’s (“refused to respect me”) uses an inactive adverb; whereas, NIRV’s (“making fun of me”) uses an active verb. However, this is very subjective because everyone may have their personal opinion as to what constitutes speech or action.

I prefer the rendering in The Message the best because it seems to most accurately describe blasphemy while covering both aspects of blasphemy in speech and action, and is easy to understand. Most people do not know what "blasphemy" means so I have to prefer a thumbs up for The Message. HCSB also has an excellent rendering: “his sons were defiling the sanctuary”. It's extremely clear and understandable, but it's in the mediating translation category.

also see related posts on functional equivalent comparison: The search begins || 1 Sam. 3:7 || 1 Sam. 3:13 ||Rom. 7:15-16

Where many of today's young evangelicals are at politically

2009-02-02T22:11:00.010-06:00

I just bought my current issue of Relevant magazine from the local Christian bookstore this afternoon and read an interesting article about where many of today's young evangelicals are at politically. Brett McCracken's article: "A change we can believe in?" really hits the nail on the head as to how some young evangelicals feel about politics and how they vote. Even though I tend to be conservative on many issues, I can relate to some of what McCracken says concerning young evangelicals. I think his assessment is fairly realistic and open-minded because I feel there is a change in the undercurrent that many of us don't see. Here's a brief blurb:

....Even though young evangelicals veered farther to the left this election, their older counterpoints actually voted in higher percentages for McCain than they did for Bush.

"We're seeing that younger generations are more and more concerned with living a life that is consistent with the teachings and ministry of Jesus Christ than they are with towing a particular party line," Merritt told PBS.

Indeed, fewer and fewer young evangelicals are identifying with old-school Republicanism. They may side with Republicans because of issues like abortion, but when it comes to Reagan-style economic philosophies or Cold War-infused, us-vs.-the-world foreign policies, many young Christians are finding more in common with the left.

...Rather than tow a particular party line, young evangelicals are increasingly more concerned with simply living a life that is defined by and consistent with the teachings of Jesus Christ. That can mean Democrat or Republican, but most often it means both and neither. Two parties cannot contain the cause of Christ, many Christians would say. And as such, many of us feel trapped between a rock and a hard place."

I don't entirely relate to this but I do feel this is why some of our younger evangelicals really feel inspired by President Barack Obama's speeches. I know he does inspire me.

Where do you stand as a younger or older Christian voter? Can you relate to feeling trapped between a rock and a hard place, or do you feel strongly one way or another?

You can read the entire article here (see p. 38).

A Testament of Devotion: The Holy Fellowship, the Blessed Community

2009-02-01T23:02:00.004-06:00

If there is one contemporary literary classic I would suggest to others to read on personal devotion, it would be A Testament of Devotion by Thomas R. Kelly, a Quaker. His single volume is actually a collection of essays, and was first published in book form in 1941. It is one of the deepest and most profound writings of personal devotion I have ever read. It is worth reading over and over again. His eloquent and passionate writing is most beautiful; but that's just what' on the surface. Going deeper, it is his passion of the inner life humbles me. The cry of his soul for the Holy Spirit's deeper life inspires me to seek a closer relationship with the Lord Jesus. I feel like an ant standing before a giant. With this said, I do not wish to elevate Kelly because it would be abhorable. If there is one person who really understands and experiences the deeper spiritual life, it is Thomas R. Kelly. Therefore, I wish to share some of this with you who frequent the New Epistles blog. I will be including tiny excerpts from his book on a continuous basis.

“See how these Christians love one another” might well have been a spontaneous exclamation in the days of the apostles. The Holy Fellowship, the Blessed Community has always astonished those who stood without it. The sharing of physical goods in the primitive church is only an outcropping of a profoundly deeper sharing of a Life, the base and center of which is obscured, to those who are still oriented about self, rather than about God…. (p.53)

….Yet still more astonishing is the Holy Fellowship, the Blessed Community, to those who are within it. Yet can one be surprised at being at home? In wonder and awe we find ourselves already interknit within unofficial groups of kindred souls. A “chance” conversation comes, and in a few moments we know that we have found and have been found by another member of the Blessed Community. Sometimes we are thus suddenly knitted together in the bonds of a love far faster than those of many years’ acquaintance. In unbounded eagerness we seek for more such fellowship, and wonder at the apparent lethargy of mere “members.” (p.55)

In the Fellowship cultural and educational and national and racial differences are levelled. Unlettered men are at ease with the truly humble scholar who lives in the Life, and the scholar listens with joy and openness to the precious experiences of God’s dealing with the workingman. We find men with chilly theologies but with glowing hearts….

Kelly, Thomas R. A Testament of Devotion. New York: HarperCollins, 1992.

The new ESV Bible with Apocrypha by Oxford: let's take a look

2009-01-30T15:19:00.004-06:00

Timothy over at Catholic Bibles has recently been blogging about the new ESV Bible with Apocrypha published by Oxford. I've enjoyed his recent posts on how he is finding the new ESV/Apocrypha edition here:

Jeremiah: A Commentary. The Old Testament Library by WJK

2009-01-29T22:29:00.008-06:00

Jeremiah: A Commentary. The Old Testament Library.

Author: Leslie C. Allen.
Publisher: Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008. pp. xxix, 546.
ISBN: 0664222234, 9780664222239

I would like to offer a word of thanks to the people at Presbyterian Publishing Corporation for this review copy.

Westminster John Knox Press has newly released Jeremiah: A Commentary in late 2008. It is an addition to the Old Testament Library (OTL). The author, Professor Dr. Leslie C. Allen, is Sr. Professor of Old Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary. He has written commentaries on Ezekiel, Psalms, the minor prophets, Chronicles, and now Jeremiah. This replaces OTL's 1986 edition by Robert R. Carroll.

In taking the form-critical approach to study the book, Allen typifies its genre as mainly oracles. He also points out various psalms of lament in Jeremiah. When we see the book of Jeremiah through the lens of redaction criticism, one can begin to notice components or units of texts sewn together. Allen says:
“In chs. 2-6 units evidently reflecting Jeremiah’s early prophetic activity have been grouped together with the addition of some post-Jeremianic prose. A similar impression of quilting is given by the originally independent collection of chs. 30-31, where some of Jeremiah’s own oracles have been deliberately combined with later poetry and prose of a prophetic nature, and by the foreign oracles in chs. 46-51.” (p. 10).

With this quilting, the writings in Jeremiah are called into question of which can be attributable as the prophet’s own oracles. Many are his, but how many? His explanation of this redaction shows the skills of the redactors who have taken various compositions that are “centered on a single incident, which have been skilfully assembled into blocks with a coherent message,” says Allen. This explains why Jeremiah can be such a complex book to study.

Prior to reading this, I did not see this in Jeremiah but Allen has alerted me notice the various units that have been carefully woven together by the redactors. I am no scholar of Jeremiah but now that I’ve been made aware of this, I can see the literary system of compositions and blocks where they have been placed (e.g. Jer. 30-31). How does this look like?
“This new literary block is ‘an anthology of poems and prose pieces that form a tapestry of hope’…; it consists of three compositions, 30:1-31:1; 31:2-26; 31:27-40. The oracle reception heading in 30:1 indicates that a fresh block consists of 30:1-31:40 since the heading next appears at 32:1….The short units in 30:1-31:40 represent an editorial collection of originally independent material. The block cites a series of oracles Jeremiah had delivered concerning the return of the exiles of the northern kingdom and crowns them with a number of post-Jeremianic oracles of hope.” (p. 333)

For example,it is interesting that Jeremiah 25 consists of various foreign oracles in the Septuagint have been slotted into this chapter. This makes Jeremiah kind of fascinating and more fun to analyze, well, at least for a person like me. I don’t think I could have seen this on my own. I love how Allen expressed his analogy of Jeremiah with a house:
“The book of Jeremiah is like an old English country house, originally built and then added to in the Regency period, augmented with Victorian wings, and generally refurbished throughout the Edwardian years. It grew over a long period of time.” (p. 11)

Allen says the dating of Jeremiah takes into consideration 33:14-26 as being postexilic Judah. In addition, even though the oracles’ perspectives seem to take a Babylonian setting, the oracles looks forward to the downfall of the neo-Babylonian Empire and its later oracles align with Second Isaiah. Therefore, a reshaping of Jeremiah had to have taken place.

The purpose of Jeremiah is addressed by the author. Allen presents the possibility that one may read the prophecies in Jeremiah with the mindset of looking back into history to the fulfillment of the prophet’s oracles of disaster (rather than prophecy as looking into the future). By presenting a question and attempting to answer it, one may be able to get at the purpose of Jeremiah. One may ask why the disaster happened. Then provide an explanation which may be the pre-exilic pagan worship. Jeremiah is a prophet who warned of worship of other gods (9:12, 13; 16:11; 22:9). I think that is the nature of prophetic writing.

Allen has done a very good job at exegeting the Jeremianic text. This is an excellent commentary on the book and I would recommend getting this for your library to help you exegete and interpret the text for a sermon on Jeremiah. Very well done.

