As a USAF veteran …
Author: henry
-
A Temperate Comment on the Mark Driscoll Controversy
I like the tone of this article by Andy Crouch in Christianity Today. I’m concerned about the concentration of Christian thinking, preaching, teaching, and writing in the hands of Christian celebrities. I think Crouch makes some good points.
As a Christian publisher myself (Energion Publications), I don’t intend to comment on the details of this case. I would note that it is incredibly easy to make mistakes and very hard work to find them. There have been a number of times when someone I work with says, “I don’t see how anyone could make (or miss) that mistake” only to do something similar (or worse) by mistake down the road. I do not say this to excuse wrongdoing or carelessness, but to make us think twice before throwing stones at others.
When we do make a mistake, the correct response is not defensive. It is to say simply, “I made a mistake. I’m sorry. I’ll correct it.” I’ve been there any number of times.
I hope that in my own publishing work I am managing to distribute the work of a broad range of people. As a small publisher, these people will rarely be celebrities. To me, however, they are stars. Why do I say that? I have authors who donate their royalties to various causes. I have authors who have refused royalties on certain books in order to help me reduce the price and allow wider distribution. Every author I publish is active in service in a variety of ways. I have encountered no authors who are not extremely anxious to give credit to everyone who contributed in any way. I have even had to suggest that authors cut down the acknowledgments section in a couple of cases.
That’s what I took away from Andy Crouch’s article. There’s a church filled with people who can contribute. I want to give as many as I can a voice. The church needs to hear them, and not just the folks who can get a manuscript accepted with one of the big presses. The church needs to realize the breadth and depth of the talent available to it.
-
Step-by-Step Exegesis
Thomas Hudgins provides 10 steps for biblical exegesis. I’m particularly pleased to see structural and rhetorical analysis on the list.
-
Psalm 122: On Praying for Both Israelis and Palestinians
Bruce Epperly, in his comments on the scriptures for the first Sunday in Advent at Process & Faith, has a note about praying for Jerusalem. The call for this is made in the Psalm for this first Sunday in Advent, 122.
Bruce notes:
“I was glad when they said unto me let us go unto the house of the Lord,” rejoices the Psalmist. The Jerusalem temple becomes a focal point for the nations through its vision of peace. Without peace in Jerusalem, there is no peace on Earth, the Psalmist asserts. The Psalmist commands, “pray for the peace of Jerusalem.” This is a strong admonition for progressives who often side with the Palestinians over the State of Israel. We must pray for Israel as well as Palestine; we must insure a just peace that protects Israel as well as liberates Palestine. We must go beyond polarization in the Middle East, recognizing the universality of threat, violence, and self-interest, along with the possibility of personal, national, and regional transformation. God loves the whole world, without exceptions; and God’s love embraces the diversity of nations and ethnicities, inviting them toward peace, goodness, and beauty.
As Christians, it is our duty to love and care for all people, not just particular people. It’s very easy in promoting a particular political agenda to ignore the needs of those who are out of our focus. But the agenda of the Christian should be to build the kingdom of God.
There are many responses to Psalm 122 amongst Christians. There are those for whom the command is a simple command to us to pray for the peace of Jerusalem. Some would respond that this command was given to the people of Israel, and not in general to the people of the world. And it is truly “decreed for Israel.” At the same time, the language of this Psalm is such that it’s hard not to get an eschatological sense from it, or perhaps to read one into it if it’s not already there. Others might see its application in praying for our own nations and their leaders. My point is not to deal with all possible issues of interpretation, nor to answer policy questions regarding the middle east. Rather it’s to look at our prayers, starting at home, but extending to all people.
Bob MacDonald, in Seeing the Psalter, notes that the reference to the house of David (verse 5) falls between opening and closing references to the house of the LORD (verses 1 & 9). This explains to some extent why the passage is an advent passage. That eschatological sense comes through. God’s presence is, according to the Psalmist, manifested in Jerusalem in the house of the LORD. God’s presence will be manifested. Eschatology always has a sense of the future in the present.