Functional equivalent translations #1: 1 Samuel 3:7 Confusion about young Samuel

2009-01-23T13:03:00.010-06:00

The comparison between functional equivalent translations begins with the First Samuel 3:7.

NCV: Samuel did not yet know the Lord, and the Lord had not spoken directly to him yet.

Message: This all happened before Samuel knew GOD for himself. It was before the revelation of GOD had been given to him personally.

CEV: The LORD had not spoken to Samuel before, and Samuel did not recognize the voice.

REB: Samuel had not yet come to know the LORD, and the word of the LORD had not been disclosed to him.

NLT: Samuel did not yet know the LORD because he had never had a message from the LORD before.

NIrV: Samuel didn't know the Lord yet. That's because the Lord still hadn't given him a message.

GNT: The boy did not know that it was the Lord, because the Lord had never spoken to him before.

God's Word: Samuel had no experience with the LORD, because the word of the LORD had not yet been revealed to him.

I was studying 1 Samuel 3:7 and noticed something puzzling. I asked myself: Why did young Samuel not know the Lord? Did the writer of Samuel mean that Samuel did not know the LORD because:

a/ he was still young?
b/ he had not yet spent enough time to learn of the LORD?
c/ he had not yet heard from the LORD in a personal way?

The interpretations provide by these translations are indeed numerous with each one including a slightly different connotation. Personally, this brings more confusion rather than clarification. The interpretations for this verse can vary quite a lot (see translations below).

The NLT, NIrV, GNT, and GW translations add “because”, which makes Samuel’s knowledge of the LORD conditional upon a prior revelation from the LORD. The original Hebrew does not contain the word owdowth ("because", "on account of|). This is very different from the rendering provided by NCV, The Message, REB, and CEV, which do not contain this conditional clause. The two ideas expressed are independent upon one another but may also be taken as conditional (depending on how you wish to read it).

GW’s rendering expresses the idea of Samuel’s “inexperience” with the LORD, whereas, other translations stick with the idea of “knowing the LORD.” GNT’s rendering expresses that even though Samuel had heard, he did not know who it was. The Message ‘s rendering expresses Samuel’s knowledge of the LORD in a more personal way: “for himself” and “personally.”

There are many places in the O.T. where the original Hebrew lacked "because" but have been added by translators to add clarification. However, in this instance, I would prefer not adding "because."

also see related posts on functional equivalent comparison: The search begins || 1 Sam. 3:7 || 1 Sam. 3:13 || Rom. 7:15-16

Psalms 8:5 - Are we only a little lower than God? Or heavenly beings?

2009-01-20T20:40:00.005-06:00

Some of us may have the idea that humans are just a little bit less than God. Do we humans deserve this elevated status? I prefer to not think so because I know how depraved we human beings really are. I wonder if perhaps our renderings of Psalm 8:5 may have given us this false impression. Here is how the RSV and ESV rendered Psalm 8:5

Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. (ESV)

Yet thou hast made him little less than God, and dost crown him with glory and honor. (RSV)

In this context, the ESV has this correctly rendered Elohim (מֵאֱלֹהִים) as “heavenly beings” rather than “God”. This can also be translated as “mighty ones” or even “a god”. Some also translate this as "angels". This TNIV has also used “heavenly beings”, but the NRSV stuck with “God” but included in footnotes “divine beings or angels.” The NASB also used "God". In this regard, I think the ESV made an improvement over the RSV.

Quiz: What is your theological worldview

2009-01-19T22:51:00.004-06:00

I do not know how reliable this quiz. I think misses out on other important things and does not cover everyone. I did not know I was Wesleyan. Well, some dispute the quiz saying that it does not accurately describe them...but have a try. HatTip: Byron.
Here is the link to the quiz here. [added]

You Scored as Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan

You are an evangelical in the Wesleyan tradition. You believe that God's grace enables you to choose to believe in him, even though you yourself are totally depraved. The gift of the Holy Spirit gives you assurance of your salvation, and he also enables you to live the life of obedience to which God has called us. You are influenced heavly by John Wesley and the Methodists.

Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan

79%

Reformed Evangelical

71%

Emergent/Postmodern

57%

Modern Liberal

54%

Roman Catholic

54%

Neo orthodox

54%

Classical Liberal

43%

Charismatic/Pentecostal

39%

Fundamentalist

29%

Search for a functional equivalent translation

2009-01-17T11:19:00.012-06:00

In the future, I will be blogging on functional equivalent translations (or dynamic translations). The plethora of functional translations seems to be a recent phenomena. It really seemed to have taken off in the last ten to fifteen years. I have decided to cover all the main functional equivalent translations in this comparison. This is a continuation from the formal equivalent translation and mediating translation comparisons.

I have included the six main functional equivalent translations:

New Living Translation (NLT) by Tyndale House (1996, 2004, 2007)
New Century Version (NCV) by Thomas Nelson (1987, 1988, 1991, 2005)
New International Reader’s Version (NIrV) by International Bible Society (1996, 1998)
God’s Word (GW) by God’s Word to the Nations, Baker (1995)
Contemporary English Version (CEV) by American Bible Society (1995)
Good News Translation (GNT) by American Bible Society (1966, 1976, 1992)
Revised English Bible (REB) by Oxford and Cambridge University Presses (1989)
The Message by Eugene H. Peterson, NavPress (1993, 2002)

This type of translation is the most readable. However, they tend to be the least literal but that’s the character of functional equivalent translations. Personally, and generally speaking, I don’t feel comfortable using it in a serious bible study; however, there are a few I would feel comfortable about using in a bible study. I will tell you what they are at the end of this series of comparisons between functional translations.

I learned that most of these translations began from a vision of a single person, which then, later expanded to include other people, or a larger committee. To my knowledge these were:

New Living Translation (Kenneth N. Taylor)
The Message (Eugene H. Peterson)
God’s Word (William F. Beck)
New Century Version (Ervin Bishop)
Good News Translation (Eugene Nida)
Contemporary English Version (Barclay Newman)
Revised English Bible (G.S. Hendrey)

God does like to use individuals to do the work of his kingdom. Thank God for these servants who wanted to bring the bible into the contemporary language of the people.

Note: Rich resources about the history of various bible translations can be found at:

www.KenAnderson.net
www.Bible-Researcher.com (Michael Marlowe)
American Bible Society

also see related posts on functional equivalent comparison: The search begins || 1 Sam. 3:7 || 1 Sam. 3:13 || Rom. 7:15-16

ChristianColleges ranks NewEpistles blog in Top 100 Theology Blogs

2009-01-13T18:15:00.001-06:00

I was pleasantly surprised to discover that NewEpistles.com has been ranked in the Top 100 Theology Blogs by ChristianColleges.com.

Thank you very much for your vote of confidence and encouragement. It was a blessing.

Happy New Year in 2009

2009-01-01T22:59:00.002-06:00

I can't believe it's a new year. Happy New Year everyone!

This year is going to be a new year for me. I hope to see new things happen in my life, and in my family, in the not too distant future.

I also wish that everyone out there will be able to sense God’s peace, love, and joy, and God's presence in your lives, and in your families. Blessings to everyone. :)

John 1:13, TNIV - It's man, not husband

2009-01-01T22:48:00.003-06:00

As I was reading John 1:1-18, a Christmas reading related to Christ birth into this world, I came across a word that stuck out for me in John 1:13:

12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God. (John 1:12-13, TNIV).

T/NIV’s rendering of ἀνήρ (anēr) as “husband” is very peculiar. Other translations render this quite differently. They all render it as “man.” Aner (ἀνήρ) can be rendered as “husband”, or “man”, or even as “man” in the context of “sir”. However, in this context, it seems to make more sense as “man” or even “human”. If someone could enlighten me on why the T/NIV rendered this as “husband”, I would appreciate it. If I am correct on this, I hope TNIV will make a correction in v. 13 in its next edition.

_________________

But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God. (NLT)

But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. (ESV)

But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God. (NRSV)

But to all who did receive Him, He gave them the right to be children of God, to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood, or of the will of the flesh, or of the will of man, but of God. (HCSB)

Charlie Brown: Linus really does know what Christmas is all about

2008-12-21T22:07:00.004-06:00

What get's your Christmas spirit into gear?
Charlie Brown's Christmas does it for me...so does Scrooge.

Mary, Joseph, Jesus and Kevin had no guest room available

2008-12-19T23:19:00.002-06:00

Luke 2:4-7
4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. 6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them. (TNIV)

This kind of reminds me of the time during my 20s during university in Ontario. I was coming back home for the summer. I decided to drive instead of fly. I also decided to drive through Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan instead of going through northern Ontario. I remember being young and naive. I didn’t book ahead for a hotel room. I just drove till I got tired and then looked for a place to stay. I was sure I could find a motel with rooms available. So I drive by the Motel 6 and I see the sign: “No Vacancy”...next, Super 8 Motel: “No Vacancy”...next, EconoLodge: “No Vacancy”...Rodeway Inn: “No Vacancy”. It was getting really late. It was past midnight and I was getting very nervous. The motel night attendant tells me that all the hotels and motels in town are booked solid because of heavy travelling this time of year. She tells me some people end up sleeping in their cars through the night. So that's what I decided to do. I had no choice. It was summer time and the temperatures stayed in their 20s through the night. It wasn’t the most comfortable sleep but at least I got some rest and started on my journey the next morning.

That night, I felt a little like Mary and Joseph. No place of physical comfort to lay my head and rest. I rested where I was, in my car and slept…a little frightened…a little uncertain of my safety. I had no bright lights to light my path… No angelic hosts to guide me, and I prayed that God would protect me.

TNIV Reference Bible, Renaissance Fine Leather

2008-12-17T23:48:00.003-06:00

I want to thank Zondervan for the wonderful promotional copy of the TNIV Reference Bible in the Renaissance fine leather edition. And I also must say thanks to TC Robinson at New Leaven for his correspondence with Zondervan to get some of us pastors signed up for this outstanding gift.

When I opened the box, and looked at the fine black leather, I blushed and thought that this was even better than I expected...and it truly was. When I lifted the leather bible out of the box, I felt the soft and supple leather almost melded into my hand, and right away, I knew that this was a very fine bible indeed. The hand-crafted leather bible is not just any old leather, but it’s thick and soft leather, and it feels just fabulous. Everything about the bible is classy...not just the box and design but also the silver gilded edge. It is something I would cherish and be proud to carry around church. It is also a great bible to preach from the pulpit with because the soft leather is so comfortable that it droops and curves to the shape of my hands. Ah...a wonderful feeling. Okay, this is all beginning to sound like idolatry, and idolatry is a sin, so I will just say that it’s a great bible indeed.

One thing that bugs me is when I see nice leather bibles that have a glued binding. Doing that doesn’t make sense. The binding in the TNIV Reference Bible Renaissance edition looks like it’s Smyth-sewn rather than glued. How I can tell is when I open up the bible, the pages lays flat. Not many bibles are Smyth-sewn today and I have to give kudos to Zondervan for this quality feature which cannot be overlooked. Smyth-sewn binding allows the bible to last longer. And there are two ribbon markers.

The cross reference is also an important feature in this bible. I’m a cross reference user and prefer this in my bible because I do study and research and find it very useful. I would say that it’s a must-have for me. Another important reference feature in this bible are the Topical Ties. It’ a topical reference system. You can think of it as something like the Thompson-Chain Reference system, but basically, it does the same thing. There are 700+ Topical Ties and they are located at the bottom of the page. Together with the cross-reference system and the Topical Ties, this TNIV Reference Bible is one of the best reference bibles out today.

The text is in single column which is perfect. I used to prefer double columns but now I find the single column easier to read. I don’t know why but it just works better for me. The text is in black, no red lettering.

The TNIV is a great translation and is my favourite mediating translation. (FYI, mediating sits in between formal and dynamic). It is easy to read and it is accurate. It is now more accurate than the NIV because the editorial committee has made many improvements. It is also gender-inclusive, just like the NLT and the NRSV. I’m one of these people who can accept gender-inclusive language but I know it’s not everyone’s cup of tea so I don’t push it.

Thanks again to Zondervan for producing an excellent translation in the TNIV, and a bible of superb quality and craftsmanship.

Missio Dei: we are sent out by God to be a missional church

2008-12-16T09:50:00.001-06:00

Missional. This new hip word that first came onto the Christian scene ten years ago is now misunderstood and being misused. I used to associate the word “missional” with evangelism or seeker-sensitive, but apparently, this is incorrect.

The missional movement can be traced back to a book written by six authors, edited by Darrell Guder ten years ago. Alan Hirsch's article in the lastest edition of Leadership Journal that defines missional. According to Hirsch, we must maintain the integrity of this word for the sake of the survival of Christianity in the West. I agree. We Christians in the west have resorted to attraction; that is, our church model of reaching out to the culture and drawing people into the church, no longer works...or did it ever work? We end up becoming too much like the culture of the world and eventually become overtaken and engulfed by it. Then, the church will have lost its usefulness and is no longer being the church that Christ has called us to be. We, the church, have failed and have not truly fulfilled our calling as a missional church.

So what is missional? The doctrine of mission Dei is the sending of God. We, the church, are actually the “sent” people of God. We, the church, are the instrument of God’s mission in the world. However, we have often thought of it being the other way around—that is, we’ve thought of the mission as an instrument of the church, but this is incorrect. To be missional means that we, the church, are sent into the world. People do not come to us...we go to them. This way of thinking about being missional is different from the hopeless attractional model of church.

In the past, I have fallen for this and am guilty of trying to be attractional. This does not work and has never worked, and I think we are slowly getting the picture. Churches that have been doing evangelism and have the correct posture of truly being missional have seen and will see increasing numbers come into the church. Why? Because live breathing Christian believers are actively bring them into the church. Churches that fail to carry the proper posture of missional will be in for a big surprise because they will wonder why there are no new people being brought into the church, and their memberships are in decline.

Another point is that this missional theology applies to the entire life of the believer. Hirsch says that “Every disciple is to be an agent of the kingdom of God, and every disciple is to carry the mission of God into every sphere of life. We are all missionaries sent into a non-Christian culture. This is very important. God is a missionary God who sent his own son into the world; therefore, we also ought to carry the mindset that we are sent into the world.

We can no longer expect to look like the world and expect the world to come to us. We must go into the world to be agents of the kingdom of God. Let’s go to it and be the missional church that God has called us to be.

Reading the bible from the New Living Translation 24/7

2008-12-14T17:11:00.003-06:00

Thanks to Laura Bartlett at Tyndale House Publishers who sent me the new 24/7 A One Year Chronological Bible to review.

Upon first opening the package from Tyndale, I was surprised by its small size. It is the same height as my pocket bible except it’s a lot thicker, about twice as thick as my pocket bible. It has about 2200 pages. It comes in both paperback and hardcover. I have to say that the design of the front cover is quite attractive. I like the hip design of the two fishes on the front and back cover. It’s post-modern and it would definitely appeal to this generation. Its small enough that it wouldn’t take up a lot of space in the office and it would be something that you could read during your lunch break.

As I was first scanning through its pages, I felt that the 24/7 bible did not appear like a traditional bible; and it isn’t. The beautiful watermarks of twelve historic Christian symbols are what make this bible stand out from the rest. If you like art, these watermarks on each page will liven up your day. I really like the design because these classical pictorial watermarks add a unique flavour to each page for each day. For example, there’s the crown of thorns, the dove, the cup of the Last Supper, the basin and bowl, the lamb and the cross, the seven lampstands, plus more. There is a new symbol for each month. An artist was commissioned by Tyndale to create new woodblock prints just for this bible. I think it’s a wonderfully creative idea. That’s what makes the pages beautiful.

On the inside, the text is written in single column format, which is awesome. The font is about 8 or 9 so if the print was just a tad darker, it would have been easier to read. So next printing, please make the print a little bolder. At the back of the bible, there is a daily reading guide which shows the daily sections of texts for each day. Each day varies as to the variety of passages. For example, on January 3, the Genesis and 1 Chronicles readings alternate 7 times so that you won’t feel that you’re reading an endless chunk of the same genre of scripture. On April 6, the reading is only Judges 19-22. On November 5, the readings alternate between all four gospels eleven times.

If you want to read the bible according to the order of biblical events, then this would be a good way to do this. The introduction states: “This edition of 24/7 contains the entire text of the New Living Translation, arranged in the order the events actually occurred. This unique viewpoint allows you to read the whole Bible as a single story and to see the unfolding of God’s plan in history.”

The New Testament begins on September 24 with Mark 1. I don’t think 99.9% of regular bible readers could read the bible straight through without also reading from the gospels. If you’re like me and have always wanted to read the bible in chronological order but also fear that you have to read the Old Testament until September before getting to the New Testament, then you have to come up with a solution. I will also read a bit from either the gospels or the epistles. That’s the plan.

There's still room for the ESV to improve

2008-12-12T09:38:00.006-06:00

Tim gave a well thought-out comment in a previous post ESV can become better. I am posting his comment here, particularly because he felt that he wasn’t heard on another blog mentioned below. It was a response in my post that the work invested into the NRSV was much greater than the work invested into the ESV. I still stand by this, however, I really like Tim’s comment. He said:

I think it's a little unfair to expect there to be another revision so soon after the last one. Let's not forget, they brought out the revision relatively quickly after the ESV first came out and that is to be commended. I feel very strongly that they do listen and that another revision will happen. If they didn't listen then the first revision wouldn't have taken place would it?

People say that the NRSV is a good version, and I echo that, as I like it. But I couldn't understand why there were not that many sales. I asked this question on BBB, that if it was the version recommended by scholars and academics why did it consistently do poorly in the sales rankings, to be told that the reason was probably because not many scholars and academics bought it. Bit of a smart**** answer and not the one I was actually looking for, so I did a little rooting around myself…..

It's clear to me that where a translation is concerned it becomes an attempted balance between style and substance. Such a balance is going to, by its very nature, be almost impossible to strike as many people have their own ideas of what 'perfect' English actually means. I tried to demonstrate this on BBB, failed, and instead had people jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about my comments, and getting it wrong […]

I believe Tim’s view is valid and is felt by many other ESV readers whose sentiments do not resonate with those who favor gender-inclusive language. I don’t know what the solution is to this but I think both views are valid. Neither is wrong. For some, gender-inclusivity in the bible translations do speak more clearly and directly to them. For others, gender-inclusivity in translations is unnecessary because they read and interpret the bible with gender-inclusivity in mind but would prefer to leave the technical definition of the masculine in tact. I believe there are many readers out there who would agree with both views too.