I must mine another one of my Energion authors, Edward W. H. Vick, quoting from Eschatology: A Participatory Study Guide:
Christian theology is essentially eschatology. ‘From the beginning, eschatology is not primarily an apocalyptic conception, but an understanding of being in faith.’ The question then is, Which eschatology? Is it a theology of the future? Or, may it be better understood as a theology of the present? Are there other alternatives, relating present and future? (p. 51)
If the tension between the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’ in the New Testament and in the Christian message is maintained, there is no antagonism between ‘salvation-history’ and Christian existentialism. Indeed the two positions are complementary. To raise the essential question of continuity between the historical Jesus and the Christ of faith is to press beyond the position of Bultmann. The question is whether a sequence of events can be an object of faith as well as of assent. Cullmann answers with an emphatic affirmative. In faith the believer is overwhelmed by that in which he did not participate (p. 115). The events of salvation are pro nobis, but first they are extra nos. (p. 63)
Now there’s quite a bit of theological terminology in that quotation, especially without the 12 pages that come between the two paragraphs I quoted. But I want to bring out two points. First, Christian theology is essentially eschatology, that is, it has to do with the age to come, last day events, or something similar. What we often miss, however, is that God coming near is also now, not just something to await in the future. Second, when we participate in Advent we are celebrating events “in which [we] did not participate” and in that celebration we certainly hope they “overwhelm” us, i.e. bring us into themselves.
It’s in that “overwhelming” that “to the Jew first, but also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16) becomes also “there is no longer Jew nor Greek” without contradiction. At the same time, it is only in that way that we can both pray for the peace of Jerusalem, and for justice for Palestinians without contradiction.
-
Book Extract: Discerning Interpretations
Many teachers and preachers speak with great authority and then say, “This is not me speaking. I’m only telling you what the Bible says.” But that assertion is always dangerous. When we apply the Bible to any particular situation we are interpreting. This is another case when one’s words can seem very pious, but actually border on sacrilege. What could be more pious than simply speaking God’s words and never adding anything of your own to them? But there is the problem. You and I are not capable of speaking “just what the Bible says.” There is always something of our own thinking and interpretation in what we have to say.The honest thing to do is to admit that what we say is our interpretation, and leave the accuracy of our interpretation open to discussion and discernment. At the same time, no matter how
forcefully someone says that what they say is simply God’s truth, whether they claim that they got it by hearing directly or by reading and interpreting sacred documents, discernment is always up to the individual hearer.A word of prophecy must be tested. An interpretation of scripture must be tested. Everything must be tested using the intelligence God gives you and the wisdom he promises (James 1:5).
— When People Speak for God, p. 78
-
Excellent Links on Pentecost + 25 – Cycle C
Let me start with Energion author Bruce Epperly, who blogs at The Adventurous Lectionary. I always find his perspective on these texts interesting and challenging. Overall, he describes this lectionary as dealing with the authority of prophets and world spiritual leaders.
We can experience inner authority by aligning ourselves with God?s vision of the future, and while we can?t know the exact nature of everlasting life, our vision of eternity is intended to be lived out fully in this lifetime. Jesus shares his authority by reinterpreting a puzzling question in a new and creative way.
I think his perspective on the passage in Luke, regarding the woman who was the wife of seven brothers successively, to be particularly interesting:
Eternity is about experience and a sense of divine presence, not chronology, whether this involves Jesus? Second Coming or our own post-mortem journeys.
Be sure to read the whole thing.
In a bit of a contrast, my wife Jody titles her discussion of the passages When We All Get to Heaven. But when you get to her conclusion, perhaps the difference in perspective is not as great as it first appeared:
As my granddaughter reminded me, I have much to do here yet. God has given me a race to run, a mission in His Kingdom. But it?s a good thing to take time to consider and imagine what heaven will be like and joyfully look forward to seeing my LORD and the cloud of witnesses (Hebrews 12:1) who have gone before me.
Bob Cornwall, another Energion author, focuses on the question most congregants are likely to ask: Will there be marriage in heaven? He titles his post No Marriage in Heaven? Oh My!, thus also catching the probable attitude of most of the questioners. But the Sadducees, he contends, despite the form of their question, were not primarily interested in marriage as such, but rather with security. How will we be secure in the coming kingdom?
-
How to Die – How to Live
I learned from my wife, a 12 year veteran as a hospice nurse, that it’s important to think and talk about end of life care and dying. We tend to avoid it, especially when we’re younger. First, it’s because death seems so far away. Surely we have 50, 60, or 70 years, at least, to go! Then we avoid it because it seems that talking about it makes it come nearer. Fear of death impacts our lives in so many ways.
Over the last couple of weeks, several families close to us have experienced the death of a loved one. Yesterday, Jody’s uncle and godfather passed away. When so many deaths in your immediate circle of friends and family come so close together, it tends to make you think.
I suspect that’s why Jody reposted something I wrote for her devotional list back in 2010 this morning, titled Life and Death. I might retitle it, as I have here, How to Die – How to Live. The “How-To’s” are amazingly similar, I believe.
-
Review: A Bat in the Belfry
This was the first book I’ve read by Sarah Graves. I must confess that initially I came close to abandoning the book. The first couple of chapters plodded along, and there were too many people introduced for my taste. But I persevered, and it was worth it.
As the book moves forward the many personal stories start to make sense and to combine into an excellent mystery. I’ve seen this before, but I’ve also seen books where the personal stories failed even after the reader was obviously supposed to see the connections.
The story line combines small town values, society, and politics with an excellent mystery. I did suspect the correct person fairly early in the book, but I only suspected him. The details that would make me certain didn’t come until later.
I still rate this a 3 of 5 stars. I will look at more books by this author, but I’m not running out to get another one today.
-
On Partisan Criticism and Excuses
When President Obama was elected in 2008, I commented to Jody that I would now have to listen to over-the-top complaints from a completely different group of friends than I had over the previous eight years.
I’m no apologist for George W. Bush. I just don’t think he was as bad as so many of his critics thought he was. Neither was he as good as his apologists tried to claim. I think you could say that about just about any politician.
President Obama also has his critics and defenders, and I would say the same thing. He’s not nearly so bad as the critics claim, nor so good as his apologists would have us think.
Now there will be plenty of shrill voices to tell me I’ve missed this or that scandal about either man. I make sure that my ears are not just picking up from any one direction, so I’m going to hear both sets. What will I hear? I will hear Democrats excusing behavior on the part of the current administration that would have had them apoplectic had the same behavior taken place in the previous administration. I will hear Republicans criticizing the current administration for things they would have excused under a Republican president.
That’s why I move past these criticisms very quickly. It’s not that I think the behavior—in either case—is OK. It’s just that I always hear the other half of the argument, whether it’s explicit or not: And so you should vote for our party.
But the problem is that “your party,” whichever party that happens to be, scares me. As much as I dislike the failure to agree to compromise legislation on things like the budget, I also am very much afraid of what would happen if either of the two parties we have now gets hold of the entire government. There just isn’t enough good sense to go around.
So regardless of the screaming, I can tell you right now that I don’t know who I will vote for come the next election. That’s going to depend on who is nominated by each party. I’m going to go through the issues, the behavior, and yes, the associations of each candidate and make my decision. I’m also not going to be commenting publicly that much. Doing a good job of political commentary simply takes more time than I have, and apparently than most of you, or most of the paid commentators have. This piece is a good example. I should provide examples and references. I should tell you what I think would be “good sense” in government. But I’m not going to. I just don’t have the time to do this right.
So this is more in the nature of a plea to self-examination. Try to recognize the weaknesses on your own side. You can actually vote for a candidate you consider flawed. I do it every election. If I were running, I would be that flawed candidate. There are no candidates without flaws.
We should admit it, and make the best decisions we can.
-
A Bible and Book Burning
Pastor Marc Grizzard of (oh the irony!) Amazing Grace Baptist Church (I’d link, but the web page at the only link I have is suspended) is planning a book burning. He believes the KJV is the only true Word of God for English speaking people, so he’s going to burn copies of all those “perversions.” But he’s also going to burn books by heretics such as Billy Graham, Rick Warren, and Mother Theresa.
I think I’m a much worse heretic than any of those guys, and in proof I present my YouTube video, Why I Hate the KJV:
In addition, I write about and commend all those “perversions” of the Bible in my own book, What’s in a Version? complete with the friendly slogan on the front: The best Bible version is the one you read. Alternatively, one might read my book Not Ashamed of the Gospel: Confessions of a Liberal Charismatic. Surely there is enough heresy (as defined by Marc Grizzard) in there to merit burning.I’ll tell you what. I’ll even supply copies of the books. It’s probably too late to get them there for this Halloween, but it’s not too early to plan for next year.
And send me a video of my books going in the flames, of course.
Just noticed how old the story was. Oh well … it was fun anyhow!