The AV (1611) was itself a revision (even then the language was considered a little dated), and went through numerous revisions after it was first released. But for all its faults, it brought millions to Christ. Yet there are many who would make fun of others for still using it. How out of date was the Septuagint when the apostles were quoting from it? To my mind it isn't the version that matters but whether you read it and use it, that does. As someone else (I cannot remember who) said, use the version that sings to your heart. I use many versions, and although my favourite is the Wycliffe Bible that is purely for stylistic reasons and its historical value. Firstly it can be considered the first shot fired in what led to the Reformation. Secondly, as an Anglo-Saxon buff, it interests me for the language it uses and is a link between Anglo-Saxon and our modern English.

When I think of some translators I am put in mind of the priesthood of old (before the Reformation) which maintained that no-one was allowed to read the bible unless it was one of the 'approved' versions. Only the priesthood held the 'secret knowledge' that enables others to understand it properly. Well that's rubbish. And regardless of how perfect the style is, it isn't going to be much worth if no one wants to read it, is it? The ESV tends to fly off the shelves around here, and that is a big plus. It doesn't matter what version it is, nor how perfect the English within it. What matters is whether people buy it and use it. And on that score the ESV is doing well. So, if you can't have both then what's it to be, style or substance? I know what I'd rather choose.

Personally, I do not agree with Tim on this one. We need both style and substance in bible translations. If a translation lacks one or the other, it needs to be improved. If one loves style, there are many out there who are not Anglo-Saxon buffs and cannot even begin to read the Wycliffe Bible or even the King James Version. The ESV still has room to improve on its style and substance. I am confident that Good News Publishers and future revisions will be working on improvements in the ESV. In the end, there is lots of room for the ESV, and even the NRSV to improve.

How many people did the shepherds tell about the angelic appearance?

2008-12-10T15:45:00.003-06:00

God sends an angel to speak to the shepherds:

They were terrified, 10 but the angel reassured them. “Don’t be afraid!” he said. “I bring you good news that will bring great joy to all people. 11 The Savior—yes, the Messiah, the Lord—has been born today in Bethlehem, the city of David! 12 And you will recognize him by this sign: You will find a baby wrapped snugly in strips of cloth, lying in a manger.” 13 Suddenly, the angel was joined by a vast host of others—the armies of heaven—praising God and saying, 14 “Glory to God in highest heaven, and peace on earth to those with whom God is pleased.” (NLT)

This story is extraordinary. What makes this story extraordinary were not just the magnificent appearance of the angel and the hosts of heaven singing the “Gloria.” It was that they believed the angel’s story and told it to other people. They could not hide it to themselves. After the angel had left them, they quickly move to look for look for Jesus in a manger. After finding him, they revealed to others what the angel had told them.

Here's what we do not know exactly. Should we assume that with evangelistic zeal, they went on to tell everyone words from the angel? Or, were the people they told only Mary and Joseph or can we assume that they told more people? It depends on the translation.

Various translations assume that the shepherds told everyone, including the TNIV, NLT, and Message. These translations suggest an evangelical zeal of telling everyone.

But the GNT suggest that they only told Mary and Joseph, which does not indicate an evangelistic outlook.

The NRSV and ESV do not say how many people they told. So which is it?

When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child, and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them. But Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart. (TNIV)

After seeing him, the shepherds told everyone what had happened and what the angel had said to them about this child. 18 All who heard the shepherds’ story were astonished, 19 but Mary kept all these things in her heart and thought about them often. (NLT)

Seeing was believing. They told everyone they met what the angels had said about this child. All who heard the sheepherders were impressed. Mary kept all these things to herself, holding them dear, deep within herself. (Message)

When the shepherds saw him, they told them what the angel had said about the child. All who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said. Mary remembered all these things and thought deeply about them. (GNT)

When they saw this, they made known what had been told them about this child; and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds told them. But Mary treasured all these words and pondered them in her heart. (NRSV)

And when they saw it, they made known the saying that had been told them concerning this child. And all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them. But Mary treasured up all these things, pondering them in her heart. (ESV)

ESV can become better

2008-11-30T23:17:00.005-06:00

I haven’t been around the blogosphere for a while but I’ve been catching up on what’s going on at Better Bibles: Wayne Leman finished posting a series of posts on a paper by Mark Strauss: Why the English Standard Version (ESV) should not become the standard English version: How to make a good translation much better. It’s also available in PDF. I don't think this should be seen as being critical against the ESV but rather, I think this is the type of constructive criticism that can make our bibles better.

The ESV can do so much better so Crossway should pay attention. I think Crossway has great opportunity to improve this great translation and make it so much better. If the translation team takes advice such as this, the ESV will surely become even more popular than it is now. It was be known as one of the great modern translations for a long long time. The enormous work done by the NRSV was a huge improvement and can be called a genuine translation. But the ESV has not done nearly as much work on it as the NRSV translators. So the ESV, there's still room to improve.

Why do Christians have to suffer?

2008-11-23T20:21:00.004-06:00

Voice of the Martyr reports:

[China Aid Association] CAA has received reports of intensified religious persecution in Beijing, Heilongjiang, Yunnan and Shangdong provinces. In Beijing, Pastor "Bike" Zhang Mingxuan and his family members have been evicted from their home, beaten and arrested. In Heliongjiang province, one city called Yichun recently banned all house churches, CAA reported. In Yunnan province, some house church members were attacked right after the Olympics. In Shandong province, Pastor Zhang Zhongxin was sentenced to two years of re-education through labor, and after the Olympics his appeal was denied, according to CAA.

Meanwhile, CAA has learned that 29 house church leaders have been serving time in labor camps and prisons in Henan province since July 2007. They are accused of being "evil cult" members. One leader was sentenced to seven years imprisonment, which is the harshest sentence against a house church leader in recent years, besides Pastor Zhang Rongliang, who was sentenced to seven-and-a-half years in 2004, for allegedly "attempting to illegally cross the border and forgery of an official document," CAA added. VOM Report on China.

On Nov. 12, two sisters were killed and their mother wounded by a gang of Islamic extremists in the Al Qahira section of Mosul, Iraq, according to [Voice of the Martyrs] VOM contacts. The gunmen shot one of the sisters as she was waiting for a bus outside their home. They then stormed into the home, killed the other sister and injured their mother. A bomb placed by the assailants at the entrance of the house detonated as police arrived on the scene, injuring several officers.

This incident is the latest in a series of attacks on Christians that have occurred in Mosul, in recent weeks. Since October, more than seven Christians have been killed and more than 200 families displaced. The Christian community in Iraq is estimated to be 3 percent of Iraq’s 26 million people, or about 800,000. Some Christians believe they are being targeted in an effort to wipe out the Christian community's economic activity and drive believers from the area. Since 2003, Christian leaders, churches and businesses in Iraq have been targeted by Islamic extremists. As a result, many believers have fled. VOM report on Iraq.

If God is a loving God, then why does he allow suffering? If God is omnipotent, then why does God not stop all the pain and suffering? Is God still sovereign even with all the pain that goes on? Does all suffering happen as a result of human wrongdoing? No but it happens even if there is no fault on anyone’s part. If so, then do we just accept it? Is it just a fact of life, a dimension of our lives here on earth? Is there a connection, or is there no connection between suffering and human wrong-doing?And is there an explanation? Atheists would say there is no God. Christian scientists would say that suffering is unreal because it is merely a way of thinking. Or is God just a malevolent God who is let loose and Satan just roams the world and has a free reign to wreak havoc? Does God enjoy seeing us humans suffer here on earth?

Despite the pain and suffering, I believe that the heart of God would also suffer along with us in our pain. If God is suppose to be God, then who are we to judge what is just and unjust? Our human temptation is to judge and be a judge, like in the Garden of Eden. We want to be like a god. Okay, so Christ died at the cross and suffered on our behalf. Then Christ knows our suffering and pain, our injustices and wrongs done against us. Then how can this hurt us? If Christ is omnipresent with us in the midst of all our pain and suffering, then can suffering hurt us? If Christ is for us, then who can be against us? Christ will give us the strength to carry our cross.

Pope Benedict on St. Paul's Justification by Christ's love

2008-11-20T10:20:00.016-06:00

In November 2008, Pope Benedict XVI said in St. Peter's Square in one of his series of lessons:

"Luther", said the Pope, "translated this as 'justified by faith alone', ... yet before returning to this point it is necessary to clarify which is the 'Law' from which we have been freed and what are the works that do not justify us. In the community of Corinth there already existed an opinion, that crops up again throughout history, to the effect that it is the moral law, and that hence Christian freedom means freedom from ethics. ... Obviously this is an incorrect interpretation. Christian freedom is not debauchery, ... it is not freedom from doing good". ("St. Paul: Justification by Christ's love", Vatican Information Service)

Amen. I agree with him. It light of scripture (and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (1999) signed by signatories from the Lutheran World Federation and Roman Catholic Church), it is good to hear Pope Benedict affirm the doctrine of justification, which Lutherans and Protestants of the Reformation know as the cornerstone of our faith. The most chief article, Article IV of the Augsburg Confession states:

"Furthermore, it is taught that we cannot obtain forgiveness of sin and righteousness before God through our merit, work, or satisfactions, but that we receive forgiveness of sin and become righteous before God out of grace for Christ's sake through faith when we believe that Christ has suffered for us and that for his sake our sin is forgiven and righteousness and eternal life are given to us. For God will regard and reckon this faith as righteousness in his sight, as St. Paul says in Romans 3[:21-26] and 4[:5]."

Pope Benedict obviously has no hang ups about doing good works. In fact, he encourages it. I like that because that is what St. Paul the Apostle meant to explain in his Epistle to the Romans. As children of God who have been redeemed by Christ, we have been set free from the requirements of the law. At the same time, we are not free from doing good works, but we are not bound by good works either. I also premise this by saying that good works ought to come from a voluntary basis out of our love for God and not out of compulsion. That is the good fruit we are called to bear (Rom. 7:4; Eph. 5:9; Col. 1:10).

“Likewise, my brethren, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God” (Rom. 7:4, RSV).

“(for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true), and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord.” (Eph. 5:9-10, ESV).

“so that you may lead lives worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to him, as you bear fruit in every good work and as you grow in the knowledge of God” (Col. 1:10, NRSV).

The holy Pontiff concludes in this articles saying:

"Being just simply means being with Christ, being in Christ, that is all. The other precepts are no longer necessary. ... For this reason Luther's 'sola fide' is true if it is not placed in opposition to charity, to love. Faith is looking at Christ, trusting in Christ ... conforming to Christ. And the form of Christ's life was love. ... We become just in communion with Christ Who is love. ... Justice is defined in charity".

"We can only pray to the Lord to help us believe", Benedict XVI concluded. "Thus belief becomes life, unity with Christ, transformation. ... And transformed by His love, by love for God and mankind, we will truly be just in the eyes of God".

Hat tip to Tim at Catholic Bibles

Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds. Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 2000), 39-40.

Obama's faith in Christ

2008-11-15T15:01:00.005-06:00

The interest in President-elect Barack Obama has not simmered yet. I think we all want to learn more about the new President. The conversations around the blogosphere prove it. Peter Kirk at Gentle Wisdom found an interesting link through another blogger (hat tip: John Meunier) of an interview with Barack Obama at Belief.net.

The article is called "Obama's Fascinating Interview with Cathleen Falsani." Have a read. It's very interesting.

ESV Study Bible and the ESV translation

2008-11-15T01:29:00.010-06:00

Thank you Michele Bennett of Crossway Publishing for sending me a review copy.

In this rather lengthy post, I will speak about what I have found to be the main features of the ESV Study Bible, and then in the second half of this post, I will give my opinion about the ESV translation itself. I know there have already been numerous other bibliobloggers in the blogosphere blogging about the ESV Study Bible (ESVSB). I will finally add mine opinion of the it here today.

1. The features of the ESV Study Bible:

The more I read the ESV Study Bible, the more I like it. If you’re looking for a good study bible, the ESV Study Bible is definitely one of the best available. The study notes and the overall feel of it will make it one of the all-time great study bibles. With over 20,000 study notes and 50 articles, it is a heavy-duty study bible, and it also looks and feels like one too. With 2,750 pages, it is one of the thickest study bibles out there, if not the thickest. The ESV Study Bible is the biggest of them all. It is also the most comprehensive I’ve seen. The quantity and quality of study notes is comparable to its two major rivals, the T/NIV and NLT study bibles. The introductions for each book are excellent. They are scholarly and are based on up-to-date scholarship. The contributing scholars for the ESV Study Bible are top-notch evangelical scholars. The wide variety of scholars from many denominations makes this study bible ecumenical. The scholars who have contributed the study notes, articles, and the ESV translation itself, are from a variety of denominational seminaries, theological schools, and universities. They come from a variety of denominational backgrounds: Baptist, Reformed, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Anglican, Pentecostal, and many and various evangelical seminaries (their names can be seen here).

In my opinion, the big name on the editorial oversight committee is J.I. Packer, the Theological Editor. The other names on this committee are C. John Collins, the Old Testament Editor, and Thomas R. Schreiner, New Testament Editor. The editorial committee is covenantal in theology. It is not surprise me that this committee leans more toward covenantal in theology. Well, the majority of the readership of the ESV translation is covenantal or reformed; so why not? Will dispensationalists find this study bible overly covenantal? I don’t think so. There are some dispensationalists on the list of study note contributors but they are the minority. In recent years, I have found that my own theology moving from an Arminian dispensational outlook to more of a covenantal one. So now, I can appreciate both theological views. I can say that it is not as covenantal or reformed as the ESV Reformation Study Bible. So if you’re a dispensationalist, you’ll still like this study bible and appreciate its value.

In the ESV panel discussion, Dr. J.I. Packer, the theological editor, spoke about the ESV Study Bible being a useful tool for catechesis (or oral instruction). I have wondered what makes it a good tool for catechesis. If someone could enlighten me on this one, I would appreciate it.

One thing that separates the ESV Study Bible from the rest of the other study bibles is the physical quality of the bible itself. It has a very good quality binding because it is Smyth-sewn rather than glued. This makes it much longer-lasting, and it allows the bible to lay flat when you’re at the beginning of Genesis or at the end of Revelation. Most study bibles out there only use the cheap glue binding, including the NTL Study Bible, NIV Study Bible, New Oxford Annotated Bible, and HarperCollins SB. The ESV Study Bible, however, is Smyth-sewn and reinforced with some glue to make it more durable. So kudos to Crossway for providing a good quality binding. I think Crossway has really improved on the quality of some of its bibles. One pet-peeve I have about bibles is that when you open up the bible, and the pages at the seam crinkle-up. The pages near the seam in this bible seem to crinkle, and I don’t know why. Open one up and you’ll see for yourself. Maybe someone can explain to me why this happens?

The layout is very attractive. It is easy on the eyes. Personally, I like the lines that separate the header, the study notes, and the side columns. I find this easier on the eyes and it gives the appearance of a clean-cut layout. Crossway has also provided quality high-opacity French bible paper and a very nice print job. I like the dark arial font for the study notes and the dark serif font for the biblical text. It provides a good contrast and it makes it easier to read. The font size is also a good size. I don’t have to use a magnifying glass to read it. I also like the single column format. I was accustomed to double columns but I have slowly become accustomed to reading wide single columns. Moreover, the abundance of white space around the text makes it easier and quicker to read, especially if you’re a speed reader (which I'm not).

This is one of the only bibles I’ve seen with so many full-color maps and illustrations within the pages of the bible texts. No other bible has come close to what the ESV Study Bible has done in providing relevant maps that are in such magnificent colors and detail. It has certainly set the bar in this area. Not only are these color maps placed in each of the book introductions, but they are also placed within the pages of the main texts to provide the readers with an historical place where the story was situated. The regions, nations and cities are concurrent to the period of time when the characters and stories took place. It’s really well done.

I have to say that I’m a cross reference user and prefer bibles that have cross references. I don’t know about most people, but when I do indepth study into the text, I actually use cross references to find relevant and comparable scripture verses. I have found that the cross references are in the ESVSB is sufficient and comparable to other bibles; plus there is a concordance in the back.

The numerous theological articles in the back of the bible reflect an evangelical perspective. They are quite readable, even for beginner Christians. It's a nice addition. Perhaps these theological-biblical articles were what J.I. Packer was referring to when he spoke about the ESV Study Bible being a useful tool for catechesis? Also, in the past, I’ve wondered what it was like during the time period in between the OT and NT. Some historical and scholarly articles are appropriately placed in between the Old Testament and the New Testament to explain in a compact fashion: the time between the testaments; the Roman Empire and the Greco-Roman world; Jewish groups at the time of the NT.

2. The ESV translation:

As far as the translation itself goes, I see the ESV translation becoming ever more popular in the future. It is popular in covenantal Baptist and Reformed churches, but it is also becoming more widely used in Lutheran congregations. The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) has switched their new hymnal from the NIV to the ESV translation. For some Lutherans, the previous switch from the RSV to the NIV, and now to the ESV, is sort of a return to the Tyndale RSV-style language. For those who are used to the old RSV, they will find the ESV an easy transition. I don’t think Crossway wants to market the ESV as an ‘updated RSV’ but it really is kind of like an ‘updated RSV’ since much of the text is identical to the old RSV. In fact, maybe Crossway could have renamed it the RSV2? The difference between the two is in its updated and conservative biblical scholarship, and easier to read punctuations and some modernized grammar. Overall, it still reads very much like the RSV. When I was reading from the ESV aloud, many thought I was reading from the RSV. In certain passages, the difference between the ESV and RSV is only slight. There is even less of a difference between the KJV and NKJV.

Even though some have debated the accuracy of between the ESV and the TNIV, there is really not much to debate about because the ESV is still a very accurate and scholarly translation. If we want to debate the accuracy of the ESV, we will also have to debate the accuracy of the RSV. Some may accuse the ESV being a step back from the RSV, but I don't think so. I acknowledge that the RSV is one of the best translations ever translated into the English language and in many ways, the ESV has improved over its predecessor. Personally, I really like the NRSV, TNIV and NLT translations because they are gender-inclusive and highly accurate. The ESV is also gender-inclusive, but to only to an extent. That's the criticism. The level of gender-inclusivity in the ESV is somewhere in-between the TNIV/NRSV (which fully use gender-inclusive language) and NIV/RSV (which mainly use masculine language). We can come to two possible conclusions concerning this issue of moderate use of gender-inclusive language:

1/ It is inconsistent; or
2/ It is ‘playing it safe’ and not 'going over-board'.

Personally, I think both points of view are legitimate. Personally, I do prefer gender-inclusive language because it fits the context of the audience to whom the writers were originally writing to. However, technically speaking, the gender of the pronouns (i.e., he, him, his) are mostly masculine because that’s how gender was used in Greek writing.

The ESV translation is already a very successful translation but I believe it will become even more popular. In the near future, it will become head-to-head rivals with the NIV and NLT. I predict that the ESV will become one of the great modern translations of all time. I am not just saying that but I really believe it. Crossway has put together great study bible with a great translation to go along with it. Good job Crossway!

November 11 is Remembrance Day: "Lest We Forget"

2008-11-11T00:00:00.005-06:00

Lest we forget. November 11, 2008 is Remembrance Day in Canada in honour of our Canadian veterans who died in the service of our country. I’m way too young to remember any of this but I appreciate what the veterans have done to protect and secure our freedoms. I have seen many senior veterans dressed in their uniforms and proudly tell their stories. I remember my 2nd grade school teacher Mr. Sage tell us his story in the trenches. He broke down into tears telling our class. I didn’t know how to appreciate his stories back then but I do remember his heartaches and even the tears he shed while telling them. He and many others like him suffered and died in combat for the freedoms we have today. I appreciate and thank them for their loyalty and their service to country. God bless them and their families.

I’d like to show off some proud moments of our little-known Canadian history. I've seen all 14 of these are historical minutes on video but these three here are my favorites.

Osborn of Hong Kong | Valour Road | Home from the Wars

The young Canadian men and women sacrificed their livelihood, love and safety of home to defend the rights and freedoms we have today. So I want to express my appreciation and thanks for these men and women today. (picture: Victoria Cross, Canada's highest medal of honor.)

Why I am a Christian today

2008-11-10T14:33:00.002-06:00

Why am I a Christian today? Luther’s Small Catechism from the Third Article of the Creed answers this one for me.

"I believe that by my own understanding or strength I cannot believe in Jesus Christ as my Lord or come to him, but instead the Holy Spirit has called me through the gospel, enlightened me with his gifts, made me holy and kept me in the true faith, just as he calls, gathers, enlightens, and makes holy the whole Christian church on earth and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one common true faith. Daily in this Christian church the Holy Spirit abundantly forgives all sins—mine and those of all believers. On the Last Day the Holy Spirit will raise me and all the dead and will give to me and all believers in Christ eternal life. This is most certainly true."

This is how I understand the theology behind this. The Holy Spirit unites me to Christ independent of any cooperation from my unrenewed human nature. This means that only God can illuminate my understanding of his word so that I can believe. It is only God who enables me to see God’s excellence and unsurpassing beauty. Due to my human nature, it is impossible for me to come to Christ on my own, no matter how hard I may try. My own hardened resistance and stubbornness wants to do everything on my own without God; but it is only by the power of the Holy Spirit who regenerates me so that I am born again.

Do you believe you came to Christ on your own power? Why are you a Christian today?

My hope in the days ahead | Post-election posts

2008-11-09T23:31:00.004-06:00

1. Due to some busy-ness in my school work and final exam, I have not been able to blog as much as before. I do miss blogging with my network of biblioblogger friends who keep me informed and my intellect in active mode. Very shortly, the next few weeks marks the end of my seminary days, and new days ahead as an ordained pastor. I am really looking forward to the future because I hope to be ordained in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada...God-willing.

2. In the future, I will be doing more reviews, including the ESV Study Bible. I am more impressed with this study bible each day I use it. John Hobbins at Ancient Hebrew Poetry is currently doing a series on the comparison of the Psalms between the NLT Study Bible and the ESV Study Bible. I am following this but I wish my Hebrew was better.

3. I wish we Christians can be more thoughtful than knee-jerk reactionary partisans (myself included). I like some of the posts some of us bibliobloggers have been blogging about after the election. David Ker briefly left his blogging sabbatical and posted an interesting election-related post on “Why American Christians look so stupid and what you can do about it.” I also found John Hobbins, Peter Kirk, and Doug Chaplin with interesting posts on the post-election.

Barack Obama is the new President-elect: Congratulations!

2008-11-04T23:54:00.005-06:00

Tonight’s election victory belongs to Sen. Barack Obama and the Democratic Party. It was an overwhelming victory, and it was truly an historic day for the nation of the United States of America. Obama won the states of Ohio and Pennsylvania earlier in the evening; this gave a strong indication where the country would be heading in terms of the election results. Obama also took the west coast states of California, Oregon and Washington. Even coming into the election ahead in the polls, I personally did not expect such a landslide victory; well, it turns out that it definitely was a landslide. Obama won 338 and McCain won 156 of the electoral college votes.

With President-elect Barack Obama taking the Oval Office in the White House, I think he will introduce a new and positive image of America domestically and internationally. Perhaps this will correct the negative international image that America has had under the Bush Administration. America has had a negative image outside of the United States; and it was primarily due to the unpopular war on Iraq.

But that aside, President-elect Barack Obama will be well liked by much of modern America, particularly by the younger generations, whites and non-whites, alike. The younger generations do want to see postive change in society, including myself. Though I am personally conservative in my worldview, including my politics, I do think Obama will bring a new freedom and a new way society perceives itself. This will affect a new way of doing public policy and politics for the United States. It will also affect how other nations treat the United States. I perceive that there will be a new hope and also a bright light that will come to the people in this nation. May God bless the new President, Barack Obama, and may God bless America!

Election Day November 4, 2008 will be an historic day

2008-11-03T06:55:00.003-06:00

This election on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, is slated to make history because Americans may be electing their first African-American president, if Barack Obama continues to hold the lead in this race. Many people are expecting Obama to win this election, unless McCain pulls a last minute win.

So far, one day before Election Day, Sen. Obama is still in the lead by about 7-10 points over Sen. John McCain, depending on pollsters. I think it is very likely Obama will be the next president of the United States. From what I’ve seen on television news, the line ups for early voting are long. Many people want to make sure they get their votes in, and it shows many people are really excited about this election. This might even be the biggest voter turnout in recent American history. It’s good for the democratic process. So get out there and vote tomorrow.

Justice vs righteousness

2008-11-02T00:06:00.002-06:00

Is it justice or righteousness? Here's how Merriam-Webster defines the two terms:

Righteousness
1 acting in accord with divine or moral law : free from guilt or sin;
2 morally right or justifiable.

Justice
1 the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity;
2 the quality of being just, impartial, or fair b (1): the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action;
3 conformity to truth, fact, or reason.

Both terms seem to be used interchangeably, depending on the translation. Justice comes from the Latin term “justitia” and righteousness comes from the Old English term “rihtwīs” or rightwise. The term “justice” has a tone of judgment or criminal law; whereas, “righteousness” does not.

E.g., in Isaiah 51:8, Catholic translations (NJB, NAB, and Douay-Rheims) tends to use “justice”. The other translations (NRSV, ESV, TNIV, HCSB, and NASB) tend to use “righteousness”. Which term is more correct? Or are they both equally correct?

Reformation Day - October 31

2008-10-31T14:03:00.004-06:00

Thanks to Stan McCullers who informed us about the offer of a genuine leather ESV Reformation Study Bible for a donation of any amount to Ligonier Ministries. Offer good till Nov.2.

Ligonier Ministries - Renewing Your Mind has some good audio programs:
Making of the Protestant Reformation (Pt. 1)
Making of the Protestant Reformation (Pt. 2)

Below, the first video is also about the history of the Reformation.
The second video is about why the Reformation matters (Calvinist perspective)

October 31 is Reformation Day--not just Halloween

2008-10-30T00:38:00.005-06:00

October 31 reminds most of Halloween and of ghosts, goblins and kids dressed in costumes wandering through the streets on Halloween “trick or treating," but most people know little about what October 31 means to the church. It means much more. For Protestants, October 31 is a very special date because it marks the beginning of the Protestant Reformation. On October 31, 1517 Martin Luther nailed his famous ninety-five theses on the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany (pictured here).

When the Reformation began in Germany, Dr. Rev. Martin Luther was a Catholic priest and theologian who only wanted to see the beloved church reform some of the ways it looked and practiced theology. The Church has gone astray because it began to attach a price to the salvation of souls. It taught people that paying for indulgences would earn them and their family a shorter stay in purgatory. The Pope encouraged the sales of indulgences and would even issue a certificate by the church. Behind this was the goal of raising of funds to help pay for the building of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

At the core, for Luther, was the issue of trusting in God’s righteousness rather than doing good works to earn God’s righteousness. Luther saw this doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone as central to the gospel. This most important theological truth was being freshly revealed to generations of Christians in the 16th century. Luther identified this truth as the head and cornerstone of our church’s doctrine, and even of the Church’s very existence. He was convinced of this truth and was determined to defend it, preach it, and teach it so that the world may know the truth and be set free from the enslavement and guilt of their sins.

This theological issue justification by grace through faith became a big controversy that eventually grew into a huge movement that went even beyond Lutheranism. It brought about a great reformation and birthed the Lutheran Church and other protestant churches around the world. As the church on earth today, we must continue to defend, to teach and preach this doctrine for the glory of God and for the salvation of all God’s people. (pic1: door of Castle Church; pic2: sale of indulgences in a church)

I, II, & III John: A Commentary. The New Testament Library by WJK

2008-10-28T14:04:00.011-06:00

I, II, & III John: A Commentary. The New Testament Library.

Author: Judith M. Lieu.
Publisher: Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008. pp. 336.
ISBN: 0664220983, 9780664220983

First, I’d like to thank the fine people at the Presbyterian Publishing Corporation for this review copy.

The New Testament Library published by Westminster John Knox Press has just newly released I, II, & III John: A Commentary. The author, Professor Dr. Judith M. Lieu, is a professor of Cambridge University’s Faculty of Divinity. She is also the editor of the journal New Testament Studies and is also the author of numerous books on early Christian identity.

Author Dr. Judith M. Lieu’s speaks about the historical aspect of these letters, as well as, the author, audience, and situation of the epistles’ setting. The introduction also covers the argument, style, and thought of the letters. The author’s question of the anonymity of the author leaves me wondering if it was written by the same person who wrote the Gospel of John; however, her analysis and comparison between the similarities of the Johannine corpus still leaves me leaning towards the corpus as being written by one and the same person, which is traditionally agreed upon.

Lieu’s introduction to the commentary makes use of the latest biblical scholarship. Her expertise on early Christian identity lends itself nicely in this commentary because she also looks at the early Christian church through the eyes of John and how its dynamics influenced John’s letters. Lieu states:
“Although 1 John moves within a dualist worldview, it is a profoundly Jewish one; in many ways, like other early Christian literature, this is an apocalyptic interpretation of history and experience. The denigration of “the (or this) world” owes something to the contrast in apocalyptic thought with “the world (or age) to come,” although that concept is not used in the Johannine literature....1 John’s favorite term for the eruption into the world of the Son of God is the verb phaneroo, to “reveal” or “manifest”; it refers to the past but also to the anticipated future revelation (2:28; 3:2, 5, 8). The emergence of the antichrists is a spurious imitative manifestation (2:19), and, although probably experienced in terms of human schism and conflict, they are described in all the language of the eschatological denouement.” (p.22)

Her identification of a literary element of rhythmic style within the first letter of John opened my eyes to there being a possible hymn of love in chapter. I am not entire convinced of this but there is definitely is some repetition.

The letters have a dualistic worldview. Concerning this, Lieu states:
“Most fundamentally this worldview is characterized by dualism between light and darkness, truth and falsehood, life and death, love and hatred; in the Gospel, but not in 1 John, there is a vertical dimension, above and below, and both writings set the (or this) world against that which is “not of the world.” (p.18)

The author agrees with the gender inclusive writing of the letters in using “brothers and sisters,” however, she realizes some difficulty in certain verses in stating:
“While this may make the text more accessible to contemporary readers, it may also obscure the mindset of the earliest authors, who probably took for granted that priority of the masculine address....The associated image of strength and of victory over the evil one is apposite for the young male (neaniskos) but not for his coeval “sister.” Although it is unlikely that 1 John is addressed to an all-male community, such a reading would not be impossible.” (p.31).

Her scholarly assessment of the Epistles of John is quite in-depth and detailed. Going by a verse-by-verse exegetical format, she locates some of the difficult parts of the biblical text. For example, in 1 John 3:19-20, Lieu offers five alternative renderings based on the Greek text (p.155). In 1 John 4:9-10, the author also draws a parallel between this text and John 3:16-17. Lieu states:
“Equally, while it is possible that the story of Abraham, the father who offered his only son, informed some other early Christian reflection on God’s giving of his Son (see Rom. 8:32), it is nowhere in view at this point in 1 John. These conclusions are reinforced by the verb “sent” (apostello). That Jesus is the Son sent by the Father, God, is axiomatic for the Fourth Gospel’s Christology...However, none of this can be read into 1 John; the three occurrences of the verb...are formulaic and do not invite further theological reflection.” (p.183)

This commentary's exegesis of the biblical text is top notch. Overall, I would like to comment that the entire New Testament Library commentary series is not intended to provide much pastoral application because it is designed so that it leaves it up to the exegete to provide a pastoral application from the text. Other commentary series may provide much more pastoral application than the NTL. This series of commentaries provides a transliteration of the Greek so that it is accessible to those not familiar with Greek such as lay people; moreover, it is not so technical that only an academically trained person in the original languages can use it.

Lieu has written an excellent commentary on I, II, & III John. Her biblical exegesis of the text is thorough and very well done. This is definitely a commentary I would reference in my personal exegesis and interpretation of the letters of John.

Acts 1:4 - Jesus eating salt with his disciples

2008-10-17T15:06:00.014-06:00

[Edited] Were Jesus and his apostles eating together, gathered together, or just plain staying together? The original Greek says sunalizô, in the form sunalizomenos (sunalizô, eat together, or gather together). The BDAB lexicon provides three possible options as to the meaning of sunalizô:

1) eat (salt) together, share a meal with; or
2) to bring together, assemble, come together, or
3) “spend the night with,” “stay with.”

The BDAG says the problem with the first possible meaning is that it doesn't really fit the context; furthermore, it is not used anywhere else. The problem of the second meaning is with the singular number and the present tense. The third possible meaning is based on a spelling variation of συναλιζομενος (sunalizomenos) present in some miniscules. Below, the TNIV, NLT and Douay-Rheims translations render sunalizô as eating together. The NASB rendering of sunalizô is the second option of "gathered together"; and the NRSV, ESV and HCSB render sunalizô as the third option--"staying with them." Most commonly, translations lean toward the NRSV or ESV rendering of “stay together” because these are most commonly used elsewhere in the New Testament.

The TNIV and NLT may have correctly rendered the this meaning of sunalizô as "eating with them." Arie W. Zwiep argues for the first option of the TNIV and NLT: "A more plausible meaning of the verb is 'eating salt together with'...hence: 'eating together.' Concerning the second option, Zwiep says: "The present tense may be taken to denote an uninterrupted period of Jesus' presence among his disciples. The problem with this interpretation is that it is difficult to imagine how this meaning would apply to only one person (Jesus being the subject of the sentence)."

I don't know if there's any theological implications about this but "eating salt" may have a much deeper meaning than what's being suggested on the surface. The word sun-al-izô might actually be a composition of two words "together" (sun) and "salt" (als). Jesus uses salt as an example in speaking with his disciples:

"Salt is good, but if the salt has lost its saltiness, how will you make it salty again? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another." (Mark 9:50, ESV).

It may be that the word sunalizô may have the connotation of a union of being at peace with one another, or "being salted together." Jesus also told his disciples to stay together and wait for the Promise of the Father, which is the Holy Spirit. And after they received Holy Spirit, they were in the "unity of the Spirit" (Eph. 4:3). Therefore, being salted together is to be in unity and at peace with one another.
__________________________

On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. TNIV

Once when he was eating with them, he commanded them, “Do not leave Jerusalem until the Father sends you the gift he promised, as I told you before. (NLT)

And eating together with them, he commanded them, that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but should wait for the promise of the Father, which you have heard (saith he) by my mouth. (Douay-Rheims)

While at table with them, he had told them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait there for what the Father had promised... (NJB)

While He was together with them, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for the Father's promise. "This," [He said, "is what] you heard from Me; (HCSB)

While staying with them, he ordered them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait there for the promise of the Father. ‘This’, he said, ‘is what you have heard from me; (NRSV)

Gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, "Which," He said, "you heard of from Me; (NASB)

And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, "you heard from me; (ESV)

Arie W. Zwiep, The Ascension of the Messiah in Lukan Christology (Brill, 1997).

Let's ask deeper questions to probe reality--not fear

2008-10-16T13:10:00.013-06:00

It seems there is a double standard out there. Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska is a first term Governor, just as, Sen. Barack Obama, is also a first term Senator. The fact is that the responsibilities of a state governor is much greater than that of a senator; however, there are more polls out there questioning Gov. Sarah Palin’s ability to perform as a potential President if John McCain was the President-elect but was forced to leave office in case of ill health or death. The very questions posed by opinion polls can be used to make suggestions and plant seeds of doubt based on fear rather than reality. Thinking American people should be looking at reality. Opinion polls are not capable of asking these types of deeper questions. Only real people are capable of doing so. I hope everyone will ask ourselves these questions before the election is over.

1/ How did Gov. Sarah Palin do in office as governor of Alaska? Then compare this with findings from the following question: How did Sen. Barack Obama do in office as senator of Illinois?

2/ Why is there a double standard? Is it because Gov. Sarah Palin is a woman?

3/ Are opinion polls such as this one from Abraham & Harrison funded by Democratic or Republican supporters?

Deuteronomy 17: How the government/governor should govern

2008-10-16T00:22:00.006-06:00

Deuteronomy 17:14-20 gives some instructions for the government/governor. Maybe our governments should heed this biblical advice for today? It's still relevant.

1/ The people must pray about who we choose to vote for. “be sure to appoint over you the king the Lord your God chooses.” (Deut. 17:15, TNIV)

2/ The national leader must be a citizen of the country. “One of your own community you may set as king over you; you are not permitted to put a foreigner over you, who is not of your own community.” (Deut. 17:15b, NRSV)

3/ The government should have limited state-control of assets, and limited powers. “The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself.” (Deut. 17:16a, TNIV)

4/ The government should not tax excessively. “He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold.” (Deut.17:17b, TNIV)

5/ The government/governor must follow and enforce the laws of the land. “When he has taken the throne of his kingdom, he shall have a copy of this law written for him in the presence of the levitical priests. It shall remain with him and he shall read in it all the days of his life, so that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, diligently observing all the words of this law and these statutes.” (Deut. 17:18-19, NRSV)

6/ The leader must be humble. “And not consider himself better than his fellow Israelites.” (Deut. 17:20, TNIV)

7/ The governor should be centrist, neither right-wing nor left-wing. “And not... turn from the law to the right or to the left.” (Deut. 17:20, TNIV). (Hahaha. Almost gotcha on this last one.) The full verse actually says: “and not consider himself better than his fellow Israelites and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.”

HT: GaryNorth.com

Election Day: Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada remain in power

2008-10-15T00:17:00.013-06:00

Tonight was federal election day in Canada. The Conservative Party of Canada will remain in power and will now have a stronger minority government than before. Prime Minister Stephen Harper was re-elected in his electoral district. Most importantly, the Conservative Party garnered the most support of all major parties; therefore, he remains in power as the Prime Minister of Canada. Congratulations to P.M. Stephen Harper.

In Canada, our Parliament and Cabinet are fused together. Unlike the U.S. system of government, the Prime Minister has the power to appoint Cabinet Ministers from amongst the elected Members of Parliament. The ideal is to elect a majority government because it enables the passage of bills into laws without much hindrance from opposition parties. With 143 of the total 308 seats in the Canadian Parliament, the Conservative Party is about 12 seats shy of forming a majority government. Even though it does not get to form a majority government this time around, it will have a stronger minority government.

Conservative Party: 143 elected as MP
Liberal Party: 76 elected as MP
Bloc Quebecois: 50 elected as MP
New Democratic Party: 37 elected as MP
Independents: 2 elected as MP (edited: final results from Elections Canada)

My personal view of Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been quite positive. I see him as a positive person who is level-headed thinker-type who is able to handle the national and international political affairs of the country very adeptly. He is a policy and an ideas-type of person--definitely not a charismatic figure–type like U.S. Sen. Obama, Gov. Palin, and even, Sen. McCain. He may be even less charismatic than some of the other Prime Ministerial candidates—and some might even say boring. However, he is a hard working, intellectual policy wonk who has guided the party in policy development for years, even before becoming leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.

What makes a Prime Minister or national leader great is not necessarily charisma and charm, but it is one’s trustworthiness. Harper seems to be a very trustworthy person. His faith in God is steady and seems to be his strength and fortress. He is a good family man married to a good and supportive wife. Overall, I think Stephen Harper has been a very good Prime Minister so far. He will continue to lead our nation of Canada with strength based on character and integrity, supported by the right ideas for the Canadian economy and society.

In my home town of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, all four (including incumbents) are Conservatives. Congratulations to all four: Maurice Vellacott, MP; Brad Trost, MP; Lynne Yelich, MP; and newly elected MP Kelly Block.

The Conservative Party of Canada is very popular in western Canada, and has the trust of most western Canadians. It has also made strides in the seat-rich Province of Ontario this election; but the Liberal Party seems to have lost popularity since the last election.

Exodus 15:3 - Yahweh is his name

2008-10-10T11:58:00.003-06:00

Only the NJB and HCSB translations use the name of God when the writer clearly intended to speak His name in Exodus 15:3. The intention of the writer seems clear here: "Yahweh is his name". When one speaks someone's name, you would expect the person's actual name be mentioned. The TNIV, ESV, NRSV and all other translations did not do this.

Should the name of Yahweh be mentioned if the writer intended to use it?

1 It was then that Moses and the Israelites sang this song in Yahweh's honour:
I shall sing to Yahweh, for he has covered himself in glory, horse and rider he has thrown into the sea.

2 Yah is my strength and my song,
to him I owe my deliverance.
He is my God and I shall praise him,
my father's God and I shall extol him.

3 Yahweh is a warrior;
Yahweh is his name. (Exodus 15:1-3, New Jerusalem Bible)

1 Then Moses and the Israelites sang this song to the LORD. They said:
I will sing to the LORD,
for He is highly exalted;
He has thrown the horse
and its rider into the sea.

2 The LORD is my strength and my song;
He has become my salvation.
This is my God, and I will praise Him,
my father's God, and I will exalt Him.

3 The LORD is a warrior;
Yahweh is His name. (Exodus 15:1-3, Holman Christian Christian Standard)

1 Then Moses and the Israelites sang this song to the LORD:
"I will sing to the LORD,
for he is highly exalted.
Both horse and driver
he has hurled into the sea.

2 "The LORD is my strength and my defense ;
he has become my salvation.
He is my God, and I will praise him,
my father's God, and I will exalt him.

3 The LORD is a warrior;
the LORD is his name. (Exodus 15:1-3, Today's New International Version)

1Then Moses and the people of Israel sang this song to the LORD, saying,
"I will sing to the LORD, for he has triumphed gloriously;
the horse and his rider he has thrown into the sea.

2 The LORD is my strength and my song,
and he has become my salvation;
this is my God, and I will praise him,
my father’s God, and I will exalt him.

3The LORD is a man of war;
the LORD is his name. (Exodus 15:1-3, English Standard Bible)

Funny renderings in the NEB - REB translations

2008-10-06T21:24:00.014-06:00

I know that there are some of you out there (like ElShaddai) who are REB-lovers. But as I was doing research on the REB and NEB, I learned of some weird and hilarious renderings that I can't help sharing. I really don't know where the NEB/REB translators got these from? Some of them really need a good explanation. Here’s some examples of my favorites.

Song of Solomon 1:7

"That I [the bride] may not be left picking lice as I sit among my companions." (NEB/REB)

"for why should I be like one who wanders beside the flocks of your companions?" (RSV)

"for why should I be like one who is veiled beside the flocks of your companions?" (NRSV)

"Why should I be like a veiled woman beside the flocks of your friends?" (TNIV)

Who has time to stand around picking lice?

Josh 15:18

"she broke wind" (NEB)

"she dismounted." (REB)

"she got off her donkey" (HCSB, TNIV, ESV)

Someone cut the cheese.

Ezek 21:7

"all men's knees run with urine" (NEB)

"all knees will turn to water." (REB)

"Every heart will melt and every hand go limp; every spirit will become faint and every knee be wet with urine." (TNIV)

"Every heart will melt and all hands will be feeble, every spirit will faint and all knees will turn to water." (NRSV)

"Every heart will melt, and every hand will become weak. Every spirit will be discouraged, and every knee will turn to water." (HCSB)

"When it comes, their hearts will be filled with fear, their hands will hang limp, their courage will fail, and their knees will tremble." (GNT)

"When it comes true, the boldest heart will melt with fear; all strength will disappear. Every spirit will faint; strong knees will become as weak as water." (NLT)

I forgot to wear my daipers. In this verse, the REB reverted to a more conservative rendering but the TNIV reverted from the conservative rendering in the NIV to a similar one in the NEB.

Proverbs 19:29 [edited]

"There is a rod in pickle for the arrogant, and blows ready for the stupid man's back." (NEB) / "for the fool's back" (REB)

"The irreverent have to learn reverence the hard way; only a slap in the face brings fools to attention." (Message)

"Judgments are prepared for mockers, and beatings for the backs of fools." (HCSB)

"Penalties are prepared for mockers, and beatings for the backs of fools. " (TNIV)

I think a "rod in pickle" means a scolding in store or in waiting.

1 Cor 5:9

"…Have nothing to do with loose livers" (NEB)

"…Have nothing to do with those who are sexually immoral." (REB)

"…not to associate with sexually immoral people” (NLT)

I've never heard of this term before.

Exodus 11:1

"he will send you packing, as a man might dismiss a rejected bride." (NEB)

"…When he finally lets you go, he will drive you out forcibly as a man might dismiss a rejected bride." (REB)

"When he lets you go, he will surely drive you out from here completely." (NASB)

"indeed, when he lets you go, he will drive you away." (NRSV)

Here, the NEB sounds as paraphrasical as The Message